Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-4567 / Y i/ y ].{_=�i ...o.i-^.s. •`.Fr,..� 'A' �iY-�'"•_.•�LR_ 4 I`YY ) Af;jt: 1� Board Of Southold Town Trustees SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK PERMIT NO. .. . ..So .. DATE: ...March.,28,..,,1996 �> a ISSUED TO ........William_..an•d..,Christopher...Connors................... � . Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 615 of.the Laws of !� the State of New York, 1893; and Chapter 404 of the Laws of the ;. `%• State of New York 1952; and the Southold Town Ordinance en- titled REGULATING AND THE PLACING OF OBSTRUCTIONS IN AND ON TOWN WATERS AND PUBLIC LANDS and the �w ' J REMOVAL OF SAND, GRAVEL OR OTHER MATERIALS FROM 1FR ri LANDS UNDER TOWN WATERS;" and in accordance with the , ! Resolution of The Board adopted at a meeting held on ..M.ar.ch...2.7... l 1 19........9.4 and in consideration of the sum of ...150...0.0....... paid by 1 Christopher...Connor.s....................................................................................... ' of ................................:........................................................ N. Y. and subject to the Terms and Conditions listed on the reverse side hereof, f of Southold Town Trustees authorizes and permits the following: to construct a single family, two-story dwelling, a 10'X25' deck ;k •a on north side, a 5' X 25' deck on south side, sanitary system, 4 AI septic system with 5 leaching pools with approx. 4%c.y. of clea A fill, and well as approved by S.C.D.H. Map dated ffecember 21 N all in accordance with the detailed specifications as presented in 1995 F' f {, * the originating application. WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.,I� Convert area on west side to wetlands, Haybales and silt fence < IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The said Board of Trustees here- by causes its Corporate Seal to be affixed, and these presents to + al be subscribed by a majority of the said Board as of this date. F ',i � ...... ►fix: .. } o :< .................................... Trustees I ,1 M, °' ,''`.sa:P. ...!*- °:�..3W,/.rx `wr�L:... s�nra r`t„1.:..a +r- ./ �.s.'x-,t�,:ram :i. •a v.,:* xs�, .��a .�r **See details on approval letter. , Albert J. Krupski,President �O�OSVFfO��COG Town Hall John Holzapfel, Vice President = y< 53095 Main Road Jim King y a P.O. Box 1179 Martin H. Garrell 5 �� Southold, New York 11971 Peter Wenczel ?t� a0 Telephone (516) 765-1892 1 Fax (516)765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 28, 1996 Christopher Connors 5 Viking Road Glenwood Landing, NY 11547 Re: William & Christopher Connors SCTM # 59-5-29.3 Dear Mr. Connors: The following action was taken by the Board of Town Trustees during its regular meeting held on March 27, 1996 regarding the above matter: WHEREAS, WILLIAM AND CHRIS CONNORS. applied to the Southold Town Trustees for a permit under the provisions of the Wetland Ordinance of the Town of Southold, application dated. August 7, 1995, and, WHEREAS, said application was referred to the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council for their findings and. recommendations, and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held by the Town Trustees with respect to said application on March 2.7, 1996, at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, and, WHEREAS, the Board members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question and the surrounding area,. and, WHEREAS, the Board has considered all the testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application, and, WHEREAS, the structure complies with the standard set. forth in Chapter 37-18 of the Southold. Town Code., WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the. project as proposed will not affect the health, safety and general welfare of the people of the town, NOW THEREFORE BE IT, � 1 1 RESOLVED, that the Board. of Trustees grant a Wetland Application to WILLIAM AND CHRISTOPHER CONNORS to construct a single family, two-story dwelling, a 10' X 251 deck on north side, ,.a 51 X 251, deck on south side, sanitary system septic system with 5 leaching pools with approx. 400 c.y. of clean fill.,and well as approved by the. S.C. Dept. of. Health, map dated December 21, 1995, subject to: 1. The area on west side of house be converted to a fresh water wetland during construction of the house. Construction of wetland area must be completed by November. 1, 1996. (You can contact Chris Pickerill at Cornell Coop. . for assistance) . 2. A staked row of haybales must be in place at the flagged wetland line at all times. 3 . A silt fence must be placed by haybales. during construction. and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that. this determination should not be considered a determination made for any other Department or Agency which may also have an application pending for the same or similar project. Permit to construct project will expire two ,years from the date it is signed. Fees must be paid, if applicable, and permit issued within six months of the date of this notification. Two inspections are required and the Trustees. are to be notified upon completion of. said project. FEES: None. Very truly yours, Albert J. Krupski, Jr. President, Board of. Trustees AJK/jmd cc: CAC Tim Collins•. "BA Bldg. Dept. Chris Pickerill Health Dept. ' Albert J. Krupski, President �p� _� 0, Town Hall John Holzapfel, Vice President 't �� 53095 Main Road j William G. Albertson P.O. Box 1179 Martin H. Carrell O Southold, New York 11971 Peter Wenczel 4A� � Telephone (516) 765-1892 t Fax (516) 765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Office Use Only , C astal Erosion Permit Applicatiop �tland Permit Application I ...,�.�. �a Grandfather Permit Application Trustee Lands Permit Application AW _ 7 � Waiver eceived Application: erical Review: - -� T_pN OF SOUTHOLD C omp leted Application niv _ LPA SEQRA la.ssification: Type I1'ype II Unlisted oordination: (date sent) CAC Referral Sent: �/ n ate of Inspection: la Receipt of CAC Report: ( ate) y Lead Agency Determination: Technical Review: (date) Public Hearing: (date) Decision: Approved (Y/N) (date) Application Fee:$ Name of Applicant l.ONNQ/26 Kh l hGe�� T. 9- OA6,51©,her- Address 5 VIEIV& /lLL (1TLLowecd Land)Lq A/y Phone Number: (51lO ) ( 7 j 8'15 Z Suffolk County Tax Map Number: 1000 - gr13geg J . -(Cs- 3 Property Location: J® e�� cOui I1 (provide LILCO Pole stance to c oss streets, and location) Agent: ( If applicable) Address: Phone: 1 I rd of Trustees Applicatio GENERAL DATA Land Area (in square feet) : Area Zoning: Previous use of property: VOC6a-� U%/V& Intended use of property: 04 e- dwe)[o a Prior permits/approvals for site improvements: Agency Date lam 1 rV s5(� M 'S 'bF-C VCAc,�?,Yrr Lao6- 0—'J'10 No prior permits/approvals for site improvements. Has any permit/approval ever been revoked or suspended by a governmental agency? X_ No Yes If yes, provide explanation: Project Description (us�e� attachments if necessary) : ( see- 0,4e-� I-e-4e-r) 2 5 Viking Rd. PO Box 278 Glenwood Landing, NY 11547 August 4, 1995 =T!OWLN-OFSOUTHOLD fp Mr. Albert J. Krupski, PresidentBoard of Trustees, Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Rd. PO Box'l179Southold, NY 11971Re: Connors 350 West Drive SCTM#59-5-29.3 Dear Mr. Krupski, Enclosed you will find a new application as requested. I have completed same to the best of my ability. Please review and let me know if there is any additional information you need. Complying with your letters of 8/11/94,4/28195 and Judge Cohalan's decision of 4/5/95,we have been diligently working on trying to accommodate the Trustees preferential location of the septic system to the WE comer of our property. As you know,this requires the cooperation and approval of the neighboring landowner to relocate their existing well (at our expense)to a distance of 100'from both our septic system as well as their own. In addition,we would also need the approval of the SCHD. We regret to advise,that to date,we have not been able to obtain a firm response with respects to the possible relocation of the neighbogng well to accommodate your desired location of our septic system. After numerous letters to and from our neighbor,we have not been able to make direct contact. The most we have received thus far is a maybe, IF we were to permanently change our deed to limit the dwelling to a one story house. We have already submitted proposals for the only two remaining possible locations of the septic system.These were submitted for the June 29, 1995 monthly meeting for your review. One has the septic system location in the N/W comer for which we already have SCHD approval. This location adjoins the neighboring land which has already been filled in and would: just extend the amount of improved land by the length of the septic system. Although this location has previously been denied by the Trustees,we have since then reduced the amount of fill, reduced the size of the dwelling, proposed a self-composting toilet and gray water septic system*. This proposal uses only approximately 38%of our total land usage(which in total is only 1/2 acre.) The second proposal locates the septic system in the S/E comer of the property. If this would be a more desirable location,we ask that you help to coordinate this with the SCHD. As we do not have a permit from them for this location. We thank you for all your efforts and hope that we can continue to work towards our final goal of obtaining a Trustee Wetlands Permit without any further undo delay. Most sincerely, duLt, Colleen Connors CC encl. cc: Judge Cohalan index#20674.94 *We ask that you re-review your position on the clivis multrim type toilet system. According to our environmental impact statement,the SCHD and other evidences given to the Trustees, the use of a standard black water system would be less of an environmental threat than that of a self composting toilet and a gray water system. Thank you. B -d of Trustees Applicatioi WETLAND/TRUSTEE LANDS APPLICATION. DATA Purpose of the proposed operations: F dwd[ Area of wetlands on lot: I©,Doo square feet Percent coverage of lot: '5D o Closest distance between nearest existing structure and upland edge of wetlands: 40 feet elf qco�__p Closest distance between nearest proposed structure and upland edge of wetlands: 0 feet Does the project involve excavation or filling? No x Yes If yes, how much material will be excavated?_cubic yards How much material will be filled? Llcn cubic yards(cSWVL16C��) ri /Depth of which material will be removed or deposited: feet Proposed slope throughout the area of operations:q5 ,�cr 5c 14 D A.14 Manner in which material will be removed or deposited: Statement of the effect, if any, on the wetlands and tidal waters of the town that may result by reason os such proposed operations (use attachments if appropriate) : �}© rein► Jcs L d' veil Acj*\ u)l�;►G s 'vla e-Vi .cti✓1C I _�,EG. S tc � 5 e�N t�oL D - c61 LT- 4iAln f� !�L�CL i-�i a m'!' , `i 6�e CIO `I.5 lllfa C()V 1 L`��V 1 CJ C'Cata m V16�$CIA 5c l �s glued a NI �� �;wVe_. . � c+ CA 'f,�i ► IO►% ��� wr��� �5�erv� . I�1C C�►�,5 r�c�`���vl �,r°` �.:XC�ed s r,�r�� ��' (�-� ' `jj L ►v\ �e C4reCJd L,10_ � - q- !M'115+ive. �u r�-���✓�V�� v�r/�rC�Vkk'Lvv-T' f e65 06 G( -1t y, n t �b }fie ey"N)y_Nm v'f *Vv' rDP_U_i1 e5 411U, wefc 1.4-16-4(2/87)—Text 12 ,• PROJECT LD. NUMBER 61— SEQF. Appendix C State Environmental Quality Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I—PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor) 1. /S PPLICA T PONSOR 2. PROJECT NAME �� _6j o'r4 W%apt 0)6A� 3. PROJECT LOCATIO y 7 ,)� Municipality M��L� County ��i l W ��, 4. PRECISE LOCATION(Street address and road intersections, prominent landmarks, etc.,or provide map) 5. IS PROPOSED ACTION: ll New ❑Expansion ❑Modification/alteration 6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: lu"ib!�, 9 M C�V ss 7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFE TED: i icrvo L, O -c6— OC,c)433, iP1� l Initially ° J acres Ultimately acres 1 B. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS? 14 Yes ❑No If No,descr'be briefly Gl�� 9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? 14 Residential ❑!ndustrial ❑Commercial ❑Agriculture ❑Park/Forest/Open space ❑Other Describe: 10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL,OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY(FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL)? ❑Yes VLJo If yes, list agency(s)and permit/approvals i I 11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTIOIJ HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL? Yes ❑No If yes, list ag ncy name and permit/approval 12. AS A RESULT OF ROP S �p A T,IpN ILL ISTJ PERMI I PPF VA E� E Yes ? Y 17 Gl� k Mk3 � W �V� ✓C(e ❑No II Gc yyp� y� P *I'd 7 {�P II YC1L/ Ad - I C 'TAT O T1L) PR VI B S R ff BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant/sponsor n e �l�rf Date: xQejal) Signature: If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this a..Vessment OVER PART II—ENVIRONMENTAL ) SSMENT (To be completed by Agency). A. DOES ACTION EXCEED ANY TYPE I THRESHOLD IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.12? If yes, coordinate the review process and use the FULL IDAF. ❑Yes ❑No - r „ B. WILL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.6? If No,a negative declaration may be superseded by another involved agency. ❑Yes ❑No C. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING:(Answers may be handwritten, If legible) C1. Existing air quality, surface or'groundwater quality or quantity, nolse levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion,drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly: C2. Aesthetic,agricultural,archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources;or community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly: C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species,significant habitats,or threatened or endangered species?Explain briefly: C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted,or a change In use or Intensity of use of land or other natural resources?Explain briefly.; i ' I C5: Growth, subsequent development,or related activities likely to be Induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly. C6. Long term,short term,cumulative,or other effects not identified in C1-05? Explain briefly. C7. Other impacts(including changes In use of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly. D. IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE, CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS? ❑Yes ❑No If Yes, explain briefly PART III—DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by Agency) INSTRUCTIONS: For each adverse effect identified above,determine whether it is substantial,large,Important or otherwise significant. Each effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting (i.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occuiJ1ng; (c) duration;,(d) Irreversibility; (e) geographic scope; and (f) magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that • explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been Identified and adequately addressed. ❑ Check this box if you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the FULL EAF and/or prepare a positive-declaration. ❑ Check this box if you have determined, based on .the information and analysis above and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action WILL NOT result in,any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide on attachments as necessary, the reasons supporting this determination: Name of Lead Agency Print or type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer Signature of Responsible Officer.in Lead Agency Signature of i'reparer(If different from responsible officer) Date 2 rd .of Trustees Applicatic County of Suffolk State of New York 61(A(61ZS BEING DULY SWORN DEPOS S AND FFIRMS THAT HE/SHE IS THE APPLICANT_ FOR THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PERMITS) AND THAT ALL STATEMENTS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE TRUE TO THE BEST OF HIS/HER KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, AND THAT ALL WORK WILL BE DONE IN THE MANNER SET FORTH IN THIS APPLICATION AND AS MAY BE APPROVED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF TRUSTEES. THE APPLICANT AGREES TO HOLD THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AND THE TOWN TRUSTEES HARMLESS AND FREE FROM ANY AND ALL DAMAGES AND CLAIMS ARISING UNDER, OR BY VIRTUE OF SAID PERMIT(S) , IF GRANTED. IN COMPLETING THIS APPLICATION, I HEREBY AUTHORIZE THE TRUSTEES, THEIR AGENT(S) OR REPRESENTATIVES(S) , TO ENTER ONTO MY PROPERTY TO INSPECT THE PREMISES IN CONJUNCTION WITH REVIEW OF THIS APPLICATION. Signature SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS DAY OF ,19NOTARY PUBLIC. Pe�TAtCl��AR1tdlP'^ omftm Pie-�L�..C/ • �i.:` •. :':..-;;Notary Pub is c^ 3 �. 617.21 SEAR ;,..��. .'Appendix A , � State Environmental Quality Review ��o �. ® - FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM``` 7 d . Ourpgt* TVEDag F isa signed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly'ma r, whether a project o, ac may be significant The question of whether an action may be significant is not always ea nswer. Frequent- I� there areaspeets" - oject that are subjective or unmeasureable. It is also u � n P y� t understood that thbse who determine si i arc fi� 0.�a�y�hr� or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert � environmental a°aa Ir' ion, many who have knowledge.in one particular area may not be aware of the broader co' rns affecting the question of significance. � The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that th(Mete mination process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature,yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a proiWet or action. 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 project data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3. ?art 2: =ocuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides guidance as to whether an impact is like'y to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially- 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 potentially-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE—Ty,pe 1 and Unlisted Actions Identify the Portions of EAF completed for this project: ❑ Part 1 ❑ Part 2 El 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 of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that: ❑ A. The project will not result in any large and important impacts) and, therefore, is one which will not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore 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 large 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 C, Name f Action' Name.of Lead Agency Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer ( Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer(If different from responsible officer) Date 1 PART 1—PROJcCT INFOI 1TlON Prepared by Project Sponsor NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effe on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be'considerf as part of'the application for approval and may be subiect to further verification and public review. Provide any addition 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 invol, new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and speci each-instance. NAME OF ACTION LOCATION OF ACTION Include Street Address,Municipality and County) 3 5 a es 7 i F()LIE N E OF APPLICA T/SPONSOR BUSINESS TELEPHONE 'i 1il � t ) amo ADDRES CITY/PO STATE ZIP CODE -Po ? aig i� u� . xl off, • 1/54 NAME OF OWNER(If different) BUSINESS tELEPHONE ADDRESS CITYIPO STATE ZIP CODE DESCRIPTION OF ACTION _7_0 CC) —IP,U-Cr Please Complete Each Question—Indicate N.A. if.not applicable A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas. 1. Present land use: ❑Urban ❑Industrial ❑Commercial ❑Residential (suburban) �ll ❑Aural (non-farr ❑Forest ❑Agriculture Other Ymodf l f}(� — �E�t eywi0L 2. Total acreage of project area: t )7 acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE PRESENTLY AFTER CO,\-IPLETION Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural) Z acres I acres Forested acres — acres Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, 'etc.) acres — acres Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECL) 3 acres 2 acres Water Surface Area acres — acres Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) acres _ I"I acres Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces — acres acres Other (Indicate type) acres acres 3. What is predominant soil type(s) on project site? a. Soil drainage: ❑Well drained % of site Modem~ly Well drained r_ j go of site OPoorly drained �)!5 % of site b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group I through 4 of the N) Land Classification System? _ acres. (See 1 NYCRR 370). 4. Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? Dyes XNo. a. "'liat, is depth to bedrock? (in feet) 2 :3.;Approximate percentage of p setd project site with slopes: U 10 J 015 or greater % 6. Is project substantfally contiguous to, or contain a building,'site, or district, listed on the State or the Nationa Registers of Historic Places? ❑Yes No C '. Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? Dyes KNc 8. What is the.depth of the water table? 0 (in feet) 9. Is site located over a primary, principal,-or sole source aquifer? ❑Yes' (XN0 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? Dyes: )<No 11. Dbes project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered-f Dyes AN According to Identify each species 12. Are there any uni ue or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, other geological formations Dyes ANo Describe 13. Is the prof(,c`- sit? presently used by the community of neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? ❑Yes sit..? No If yes, explain _ 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? Dyes* No 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: n i)n Q a. Name of Stream-and name of River to which it is tributary 16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Name b. Size (In acres) 10t 17. Is the site served by existing public utilities? Dyes No Ca) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? Dyes ONO b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? ❑Yes ❑No 18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? Dyes ' No 19. Is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 617? Dyes ❑No ♦JtT K1�pWi� 26. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? ❑Yes XNo B. Project Description.. 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor o 5 acres. b Project acreage to be developed: _0 acres initially; acres ultimately. C. Project acreage to remain undeveloped_ acres. d. Length of project, in miles: _ (If appropriate) e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed _ f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing —�—; proposed g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour U !1J (upon completion of project)? h. If residential.' Number and type of housing units: Initially One Family Two F.Imily Multiple Family Condominium Ultimately j i. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure 55 _ height; _30 width; 40 j. Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project w occupy is.ill occu ft. length. ? 3 2. How much natural material (i.e., rock, earth, etc.) will be removed '-- 1 the site? tons/cubic: yards 3. Will disturbed areas be limed? . [--]Yes ONO N/A ' a. If yes, for what intender: purpose is the site being reclaimed? b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? OYes ONO c: Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? OYes - ONO 4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? a- acres. 5. Will any matp forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project? OYes RNo 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction months, (including demolition). 7. If multi-phased: n CA a. Total number of phases anticipated (number). b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 month year, (including demolition). c. Approximate completion date of final phase month year. d. Is phase 1 functional.ly dependent on subsequent phases? OYes ONO 8. Will blasting occur during construction? ' ❑YesNo 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction after project is complete 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project 11. Will project require relocation of any projects or. facilities? OYes KNO If yes, explain 12. Is surface liquid.waste disposal involved? IAYes . ONO a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.).and amount �Cll1 �, �C1Ul�/Il� b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged Jl�J1C� 13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? OYes ONO Type 14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? Dyes No. Explain 15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? OYes ANo 16. Will the project generate solid waste? OYes --),NO a. If yes, what-is. the amount per month tons b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? OYes ONO c. If yes,.give name location d. Will any wastes not go into a.sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? []Yes ONO e. If Yes, explain 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? OYes *o a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? tons/month. b. If yes, what is the anticipated site life? years. 18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? - OYesN0 19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? OYes ONO 20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? Dyes No 21. Will project result in an increase in energy use? 4qY No If yes , indicate type(s) U tiC t i G 22. If water supply is from wells, indicate puniping capacity gallons/minute. 23. Total anticipated water usage per day _ gallons/day. 24- Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? OYes �NO If Yes, explain 4 City, Town,.Village Board Dyes IgNo City, Town, Village Planning Board Dyes XNo -City, Town Zoning Board Dyes fANo II' City, County Health Department Dyes KNo ilk' Dyes 0,No Other Local Agencies IIL Dyes XN0 Other Regional Agencies State Agencies Dyes �No -Federal Agencies Dyes KNo C. Zoning and Planning Information 1. Does proposed action involve a planning-or zoning decision? Yes ❑No If Yes, indicate decision required: zoning amendment ❑zoning variance ❑special use permit ❑subdivision ❑site plan ❑new/revision of master plan ❑resource management Ian other Ir►4•S_06 ��U�lilhll�� A re�SL �Yl��(t ���r��-I I U Cd l~ 2. What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? — 3_ What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? 1J► � .. 4. What is the proposed zoning of the site? 5- What is the maximumQotential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? ` 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? Dyes ❑No C 7. What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a '/ 'le radius of proposed iEtion? P,A 1 ( 8. Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a I/ mile? Yes ❑\o 9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? 171 01 a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? 10. Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of`9e\yer or water districts? ❑Yes ❑Nc 11. Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection)? ❑Yes ;,No a. If yes., is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? Dyes ❑No 12. Will the proposed action result in tale generation of traffic significantly above present levels? Dyes lxIN0 a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? ❑Yes ONO D. Informational Details Attach any additional information as may he needed to cl,rrify your project. If there are or may be any advers impacts associated with your proposal, plr,rse discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate c avoid them. E. Verification I certify that tho information )rovidvd ahovo is true' to tit, hest of my knowledge. ApplicantiSpc�r r une I Date d Signature Title If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a ,tale a};ency, cornPlete the Coastal Assessment form before proeeedir with this assessment. 5 • � rya - pie nl:tl.uAfMaL'+�-n^i1M1`•,.J/....-.a�fx.✓,n r4 im. ;, ri w2i6US�Lei�ik:�ddd�!:ks6tafdurJrdti�>.r1.'r.+n'Yfuie+e(isasl�ru. .::wxiuixaUi.4_Y+wi3�.�iror,.d•�� e.7►_f 11�+i.�eiyS'i�.�+7M4Fs'f{e'S6ess�RVI.iK;f!,RyW Par"' "—PROJECT IMPACTS AND T' I MAGNITUDE Responsihility of Lead \pency s + General Information (Read Carefully) • In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my responses and determinations beer- reasonable? The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst. •,Identifying that an impact will be potentially large (column 2) dogs not mean that it is also necessarily significant. Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact in column 2 simple asks that it be looked at further. • The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever, possible the threshold of magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State ano for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appro riate evaluation in Part 3 for a Potential Large Impact response, thus requiringp . • The impacts of each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples are illustrative and have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each question. • The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. • In identifying impacts, consider long term, short term and cumlative effects. Instructions (Read carefully) a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will he any impact. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers. c. If answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column t or 2) to indicate the potential size of the impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. It impact wall occur but threshold is lower than example, check column 1. d. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potentiaily large and proceed to PART 3. e. If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by changets) in the project to a small to moderate impact, also check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. This :`must be explained in Part 3. 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can impact Be IMPACT ON LAND Moderate Large Mitigated By 1• Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site? Impact Impact Project Change Examples that would apply to column 2 LINO DYES • Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100 ❑ ❑ No- foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed ❑�es ❑No' 10%. • Construction on land where the depth to the water table is less than El ❑ 3 feet. ❑Yes ❑No • Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles. ❑ ❑ • Construction on l generally El Yes ❑No ', and where bedrock is exposed car within ❑ 3 feet of existing ground surface. ❑Yes ❑No • Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more ❑ ❑ than one phase or stage. ❑Yes [:]No • Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than I,o00 ❑ ❑ tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per year. ❑1'es ❑No • Construction or expansion of a s:uaitary Landfill. ❑ • Construction in a designated flooclway, ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Other impacts ❑ 01'es ❑No ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 2• Will there he an affect t:. ...ay ur:,(lue or unusual bind f )rnis found on the site? (i.e.. cliffs, dunes, geological furrnations, etc.)1.1NO []YES • Specific land forms: • ❑ CYes ❑No Z 6 -_'�'�*�� .esi;,:iiaifiifw:," -il3e:[r.,ea+a�v.•,?.ee:a•rvo-s::w.c,.:FAr:L'i.i�:ericai:nrn.:.r..+r.:e^q�,9G,�4'�:r,..mi=.. MAR - 1 1996 LS ;; Timothy Collins,AICP Environmental,Planning&Land Development Consultant " 27 Joshua Edwards Court East Hampton; New York 11937 (516)329-5930 Fax(516)329-6932 February 28, 1996 Board of Town Trustees Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 RE: Wetland permit application of Christopher Conners, Southold. Dear Board Members: Enclosed you will find the Environmental Assessment Forms Parts H and III for the above referenced application. The EAF has been prepared for a negative declaration. The Board should review the forms and if you agree with the determination, a resolution can be adopted and the President can sign the forms. The proposed action is considered an unlisted action pursuant to SEQRA. Consequently, coordinated review is not required and no routing is necessary. If the Board has any questions or requires further information, please feel free to contact me. Yours truly, Timothy Collins, AICP TC: tc Enc. N' d I L! MAR - 19% N Environmental Assessment Form, Part 11 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Date: February 28, 1996 Project: Application of Christopher Conners Applicant: Christopher Conners Location: West Drive, Southold SCTM#: 1000-059-05-29.3 Brief Project Description: This application is a request for a wetland permit pursuant to Chapter 97 of the Town of Southold Code. The project involves the construction of a 25' x 40' two story dwelling, a 10'x 25' deck on the north, a 5'x 25' deck on the south, the installation of a sanitary system consisting of a septic tank and five leaching pools, installation of a water supply well, and the construction of a 375.square foot driveway. Associated with the project and the installation of the sanitary system will be the construction of a retaining wall and placement of approximately 510 cubic yards of fill. . The project site is a 20,000 square foot parcel located on the west side of West Drive, Southold. . It contains approximately 13,000 square feet of freshwater wetlands, or approximately 65% of the site. The wetlands are associated with a larger system which extends to the south and west. A portion of the project site, located directly adjacent to the road, has been previously filled. Consequently, the northeastern portion of the site is considered to be uplands. The balance of the site has been identified as wetlands. The project has been significantly revised from a previous application by relocating and reducing the size of the improvements. All of the improvements have now been located entirely out of the wetlands. However, approximately 1,250 square feet of wetlands will be cleared as a result of the proposed action. This clearing is necessary to accommodate construction and filling activities. The Board has considered other alternatives, including cluding acquisition, design alternatives and relocation of the neighbors well. To accommodate the location of the proposed dwelling, a variance is necessary from the Zoning Board of Appeals. This variance is necessary so as to minimize the disturbance to the wetlands. The Board finds that this proposal minimizes the disturbance to the wetlands to the greatest degree possible while taken into consideration the adjacent development and the applicants needs. The proposed project is considered to be an unlisted action pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was prepared on a former application and is included as part of the record. IMPACT ON LAND 1. Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site? Yes. Approximately 8,250 square feet of the property will be disturbed as a result of the project. This includes approximately 7000 square feet of uplands and approximately 1,250 square feet of wetlands. The balance of the site will remain in its natural state. This represents approximately 59% of the site. The wetlands found on the site are classified as both tidal and freshwater wetland. However, from field inspection, the highest quality wetland is located within the northwest portion of the site. The disturbance of the site will result in a slight loss of upland and wetland habitats and an increase in impervious surfaces. Construction activities may impact adjacent wetland as a result of erosion of disturbed areas and sedimentation. Identified impacts have a potential for a large impact. Can impacts be mitigated? Yes. All clearing shall be limited to the clearing line as shown on the surrey prepared by Peconic Surveyors dated revised December 21, 1995. Furthermore, a project limiting fence and hay bales, staked end to end, shall be placed along the clearing limit line and all disturbed areas shall be revegetated prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Finally, the wetland area bounded by the project limiting fence shall remain in its natural state in perpetuity and a covenant shall be filed which provides for such protection. These mitigation measures will assist in controlling erosion, preventing sediments from reaching the wetlands and protect the wetlands 2. Will there be an affect to unique or unusual land forms found on the site? No. IMPACT ON WATER 3. Will the proposed action affect any water body designated as protected? No. Located approximately 400 feet to the northwest is Great Pond. As part of the original application the Board felt that there was a potential for significant impacts to the pond. However, this proposal has relocated all of the improvements out of the wetlands. The proposed sanitary system has been located within the southeast corner of the site, futher away from the prime wetland area. The proposed leaching pools have also been shown to be elevated 3' above groundwater. The previous plan provided only a 2' separation distance between the bottom of the leaching pools and groundwater. As part of the construction of the sanitary system the bog material will be removed and replaced with clean sand. The additional separation distance, along with relocating the sanitary system out of the wetlands, will allow for additional filtration of the effluent. This additional filtration will assist in the further removal of pollutants contained in the effluent and provide further 2 protection to the adjacent wetlands and surface waters. Other alternatives have been considered, however, this plan maximizes the setback to the greatest degree possible, provides for proper maintenance by future property owner and has been approved by the Suffolk County Dept. of Health Service. 4. Will the proposed action affect any non-protected or new body of water? No. See Item#3 above 5. Will the proposed action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? No. See Item#3 above. Furthermore, the proposed sanitary system and well has received the approval of the Suffolk County Department of Health Service. The Health Department has been given the responsibility to review and approval of subsurface waste disposal system and water supply wells in Suffolk County. The proposed sanitary system has been designed to exceed the Health Dept. requirement for a 2' separation distance between the leaching pools and groundwater(3' is proposed). This will assist to protect the groundwater and surface water quality and quantity. 6. Will the proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water runoff? Yes. The proposed project will result in approximately 1,750 square feet of impervious surfaces. This will result in a slight increase in surface water runoff. This impact is felt to be a small to moderate impact. To assist in the proper disposal of the surface water runoff, the proposed dwelling should be equipped with leader and gutters which empty into a dry well and the driveway shall be constructed of pervious material. No direct runoff shall be permitted to flow into the wetlands. IMPACT ON AIR 7. Will the proposed action affect air quality? No. IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8. Will the proposed action affect any threatened or endangered species? No. 9. Will the proposed action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species? No. 3 IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 10. Will the proposed action affect agricultural land resources? No. IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11. Will the proposed project affect aesthetic resources? No. The subject property is zoned for residential use. There are one and two story dwellings within the immediate vicinity of the site. The project is compatible with the existing development. IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12. Will the proposed action impact any site or structure of historic, prehistoric or paleontological importance? No. IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 13. Will the proposed action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities? No. IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION 14. Will there be an affect to existing transportation systems? No. IMPACT ON ENERGY 15. Will the proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? No. 4 NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS 16. Will there be objectionable odors, noise or vibration as a result of the proposed action? No. IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH 17. Will the proposed action affect public health and safety? No. IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD 18. Will the proposed action affect the character of the existing community? No. 19. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? Yes. During the previous application nearby neighbors voiced concerns and objection on the development of the property. The Board will hold another public hearing to obtain comments from the public DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE Environmental Assessment Forms, Parts I & II have been prepared for this project. Upon a review of the information recorded in these documents, and other supporting information, and considering both the magnitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by this Board that the project will not result in any large and important impacts. In that the project is on which will not have a significant impact on the environment, a negative declaration will be prepared. Signature of Preparer Alan J. Krupski, Jr., President Board of Trustees Town of Southold 5309 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 5 NEGATIVE DECLARATION Notice of Determination of Non-Significance This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Conservation Law. The Town of Southold Board of Trustees, as Lead Agency, has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared. Date: February 28, 1996 Project: Application of Christopher Conners Applicant: Christopher Conners Location: West Drive, Southold SCTM#: 1000-059-05-29.3 Brief Project Description: This application is a request for a wetland permit pursuant to Chapter 97 of the Town of Southold Code. The project involves the construction of a 25' x 40' two story dwelling, a 10'x 25' deck on the north, a 5'x 25' deck on the south, the installation of a sanitary system consisting of a septic tank and five leaching pools, installation of a water supply well, and the construction of a 375 square foot driveway. Associated with the project and the installation of the sanitary system will be the construction of a retaining wall and placement of approximately 510 cubic yards of fill. The project site is a 20,000 square foot parcel located on the west side of West Drive, Southold. It contains approximately 13,000 square feet of freshwater wetlands, or approximately 65% of the site. The wetlands are associated with a larger system which extends to the south and west. A portion of the project site, located directly adjacent to the road, has been previously filled. Consequently, the northeastern portion of the site is considered to be uplands. The balance of the site has been identified as wetlands. The project has been significantly revised from a previous application by relocating and reducing the size of the improvements. All of the improvements have now been located entirely out of the wetlands. However, approximately 1,250 square feet of wetlands will be cleared as a result of the proposed action. This clearing is necessary to accommodate construction and filling activities. The Board has considered other alternatives, including acquisition, design alternatives and relocation of the neighbors well. To accommodate the location of the proposed dwelling, a variance is necessary from the Zoning Board of Appeals. This variance is necessary so as to minimize the disturbance to the wetlands. The Board finds that this proposal minimizes the disturbance to the wetlands to the greatest degree possible while taken into consideration the adjacent development and the applicants needs. The proposed project is considered to be an. unlisted action pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was prepared on a former application and is included as part of the record. Reasons Supporting This Determination: The Board has taken a hard look at the environmental consequences of this project and has determined that the project has been designed to maximize the wetland setback and disturbance to the greatest degree possible. The Board has also considered various alternatives. These include, acquisition, design alternatives, relocation of the adjacent private well and reduction in the size of the proposed improvements. The Board finds that the project as proposed provides the applicant with a reasonable use of the property while minimizing the impacts to the wetlands, surface waters and groundwater systems to the greatest degree possible. Mitigation measures include; project limiting fence, hay bales, covenant protecting the wetlands in perpetuity, leaders and gutters leading to one or more dry wells, sanitary system which has been approved by the Suffolk County Department of Health Service and provides for a 3' separation between groundwater and the leaching pools and revegetation of disturbed areas after construction. Therefore, the project will not have a significant impact on the environment. Alan J. Krupski, Jr., President Board of Trustees Town of Southold 5309 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 For Further Information: Alan J. Krupski, Jr. President Board of Trustees Town of Southold 5309 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Phone: (516) 765-1892 Copies Of This Notice Sent To: UN Suffolk County Suffolk County Marine Cornell Y Environmental Learning Center 3690 Cedar Beach Road Cooperative Southold,NY 11971 Extension 516.862-8660 ryyb gmcs FAX 516-852-8662 GIOH SOS J10 NNi MEMORANDUM go L Hdd t btu ou TO: 6b&ff J. Krupski President Board of Town Trustees Town of Southold FROM: Christopher Pickerell COOPERATIVE EXTENSION AGENT Wetlands Specialist DATE: April 29, 1996 RE: Connors property As per your request, I made a site visit.to the Connors property on West Drive in Southold to observe the building lot, cesspool area and extent of clearing described in the.approved site plan dated Dec. 21, 1995. My observations and the plan indicate that there will be some loss of wetlands (approximately 1,200 sq. ft.) resulting from construction of the proposed septic system. In order to compensate for this loss, I recommend restoration of a formerly wet area directly behind the.cesspool area as opposed to the area to the northwest of the.house that the Board originally recommended. The concept I propose will ensure the greatest opportunity for successful mitigation while providing the landowners with useful fill necessary to complete their approved plans. Even though I cannot be onsite when the actual work takes place, I have offered to meet with the Connors' contractor prior to commencement of excavation to ensure that there are no misunderstandings. The following is a brief description of existing and recommended conditions for the restoration area: The suggested restoration area is a linear stretch of fill located in the southern third of the property perpendicular to West Drive extending from the back of what is to be the cesspool field. This fill is terrestrial in origin and consists of coarse sand and some gravel. This filled area is approximately 20 feet wide and 60 feet long (approximately 1,200 sq. ft.). The current grade within this area is approximately 1-1.5 feet above the bottom elevation of the surrounding wetland pools. In order to restore this area to a condition similar to surrounding wetlands onsite it will be necessary to lower the elevations throughout the fill to that of the surrounding wet areas and move some of the wetland vegetation to be destroyed into this newly created depression. Helping You Put Knowledge to Work Cornell Cooperative Extension provides equal program and employment opportunities.NYS College of Agriculture and Life Sciences,NYS College of Human Ecology,and NYS College of Veterinary Medicine at Cornell University,Cooperative Extension associations,county governing bodies,and U.S.Department of Agriculture,cooperating. Work should begin with excavation of the fill from the back of the property and redeposition of this material near the front in the building envelope. It is essential that the heavy equipment used for this work not travel into the excavation once the elevation has been lowered as this will compact the soil and prevent plant establishment. Therefore, it may be necessary to excavate the rear portion of the fill first and work forward towards the road. When a significant area of fill has been removed the machine operator can then go to the wetland area to be filled and dig up some of the existing wetland vegetation. Salvage of this vegetation should involve removing the top 6 inches of wetland soil and organic matter and moving it as a"sod" or in large sections. This material is then spread evenly into the new excavation. This process should continue towards the road in increments that allow for excavation and replanting without entering the excavated area. It may be necessary to complete the excavation/replanting in 2 to 6 sections depending on the type and size of equipment used. Once the back of the proposed "clearing limit" is reached, excavation stops. cc: Chris and Colleen Connors Chris Smith i H-S Re%# RI0-94-007/ aFft 'TE, SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM DESIGN; e,7o Flvl5Nc 1 ell INCL UDING WALL- s c,P,�l BYt JCSEPN r/SCHET TI, P.E. HCBAr?T ,ROAD SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 1197/ �' sePr� �z S9 v 9 (516) 765-2954 I rAIJ I GRcyvO WArEe7 o F 0 PdE, --- - - _ V / p �j CA �.�ecYoeseac FiscyFT�:� GRADING PLAN APAR CYQ OA 0525' C. � 0FE:SSlc]V4 SURVEY FOi � r \ TAINING , �• , •. � ��. CHRIS TOPHER CO, =_ o �s , \ AT SOUTHOLD TO WN OF SOUTHOI R �+ SUFFOLK COUNTY, rE' 1000 59 -. 05 - 29 3 �o I/ Scale: 1 _. 40' z � .R ug. 31 1992 Nov. 3, 1993 (13 July 15, 1994:. (-Fill .0 , � _ . June :21,1995 ( :Re vi. �►� r /. Aug. 30, 1995 : v EPPR MUM DFPARTt►4EhfP OF Ntl.171i SERVICES Pi:. 27)1095 (Well, O i. l5, 1995 IRe vis APPROVAL OF C0;<ST.�JvTtON ONLY O l• 23, 1995 (re vis 25 1 �� 0 c. 2/ l995 (Re vi O 1. E YEO,R,S�RO!►4 DATE -+c ervallons OF APPROVAL Jr; 05 � 4 -•P,-aaccl in a:cor;iar.ce •:iti� fic -' 1 Bog .o b�rcmoYBd tiolYi Se.�-, _ SYs frn. �_:.._ ''` �"—` -•------_=---• � � OF �F u.�'�a eneompeso s��y �era�n "9 1,,;Q/i S ,� -E•. .._ :�'�-;�---.... -------•-+ ,4p.F, yY y �oo�irl s . .ji �c „f� cp Nt.METr 9 ; TOTS AREA = .20,000s4.If. ,°� aF� et 7.6 = proposed, ele vp1lon ARF1 OF WE TL ANDS = I? V. :"'' a, o��gUfFO(,�co Albert J. Krupski,President y� Gy Town Hall John Holzapfel, Vice President c 53095 Main Road v' Z P.O. Box 1179 Jim King py • �� Southold,New York 11971 Martin H. Garrell Peter Wenczel ��,( �a0 Telephone (516)765-1892 Fax (516)765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD April 25, 1996 William & Christopher Connors 5 Viking Road Glenwood Landing, NY 11547 Re: SCTM #59-5-29.3 Dear Mr. Connors, The following action was taken by the Board of Trustees at their regular meeting of April 24, 1996: RESOLVED that the Southold Town Board of Trustees approve the request for an Amendment to Permit #4567 to add a 6' X 50' deck onto the western side of house which will be buttressed to house with no pilings and no fill added to property. Located: 350 West Drive, Southold. If you have any questions, please feel free to call our office. Very truly yours, n Albert J. Krupski, Jr. President, Board of Trustees AJK/djh cc. CAC BLDG. DEPT. April 20, 1996 5 Viking Rd. PO Box 278 Glenwood Landing, NY 11547 I Mr. Albert Krupski, President D Southold Town Board of Trustees �� Southold Town Hall APR 2 A 06 Main Rd. Southold, NY 11971 ��.� ������ �.���� Re: Permit#4567 -" Connors 350 West Drive Dear Al, This is a follow up to my request dated 4/2/96 for an amendment to our wetlands permit#4567. I have enclosed a check for$40.00, along with a copy of our survey which outlines a 6ft. deck with pilings. As per my conversation with Diane, we are agreeable to reduce.the size of the deck from the 8ft. we originally requested to 6ft. This is a fair compromise and we feel this would still service our needs. Again, I wish to point out, the deck would be on the second story, approximately 16ft. above grade. There would be no obstruction to the wetlands and no effect on the light filtration. We own a total of 1/2 acre, but due to the nature of the property, we are limited to its use. The addition of this 6ft. deck would add significantly to the usage of our property. Thanking you in advance for giving this matter your attention, I.remain, Very truly yours, Colleen Connors & Town Hall, 53095 Main Road cn P.O. Box 1179 Telephone (516) 765-1801 � ' ��' Southold, New York 11971 SOUTHOLD TOWN CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL At the meeting of the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council held Monday, April 22, 1996,- the following action was made: A-49 Moved by Allan Connell, seconded by John Hagerty, it was RESOLVED to recommend to the Southold Town Board of Trustees APPROVAL WITH PROVISIONS of the request of WILLIAM AND COLLEEN CONNORS 59-5-29.3 to amend permit to add a deck on the western side of the house. Deck would be on the second story, a height of approximately 16'-17' above grade; 8' x 40' with additional pilings; or cantilever a 4' deck on the west side for the length of the house (40') and 16'-17' above grade. The Council recommends approval of the 4' deck on the west side of the house provided there is no additional disturbance to the wetlands in the form of additional pilings. 350 West Drive, Southold Vote of Council: Ayes: All Motion carried. ,. APR 2 3 1996 April 20; 1996 To _ ' 5 Viking Rd. FO Sox 278 N OF `��V�•��`�����' Glenwood Landing, NY 11547 Mr. Albert Krupski, President Southold Town Board of Trustees 'Southold Town Hall Main Rd. Southold, NY 11971 Re, Permit#4567 Connors 350 West Drive Dear Al, This i a a follow up to my request. dated 4/2/96 for an amerldnient to our wetlands permK#4567. . r I have enclosed a check for $40.00,.along witin �j copy of survey which outlines a 6ft. deck'with pilings. As per my conversation with Diane, we are agreeable to reduce the size of the deck from the 8ft...we originally requested to 6ft. This is a fair compromise and we feel this would still service our needs. Again, I wish to point out, the deck would be on the second story, approximately 16ft, above grade. There would be no obstruction to V to watiands and no effect on tho light filtration. We oi-tvn a total of 1/2 acre, but due to the nature of the property, we are limited to its iise. .The addition of this 6ft. deck would add sigr;,&&fitly to the usage of our property. Thanking you in advance for gi�,ing this mattor your Mteat�ort, I remain, Very truly yours, Colleen Connors v .y a �r '� w 0�1 H.S. ReL# R10-94-0071 a►��" `mot �o NOTE" SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM.DESIGN 7-0 efts fi"'rRAPe �� s5 r" k INCLUDING WALL , �- oizo BY, JO,TPN. FISCrHETTl, P.E. L , HOBART ROAD . I (rt T° rod W' o D, N,Y. t19T! SEPrle �s sI- t.Pre.ere►) r • c - - SOUTHOL ,- '� tANr .• `Z - - rsiso rss-zss4 } N el g MCA OF REP/pp • i7H AU1DE o fISC�G� C. e.�ac�eef� u�-Jrhor �► ti GRADING PLAN �{ 0 mac � ,q a, l^ o A �. SURVEYFOR CHRIS TOPHER CONNERS .L OivC. RETAWIN6 �O� AT SOUTHOLD 0 _ _ � �. •ems,__. � s --;�L TOWN OF SOUTHOLD _ - a ��_ C o .0 51 y SUFFOLK COUNTY, N.Y. f00 0-59-05-293 o c ! L 4� `�� ,r�, Scale: 1"= 40' 3 . ,. , ,o Aug. 31, 1992 Nov. 3,1993 (B.0.H revisions) ��' `� p. July 15, 1994 (.Fi11 Revision) �so June 21,1995 ( Revised.) 0. Aug, 30, 1995 (Revised) �- COIINNDJ'ARTbrTOF HFALIN SERII[CE 1. 2.7,1995 (Wetlands Flags) SO �. 15, 1995 (Revised) c GG �JIFPROV:L OF Oa'<'Si:�iJCTION OT�.Y t 23► 1995 (revisions 8 addit. 1 Q �..` �� (i7 �{ RcJ�1F �►�° OA�5M 2 1 �„ _ D c. 21, 1995 (Revised) (� 4 0� iy i��fit:i�`t9a ® �, to 1 ir . 7s and cesspools <� \ DES 1N�EE YEpAS FFOiIfiDATE OFAPPROVAC'��,om held obsmallo � •e -' '°�r - lalned from others ,\ %:pmvJ in•reroriame,iej F r c Re ie�v _ I . I I A 1019 ts.�fiheremove4 /om se.�:i.- lWe,. ��._... ae�E���Yn. AP,R"-22 — S6 MON A 4 : MS H.00II— CONNORS— _f-ACKSON R _ 0 1 r (516)488-3330 i (718)347-0148 FAX (51M 775-0831 N S U R ,A N C. E 340 JERICHO TURNPIKE FLORAL PARK,N.Y. 11001 FACIMILE COVER PAGE DATE: v� TO: � A D LGS✓ �.4 ATT: -�-=x-• -- FROM:_ Cr• � C.d�7/7D�S 2'8 1996 RE: ( ins ed a (D.O.L. ) COMMENTS: ;-f -lo[�131A Ig n — � SctaA - f y _ L4 TOTAL k OF PAGES. SENT: THANK YOU FOR GIVING THIS MATTER YOUR PROMPT ATTENTION.. IF YOU HAV NY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THE UNDERSIGNED. - - i N a L R M6 d; AP 3 April 2, 1996 1 q 5 Viking Rd. PO Box 1278 Glenwood Landing, NY 11547JVW'� i ,,)F �UU a ���+O D a - - Mr.Albert Krupski, President Southold Town Board of Trustees Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Permit#4567 Connors 350 West Drive ;�. Dear Al, First I w6RId like to extend my most sincere thanks to the Board for resolving this application in granting our long awaited wetland permit. Even with the granting of same, it was apparent that not all board members were in agreement-. I applaud the Board for being able to recognize the fact that a property owner should have some rights. I must be honest in saying however, that this house is not the house of our dreams, but understand and respect the boards decision. With that thought, in trying to design the perfect house on this not so perfect lot,we realize that a deck on the western side of the house, overlooking the Peconic Dunes would be greatly desired. The deck would be located on the second story, a height of approximately 16-17 ft. above grade. Ideally, we would like to propose'an 8ft x 40ft deck, which would require additional pilings, but no additional fill and would still be kept within the 10 ft. construction barrier. The silt fence and hay bales would remain as originally planned. But being the realist I am, if this is not acceptable to the board, I would ask that we be able to at least cantalever a Oft deck on the west side for the length of the house (40ft.) There will be zero obstruction/destruction to the wetlands and being 16-17 ft. above grade will not have any effect on the light filtration. In designing the plans for our home, it makes a difference in the construction in whether or not we plan to include this deck. We cannot file a plan with out a cantalever deck and then just amend it, structurally the entire plan must be changed to accommodate the inclusion of the deck. thank you for giving this matter your attention and remain, r Very truly yours, Colleen Connors 4VN 1 Ir lk\k \ HOOD-CONNORS-JACKSON AGENCY, INC. 340 JERICHO TURNPIKE FLORAL PARK, NEW YORK 11001 (516) 488-3330 (718) 347-0146 FAX (516) 775-0831 TO Dote 4/146i� lim � UV Ct/Y6 . 741 &LX ,- n � 6 /1-t. Item No.FC-20 AVAILABLE FROM BUSINESS ENVELOPE MANUFACRIPfRS,INC. DEER PARK,N.Y. ANAHEIM,CALIF. oc��FFULI'r Q Town Hall. 53095 Main Road ct� P.O. Box 1179 Telephone O � Southold. New York 11971 (516) 765-1801 01 SOUTHOLD TOWN CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL At the meeting of the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council held Thursday, August 24, 1995 the following action was taken: No. 1290 Moved by Bruce Loucka, seconded by Stephen Angell, .it was RESOLVED to recommend to the Southold Town Board of Trustees DISAPPROVAL of the Wetland Application of WILLIAMD AND CHRISTOPHER CONNORS 59-5-29.3 to construct a single family dwelling. The CAC recommends disapproval for the following reasons 1 . Project is located on Wetlands 2. Lot size is inadequate. 3. 67% of the lot is wetlands. 4. Located in flood zone. 5. Shallow watertable - septic system could impact the groundwater. 350 West Drive, Southold Vote of Council: Ayes: All . Motion carried. Albert J. Krupski,President p��SUFfo` Town Hall G John Holzapfel, Vice President =� 53095 Main Road co Jim King cc 2 P.O. Box,1179 Martin H. Garrell Oy !� Southold,New York 11971 Peter Wenzel Telephone (516) 765-1892 Fax (516)765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 22, 1996 Christopher Connors 5 Viking Road Glenwood Landing, NY 11547 RE: SCTM #k59-5-29. 3 Dear Mr. Connors: The following is a schedule of payments for environmental review for above referenced property; October 10, 1995 paid $1,625.0.0 8/31/95 to 10/2/95 billed. <763..75> 2/19/96, 2/2.8/96 billed <357.50> Balance as of 3/22/96 503.75 in applicants favor -- If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerel� , Albert J. Krupski, Jr.. President, Board of Trustees AJK:jmd cc.: Timothy CGllins APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS i South�gtd Town Hall Gerard P. Go ehringer,Chairman �' • 2 5306 09,S�1Iain Road Sere Doyen,Jr. y 2 P O. Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. O! . �a0 _ Sou[ho�d,New York 11971 Robert A.Villas °n`1JJ�1��x56)765-1823 Lydia A.Tortora TOWN�� `""�Telephone(516)765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS Appl.. No. 3648 as amended 2/13/96: Application of CHRISTOPHER . CONNORS, for a variance based upon a Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector, dated 2/8/96 for a building permit to construct single-family dwelling with an insufficient front yard setback, Article IIIA, Section 100-30A.3, and subject to obtaining. approval from the Southold Town Trustees and other appropriate agencies, concerning premises Down as 350 West Drive, Southold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-59-5-29.3. WHEREAS, after due notice, a public hearing was held on March 6, 1996, and at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all-testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, Board Members have personally viewed and are. familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1. This is an application for an "area" setback variance. The appellant has applied to the Building Inspector for permission to locate a proposed single-family dwelling. The application for- a building permit was disapproved on the grounds. that "under Article HIA, Section 100-30A.3, proposed construction will not have sufficient front yard setback - minimum 40 ft. required." 2. The subject lot is referred to as 350 West Drive, South- old, New York, and contains a lot width of 133.33 feet and lot area of 20,000 square feet. This parcel was created by town approval on March 16, 1972 under Appl. No. 1506 (Map of Druhl), and is vacant. 3. In this application, applicant proposes to locate a new dwelling at 26 feet from. the front property line along West Drive, Southold pursuant to recommendations and discussions with the Town Trustees' personnel, and locating a smaller house as far from the wetland area as possible. The remaining yard setbacks will be in accordance with the code requirements applicable to a nonconform- 1 s Page 2 - Appeal No. 3648 Application of CHRISTOPHER CONNORS & ano. Decision Rendered March 6, 1996 ing lot of this size (ref. Section 160-244 as amended 12/95).. 4. In considering this application, the following facts are also noted: (a) approval has been issued by the Suffolk County Department of Health dated January 25, 1996, under HS Ref. No. R=10-940071, in accordance with a Board of Review determination dated December 17, 1993. _ (b) by Supreme Court Order granted July 1, 1992, Justice Thomas M. Stark, it was ordered that this property is exempt pursuant to the Environmental Conservation Law, Section 24-1305 from having the requirement of a freshwater wetlands permit for land uses referred to in the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation letter dated June 25, 1992 (DEC Ref. No. 1-4738-00560/00001-0; (c) the Southold Town Board of Trustees have on February 28, 1996 issued a Negative* Declaration, determining non-significance under the SEQRA regulations; (d) under reviews by the Town Planning Board on or about March 24, 1970, the Town Board of Appeals dated March 16, 1972, and the Building Inspector dated December 13, 1972, it was determined that the lot was a separate lot for the purposes of zoning and building; (e) under Certificate of Occupancy No. Z-15292 dated February 23, 1987, the Building Inspector certified that the vacant lot conforms substantially to the applicable provisions of the Zoning Code (issued to Dorothy Babson and Daniel Gurkin); 5. Further, the Board finds and determines: (a) the circumstances are uniquely related to the sensitive nature, unique characteristics, dimensions, contours, and location of the property; (b) there is no alternative for applicants to pursue other than a setback variance; (c) the variance requested will create a minimal visual _ change in the character of the neighborhood along this street, and may cause a minor visual detriment, if any, to adjoining properties, although presently vacant, when comparing the difference of 14 feet {the code requirement of 40 feet less the requested 26 ft. setback, and any possible alternative to that figure); Page 3 - Appeal No. 3648 Application of CHRISTOPHER CONNORS & ano Decision Rendered March 6, 1996 (d) the relief requested is substantial at 14 feet, or, 35%, however, the reasons for this request are rational and necessary, and the variance as granted is the minimum which would allow some benefit to the property owner within reason, and at the same time not have an adverse effect or impact on physical or environmental conditions in the neighorhood (also see SEQRA Negative Declaration dated 2/28/96 by the Town Trustees); (e) it is not uncommon for an owner to request a set back variance in order to preserve the environmental character- istics of the property (such as wetland grasses, etc.); (f) the variance requested does not involve an increase in living area or dwelling unit density; (g) the relief requested will not cause a substantial effect on available governmental facilities since the structure is for single-family use in a residential zone district and residential neighborhood; (h) the variance will not in turn be adverse to the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience, or order of the town, or be adverse to neighboring properties, and the benefit to the applicant is greater when weighed against the health, safety, and welfare of the community; (i) the relief requested is not self-created by applicant; (j) in considering all the above factors, the interests of justice will be served by granting the variance as noted below. Accordingly, on motion by Member Dinizio, seconded by Member Doyen, it was RESOLVED, to GRANT a Variance for the front yard setback at 26 feet as requested (and shown on the Map last revised Octo- ber ,23, 19951 prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C. for the applicant). Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Goehringer and Dinizio. Nays: Members Tortora and Villa. This resolution was duly adopted (3-2 margin). (During a period of time in the deliberations prior to Member Dinizio's offering this motion, some dissention was discussed. The Chairman asked several times if Page 4 - Appeal No. 3648 Application of CHRISTOPHER CONNORS & ano. Decision Rendered March 6, 1996 anyone would like to offer a motion for alternative relief, however, no alternative motion was offered.) ZBA:lk ERARD P. GOEHRIN ER CHAIRMAN . BY ` 1 �• f Timothy Collins, AICP Environmental,Planning&Land Development Consultant 27 Joshua Edwards Court East Hampton,New York, 11937 (516)329-5930 Invoice submitted to: Board of Town Trustees Town of Southold 53095 Main Road i M _ 5 P.O. Box 1179 Southold NY 11971 March 2, 1996 Professional services Hrs/Rate Amount Conner Application 2/19/96 Review Plans. Prepare EAF Part II and Part III for review,by Town 4.50 292.50 Trustees 65.00/hr Conner Application 2/28/96 Revise EAF based upon comments. Finalize, print and fax to 1.00 65.00 Trustees. 65.00/hr Conner Application SUBTOTAL: [ 5.50 357.501` Town Trusttees !h6/96 Review revised SEQR regulations for changes'from previous taw. 2:25 146.25 Start draft of narrative to Trustees on Type I and Type II'Actions 65.00/hr _ Town Trusttees 1/18/96 Telephone conversation with NYSDEC. Finalize letterto Trustees 2.00 130.00 re: SEQRA regulations. 65.00/hr Town Trusttees 1/19/96 Review letter, revise and fax to Town in draft form 0.50 32.50 Town Trusttees 65.00/hr 1/26/96 Met with Board of Trustees on SEQR Law changes. 2.25 146.25 Town Trusttees 65.00/hr o��g11f Albert J. Krupski,President hQ• Gy Town Hall John Holzapfel, Vice President o < 53095 Main Road y = P.O. Box 1179 Jim Kin g Martin H. Garrell y� • � Southold,New York 11971 Peter Wenczel �,( �►� Telephone(516)765-1892 Fax (516) 765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD February 28, 19-96 William & Chris Connors 5 Viking Road Glenwood Landing, NY 11547 Re: SCTM ##59-5-25.3 Dear Mr. Connors, The following action was taken. by the Board of Trustees at their regular meeting of February 28, 1996: RESOLVED that the Southold Town Board of Trustees grant the following Negative Declaration for a one-family dwelling. See attached. If you have any questions, please feel free to call our office.. Very truly yours, Albert J. Krupski, Jr. President, Board of Trustees AJK/djh cc. CAC ZBA ' BLDG. DEPT. HEALTH DEPT. NEGATIVE DECLARATION :;'.. . Notice of Determination rmination of Non-significance U � h This notice is issued pursuant to-Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 f (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Conservation Law. The Town of Southold Board of Trustees, as'Lead Agency, has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared. Date: February 28, 1996 Project: Application of Christopher Conners Applicant: Christopher Conners Location: West Drive, Southold SCTM#: 1000-059.05-29.3 Brief Project Description: This application is a request for a wetland permit pursuant to Chapter 97 of the Town of Southold Code. The project involves the construction of a 25' x 40' two story dwelling, a 10' x 25' deck on the north, a 5' x 25' deck on the south, the installation of a sanitary system consisting of a septic tank and five.leaching pools, installation of a water supply well, and the construction of a 375 square foot driveway. Associated with the project and the installation of the sanitary system will be the construction of a retaining wall and placement of approximately 510 cubic yards of fill. The project site is a 20,000 square foot parcel located on the west side of West Drive, Southold. It contains approximately 13,000 square feet of freshwater wetlands, or approximately 65% of the site. The wetlands are associated with a larger system which extends to the south and west. A portion of the project site, located directly adjacent to the road, has been previously filled. Consequently, the northeastern portion of the site is considered to be uplands. The balance of the site has been identified as wetlands. The project has been significantly revised from a previous application by relocating and reducing the size of the improvements. All of the improvements have now been Located.entirely out of the wetlands.:: However, approximately 1,250 square feet of wetlands will be cleared as a result of the proposed action. This clearing is necessary to accommodate construction and filling activities.. The Board has considered other- alternatives, including acquisition, design alternatives and relocation of the neighbors well. To accommodate the location of the proposed dwelling, a variance is necessary from the Zoning Board of Appeals. This variance is necessary so as to minimize the disturbance to the wetlands. The Board finds that this proposal minimizes the disturbance to the wetlands to the greatest degree possible while'taken into consideration the. adjacent development and the applicants needs,. The proposed project is considered to be an unlisted action pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was prepared on . a former application and is included as part of the record. . _ .• Reasons Supporting V . _ ... . :_. _ `�• . ppomting This Determination: The.Board has taken•a hard look at the environtnentat consequences of this project and has determined that the project.has"been designed to the wetland setback,-and- disturbance' to the greatest degr ee. possible.- =:::.The .,Board` has•`Kalso considered various alternatives: _These include, acquisition design.altematives;►elocation of.the adjacent private w duct ell. and reion In the size.of roposed'improvem the pents.. `The:Board.finds that the project as proposed provides the applicant with'a reasonable use of the,property while minimizing the impacts to the wetlands, surface waters and groundwater systems to the greatest degree possible. Mitigation measures include; project limiting fence, hay bales, covenant protecting the wetlands in perpetuity, leaders and gutters leading to one or more dry wells, sanitary system which has been approved by the Suffolk County Department of Health Service and provides for a 3' separation between groundwater and the leaching pools and revegetation of disturbed areas after construction. Therefore, the project will not have a significant impact on the environment. Copies to: CAC ZBA Bldg. Dept. Health Dept. „z fps, FEB 2 � Special Conditions For R10-95-0071 -- 1. Unsuitable soils shall be removed and replaced with sand and gravel, acceptable to the Department, for a diameter six feet greater than the leaching pools (three foot collar) extending down into a minimum six foot strata of acceptable sand and gravel. 2. Maintain a minimum ten feet separation between retaining wall and leaching pools. Plan indicates that leaching pools may .be less than the required ten feet; therefore the actual location of the leaching pools or retaining wall may have to be adjusted to maintain the required separation. 3. A licensed design professional must inspect and certify construction according to the approved plan and conditions. 4: rom: rmomyGomns 16:Boaraof"fumes UMe 2hei90 ume:il:sci Page2 or 9 FEB-2 8 ! . Timothy C::olluis,AIC>' Environmental,Planning&Land Development Consultant T G q 27 Joshu:{Ldwarcls C:our6 , - _ Tti(��R Fast Hampton, New York 11937 (516)329-5930 Fax(51(i):329-6932 Fcblualy 28, 1996 ]Board of Town Trustees Town o('Southold Town 11ah 53095 Main Road Y.U. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 RE: WethuAd permit application of Christopher Conners, Southold. Dear Board Members: Enclosed -i-;)u will find the EnvironmcnW Assessment Fonns Parts II and III for 111c abo—,.- referenced application. The F,AF has been Prepared (br a nevative declaration. The Board should review the forms and if you agree with the detci-minatioil, a resolution can be adopted ane.the President can sign the (brills. The proposed action is considered an unlisted action pursuant to SEQRA. Consequently, coordinated review is not required and no routing is necessary. If the Board has any questions or requires fuidlcr ulfoination, please feel fice to contact tile. Yours truly, &zo� � Timo iy Collins, AICP TC: tc Elie. From:Timothy Collins To:Board of Trustees Date:,J28/96 Time:7:32:1 Page 3 of 9 Environmental Assessment Form, Part II BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Date: February 28, 1996 Project: Application of Christopher.Conners Applicant:. Christopher Conners Location: West Drive, Southold SCTM#: 1000-059-05-29.3 Brief Project Description: This application is a request for a wetland permit pursuant to Chapter 97 of the Town of Southold Code. The project involves the construction of a 25' x 40' two story dwelling, a 10' x 25' deck on the north, a 5' x 25' deck on the south, the installation of a sanitary system consisting of a septic tank and five leaching I»ols, installation of a water supply well, and the construction of a 375 square foot driveway. Associated with the project and the installation of the sanitary system will be the construction of a retaining wall and placement of approximately 510 cubic yards of fill The project site is a 20,000 square foot parcel located on the west side of West Drive, Southold. It contains approximately 13,000 square feet of freshwater wetlands, or approximately 65% of the site. The wetlands are associated with a larger system which extends to the south and west. A portion of the project site, located directly adjacent to the road, has been previously filled. Consequently, the northeastern portion of the site is considered to be uplands. The balance of the site has been identified as wetlands. The project has been significantly revised from a previous application by relocating and reducing the size of the improvements. All of the improvements have r°,ow been located entirely out of the wetlands.' However, approximately 1,250 square feet of wetlands will be cleared as a result of the proposed action. This clearing is necessary to accommodate construction and filling activities. The Board has considered other alternatives, including Requisition, design alternatives and relocation of the neighbors well. To accommodate the location of the proposed dwelling, a variance is necessary from.the Zoning Board of A,!,peals. This variance is necessary so as to minimize the disturbance to the wetlands. The Board finds that this proposal minimizes the disturbance to the wetlands to the greatest degree possible while taken into.consideration the adjacent development and the applicants needs. ,y The proposed project is considered to be ah unlisted action pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was prepared on a former application and is included as part of the record. 2 From:Timothy Collins To:Board of Trustees We:2/28/96 Ae:7:32:12� Page 4 of 9 IMPACT ON LAND 1. Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site? Yes, Approximately 8,250 square feet of the property will be disturbed as a result of the project. This includes approximately 7000 square feet of uplands and approximately 1,250 square feet of wetlands. The balance of the site will remain in its natural state. This represents approximately 59% of the site. The wetlands found, on the site are classified as both tidal and freshwater wetland. However, fre,'r field inspection, the highest quality wetland is located within the northwest portion of the site. The disturbance of the site will result in a slight loss of upland and i wetland habitats and an.increase in impervious surfaces. Construction activities may impact adjacent wetian,:. as a result of erosion of disturbed areas and sedimentation. Identified impacts have a potential for a large impact. Can impacts be mitigated? Yes. All clearing shall be limited to the clearing line as shown on the survey prepared by Peconic Surveyors dated revised December 21, 1995. Furthermore, a project limiting fence and hay bales, staked end to end, shall be placed along the clearing limit line and all disturbed areas shall be revejetated prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Finally, the wetland area bounded by the project limiting fence shall remain in its natural state in perpe�uity and a covenant shall be filed which provides for such protection. These mitigation measures will assist in controiling erosion, preventing sediments from reaching the wetlands and protect the wetlands 2. Will there be an affect to unique or unusual lane!forms found on the site? No. i IMPACT ON WATER 3. Will the proposed action affect any water body designated as protected? No. Located approximately 400 feet to the northwest is Great Pond. As part of the original application the Board felt that there was a potential for significant impacts to the pond. However, this proposal,has relocated all of the improvements out of the'trretlands. The proposed sanitary system has been located within the southeast cony„r of the site, futher away from the prime wetland area. The proposed leaching pools have also been shown to be elevated 3' above groundwater. The previous plan provided only a 2' separation distance between the bottom of the leaching pools and groundwater. As part of the construction of the sanitary system the bog material will be removed and replacoad with clean sand. The additional separation distance, along with relocating the sanitary system out of the wetlands, will allow for additional filtration of the effluent. This additional filtration,will assist in the further removal of pollutants contained in the effluent and provide further protection to the adjacent wetlands and surface waters. Other alt<<rnatives have been considered, however, this plan maximizes the setback to the greatest degree possible, provides for proper maintenance by future property owner and has been approved by the Suffolk County Dept. of Health Service. I 1 3 , From:Timothy Collins To:Board of Trustees i Dde:2/28/96.'lime:7:32:12 Page 6 of 9 4. Will the proposed action affect any non-protected or new body of water? No. See Item #3 above 5. Will the proposed action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? No.1. See Item #3 above. Furthermore, the proposed sanitary system and well has received the approval of the Suffolk County Department of Health Service. The Health Department has been,given the responsibility to review and approval of subsurface waste disposal system and water supply wells in Suffolk County. The proposed sanitary system has been dr:aigned tc exceed the Health Dept. requirement for a 2' separation distance betwr;en the leaching pools and groundwater(3' is proposed). This will assist to protect the groundwater and surface water quality and quantity. 6. Will the proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, nr surface water runoff? Yes. The proposed project will result in approximately 1,750 square feet of impervious surfaces. This will result in a slight increase in surface water runoff. This impact is felt to be a small to moderate impact. To assist in the proper disposal of the surface water runoff, the proposed dwelling should be equipped with, leader and gutters which empty into a dry well and the driveway shall be con:,o,ructed of pervious material. No!direct runoff shall be permitted to flow into the wetlands. IMPACT CNV AIR 7. Will the proposed action affect air quality? No. IMPACT ON PLANTS ANC:ANIMALS 8. Will the proposed action affect any threatened or endangered species? No. 9. Will the proposed action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species? No. IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 10. Will the proposed action affect agricultural land resources? No. i " From:Timothy Collins To:Board of Trustees Date:'2128/96 Tir:ra:7:38:10 Page 6 of 9 i N IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11. Will the proposed project affect aesthetic resources? No. The subject property is zoned for residential use. There are one and two story dwellings within the immediate vicinity of the site. The Project is compatible with the existing development. IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ki,tCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12. Will the proposed action impact any site or structure of historic, prehistoric or paleontological importance? No. IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 13. Will the proposed action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities? No. IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION 14. Will there be an affect to existing; transpo(tation syMems? No. IMPACT ON ENERGY- 15. Will the proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? No. NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS 16. Will there be objectionable odors, nois.-a or vibration as a result of the proposed action? No. 5 . From:Timothy Collins To:Board of Trustees Date:2128/96 Time:7:38:10 Page 7 of 9 IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH 17. Will the proposed action affect public health and safety? No. IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHAKACTER OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD .18. Will the proposed action affect the character of the existing community? No. 19. Is there, or is there likely to.be, public controversy related to potential adverse .environmental impacts? Yes. During the previous application nearby neighbors voiced concerns and objection on the development of the property. The Board will hold another public hearing to obtain comments from the public DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE i Environmental Assessment Forms, Parts I & II have been prepared for this project. Upon a review of the information recorded in these documents, and other supporting information, and considering both the magnitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by this Board that the project will not rest.11t in any large and important impacts. In that the project is on which vvill not have a significant impact on the environment, a negative declaration will be prepared. Signature of Preparer Alan J. Krupski, Jr., President Board of Trustees Town of Southold 5309 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 6 From:Timothy Collins To:Board of Trustees Date 2125196 Trre:7:38:104 Page 8 of 9 NEGATIVE DECLARATION Notice of Determination of Non-Sig This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the.implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental.Quality Review Act) of,the Environmental Conservation Law. The.Town'of Southold Board of Trustees, as,Lead Agency, has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared. Date: February 28, 1996 Project Application of Christopher Conners Applicant: Christopher Conners Location: : West Orive, Southold SCTM#: 1000-059-05-29.3 Brief Project Description: This application is a request for a wetland. permit pursuant to Chapter 97 of the Town of Southold Code. The project involves the construction of a 25' x 40' two story dwelling, a 10' x 25' deck on the north, a 5' x 25' deck on the south, the installation.of a sanitary system consisting of a septic tank and five.leaching pools, installation of a water supply well, and the construction of a 375 square foot driveway. Associated wi'h the project and the installation of the sanitary system will be the construction of a retaining wall and placement of approximately 510 cubic yards of fill. The project site is a 20,000 square foot parcel locate ad on thF: west side of West Drive, Southold. It contains approximately 13,000 square feet of freshwater wetlands, or approximately 65% of the site. The;wetlands are associated with a larger system wh'K;h extends to the south and west.- A portion of'.the project site, located directly adjacent to 'i'lie road, has been previously filled. Consequently, the northeastern portion of the site is considered to be uplands. The balance of the site has been identified as wetlands. The project has been significantly revised front a previous application by relocating and reducing the size of the improvements. All of the improvements have now been Located entirely out of the wetlands.i. However, approximately 1,250 square feet of wetlands will be cleared as a result of the proposed 'action: .This clearing is net-essary to accommodate construction and filling activities. The Board has considered other.alternatives, including acquisition, design alternatives and relocation of the neighbors well. To accommodate the location of the proposed dwelling, a variance is necessary from the Zoning Board of Appeals. This variance is necessary so as to minimize the disturbance to the wetlands. The Board finds that this proposal minimizes the disturbance to the wetlands to the greatest degree possible while taken into consideration .the. adjacent development and the applicants needs. The proposed project is considered to be an unlisted action.pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was prepared on a former application and is included as part of the record. 1 { 5. /Iins To:Board of Trustees Date:2/2W96 Time:7:38:10 Page 9 of 9 Reasons Supporting This Determination: The Board has taken a hard look at the environmental consequences of this project and has determined that the project has been designed to maximize the wetland setback and disturbance to the greatest degree possible. The Board has also considered various alternatives. These include, acquisition, design alternatives, relocation of the . adjacent private well and reduction in the size of the proposed improvements.. The Board finds that the project as proposed provides the applicant with a reasonable use of the property while minimizing the impacts to the wetlands, surface waters and groundwater systems to the greatest degree possible. Mitigation measures include, project limiting fence, hay bales, covenant protecting the wetlands in perpetuity, leaders and gutters leading to one or more dry wells, sanitary system which has been approved by the Suffolk County Department of Health Service and provides for a 3' separation between groundwater and the leaching pools and revegetation of disturbed areas after construction. Therefore, the project will not have a significant impact on the environment. Alan J. Krupski, Jr., President Board of Trustees Town of Southold 5309 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 For Further Information: Alan J. Krupski, Jr. President Board of Trustees Town of Southold 5309 Main.Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Phone: (516) 765-1892 Copies Of This Notice Sent To: ki President O0 Town Hall , Albert J. KrupsG John Holzapfel, Vice President o 53095 Main Road William G. Albertson co z P.O. Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Martin H. Garrell Gy • �� Peter Wenzel �1Q1 �.�� Telephone (516)765-1892 Fax(516) 765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD December 7, 1995 Roy Reynolds Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services County Center Riverhead, NY 11901 RE: Chris Connors 59-5-29.3 - R10-94=0071 Dear Mr. Reynolds: As per your letter of November 8, 1995, the Board of Trustees has no problem with the height of the retaining wall. However, the Zoning Code states that a front yard retaining wall cannot be more then 4' higher then the elevation, whatever that is made to be. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Si icerely ^ Albert J. Krupski, Jr. President, Southold Town Trustees AJK:jmd COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES MARY E. HIBBERD, M.D., M.P.H. COMMISSIONER I r it November_ 8 1995 i u1 I 3 %5 . 1 U7 Albert J. Krupski, Jr. `�. o Board of Trustees, Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P-O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Re: Chris Connors, SCTM# 1000-59-5-29. 3 R10-94-0071 Dear Mr. Krupski= I am in receipt of a copy of your October 27, 1995 letter_ to Mr. Connors concerning the above referenced property, A revised. application is presently pending with this Office. The revision involves the placement of the sewage disposal system towards the front of the property, as shown on the enclosed plan. It should be noted that a four to five foot high concrete retaining wall is proposed. Prior to making a decision on this revision, the Department would like to know if the Town has any restrictions or comments about such a wall. 1 look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible. If you have any questions concerr;izlg this please feel _free to contact, me. Yours truly, Royal R_ Reynolds, P.B. Bu?:.eau of Wastewater Management cc: C_ Connors Enclosure DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COUNTY CENTER RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901-3397 852-2100 � o Albert J. !SSupski, President �O G Town Hall John'Hb zapfel, Vice President c y�'e 53095 Main Road William G. Albertson CA _ P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Martin H. Garrell Gy • �� Peter Wenczel 't1p1 �.�� Telephone (516) 765-1892 Fax (516) 765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD October 27, 1995 Chris Connors 5 Viking Rd. Glenwood Landing, NY 11547 RE: SCTM #1000-59-5-29.3 Dear Mr. Connors: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Board of Trustees on Thursday, October 26, 1995 at the regular meeting; WHEREAS, On August 7, 1995 the Southold Town Trustees received a wetland application of CHRISTOPHER CONNORS to construct single family dwelling and associated improvements; and WHEREAS, based upon the letter of the Board' s consultant dated October 5, 1995, the Town Trustees by letter, to the applicant, dated October 6, 1995 determined the application to be incomplete; and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a revised survey prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C. , last revised on October 23, 1995; and WHEREAS, this Board has reviewed said survey and Timothy Collins, .AICP letter of October 26, 1995; and .WHEREAS, the location of the proposed improvements are acceptable for the purpose of scheduling a public hearing; however; WHEREAS, this Board finds that the location of the sanitary system and water supply well is critical in the design of the system and for the protection of the groundwater and surface waters; and WHEREAS, the Suffolk County-Department of Health Service is responsible for the review and approval of sanitary and water supply systems for .the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the application'of CHRISTOPHER CONNORS is hereby deemed incomplete pending the submission of the approval from the Suffolk County Department of Health Service for the proposed sanitary system and water supply well. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, Albert J. Krupski, Jr. President, Board of Trustees AJK;jmd enc. cc: Tim Collins, AICP Roy Reynolds, SCDH ZBA CAC , H.S. Ref.# 87 SO 93FW „A TN f/7.7 7i a/zs: � O 47.3 P/=P' ♦a'REBAa - S, •.1]XkPA11 ` N O - 6'7 SE PT/[ L.P,fc-�nr.) r ,„p.11 TANr Z O �WAreE ( I+ ' u v c.ediNa gyp. py�� .91 —— — h �j o b. rE rc r ' s GRADE a�j" d`, '/I --— GRADING PLAN — —— — �. �y ,�• LL,, �-o SOS•�" .. i� � 9 $0 w s ,,+ 6y". ':. O SURVEY FOR .p� 3"' r °aP��� \\ t� P�btiy d d�+e+�� �5 L Cf-IRISTOPHER CONNERS PROPOSED CONC. RETAINING `0\�C,� F, �• =� $ ( \ AT SOUTHOLD WALL \1 \NO 1� TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Test Hole a _ •r F' `�� y SUFFOLK.COUNTY, NY 1000-59-05-29.3 �aa�y o � : •: o Scale: 1"= 40' Sand Aug. 31, 1992 ti v r. Nov. 3,1993 (B.O.Hrevisions) e�. `gym. \� _ = Q19 4 July 15, 1994• ( Fill Revision) June 21,1995 ( Revised ) Aug. 30, 1995 (Revised) 0 Sept. 27,1995 (Wellands Flags) P� Oc(. 15, 1995 (Revised) Ocl.- 23, 1995 (revisions & addit. ) 0 5 �1 The locations of wells and cesspools shown hereon are from fleld observations and or from data obtained from others. \ TOTAL AREA,= 20,000sq.11. s�, ,.„F p ef. 7.8 =pioposed elevation. AREA OF WETLANDS = 13,500sq.11= , o°N__ r'ZeF\�% —6— =proposed contour SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTkENT OF HEALTH SERVICES - ---- -- ;- 1k, FOR APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION ONLY ESTIMATED FILL - 5/0= cu.yds. FEMA FLOOD ZONE A EL /1 I - �? 7�pared/n accordance with the minimum i S`21 . N0. 49618 DATE w.c 87 SO 93 I�fI'I Bards for lltle surveys as established The locations o/ wells and cesspools L 09 2 5 M5 .b he L.I.A.L.S. and approved and adopted PECON/C :Ygl�$; C. shown hereon are from field observations or'such use by The New York State Land (5/6) 765 - 50 r--�TIJI Assoclolion. P. O. BOX 909 and or from data obtained from others. T r ,� 7: APPROVED J.0 f� Gr �,. L ,:JL�, MAIN ROAD ELtVA77ONS ARE REFEREMCEDTO Mr.VA rv:_,v..L ,o/as/y.. SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 00-9AR, OCT 3 0 19% Timothy Collins,AICPO = T Environmental,Planning&Land Development Consultant ; ? W F 27 Joshua Edwards Court East Hampton, New York 11937 (516)329-5930 Fax(516)329-6932 October 26, 1995 Town of Southold Board of Trustees 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold New York 11971 RE: Wetland permit application of Christopher Connors,West Drive, Southold. Dear Board Members: I am in receipt(by fax) of the revised survey for the above reference application last dated October 23, 1995. I have reviewed this survey as it relates to the information requested in my previous letter dated October 5, 1995 and supported by the Trustees. It appears that the revised survey has addressed the items previously requested. The proposed project now includes a 25' x 40' two story dwelling, decking, driveway, sanitary and well. The sanitary system consists of five leaching pools, septic tank and is located within the southeast portion of the property, adjacent to the road. The well is located within the northeast corner of the property, adjacent to the Swartz's well. It appears that all of the improvements have been located outside of the flagged wetlands. The only disturbance to the wetland will occur from clearing necessary for the construction of the sanitary system and dwelling. This clearing consists of a 10' area along the perimeter of the improvements. The only remaining outstanding item is the approval of the sanitary system and well location by the Suffolk County Department of Health Service. As part of the sanitary system plan, the applicant has designed the leaching pools so that they are located 3' above groundwater. This exceeds the Health Departments present requirements and provides an additional protection to the groundwater and adjacent surface waters. The Health Department is given the responsibility to insure that the sanitary system and well supply is designed to protect human health, safety and general welfare. Therefore, it is important that the proposed plan be reviewed and approved by the Health Department prior to the Trustee's review. Consequently it would be my suggestion that the application be deemed incomplete pending submission of the Health Department approval. It appears that the applicant has made positive steps to minimize the disturbance to the wetlands contained on-site. While there may be some minor changes or mitigation required, such requirements cannot be specifically determined until after the public hearing. However, the Trustees can provide some direction to the applicant with respect to the concept. Attached for the Trustees consideration is a draft resolution which declares the application incomplete, pending Health Department approval. If you have any questions or require further information, please contact me. Yours truly, Timothy Collins, AICP TC: tc Enc. Draft Resolution of the Town Trustees WHEREAS, On August_, 1995 the Town Trustees received a wetland permit application of Christopher Conners to construction a single family dwelling and associated improvements; and WHEREAS,based upon the letter of the Board's consultant dated October 5, 1995, the Town Trustees by letter, to the applicant, dated October 6, 1995 determined the application to be incomplete; and WHEREAS,the applicant has submitted a revised survey prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C., last revised on October 23, 1995; and WHEREAS, this Board has reviewed said survey and Timothy Collins, AICP letter of October 26, 1995; and WHEREAS, the location of the proposed improvements are acceptable for the purpose of scheduling a public hearing; however, WHEREAS,this Board finds that the location of the sanitary system and water supply well is critical in the design of the system and for the protection of the groundwater and surface waters; and WHEREAS, the Suffolk County Department of Health Service is responsible for the review and approval of sanitary and water supply systems for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the application of Christopher Connors is hereby deemed incomplete pending the submission of the approval from the Suffolk County Department of Health Service for the proposed sanitary system and water supply well. OSVff�(�►C' . Albert J. Krupski,President �O�' �p .Town Hall John Holzapfel, Vice President c y1 53095 Main Road William G. Albertson ti Z P.O. Box 1179 • ^' Southold, New York 11971 Martin H. Garrell Peter Wenzel y�1pl �.a�! Telephone (516) 765-1892 Fax(516) 765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD October 27, 1995 Chris Connors 5 Viking Rd. Glenwood Landing, NY 11547 RE: SCTM #1000-59-5-29.3 Dear Mr. Connors: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Board of Trustees on Thursday, October 26, 1995 at the regular meeting; WHEREAS, On August 7, 1995 the .Southold Town Trustees received a wetland application. of CHRISTOPHER CONNORS to construct single family dwelling and associated improvements; and WHEREAS, based upon the letter of the Board' s consultant dated October 5, 1995, the Town Trustees by letter, to the applicant, dated October 6, 1995 determined the application to be incomplete; and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted. a revised survey prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C. , last revised on October 23, 1995; and WHEREAS, this Board has reviewed said survey and Timothy Collins., AICP letter of October 26, 1995; and WHEREAS, the location of the proposed improvements are acceptable for the .purpose of scheduling a .public hearing; however; WHEREAS, this Board finds that the location of the sanitary system and water supply well is critical in the design of the system and for the protection of the groundwater and surface waters; and WHEREAS, the Suffolk County Department of Health Service is responsible for the review and approval of sanitary and water supply systems for .the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the application of CHRISTOPHER CONNORS is hereby deemed incomplete pending the submission of the approval from the Suffolk County Department of Health Service for the proposed sanitary system and water supply well.. I€ you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, Albert J. Krupski, Jr. President, Board of Trustees AJK;jmd enc. cc: Tim Collins, AICP Roy Reynolds, SCDH ZBA CAC from:Timothy Collins To: Board of Trust3e; Date:10126lJ5 Time:13:57:09 Page 2 of 4 ' Timothy Collins, AICP Environmental,Planning&LandDevelopment Consultant TF .. ^ �27 Joshua Edwards Court !jEastHampton, NewYork 11937 -_ ���� (516)329-5930 �J Fax(516)329-6932 ' a October 26, 1995 Town of Southold Board of Trustees 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold New York 11971 RE: Wetland permit application of Christopher Connors, West Drive,Southold. Dear Board Members: I am in receipt(by fax) of the revised survey for the above reference application.last dated October 23, 1995. .I have reviewed this survey as it relates to the information requested in my previous letter dated October 5, 1995 and supported by the Trustees. It appears that the revised survey has addressed the items previously requested. The proposed project-now includes a 25' x 40' two story dwelling, decking,.driveway, sanitary and well. The sanitary system consists of five leaching pools; septic tank and is located within the southeast portion of the property, adjacent to the road. The well is located"within the northeast corner of the property, adjacent to the Swartz's well. It appears that all of the improvements have been located outside of the flagged wetlands. The only disturbance to the wetland will occur from clearing necessary for the construction of the sanitary system and dwelling. This clearing consists of a 10' area along the perimeter of the improvements. The only remaining outstanding item is the approval of the sanitary system and well location by the Suffolk County Department of Health Service. As part of the sanitary system plan, the applicant has designed the leaching pools so that they are located 3' above groundwater. This exceeds the Health Departments present requirements and provides an additional protection to the groundwater and adjacent surface waters. The Health Department is given the responsibility to insure that the sanitary system and well supply is designed to protect human health, safety and general welfare. Therefore, it is important that the proposed plan be reviewed and approved by the Health Department prior to the Trustee's review. Consequently it would be my suggestion that the application be deemed incomplete pending submission of the Health Department approval. It appears that the applicant has made positive steps to minimize the disturbance to the v.etlands contained on-site., While there may be.some minor changes or mitigation required, such From:Timothy Collins To: Board of Trustee, Date:10/26/95 Time:13:58:18 Page 3 of 4 requirements cannot be specifically determined until after the public hearing. However, the Trustees can.provide some direction to the applicant with respect to the concept. Attached for the Trustees consideration is a draft resolution which declares the application incomplete, pending Health Department approval. If you have any questions or require further information, please contact me: Yours truly, Timothy Collins, AICP TC: tc. Enc. Rom:Timothy Collins To: Board of Trustee Date:10/26/95 Time:13:58:56 Page 4 of 4 (7T Draft Resolution of the Town Trustees A N OF SOUaHOLP WHEREAS, On August , 1995 the Town Trustees received a wetland permit application of Christopher Conners to constructft a single family dwelling and associated improvements; and WHEREAS, based upon_the letter of the Board's.consultant dated October 5, 1995, the Town Trustees by letter; to the applicant, dated October 6, 1995 determined the application to be incomplete; and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a revised survey prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C., last revised on October.23, 1995; and WHEREAS, this Board has reviewed said survey and Timothy Collins, AICP letter of October 26, 1995; and WHEREAS, the location of the proposed improvements are acceptable for the purpose of scheduling a public hearing;however, WHEREAS, this Board fmds that the location of the sanitary system and water supply well is critical in the design of the system_and for the protection of the groundwater and surface waters; and WHEREAS, the Suffolk County Department of Health Service is responsible for the review and approval of sanitary and water supply systems for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the application of Christopher Connors is hereby deemed incomplete pending the submission of the approval from the Suffolk.County Department of Health Service for the proposed sanitary system and water supply well. ® �o� oGf JUDITH T. TERRY = � ``" ���'a ,Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 TOWN CLERK G r,r► OCT 2 0 1995 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS :" y hold. New York 11971 MARRIAGE OFFICER ax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-I80 l OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN'OF SOUTHOLD APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO RECORDS INSTRUCTIONS: Please complete Section I of this form and give to Town Clerk's Office (agency Freedom of Information Officer)'. One copy will be returned to you in response to your request, or as an interim response. SECTION 1. TO: /ZC (Department or Officer, if known, that has the information you are requesting. ) RECORD YOU WISH TO INSPECT: (Describe the record sought. If possible, supply date, file title, tax map number, and any other pertinent information. ) Signature of Applicant.* Printed Name: L) '�_ AI k � �/� Address: Z /- Mailing Address (if different from above) Telephone Number: / �j r Date: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------ --------------------- [//]---APPROVED L l APPROVED WITH DELAY* [ ] DENIED* Q C E I V E D ' Judith T. Terry C/ Date Freedom of Information Officer Southold fawn Clerk * If delayed or denied see reverse side for explanation. %IFFO� CD Town PLO 53095 Box 1Main 9 n Road �C Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 0 Telephone (516) 765-1801 LAND PRESERVATION COMMITTEE . w TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 13 OCT 1 7 199 TO: Albert Krupski, President Board of Trustees FROM: Joseph M. Gold,Chairman DATE: October 17, 1995 RE: Christopher Connors SCTM #1000-59-5-29.3 I have reviewed the attached survey as to the suitability of this property for acquisition under the Open Space Program. As I mentioned to you, there is currently no money available in the Open Space Program. However, even when funds may be authorized in the future, this property does not meet the criteria in the Open Space section of the Town Code. It is too small to measurably add to or subtract from the character of the area, and it possesses no unique uses or vistas. Unless there are circumstances not apparent in the survey, this property is not suitable for acquisition under the Open Space Program. If you have any questions, please feel free to call. JMG:jw October 14, 1995 5 Viking Rd. PO Bo .?.7-8 — Glenwood Landing, NYC 1 C�47( ,[ Q. z�� OCT 1 7 1995 p Al Krupski, President Board of Trustees, Town of Southold pa �v 53095 Main Rd. PO Box 1179 �' Southold, NY'11971 ���u iv ������ Re: Connors SCTM 59-5-29.3 Dear Mr. Krupski, By means of this letter,we wish to restate our position on why we have proposed a plan which locates our septic system in the S/E corner or our property in lieu of the N/E. As you are aware,the only way possible to propose a plan which would locate the septic system on the N/E comer of our property, would require the cooperation of our neighbor to relocate their well, of course the expense to do so would have been ours(as stated in our letter dated 5/8/95.) Our reasons for rejecting and not pursuing this matter further was due to the terms and conditions in which our neighbor would consider our request. (Please refer to their letter dated 7/21/95.) First,with respects to the actual house plan, height and location,the plans have been amended numerous times to meet your requirements and may continue to be altered before we finally receive a permit. It was and is still not possible to state the exact location, size and height until we are granted an actual permit. We wouldn't have been able to proceed with our application. Second, if we could not comply with the first, in exchange for the relocation of their well,we were requested to permanently change our deed to restrict the height on any house built to a one story. After careful consideration,we decided that this was not a viable option. It did not have any bearings on the environmental issues at hand. In addition, even if we accepted a one story dwelling,we feel we could not make a permanent change which would restrict the value of the property in the future. Third and final,we also considered the strong possibility that we would be unable to meet our neighbors satisfaction with respects to the water quality and purity. Thanking you for your continued effort in this matter, I remain, Very truly yours, Colleen Connors cc October 5, 1995DI OCT 10 1995 5 Viking Rd. PO Box 278 TgWN OF SOUTHOLD Glenwood Landing, NY 11'S4a Al Krupski, President Board of Trustees, Town of Southold 53095 Main Rd. PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Connors SCTM 59-5-29.3 Dear Mr. Krupski, Enclosed you will find our check for$1625, made payable to the Trustees for the,services of Tim Collins,AICP. For the first time in over eight years, I feel that the Town is working towards a final resolution on this project and wish to express my sincere thanks. I would like to bring to the Trustees attention the fact that the expenses we have already incurred and continue to incur on this project are very costly, l realize that this project has had many difficulties and obstacles. The fact that Tim Collins original estimate of$1,000 was increased to $1625, a 60% increase, is just one example of the,many additional expenses we have had to be responsible for. The strain this has put my family through both financially and emotionally is almost more than one can bear:.On a brighter note; for once I,feel extremely confident in having Tim Collins,working along with the Trustees,will bring a final resolution to this matter and that my family and I will be able to build our home, albeit much smaller than we had originally planned, at long last. Finally, I must express my concerns with respects to the SCHD, building dept. and ZBA. It is apparent that if the Trustees do approve and issue a wetlands permit,we will.still have other agencies and departments to go through before construction could actually begin and ask for your assistance in coordinating these efforts. After working on this project for so long I am sure you can understand how we don't want to be held up in another department. Thanking you, I am, Very truly yours, Colleen Connors CC encl. cc: Judge Cohalan index#20674-94 Albert J. Kru ski President OO Town Hall p Gym John Holzapfel, Vice President 53095 Main Road o= .� William G. Albertson ca z P.O.Box 1179 O' ^' Southold, New York 11971 Martin H. Garrell • `� Peter Wenczel y'tJQl �.a�! Telephone (516) 765-1892 Fax (516)765-1823 . BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD October 6, 1995 Chris Connors 5 Viking Road Glenwood Landing, NY 11547 RE: SCTM #1000-59-5-29.3 Dear Mr. Connors: Enclosed please find a letter dated October 5, 1995 from the Board's Consultant, Tim Collins. The Board is in agreement with this letter and asks you to conform with same. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, ,. Albert J. Krupski, Jr. President, Board of Trustees AJK:jmd cc: Tim Collins f Timothy Collins,AICP o cr Environmental,Planning&Land Development Consultant 61995 27 Joshua Edwards Court East Hampton, New York 11937 00j/ (516)329-5930 � ��D Fax(516)329-6932 October 5, 1995 Town of Southold Board of Trustees 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold New York 11971 RE: Wetland Permit application of Christopher Connors,West Drive, Southold. Dear Board Members. I have had an opportunity to review the latest survey-submitted for the above application and wish to offer the following. The survey has been revised to include the wetland line which I flagged and has been verified by the Board of Trustees. The wetland line was identified based upon the predominance of freshwater wetland vegetation. While there may be other tidal and freshwater wetland vegetation found on the site, this wetland vegetation is also mixed with upland vegetation. Therefore, those areas can be considered to be a transitional area and not a true wetland. Given the predominance of the wetland vegetation found on the site the quality of the wetland should also be considered. The freshwater wetland presently shown on the survey is considered to be a high quality wetland, with the best wetland system being located within the northwest section of the property. In a review of this latest survey and the application submitted it is recommended that the survey be further revised to include a clear identification of the wetland line and also clearly identifies the proposed improvements. Specifically, I would recommend the following; 1. It appears that by reducing the required front yard setback to approximately 26' and a reduction in the size of the proposed dwelling, a dwelling could be placed on the property with a minimum disturbance to the wetland. While this would require applying to the Zoning Board of Appeals for a variance, the Board should explore all options which would minimize the disturbance to the wetlands. Therefore, the applicant should be requested to explore this option. 2. Because of the location of the adjacent well to the north, it appears that the most appropriate location of the proposed sanitary system would be within the southeast portion of the property. However, if not already attempted, the applicant should contact the adjacent property owner and offer to relocate their well. A copy of that offer and the adjacent owners response should be include in the Board's file. 3. Only one sanitary system should be shown on the survey. Further, building envelope setbacks and the old wetland line should also be removed from the survey. 4. The proposed sanitary system should be located out of the wetlands, if at all possible. If it is necessary to disturb wetlands, this should be kept to a minimum. It appears that a sanitary system could be located within the southeast corner of the property. By locating the fill and retaining wall approximately 20 feet off of the property line, it appears a dwelling and sanitary system could be shown, with minimal disturbance to the wetland. As part of the proposal, a proposed grading plan and cross sectional detail of the proposed sanitary system should be included. The cross section should demonstrate that the proposed leaching pool will maintain a 2 foot separation between the groundwater and bottom of the leaching pool. The quantity of fill should be shown. To provide further protection to the groundwater and the adjacent wetland/surface water system, it may be appropriate to increase the separation distance to 3 feet. S. A proposed clearing line should be shown on the survey. This clearing line should minimize the disturbance to the wetland to the greatest degree possible. 6. Calculations should be provided for the total lot area, area of wetland, area of pervious surfaces, and area of clearing. 7. The Board should discuss the possibility of requiring Health Department approval for the new plan, prior to granting the final wetland permit. However, you way wish to consider the revised plan and provide some comments to the applicant. If the plan is.reasonably acceptable to the Board, then the applicant can proceed to the Health Dept. Based upon the above information, it is recommended that this application be deemed incomplete until such time as a revised survey is submitted and the applicant addresses each of the above items. If the Board has any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours truly, Timoth Collins, AICP TC:tc Timothy Collins, AICP r� �3- Environmental,Planning&Land Development Consultant 27 Joshua Edwards Court 91 East Hampton,New York, 11937 (516) 329-5930 TOWI 0 U�.�®LD Invoice submitted to: Board of Town Trustees +- n Town of Southold LI OCT 61995 53095 Main Road IT P.O. Box 1179 OWN OF SOUTHOLD Southold NYY11971 �, SOUTH OLD 4. 1995 Professional services Hrs/Rate Amount 8/31/95 Met with Board of Trustees to discuss project 1.00 NO CHARGE Conner Application. 65.00/hr 9/5/95 Travel to Town and Review Trustees files. Field inspect the project 3.00 195.00 site. Key out vegetation found on the site. 65.00/hr Conner Application 9/8/95 Prepare proposal and letter to Trustees. 1.00 NO CHARGE Conner Application 65.00/hr 9/10/95 Prepare letter to Trustees re: issue of incomplete for application and 1.25 81.25 SEQRA 65.00/hr Conner Application 9/12/95 Field inspect the site and flag the wetland line. 1.50 97.50 Conner Application 65.00/hr 9/20/95 Travel to site and met with trusttees and applicant on location of 2.50 162.50 wetland line. 65.00/hr Conner Application 9/21/95 Prepare memo of field inspection and vegetation listing and 0.50 NO CHARGE meeting on the site with client and Trustees 65.00/hr Conner Application 9/28/95 Review survey for completness pursuant to SEQRA and 3.50 227.50 regulations. Prepare sketches for alternatives. Attend Trustee work 65.00/hr session to review proposal. Conner Application t_ w Board of Town Trustees Page 2 Hrs/Rate Amount 10/2/95 Stop at Trustees office and pick up and review information on 1.00 NO CHARGE application. 65.00/hr Conner Application For professional services rendered 15.25 $763.75 Balance due $763.75 Albert J. Krupski, President �O��gUF�O[�co� Town Hall John Holzapfel, Vice President c �1 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 William G. Albertson v' = Southold, New York 11971 Martin H. Garrell Peter Wenczel �Ipl ��O Telephone (516) 765-1892 Fax (516) 765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 29, 1995 Christopher Connors 5 Viking Road Glenwood, NY 11547 RE: SCTM #1000-59-5-29. 3 Single Family Dwelling Dear Mr. Connors: Please find the enclosed estimate for the Environmental. Review of the above referenced project. This estimate is due in full as soon as possible. Once payment is received the review will continue. Any monies left over after completion of review, will be returned to you. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely Albert J. Krupski, Jr. President, Board of Trustees AJK: jmd cc: Tim Collins Timothy Collins,AICP Environmental,Planning&Land Development Consultant 27 Joshua Edwards Court East Hampton, New York 11937 (516)329-5930 Fax(516)329-6932 September 29, 1995 Town of Southold Board of Trustees 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold New York 11971 RE: Wetland Permit application of Connors, Southold Dear Board Members: With reference to the above application, I estimate the total number of hours to field inspect the site, flag the wetland, and conduct an environmental assessment of the project pursuant to the requirements of SEQRA to be approximately 25 hours. At an hourly rate of$65.00 the estimate cost for this project is $1,625.00. While this estimate may seem high, it should be noted that this project has had an extensive history which has already been the subject of an Article 78 proceeding. This estimate assumes a substantial effort will be necessary to resolve this application. If you have any questions or require further information, please contact me. Yours truly, Timothy Collins, AICP TC:tc From:Timothy Collins To:Jill-Board of Trustees Date:9/29/95 Time:11:46:12 Page 2 of 2 Timothy Collins,AICP Environmental,Planning dt Laid Development Consultant 27 Joshua Edwards Court East Hampton, New York 11937 (516)329-5930 Fax(516)329-6932 September 29, 1995 Town of Southold Board of Trustees 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold New York 11971 RE: Wetland Permit application of Connors, Spathold Dear Board Members: With reference to the above application, I estimate the total number of hours to field inspect the site, flag the wetland, and conduct an environmental assessment of the project pursuant to the requirements of SEQRA to be approximately 25 hours. At an hourly rate of$65.00 the estimate cost for this project is $1,625.00. While this estimate may seem high, it should be noted that this project has had an extensive history which has already been the subject of an Article 78 proceeding. This estimate assumes a substantial effort will be necessary to resolve this application. If you have any questions or require further infoln]ation, please contact me. Yours truly, Timothy Collins, AICP TC:tc ® Albert J. Krupski, President ��SUFFO(�� �' �y� 53095 Main Road Town H John Holzapfel, Vice President s y P.O. Box 1179 William G. Albertson v- ,,, Martin H. Garrell ® Southold, New York 11971 Peter Wenczel '�1p1 ��O Telephone (516) 765-1892 Fax (516) 765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 29, 1995 Timothy Collins, AICP Environmental, Planning & Land Development Consultant 27 Joshua Edwards Court East Hampton, NY 11937 The following action was taken by the Southold Town Board of Trustees on Thursday, September 28, 1995; RESOLVED that the Southold Town Board of Trustees retains TIMOTHY COLLINS, AICP, Environmental, Planning & Land Developement Consultant of 27 Joshua Edwards Court, East Hampton, New York 11.937, 329-5930, as the Trustees Environmental Consultant as needed at a rate of $65 . 00 an hour. Affective September 1, 1995. Also, RESOLVED that this resolution be sent to the Town Board for there verification. Fees will be a charged back to the applicant after an estimate of each particular project is given. If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, n Albert J. K/rupski, Jr. President, Board of Trustees AJK:jmd CC: Town Board KENNEY'S BEACH CIVIC ASSOCIATION Monday, September 11, 1995 -- - D1 - 4 Mr. Timothy Collins SEP 1 4 199� Southold Town Consultant ...J Southold Town �711nq�,1 �� �9D Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Connorsl59-5-29.3 Dear Mr. Collins, I was advised that you would be reviewing the above referenced new survey as the wetland lines are not correctly defined on the old revised survey. Because of the severe drought that we are experiencing, this wetland area and the wetlands around it, are dry. Great Pond is at an all time low. The Executive Board of the Kenney's Beach Civic Association feels it is inappropriate to have the wetlands lines redefined at this time. Establishing a groundwater table at this time of severe drought will also lead to erronious readings. We would suggest local observations after a normal winter and spring. I would like to extend to you the invitation of visiting the area You may also gain access to Great Pond from my property on Lake Drive (The Ark - 5th house in on Lake Drive) to see the amount of drastic deprivation of water due to this drought. Sincerely, Arline Richter, President cc: Mr Albert KruP ski Trustee The first step in any wetland permit application should be the identification and delineation of the wetland. Without an accurate representation of the wetland an assessment of the project cannot be conducted nor can the Board provide the applicant with clear direction. In this particular application, it appears that the Board has some concern that the wetland edge presently shown on the survey is not accurate. Based upon my field inspection, I would concur with the Board. On Tuesday (September 12, 1995) I will flag the upper edge of the wetland contained on this - site. When the Board conducts your field inspections on September 20, 1995, I would like to arrange to meet with the Board on-site and review the location of the flags. If the Board agrees with the delineation of the wetlands, , the applicant should be requested to revise the survey to show the wetland line as delineated by the Town of Southold Town Trustees. I would also suggest that the survey be revised to include the location of the disturbance and filling which previously took place. Additional information may be necessary at a later date, depending upon the final design. Given the past history of this application, it would be worthwhile to resolve this difficult project through a, cooperative effort. This should include the Board, applicant and interested parties. Once the survey has been revised the Board may wish to schedule a work session to discuss alternative development proposals for the site. I would be more than happy to prepare a number of alternative for consideration. However, the first step should be obtaining a revised survey which includes a accurate representation of the wetlands. If the Board agrees with this approach, it would be my recommendation that the application be deemed incomplete pursuant to Chapter 97, Wetlands, and Chapter 44 (Environmental Quality Review) . The Applicant should be notified in writing and requested to submit the revised survey at their earliest convenience. If the Board and/or Applicant has any questions or requires further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours truly, Timothy Collins, AICP TC: tc np SEP 1 2 1995 Timothy Collins,AICP TOWN ,� p Environmental,Planning&Land Development Consultant TO N OF SOP P T 27 Joshua Edwards Court a_ East Hampton, New York 11937 (516)329-5930 September 10, 1995 BY FAX\MAIL Board of Trustees Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 RE: Wetland permit application of Christopher Connors, West Drive, Southold. Dear Board Members: I have had an opportunity to review the application and survey for the above project and conducted a preliminary field inspection of: the site. As indicated ,by ;the� Board.and -other correspondence contained 'iri the :file the subject site' Is composed primarily of freshwater- wetland. vegetation and tidal- wetland vegetation. - ' This vegetation''consists of Common Reed (Phragmites) , Marsh Fern (Thelypteris palustris) , Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) , Wool Grass (Scirpus cyperinus) , Red Maple (Acer rubrum) and Groundsel bush (Baccharis halimifolia) . The red maple and groundsel bush are along the upper edges of the wetland. The site has also been previously disturbed as a result of past filling operations. If funds are not available from the State, County, Town or other conservation groups for the purchase of this property the Board should be aware that the property owner has a right to a oreasonable used of the property. The Trustees on the other hand are given the responsibility to protect, preserve and insure the proper maintenance and use of the wetlands (Section 97-11 B) . The goal in the Board's review of this application should be to provide a reasonable use of the property for the owner and .at the same time minimizing, to the greatest degree possible, the disturbance , and impacts to the wetlands.-'From my field inspection of the .site it appears that there. willAbe some �'disturbance to the wetlands;_ no .matter where on the 'site the improvements are ,placed. This is,.-unavoidable, if development -is 'to .take place. I p 0 W E 5 f995 ALLJAMES MANOS ATTORNEY AT LAW TOWN ®rr SOUTH,Oy gC-D.� 2147 LAKE DRIVE P.O. BOX 1543 SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 S 16-765-1316 July 5, 1995 Mr. Albert J. Krupski , Jr. , President Southold Board of Trustees Town Hall , 53095 Main Road, P.O. Box 117.9 Southold, New York 11971 Re: Matter of Connors Dear Mr. Krupski , Mr. Holzapfel was quite correct in giving 150 feet as the minimum separation distance between wells and septic systems. This is provided for under the new SCHDS standards which Roy Reynolds said will be promulgated shortly. The new standards also continues the separation requirement of 100 feet between leaching pools and surface waters. The uplands portion of my property is large enough to accommodate a well and leaching pools with a minimum distance of 150 feet between the two and still fulfill the 100 foot separation distance between those leaching pools and the seasonal surface waters on the northerly side of the property. The pools would be located in the most southerly corner of my property since they are required to be a minimum of 100 feet from the seasonal surface waters on the northerly part of my property. The well would have to be 150 feet to the north of the leach pools. Placement of leaching pools in the NE corner (lower right quadrant) of the Connors ' property which as you know would locate the pools immediately adjacent to seasonal surface :waters on my property, would mean that I would have the further constraint of the 150 foot separation requirement from the Connor pools for my well . There would be no place I could locate the well . I believe that my property as a consequence of the above would be unbuildable. Very truly yours, JAMES MANOS ATTORNEY AT LAW 2147 LAKE DRIVE P.O. BOX 1543 SOUTHOLD. N.Y. 11971 M 516-765-1316 U May 19, 1995 Board of Town Trustees , Town of Southold M� Town Hall 53095 Main RoadQ� P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Re; Connors Property, SCTM #59-5-29.3 Gentlemen: I am certain that if the Trustees were aware of the hazards and health risks that would result in the operation of an in-ground disposal system for greywater and a separate toilet composter for blackwater on the Connors ' wetlands lot, they would not have proposed them as solutions to Mr. Connors' problems. I am enclosing a copy of an advisory letter dated March 18, 1992 dealing with composting toilets and greywater prepared by James D. Decker, P. E. , Chief of the Residential Sanitation Section of the Department of Health of the State of New York. Mr. Decker is a high ranking State expert in residential sanitation in the employ of the N.Y. State Department of Health. Indeed one of his functions is reviewing health standards proposed by local health authorities for residential sanitation systems which he has recently done, for example, with respect to the SCDHS new standards for residential septic systems. Enclosed also is an advisory letter dated August 12, 1994 prepared by Kevin C. Scheuer,a senior Sanitary Engineer of the NYS Department of Health. It is relevant only as to what Mr. Scheuer says about the nature of greywater, since its subject matter, a Clivus Multrum system for greywater, is not an issue in this case. These letters show that greywater "is contaminated and therefore must be treated in the same manner as household sewage" , and that Greywater contains harmful "bacteria andpathogens" , "organic matter" and "inorganic material ". Emphasis supplied). Last month Judge Cohalan issued his decision in favor of the Trustees. He upheld the Trustees' action in denying a permit to the Connors on the bases of the immediate and direct contamination of surrounding groundwater and Great Pond that could be caused by the proposed disposal system "in the event of even a slight malfunction" of that system. Everything that the Trustees alleged in that proceeding with respect to the health hazards of the then proposed sanitary system is applicable to an in-ground disposal system handling greywater effluent only. Support by the Trustees of such a system would represent an irrational reversal of their former position. In my view, it would be legally indefensible. Judge Cohalan in upholding the Trustees ' decision to deny the permit on health grounds and thereby implicitly repudiating the SCDHS' issuance of a permit for the construction of a sewage disposal system, stated "there exists substantial evidence that septic effluents could infiltrate the groundwater and surface waters and that any contamination by sanitary system malfunction could contaminate the groundwater in the surrounding area including Great Pond". Greywater effluent is septic. It contains harmful bacteria, pathogens. and other organisms that cause disease. Judge Cohalan made no dis- tinction in his decision between illness caused by blackwater and that caused by greywater. As you are aware my home is located directly in line between the Connors lot and Great Pond. When Judge Cohalan talks of contamination of groundwater in the "surrounding area" he is referring to the only source of my household water. Be assured that.I will take whatever legal steps are necessary to protect the health of my family and the value of my property. Mr. Decker, in his advisory letter, warns that "users should be aware of the limitations of composters". Contrary to advertising claims and representations made by vendors of composters , Mr. Decker warns that "composted humus contains numerous bacteria and may also contain viruses and cysts. . . . the composted humus should be periodically removed by a professional septage hauler". He states that if the homeowner elects to dispose of it himself it should be buried or well mixed in soil "distant from food crops, water supply sources (i .e. , wells, springs) and watercourses". From Mr. Decker's description a composter is a high maintenance item which requires careful attention and effort, as well as a dedicatiion to the composting concept by the homeowner, to make it function. By allowing composters to be used on wetlands the Trustees, in my opinion, would be exposing the public to disease. It is not far fetched to believe that at least some homeowners either through ignorance or design would dump their compost in the wetlands or some other inappropriate place. That is now being done with household garbage by individuals in Southold to save the cost of an 75¢ bag. Consistent with New York State wastewater treatment standards, Mr. Decker points out that "Composters should be considered for household use only where insufficient water exists to support a flush toilet and on-site soils are compatible with satisfactory greywater treatment" . It is obvious that neither of these predicates are satisfied. In addition, Mr. Decker discloses that since the NYS Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code requires "water carriage" disposal of household wastewa- ter, composting toilets "should not normally be constructed as part of a new residence". I invite the Trustees' attention to the fact that NYS wastewater stan- dards for residences apply when they are stricter than the standards of local authority, viz. , SCDHS. Thus, an in-ground system for greywater must meet the same set back requirements and criteria as a conventional system, and composters also must comport with several set back require- ments and criteria which are in the NYS standards but not in the new SCDHS standard. Everything that Mr. Decker and Mr. Scheuer state in their advisory letters militates against the use of the above sanitary system on a wetlands lot. These gentlemen's opinions should be given paramount consideration by the Trustees , not only because they are experts but because they have absolutely no interest in this matter - they are unaware of its exis- tence. The Trustees may be operating under the mistaken belief that if they deny a permit then a "taking" has occurred for which compensation must be made. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia , in writing the majority opinion in Lucas v.South Carolina Coastal Council , stated that permits could be denied without compensation under common law principals that prohibit people from using their property in a way that harms the public, or in ways that create public nuisances.Certainly the installa- tion of the sanitary system discussed above would result in a public health hazard and nuisance and may be prohibited without compensation. Very truly yours, J M:n g JL Enc: 2 cc:Town Attorney Town Supervisor CAC Roy Reynolds , SCDHS NFEC I v STATE OF NEW YOR DEPARTMENT OF HEALT MAY 221995 Center for Environmental Health 2 University Place Ibany.New Y5— g To N Of.O Lorna McBarnelte Executive Deputy Commissioner OFFICE OF PUBLIC HEALTH March 18, 1992 sue Kelly Executive Deputy Director William N.Slasiuk,P.E.,Ph.D. Center Director Mr. John G. Prentiss P.O.. Box 10 � Piseco, New York 12139 RE: Composting Toilets and Greywater Dear Mr. Prentiss: Mr. Peter Smith requested me to reply to your March 7, 1992 letter regarding the above-noted subject. Composting toilets should not normally be constructed as part of any new residence since Part 900 of the State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code requires water carriage sanitary facilities. Sections 75-A. 10(b)(1), (2), and (5) of the enclosed copy of "Wastewater Treatment Standards - Individual Household Systems" address a necessary use of composting toilets plus the required treatment of greywater (i.e. , household wastewater without toilet wastes) . Greywater systems shall be designed upon a flow of 75 gallons per bedroom per day. Body wastes are present in wastewater from showers, tubs, hand washing sinks, and clothes washers. Food preparation/serving wastes are present in wastewater from sinks and dishwashers. Miscellaneous wastes are present in wastewater from garbage grinders and sinks used for equipment cleaning (i.e. , paint brushes, mops, etc. ) . Greywater is contaminated and must therefore be treated in the same manner as household sewage. Composters have been successfully used for public toilet facilities where the vast majority of wastewater generated comprises toilet/urinal flushing such as at roadside rest areas, public gathering sites and rustic camping areas. In such settings, the volume of wastewater produced and the demand upon water resources are greatly reduced by using composters. In a household 'setting, the volume of greywater to be handled remains at 75 gallons per day per bedroom and must receive conventional subsurface treatment. Composters accept only toilet wastes and kitchen food scraps (i.e. , blackwater) coupled with supplemental additions of carbon-rich bulking agents such as planer shavings or coarse sawdust. Household cleaning products should not be placed in the unit. Failure to add adequate bulking agents or maintaining adequate moisture can result in the composting pile becoming hard (and difficult to remove) or anaerobic. The composted humus contains numerous bacteria and may also contain viruses and cysts. Residual wastes (i.e. , the composted humus) should be periodically removed by a professional septage hauler. If a homeowner chooses to personally remove the composted humus, it should be disposed of at a sanitary landfill or buried or well mixed into soil distant from food crops, water supply sources (i.e. , wells, springs) and watercourses. Users should be aware of the limitations of composters. A flow of 110 gallons per day per bedroom may be used to design a complete household subsurface wastewater treatment system when the household is equipped with a water saving toilet (i.e. , 1 .6 gallons per flush) and water saving faucets/showerheads (i.e. , 3.0 gallons per minute maximum) . Use of water saving toilets and water saving fixtures is recommended to provide satisfactory sanitary facilities and simultaneously reduce water needs and reduce wastewater treatment volume/cost. Composters should be considered for household use only where insufficient water exists to support a flush toilet and on-site soils are compatible with satisfactory greywater treatment. Sincerely, James D. Decker, P.E. Chief, Residential Sanitation Section Bureau of Community Sanitation and Food Protection dam/92078 P RO0334 Enclosure cc: Mr. Smith Mr. Amberman - Saranac. Lake District Office Mr. Svenson Page 2 �r SThTE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 521 Y� Center for Environmental Health 2 University Place Albany, New York 12203-3399 Mark R.Chassin,M.D.,M.P.P.,M.P.H. OFFICE OF PUBLIC HEALTH Commissioner Lloyd F.Novick,M.D.,M.P.H. Paula Wilson Director Executive Deputy Commissioner Diana Jones Ritter Executive Deputy Director August 12. I qg4 William N.Stasiuk,P.E.,Ph.D. Center Director Ms., Eileen O'Connor Director of Environmental Health Cayuga County Health Department 160 Genesee Street Auburn, New) York 13021. Dear Ms. O'Connor: Thank you for your letter of July 28, 1904. and information regarding Clivus Multrum greywater-systems and greywater pressure infiltration pipe. You've asked for'my opinion of these items. -What fellows are my evaluations of these products and an ovendew of greywater systems in general. Greywater systems may be used in conjunction with non-waterborne toilet waste systems as an alternative to standard household wastewater where there is a desire or need to conserve water. Greywater contains organic matter, inorganic material, bacteria and pathogens that may be harmful to hLlmahs and animals. Greywater systems do not eliminate the requirement for treatment and ultimate disposal of household wastewater. 10NYCRR Appendix 75-A, Section 75-A.10(b)(5) requires greywater sysfpms to conform to the requirements for individual wastewater treatment systems. Greywater systems shall be designed upon a design flow 'of 75 gpd/bedroom. A greywater system must incorporate all of the featUres and components of a standard septic system. This will include an appropriately sized septic tank, distribution device and a soil absorption facility. The Clivus Multrum greywater systems consist of a pretreatment filter box followed by a soilbed. The soilbed works cnnceptLlally similar to an intermittent sand filter by filtering the pretreated greywater throLlgh successive layers of topsoil, sand, gravel and stone. Some evapotranspiration of the pretreated greywater takes place via vegetation planted in the soilbed. Effluent from the soilbed passes on to some form of soil absorption facility. No data was provided to evaluate the duality of effluent from the soilbed. It would appear that this arrangement is providing a level of pretreatment similar to a standard septic tank/sand filter arrangement. The pretreatment filter box clarifies the greywater while the soilbed provides filtration and some nutrient uptake. The performance of the above-ground soilhPri in the winter climate of New York State is suspect. The soilbed and related shallow absorption pipe WOLIld be subject JAMES MANOS ATTORNEY AT LAW 2147 LAKE DRIVE P.O. BOX 1543 SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 M 316-765-1316 V May 19, 1995 D 2 2191J5 Board of Town Trustees , Town of Southold N1A� Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Re; Connors Property, SCTM #59-5-29.3 Gentlemen: I am certain that if the Trustees were aware of the hazards and health risks that would result in the operation of an in-ground disposal system for greywater and a separate toilet composter for blackwater on the Connors ' wetlands lot, they would not have proposed them as solutions to Mr. Connors ' problems. I am enclosing a copy of an advisory letter dated March 18, 1992 dealing with composting toilets and greywater prepared by James D. Decker, P.E. , Chief of the Residential Sanitation Section of the Department of Health of the State of New York. Mr. Decker is a high ranking State expert in residential sanitation in the employ of the N.Y.. State Department of Health. Indeed one of his functions is reviewing health standards proposed by local health authorities for residential sanitation systems which he has recently done, for example, with respect to the SCDHS new standards for residential septic systems. Enclosed also is an advisory letter dated August 12, 1994 prepared by Kevin C. Scheuer,a senior Sanitary Engineer of the NYS Department of Health. It is relevant only as to what Mr. Scheuer says about the nature of greywater, since its subject matter, a Clivus Multrum system for greywater, is not an issue in this case. These letters show that greywater "is contaminated and therefore must be treated in the same manner as household sewage" , and that Gre water contains harmful "bacteria and pathogens" , "organic matter" and "inorganic material ". Emphasis supplied). Last month Judge Cohalan issued his decision in favor of the Trustees. He upheld the Trustees' action in denying a permit to the Connors on the bases of the immediate and direct contamination of surrounding 'groundwater and Great Pond that could be caused by the proposed disposal system "in the event of even a slight malfunction" of that system. Everything that the Trustees alleged in that proceeding with respect to the health hazards of the then proposed sanitary system is applicable to an in-ground disposal system handling greywater effluent only. Support by the Trustees of such a system would represent an irrational reversal of their former position. In my view, it would be legally indefensible. Judge Cohalan in upholding the Trustees ' decision to deny the permit on health grounds and thereby implicitly repudiating the SCDHS' issuance of a permit for the construction of a sewage disposal system, stated "there exists substantial evidence that septic effluents could infiltrate the groundwater and surface waters and that any contamination by sanitary system malfunction could contaminate the groundwater in the surrounding area including Great Pond". Greywater effluent is septic. It contains harmful bacteria, pathogens and other organisms that cause disease. Judge Cohalan made no dis- tinction in his decision between illness caused by blackwater and that caused by greywater. As you are aware my home is located directly in line between the Connors lot and Great Pond. When Judge Cohalan talks of contamination of groundwater in the "surrounding area" he is referring to the only source of my household water. Be assured that. I will take whatever legal steps are necessary to protect the health of my family and the value of my property. Mr. Decker, i,n his advisory letter, warns that "users should be aware of the limitations of composters". Contrary to advertising claims and representations made by vendors of composters , Mr. Decker warns that "composted humus contains numerous bacteria and may also contain viruses and cysts. . . . the composted humus should be periodically removed by a professional septage hauler". He states that if the homeowner elects to dispose of it himself it should be buried or well mixed in soil "distant from food crops, water supply sources (i .e. , wells, springs) and watercourses". From Mr. Decker's description a composter is a high maintenance item which requires careful attention and effort, as well as a dedicatiion to the composting concept by the homeowner, to make it function. By allowing composters to be used on wetlands the Trustees , in my opinion, would be exposing the public to disease. It is not far fetched to believe that at least some homeowners either through ignorance or design would dump their compost in the wetlands or some other inappropriate place. That is now being done with household garbage by individuals in Southold to save the cost of an 75t bag. Consistent with New York State wastewater treatment standards, Mr. Decker points out that "Composters should be considered for household use only where insufficient water exists to support a flush toilet and on-site soils are compatible with satisfactory greywater treatment" . It is obvious that neither of these predicates are satisfied. In addition, Mr. Decker discloses that since the NYS Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code requires "water carriage" disposal of household wastewa- ter, composting toilets "should not normally be constructed as part of a new residence". I invite the Trustees' attention to the fact that NYS wastewater stan- dards for residences apply when they are stricter than the standards of local authority, viz. , SCDHS. Thus, an in-ground system for greywater must meet the same set back requirements and criteria as a conventional system, and composters also must comport with several set back require- ments and criteria which are in the NYS standards but not in the new SCDHS standard. Everything that Mr. Decker and Mr. Scheuer state in their advisory letters militates against the use of the above sanitary system on a wetlands lot. These gentlemen 's opinions should be given paramount consideration by. the Trustees , not only because they are experts but because they have absolutely no interest in this matter - they are unaware of its exis- tence. The Trustees may be operating under the mistaken belief that if they deny a permit then a "taking" has occurred for which compensation must be made. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, in writing the majority opinion in Lucas v.South Carolina Coastal Council , stated that permits could be denied without compensation under common law principals that prohibit peop a from using their property in a way that harms the public, or in ways that create public nuisances.Certainly the installa- tion of the sanitary system discussed above would result in a public health hazard and nuisance and may be prohibited without compensation. Very truly yours, JM:ng Enc: 2 cc:Town Attorney Town Supervisor CAC Roy Reynolds , SCDHS NFEC i • `1 d rz v STATE OF NEW YOR DEPARTMENT OF HEALT MAY 221995 Center for Environmental Health 2 University Place Iba q� gg Lorna MCBarnette TOWN l'�a �j f 99�� Executive Deputy Commissioner OFFICE OF PUBLIC HEALTH March 18, 1992 sue Kelly Executive Deputy Director k1liam N.Stasiuk,P.E.,Ph.D. Center Director Mr. John G. Prentiss P.O.. Box 10 Piseco, New York 12139 RE: Composting Toilets and Greywater Dear Mr. Prentiss: Mr. Peter Smith requested me to reply to your March 7, 1992 letter regarding the above-noted subject. Composting toilets should not normally be constructed as part of any new residence since Part 900 of the State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code requires water carriage sanitary facilities. Sections 75-A.10(b)(1), (2),, and (5) of the enclosed copy of "Wastewater Treatment Standards - Individual Household Systems" address a necessary use of composting toilets plus the required- treatment of greywater (i.e. , household wastewater without toilet wastes) . Greywater systems shall be designed upon a flow of 75 gallons per bedroom per day. Body wastes are present in wastewater from showers, tubs, hand washing sinks, and clothes washers. Food preparation/serving wastes are present in wastewater from sinks and dishwashers. Miscellaneous wastes are present in wastewater from garbage grinders and sinks used for equipment cleaning (i.e. , paint brushes, mops, etc.) . Greywater is contaminated and must therefore be treated in the same manner as household sewage. Composters have been successfully used for public toilet facilities where the vast majority of wastewater generated comprises toilet/urinal flushing such as at roadside rest areas, public gathering sites and rustic camping areas. In such settings, the volume of wastewater produced and the demand upon water resources are greatly reduced by using composters. In a household setting, the volume of greywater to be handled remains at 75 gallons per day per bedroom and must receive conventional subsurface treatment. Composters accept only toilet wastes and kitchen food scraps (i.e. , blackwater) coupled with supplemental additions of carbon-rich bulking agents such as planer shavings or coarse sawdust. Household cleaning products should not be placed in the unit. Failure to add adequate bulking agents or maintaining adequate moisture can result in the composting pile becoming hard (and difficult to remove) or anaerobic. The composted humus contains numerous bacteria and may also contain viruses and cysts. Residual wastes (i.e. , the composted humus) should be periodically removed by a professional septage hauler. If a homeowner chooses to personally remove the composted humus, it should be disposed of at a sanitary landfill or buried or well mixed into soil distant from food crops, water supply sources (i.e. , wells, springs) and watercourses. Users should be aware of the limitations of composters. A flow of 110 gallons per day per bedroom may be used to design a complete household subsurface wastewater treatment system when the household is equipped with a water saving toilet (i.e. , 1 .6 gallons per flush) and water saving faucets/showerheads (i.e. , 3.0 gallons per minute maximum) . Use of water saving toilets and water saving fixtures is recommended to provide satisfactory sanitary facilities and simultaneously reduce water needs and reduce wastewater treatment volume/cost. Composters should be considered for household use only where insufficient water exists to support a flush toilet and on-site soils are compatible with satisfactory greywater treatment. Sincerely, James D. Decker, P.E. Chief, 'Residential Sanitation Section Bureau of Community Sanitation and Food Protection dam/92078 P RO0334 Enclosure cc: Mr. Smith Mr. Amberman - Saranac Lake District Office Mr. Svenson Page 2 S TA E OF N E W Y 0'"K DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH k71 E t-22 Center for Environmental Health 2 University Place Albany, New York 12203-3399 Mark R.Chassin,M.D.,M.P.P.,M.P.H. OFFICE OF PUBLIC HEALTH Commissioner Lloyd F.Novick,M.D.,M.P.H. Paula Wilson Director Executive Deputy Commissioner Diana Jones Ritter Atigust 12. lqq4 I Executive Deputy Director William N.Slasiuk,P.E.,Ph.D. Center Director Ms. Eileen O'Connor Director of Environmental Health Cayuga County Health Department 160 Genesee Street Auburn, New York 13021. Dear Ms. O'Connor: Thank you for your letter Of July 28, 1Q114 and information regarding CliVLIS Multrum greywater'-systems and greywater preSSUre infiltratinji pipe. You've asked for my opinion of these items. What follows are my evaluations of these products and an overview of greywater systems in general. Greywater systems may be used in conjunction with non-waterborne toilet waste systems as an alternative to standard household wastewater where there is a desire or need to conserve water. Greywater contains organic matter, inorganic material, bacteria and pathogens that may be harmful to humans and animals. Greywater systems do not eliminate the reqUirement for treatment and ultimate disposal of household wastewater. -IONYCRR Appendix 75-A, Section 75-A.10(b)(5) requires greywater sv-;f-mq to conform to the requirements for individual wastewater treatment systems. Greywater systems shall be designed upon a design flow of 75 gpd/bedroom. A greywater system must incorporate all of the features and components of a standard septic system. This will include an appropriately sized septic tank, distribution device and a soil absorption facility. The Clivus Multrum greywater systems consist of a pretreatment filter box followed by a soilbed. The soilbed works conceptually similar to an intermittent sand filter by filtering the pretreated greywater through successive layers of topsoil, sand, gravel and stone. Some evapotranspiration of the pretreated greywater takes place via vegetation planted in the soilbed. Effluent from the soilbed passes on to some form of soil absorption facility.. No data was provided to evaluate the quality of effluent from 'the soilbed. It would appear that this arrangement is providing a level of pretreatment, similar to a standard septic tank/sand filter arrangement. The pretreatment filter box clarifies the ,greywater while the soilbed provides filtration and some nutrient uptake. The performance of the above-ground soilhpd in the winter climate of New York State is sus.pect. The soilbed and related shallow absorption pipe would be subject- to freezing: Nutrient uptake by vegetation planted in the soilbed would not take place. Clivus Multrum literature indicates that several greywater-irrigated greenhouses are in operation in New England. I cannot make an educated evaluation of this type of treatment regime. However. I would recommend against installing a greywater soilbed inside the living quarters of a house (i.e.. greenhouses/solariums attached to houses). Physical contact with sewage or greywater contaminated soils must be avoided. No data was provided to indicate the effects of flow attenuation and soilbed plant.uptake on the design of absorption facilities located downstream from the Clivus Multrum greywater systems. Downstream absorption facilities must be designed in accordance with Appendix 75-A criteria coupled with applicable design flows. Site and soil conditions will dictate the type of absorption facilities constructed (i.e., standard absorption trenches. shallow absorption trenches, raised system, etc.). The Clivus Multrum greywater filter box stores and pLimps the filtered greywater to the soilbed in specific doses. The filter mechanism must be changed on a regular basis depending on use. A service contract with a Clivus Multrum authorized representative should be maintained throughout the useful life of the greywater system.. Pumped systems must be equipped with audible or visual pump alarms to notify owners of system failure. Single pump systems must have sufficient storage capacity to accommodate one day's design flow above the pump-on level to facilitate repairs. Duplex pump systems do not require additional storage capacity but must be equipped with independent alarms. Problems associated with soilbed freezing, filter box/pump maintenance and .exposure to untreated greywater must be addressed before Clivus Multrum greywater systems are approved to treat household greywater. A specific waiver allowing the use of Clivus Multrum greywater systems in lieu of a standard septic tank is required. Clivus Multrum greywater pressure infiltration pipe is a unique product with applications in drip soil absorption systems. The drip soil absorption system is a relatively new technology with origins in agriculture. Most research on this subject has been performed in southern states. I am not aware of any research being clone in New York State with these systems. I've enclosed copies of articles from the Spring 1994 issue of Small Flows that cover this topic in detail. I hope you find this information useful. Please feel free to contact me at 518-458-6706 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Kevin C. Scheuer. P.E. Sr. Sanitary Engineer Bureau of Community Sanitation and Food Protection t4 freezing. Nutrient uptake by vegetation planted in the Aoilbed would not take j place.. Clivus Multrum literature indicates that several greywater-irrigated greenhouses are in operation in New England. I cannot make an educated evaluation of this type of treatment regime. However, I would recommend against installing a greywater soilbed inside the living quarters of a house (i.e., - greenhouses/solariums attached to houses). Physical contact with sewage or greywater.contaminated soils must be avoided. No data was provided to indicate the effects of flow attenuation and soilbed plant .uptake on the design of absorption facilities located downstream from the Clivus Multrum greywater systems. Downstream absorption facilities must be designed in accordance with Appendix 75-A criteria coupled with applicable design flows. Site and soil conditions will dictate the type of absorption facilities constructed (i.e., standard absorption trenches, shallow absorption trenches, raised system, etc.). The Clivus Multrum greywater filter box stores and pimps the. filtered greywater to the soilbed in specific doses. The filter mechanism must be changed on a regular basis depending on use. A service contract with a Clivus Multrum authorized representative should be maintained throughout the useful life of the greywater system.. Pumped systems must be equipped with audible or visual pump alarms to notify owners of system failure. Single pump systems must have sufficient storage capacity to accommodate one day's design flow above the pump-on level to facilitate repairs. Duplex pump systems do not require additional storage capacity but must"be equipped with independent alarms. Problems associated with soilbed freezing, filter box/pump maintenance and .exposure to untreated greywater must be addressed before Clivus Multrum greywater systems are approved to treat household greywater. A specific waiver allowing the use of Clivus Multrum greywater systems in lieu of a standard septic tank is required. Clivus Multrum greywater pressure infiltration pipe is a unique product with applications in drip soil absorption systems. The drip soil absorption system is a relatively new technology with origins in agriculture. Most research on this subject has been performed in southern states. I am not aware of any research being clone in New York State with these systems. I've enclosed copies of articles from the Spring 1994 issue of Small Flows that cover this topic in detail. I hope you find this information useful. Please feel free to contact me at 518-458-6706 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Kevin C. Scheuer. P.E. Sr. Sanitary Engineer Bureau of Community Sanitation and Food Protection i MAY 10 1995 5 Viking Rd. PO Box 278 Glenwood Landing, NY 11547 WN OF SOUTHOLD May 9, 1995 Board of Trustees, Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Rd. PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Att: Albert J. Krupski, President Re: Connors 350 West Drive SCTM#59-5-29.3 Dear Mr. Krupski, Thank you for responding to our letter dated 4/14/95. As per your instructions in your previous letter dated 8/11/94,we are in the process of contacting our neighbor, Mr. Schwartz with respects to the relocation of his well. A copy of our request dated 5/8/95 is enclosed. If this is acceptable to him,we will then prepare a proposal which would include a smaller dwelling(approx. 30x32) on pilings, with a clivis multrim type toilet system, gray water septic system in the N/E comer. However,we cannot submit a formal proposal until we have obtained both the approvals from Mr. Schwartz and the SCHD. Any input you can give us will be greatly appreciated. Of course, our greatest concern is in the event, Mr. Schwartz does not accept our proposal, the SCHD would not approve any plans for the gray water septic system within 100 ft. of the neighboring well. We would appreciate your cooperation in advising what alternatives you would accept. We want to avoid any litigation as I am sure you are. Finally, in both your letters dated 8/11/94 and 4/28/95, you make mention of setting up a meeting which was what our letter dated 4/14/95 was hoping to accomplish. However, it is not exactly clear as to when this meeting would be set up. We want to proceed with this project in proper order,we are hoping that a meeting would accomplish this. We appreciate and need your assistance and cooperation and look forward to hearing.from you. Sincerely, Colleen Connors CC encl. cc: Judge Cohalan f • 5 Viking Rd. PO Box 278 • Glenwood Landing,.NY 11547 • • May 8, 1995 • Mr. Daniel L. Schwartz & Mrs. Sydney Schwartz • 490 Fourth Street • Brooklyn, NY 11215 • Re: 350 West Drive Southold, NY Dear Mr. Schwartz & Mrs. Schwartz, • As you may know, my family and I own the vacant lot (350 West Dr.) adjacent to your property. We purchased this land in '87 with the hopes and dreams of raising our children in the Southold community. Regrettably, there have been endless road blocks in the building of our home. We have submitted many proposals to the Trustees, none of which has been accepted. We ask that you refer to the enclosed letter from the Town Trustees dated 8/11/94. The Trustees have requested that we submit a plan which calls for a special type of enviromental septic system. As this system would be located within 100 ft. of your well, this plan would require the relocation of your existing well. This relocation of course would be at our expense. • Please advise if this proposal would be acceptable to you. A self addressed stamped envelope is enclosed for your convenience. Of course if you should have any questions, or would like to personally discuss this matter, please feel free to give me a call. My home# is 516 671-8751. • My family and I would like to thank you in advance for giving this matter your attention. • Sincerely, • Colleen Connors - CC • encl. .� cc: A Krupski, Jr. Board of Trustees-Southold • CERTIFIED MAIL qq ��� +a-2 - F01 Albert J. Knpski,President y �Gy Town Hall John Holzapfel, Vice President o= 53095 Main Road ti x P.O. Box 1179 William G. Albertson Martin H. Garrell Southold, New York 11971 Peter Wenzel y��j �►a�� ' Telephone (516) 765-1892 Fax (516) 765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD April 28, 1995 William T. Connors 1988 Knollwood Road Syosset, NY 11791 .RE: Connors Property SCTM #59-5-29 . 3 Dear Mr. Connors : The Board of Trustees would be glad to meet with you on any specific project which you seek to have approved in a presubmission conference. However, we are not architects or designers and do not offer home design advice to the public. We have told, you our concerns, which focus primarily on contamination of groundwater by a project involving the installation of a septic system on wetlands . I am sure that your architect can come up with several solutions, including a Clivis Multrum system (composting toilet) plus alternative small septic system for gray water. The fill and activity would be limited to house foot print only. Let us know when you have a proposal, and we will set up a meeting with you. Sincerely, aa-e � 9. Albert J. Krupski, Jr. President, Board of Trustees AJK: jmd encl . cc: Town Attorney CAC Roy Reynolds,SCDH APR 27 M 1 TOWN OF SOUTH&D ,l � For you home,cottage,houseboat,shop, J r SWEDISH stable or motorhome• DRY TOILET Regardless of location or *' z *IDEAL FOR climate,INCINOLET COTTAGESI guarantees you' *NO WATER ■CONVENIENCE *NO PLUMBING CLEANLINESS *NO CHEMICALS ■ AFFORDABILITY *NO ODOR INCINOLET Proven Swedish composting technology backed by 20 years of incinerates testing,development,and customer satisfaction.Rugged stainless steel and ABS plastic construction,NSF approved. waste electrically Imported by:WAAR CONSERVATION SYSTEMS,INC to clean ash... Damonmdl Square,Dept.Y,Concord,MA 01742 without water, (508)369J951 or(800)462-3341 OIIUt. Or odor. Please sendS1 for color brochure.Dealer inquiries invited. p ediate Ask about our Graywater Treatment Systems Call 1- ?e ponse551 1 r imm WI-person CtSENDFOR n INCINOLET '- THAT ELECTRIC TOILET 1 � Free cat- COMPOSTING TOILET SYSTEMS :gton VT nian Re- J 1-353-1- Y<2 .rederick - ork NYt Advanced Waterless&Low Water Models For Cottages,Homes&Commercial Use • Waterless&Low Water Systems For Cottages,Homes&industry owners' Clean,Sanitary&odor-Free "STnv-MAR"COMPOSTING TOILETS vns east 14o•30 Milner Ave.,Scarborough, esellers, SANCOR-Ontario,Canada MIS 3R3 Several models available i ink. cludingnon-electric. Call For Free Brochure&Video ��,yero Dtr. :ntema- •NO Septic System 1�4 .00-699- ' ' - •NO Chemicals Save the olrigi- IN CANADA CALL 1-800-387-5245 Environment! Wivic. Recycle Back to Nature! I 5r, - --� SUN-MAR CORP. 1-800.461-2461 ` 600 Main Street.Tonawanda. N.Y.14150.0688 USA FREE.12 Page Color Catalog APR I T 19% a y� �� ? pT1��l. � 1988 Knollwood Road Syosset, New York 11791 April 14, 1995 Board of Trustees, Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road, P. 0. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Re: Connors vs. Town of Southold Gentlemen: Per Judge Cohalan's decision dated April 6, 1995, and his reference to your letter of August 11, 1994, wherein you feel the proper type of dwelling can be constructed on my property, kindly set up your meeting with all interested parties so that a building permit can be issued. . We look forward to hearing from you soon so that we will see if you can deliver on your word. Be advised we want to know specifically what you will approve in the construction of a one family dwelling. Thank you. Very truly yours, William TT. Connors P.S. Surely, after eight (8) years, and after dozens and dozens of hearings and environmental studies at taxpayer's expense and my expense, we should be able to resolve this problem. cc: Judge Cohalan cc: Town Supervisor, Wickham M E M O R A N D U M APR K SUPREME COURT, SUFFOLK COUNTY TRIAL TERM, PART 24 -----------------------------------X In the Matter of the Application BY: Cohalan, J.S.C. of CHRISTOPHER CONNORS and DATED: April 5, 1995 WILLIAM CONNORS, INDEX No. 20674-94 Petitioners, Mot . Seq. #001-MD For a Judgment Pursuant to Article CDISPSUBJ 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules -against- BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES FOR THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, AND THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, . Respondents . -----------------------------------X WICKHP.M, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, ESQS . SOUTHOLD TOWN ATTORNEY Attys . for Petitioners By: Laury L. Dowd, Esq. Main Road Atty. for Respondents P_0. Box 1424 Southold Town Hall Mattituck, NY 11952 P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Rd. Southold, NY 11971 Petitioners are the owners of a vacant piece of property situated in the Town of Southold who have instituted this proceeding pursuant to Article 78 of the CPLR for a judgment setting aside the denial by respondent Board of Trustees (Trustees) of petitioners, application for a wetlands permit on the grounds that said denial was in violation of the law and was arbitrary and capricious . Petitioners seek as alternative relief an order that compensation for a taking of their property be given to them. Respondents oppose petitioners, application (s) in all respects . The vacant lot which is at the center of this proceeding is approximately one-half acre, bounded on the north by a developed lot, on the south by an undeveloped lot, and on the west by Peconic Dunes County Park, a camp and recreational area owned by Suffolk County. Within the park and located approximately four hundred feet from the property is Great Pond, a body of water fed by groundwater which is used for recreational boating, fishing and swimming. Prior to their purchase of the property on March 19, 1987, petitioners obtained from the Town of Southold building inspector a certificate of occupancy certifying that the vacant lot conforms to the zoning code provisions applicable to an "A" Residential Agricultural zoned district . A survey dated April 21, Connors v Board of gown Trustess for the Town of Southold Index No. 20674-94 Page 2 1987, prepared for petitioners noted most of the property to contain "phragmites in water. " On or about May 14, 1987, a Notice of Violation was issued to petitioner Christopher Connors for an alleged violation of the Southold Town Code, in failing to obtain a wetlands permit prior to adding fill to the property. Petitioner Christopher Connors thereafter submitted an application to respondent Trustees to obtain a permit to fill a portion of the property and build a dwelling on the parcel . By declaration dated June 25, 1987, the Trustees determined that the provisions of the State Environmental Quality Review Act, ECL 98-0101 et seq. , (SEQRA) applied, that the Trustees would act as lead agency under SEQRA and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) would be required. Petitioners thereafter had a DEIS prepared and submitted same to the Trustees on April 1, 1988 . By letter dated April 22, 1988, however, the Trustees declared the DEIS to be incomplete and requested that more information be supplied. Correspondence from petitioners' consultant dated May 24, 1988,. purporting to address their inquiries was sent to the Trustees, but by letter dated June 24, 1988, the Trustees declared that the DEIS was still incomplete and that a violation charged by the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) under state law had to be resolved first . Thereafter, petitioners' DEIS was accepted as complete and a hearing under SEQRA was conducted. The Trustees indicated to petitioners, however, that the permit application filed pursuant to the Town Code would not be considered until all other applicable governmental permits were obtained, in accordance with the Town Code. On or about June 25, 1992, upon request of petitioners, the DEC issued petitioners an exemption from the obligation to obtain a wetlands permit under ECL §24-0701 . On or about January 5, 1994, the Suffolk County Department of Health approved the installation of a five shallow pool sanitary system for the proposed development of the property. Such approval was thereafter amended on July 15, 1994, to provide for less fill on the property. On July 28, 1994, a hearing was conducted before the Trustees concerning petitioners' application for a permit to construct a dwelling on the property. A resolution was thereupon adopted by the Trustees, setting forth detailed findings and conclusions . Among the many findings set forth, it was noted that the property is located in a flood zone, with 'nearly all of the lot" being freshwater wetlands and the depth of the water table being between ten inches and 1 .1 feet; that the proposed sanitary system would be on freshwater wetlands, requiring excavation and filling of wetlands, as well as the erection of a waterproof concrete retaining wall in the freshwater wetlands ; that any contamination by a malfunction of the sanitary system could cause a direct and immediate contamination of groundwater in the surrounding area, Connors v Board of Town Trustees for the Town of Southold Index No. 20674-94 Page 3 including Great Pond, approximately four hundred feet to the south of the property; and that a smaller dwelling could be built on the northwest corner of the property with a contained or closed sanitary system or clivus multrum. The Trustees concluded that the development project, as proposed, will adversely affect the Town wetlands, the marine organisms, aquatic wildlife and vegetation, and would otherwise , adversely affect the general welfare of the people of the Town. Petitioners' application was thereupon denied. Among the many documents offered in opposition to petitioners' application is a survey dated February 22, 1988 on which it is indicated that, acco-ding to a study conducted by DEC, over ninety per cent of the property is wetlands. The site plan filed by petitioners shows that, if the project were to be approved, fill would be deposited to a depth of Six feet over an area consisting of approximately 12, 000 square feet, resulting in a loss of more than half the wetlands on the subject property. A report prepared by an Administrative Law Judge who conducted a hearing on November 14, 1989 in connection with petitioners' DEC permit application, recommended denial of the application for a DEC freshwater wetlands permit . Such denial was based upon numerous findings, including the close proximity of the proposed placement of the sanitary system to surface water and wetlands, indicating a threat to surface and groundwater contamination. Among the conclusions reported were that there was an inadequate demonstration "that the surface water and groundwater would be adequately protected from contamination by septic wastes and the evidence indicates that some degree of contamination can be expected. " Thereafter, by decision of the Commissioner of the DEC, dated January 23 , 1990, the petitioners' application was denied on the grounds that the potential for problems identified with the operation of the septic system indicates its incompatibility with the public health and welfare, and the construction of the project of the freshwater wetland act. Nevertheless, upon their request submitted to DEC in 1992, petitioners were granted an exemption to the requirements of the freshwater wetlands act under its "grandfather" clause. In Article 78 proceedings, the courts cannot interfere unless there is no rational basis for the exercise of discretion or the action complained of is arbitrary and capricious (Pell v Board of Educ. , 34 NY2d 222, 231, 356 NYS2d 833 [1974] ) . The arbitrary or capricious test chiefly relates to whether a particular action should have been taken or is justified and whether the administrative action is without foundation in fact (Pell v Board of Educ. , supra, at 231) . Moreover, it is well settled that a court may not substitute its judgment for that of the board or body it reviews unless the decision under review is arbitrary and unreasonable and constitutes an abuse of discretion (Diocese of Rochester v Planning Bd. of Town of Brighton, 1 NY2d 508, 520, 154 NYS2d 849, 136 NE2d 827 [19561 ) . Furthermore, judicial review of an administrative determination is limited to the grounds invoked Connors v Board of Town Trustess for the Town of Southold Index No . 20674-94 Page 4 by the agency (Aronsky v Board of Education, 75 NY2d 997, 1000, 557 NYS2d 267, 75 NY2d 998 [19901 ) . A reviewing court, in dealing with a determination which an administrative agency alone is authorized to make, must judge the propriety of such action solely by the grounds invoked by the agency (Scherbyn v Wayne-Finger Lakes Bd. of Coop. Educ. Sex-v. , 77 NY2d 753 , 758, 570 NYS2d 474, 573 NE2d 562 The determination of the respondent Trustees denying the petitioners' application for a wetlands permit for the proposed development of their land is supported by substantial evidence in the record (see, CPLR 7803 [4] ; Pell v Board of Educ. , supra; Cardullo v County of Suffolk, AD2d , 610 NYS2d 317 [2d Dept 19941 ) . Under the Wetlands Ordinance of the Town of Southold (Southold Town Code §97-10 et seq. ) , the Trustees are charged with implementation of the permit process to provide for "the protection, preservation, proper maintenance and use" of the Town' s wetlands in order to minimize loss of "beneficial marine organisms, acruatic wildlife and vegetation and the destruction of the natural habitat thereof and to otherwise protect the quality of wetlands . . . 11 (Southold Town Code 97-i1 [B] ) . It cannot be reasonably disputed that a substantial portion of the subject property contains wetlands, in view of the notation "phragmites in water" noted on plaintiff' s 1987 survey, the report of Tsontakis Associates, and the findings of En-Consultants, Inc. , the petitioners' consultant. Thus, the Trustees were authorized to require a permit for the proposed development of the parcel and to designate itself as "lead agency" under SEQRA (ECL §8-0111 [6] ) . As such, the Trustees had the responsibility of determining whether the proposal would have a significant effect on the environment (ECL §8-0111 [6] ; see also Glen Head - Glenwood Landing Civic Council, Inc. , 88 AD2d 484, 453 NYS2d 732 [2d Dept 1982] ) . _ Furthermore, it is not disputed that the installation of the proposed sanitary system would require the excavation and filling of a substantial portion of the wetlands, and that the proposal was rejected by an administrative law judge from DEC following ' a hearing, by the Commissioner of DEC, who adopted the findings and conclusions of the administrative law judge, and by the Town Conservation Advisory Council . Moreover, based upon the information received by the Trustees, and in view of the shallow water table on the property, noted by petitioners to be 1. 1 feet, there exists substantial evidence that septic effluents could infiltrate the groundwater and surface waters and that any contamination by sanitary system malfunction could contaminate the groundwater in the surrounding area, including Great Pond. Sufficient factual findings were set forth by the Trustees to support their conclusion that petitioners' proposal would adversely affect the wetlands, aquatic wildlife and vegetation, and would otherwise "adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of the people of the Town. ,, ' v - I Connors v Board of Town Trustess for the Town of Southold Index No. 20674-94 Page 5 In addition to the foregoing, the procedures undertaken by the Trustees throughout the application process were appropriate and proper. The suspension of a determination on petitioners, application until certain other agency permits and approvals were obtained was permissible (see, Carlson Assoc. v Town Bd. of Smithtown, AD2d , 615 NYS2d 407 [2d Dept 19941 ) . There is no requirement that the property wetlands be so identified on a map before the regulation of same can be undertaken by the Trustees (see, Drexler v Town of New Castle, 62 NY2d 413 , 477 NYS2d 116, 465 NE2d 116 (19841 ) . Furthermore, the respondents are not precluded from asserting their regulatory authority on the basis of statements alleged to have been made by Town employees concerning whether the property was "buildable. 11 Petitioners sought no written confirmation from respondents that development of the property had been approved or that they were authorized to proceed with filling without a permit (see, Slemp v New York State Dept. of Env. Cons. , 176 AD2d 1112, 575 NYS2d 419 [3d Dept 1991] ) . This court further finds that there is no merit in petitioners, claim that the denial of a wetlands permit constitutes an unconstitutional taking of their property. The Trustees specifically noted in their findings that a "smaller single family home" could be built on the property, thereby acknowledging that their disapproval of the plans submitted did not serve to preclude all development proposals . Furthermore, petitioners have otherwise failed to demonstrate that under no use permissible by the Wetlands Ordinance would the property be capable of producing a reasonable return (see, Eastbrook Constr. Co. v Armstrong, 205 AD2d 971, 613 NYS2d 776 [3d Dept . 19941 ) . Accordingly, the determination of the Trustees denying the petitioners' application for a permit under the proposal submitted i.s confirmed, and the petition is hereby dismissed. Submit judgment . DATED: APR 0 5 J. S.C. P c(( `�� 3 4 � Foc o Albert J. Krupski, President O ✓ Town Hall John Holzapfel, Vice President 1 53095 Main Road William G. Albertson CIO z P.O. Box 1179 Martin H. Garrell O� Southold, New York 11971 Peter Wenczel �I®� �.a� Telephone (516) 765-1892 Fax (516) 765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 29, 1995 Timothy Collins, AICP Environmental, Planning & Land Development Consultant 27 Joshua Edwards Court East Hampton, NY 11937 The following action was taken by the Southold Town Board of Trustees on Thursday, September 28, 1995; RESOLVED that the Southold Town Board of Trustees retains TIMOTHY COLLINS, AICP, Environmental, Planning & Land Developement Consultant of 27 Joshua Edwards Court, East Hampton, New York 11937, 329-5930, as the Trustees Environmental Consultant as needed at a rate of $65. 00 an hour. Affective September 1, 1995. Also, RESOLVED that this resolution be sent to the Town Board for there verification. Fees will be a charged back to the applicant after an estimate of each particular project is given. If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, n 9. d`s/. Albert J. Krupski, Jr. President, Board of Trustees AJK:jmd cc: Town Board Albert J. Krupski, President �O��gUFFO( Town Hall John Holzapfel, Vice President y1 53095 Main Road William G. Albertson W z P.O. Box 1179 Martin H. Garrell Southold, New York 11971 Peter Wenczel 'dlpl ��® Telephone (516) 765-1892 Fax (516) 765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September-29, 1995 Timothy Collins, AICP Environmental, Planning & Land Development Consultant 27 Joshua Edwards Court East Hampton, NY 11937 The following action was taken by the Southold Town Board of Trustees on Thursday, September 28, 1995; RESOLVED that the Southold Town Board of Trustees retains TIMOTHY COLLINS, AICP, Environmental, Planning & Land Developement Consultant of 27 Joshua Edwards Court, East Hampton, New York 11937, 329-5930, as the Trustees Environmental Consultant as needed at a rate of $65. 00 an hour. Affective September 1, 1995. Also, RESOLVED that this resolution be sent to the Town Board for there verification. Fees will be a charged back to the applicant after an estimate of each particular project is given. If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, n , Albert J. Krupski, Jr. President, Board of Trustees AJK:jmd cc: Town Board � -CO Albert J. Krupski,President �gUF FO(� �O Town Hall John Holzapfel, Vice President c �� 53095 Main Road William G. Albertson P.O. Box 1179 "' Southold, New York 11971 Martin H. Garrell Peter Wenczel �'$IQI �� Telephone (516) 765-1892 Fax (516) 765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 29, 1995 Christopher Connors 5 Viking Road Glenwood, NY 11547 RE: SCTM #1000-59-5-29. 3 Single Family Dwelling Dear Mr. Connors: Please find the enclosed estimate for the Environmental. Review of the above referenced project. This estimate is due in full as soon as possible. Once payment is received the review will continue. Any monies left over after completion of review, will be returned to you. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely Albert J. Krupski, Jr. President, Board of Trustees AJK: jmd cc: Tim Collins From:Timothy Collins To:Jill-Board of Trustees Date:9/29/95 Time.11:46:12 Page 2 of 2 Timothy Collins,AICP Environmental,Planning&Land Development Consultant 27 Joshua Edwards Court East Hampton, New York 11937 (516)329-5930 Fax(516)329-6932 September 29, 1995 Town of Southold Board of Trustees 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold New York 11971 IRE: Wetland Permit application of Connors, Southold Dear Board Members: With reference to the above application, I estimate the total number of hours to field inspect the site, flag the wetland, and conduct an environmental assessment of the project pursuant to the requirements of SEQRA to be approximately 25 hours. At an hourly rate of$65.00 the estimate cost for this project is $1,625.00. While this estimate may seem high, it should be noted that this project has had an extensive history.which has already been the subject of an Article 78 proceeding. This estimate assumes a substantial effort will be necessary to resolve this application. If you have any questions or require further information, please contact me. - Yours truly, Timothy Collins, AICP TC:tc TimothyCollins, AICP > OCTp o If Environmental,Planning&Land Development Consultant 6/99� 27 Joshua Edwards Court East Hampton, New York 11937 (516)329-5930 Fax(516)329-6932 October 5, 1995 Town of Southold Board of Trustees 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold New York 11971 RE: Wetland Permit application of Christopher Connors,West Drive, Southold. Dear Board Members: I have had an opportunity to review the latest survey submitted for the above application and wish to offer the following. The survey has been revised to include the wetland line which I flagged and has been verified by the Board of Trustees. The wetland line was identified based upon the predominance of freshwater wetland vegetation. While there may be other tidal and freshwater wetland vegetation found on the site, this wetland vegetation is also mixed with upland vegetation. Therefore, those areas can be considered to be a transitional area and not a true wetland. Given the predominance of the wetland vegetation found on the site the quality of the wetland should also be considered. The freshwater wetland presently shown on the survey is considered to be a high quality wetland, with the best wetland system being located within the northwest section of the property. In a review of this latest survey and the application submitted it is recommended that the survey be further revised to include a clear identification of the wetland line and also clearly identifies the proposed improvements. Specifically, I would recommend the following; 1. It appears that by reducing the required front yard setback to approximately 26' and a reduction in the size of the proposed dwelling, a dwelling could be placed on the property with a minimum disturbance to the wetland. While this would require applying to the Zoning Board of Appeals for a variance, the Board should explore all options which would minimize the disturbance to the wetlands. Therefore, the applicant should be requested to explore this option. 2. Because of the location of the adjacent well to the north, it appears that the most appropriate location of the proposed sanitary system would be within the southeast portion of the property. However, if not already attempted, the applicant should contact the adjacent property owner and offer to relocate their well. A copy of that offer and the adjacent owners response should be include in the Board's file. 3. Only one sanitary system should be shown on the survey. Further, building envelope setbacks and the old wetland line should also be removed from the survey. 4. The proposed sanitary system should be located out of the wetlands, if at all possible. If it is necessary to disturb wetlands, this should be kept to a minimum. It appears that a sanitary system could be located within the southeast corner of the property. By locating the fill and retaining wall approximately 20 feet off of the property line, it appears a dwelling and sanitary system could be shown, with minimal disturbance to the wetland. As part of the proposal, a proposed grading plan and cross sectional detail of the proposed sanitary system should be included. The cross section should demonstrate that the proposed leaching pool will maintain a 2 foot separation between the groundwater and bottom of the leaching pool. The quantity of fill should be shown. To provide further protection to the groundwater and the adjacent wetland/surface water system, it may be appropriate to increase the separation distance to 3 feet. 5. A proposed clearing line should be shown on the survey. This clearing line should minimize the disturbance to the wetland to the greatest degree possible. 6. Calculations should be provided for the total lot area, area of wetland, area of pervious surfaces, and area of clearing. 7. The Board should discuss the possibility of requiring Health Department approval for the new plan, prior to granting the final wetland permit. However, you way wish to consider the revised plan and provide some comments to the applicant. If the plan is reasonably acceptable to the Board, then the applicant can proceed to the Health Dept. Based upon the above information, it is recommended that this application be deemed incomplete until such time as a revised survey is submitted and the applicant addresses each of the above items. If the Board has any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours truly, Z Timoth Collins, AICP TC:tc JAMES MANOS2 ATTORNEY AT LAW L!7- September L52147 LAKE DRIVE P.O. BOX 1543 SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 516-765-1316 «� g ..�.,�.. September 8, 1995 Mr. Albert J. Krupski , Jr. , President Southold Board of Trustees Town Hall , 53095 Main Road, P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Re: Matter of Connors 350 West Drive Dear Mr. Krupski , Enclosed is a survey which includes the Connors plot done for a former owner of the property, J. Meo. The Meo survey is of particular value because it shows elevations above groundwater. The test hole shown on the Meo survey is within the preferred location for the mounded septic system approved by SCDHS next to Schwartz as depicted on the latest Connors survey. The Meo survey shows the elevation above groundwater as 10 inches at that lo- cation. The elevation above groundwater is one foot (two inches more than at the preferred location) at the surveyor's pipe which is next to the alternate septic system site located in the lower right corner of the plot adjacent to Manos and the roadway shoulder. The actual grade-to-groundwater level at the alternate site should be at least 6 to 10 inches less than at the surveyors ' pipe. This. is because in constructing the shoulder it was bermed slightly upward from the macadam to slightly beyond the plot lines. As a result the elevation of the pipe is not representative of the true elevation of the area beyond it. The only conclusion to be drawn from the above is that both locations are unsuitable with the SCDHS approved location being somewhat less unsuitable. Very truly yours, JM:ng enc 1 , a i N. •'i< i.i �° • 0 CD 4:•• ^ ti + II, A 0J LIZ V L: e,, _, > ram / , .� oco it ax, --55 c chi u V L+� V 01 n, L• r ',. `o LL.. .r . \ z cow. }. I � o 44' n U 3 I - �� O CU r T=+ tJ o .Pw7o/fat 1c.Y� ao Tesf �o.a - i O C Ne t! Ems+ wo I - C85S?ooi3 - ' n Elevations are in Hoe ;,� : feet QboYe rd.:la Air ro�asrdj'4' I sand 9 UNAUTHORIZED ALTE2ATION OR ADOMOK -4 _ TO THIS SURVEY IS A VIOLATION OF S 40�5 I Q/aYBI SECTION 72C9 OF THE NEW YORR STATE z: •h1 1 i /_ � ia J EDUCATION LAW. J `R p _ ►lV� /��l Ji} IO O- O f �YG�If,�IS4�.1 COPIES OF THIS SURVEY-MAF NOT BEAR110 C C XCA7y QS s/l1G Ctl ff. THE LAID SU'.V:T"JF'S INICD SEAL OR \ LMSOSSLD SEAL SHALL N::T EE CovSIDERED TO BE A VAUD T.U_C:F1. GUARANTEES It•;ll.:Ai.D il:R�rJ:: SHALL RL" ' ONLY TO THk-E. FJR V.,:ZM THE SURVEY Q IS F2E.•A:LD,A::D ,;.I'HIS ,..,CALF TO THE T TITLE CC'RLFA:.Y,%;-VL@l%dN,AL AGENCY AIA ` / - LLNCL•iG L•.Si:T-jbDh USM H-R:ON,AND , roko Jed r P TUT:O.1.ll;ARM Tk S A;: UT TLANSfkRABUE • (,� •� TO NJ:,IIUNAL INSTITUTIONS OR SMEOUE OwNbLS. . S. �f AI{Lericl,czf u,-te- Zco,1975. Q�1 /� SOS e Surve ys�a Oc f. 4, !97•F �� Ra MIS Va/-f TuyI, P G.� :��: j \ LiCcrl3.ic.� Lor .`4r/ a •} ��iQ� �r'R!al.?J;Tr';' KENNEY'S BEACH CIVIC ASSOCIATION, INC. P. 0. BOX No. 881 SOUTHOLD, N. Y. 11971 AUG 3 1 1995 September 6,. 1 5 -- OWN OF SO T OLD Mr A'Ibert 'Krupski , Trustee Southold Town Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Conners 59-5-29.3 Dear Trustee Krupski, The Executive Board of the Kenney's Beach Civic Association strongly urges the Southold Board of Trustees to deny a Wetland Permit for the above referenced subject. This parcel of land on West Court is located on freshwater wetlands. To permit the installation of any sanitary system will endanger the fresh water of Great Pond and surrounding groundwater intrusion if the system malfunctions. We feel the Southold Town Board of Trustees'shouid protect our freshwater wetlands and our water supply and deny permits for building on this and any other wetland, properties. Very truly yours, rline Richter President Albert J. KruP ski President O��S�FfO(�CO Town Hall John Holzapfel, Vice President =� y1 53095 Main Road William G. Albertson y Z P.O. Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Martin H. Garrell • Peter Wenczel y'tJpl �.ap! Telephone (516)765-1892 Fax (516) 765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August 29, 1995 Louis Chiarella N.Y.S.D.E.C. SUNY, Bldg. 40 Stony Brook, NY 11790-2356 RE: Christopher Connors SCTM #1000-59-5-29.3 Dear Mr. Chiarella: Enclosed is an application to the Board of Trustees on the above referenced property for a one family dwelling. As we understand the DEC has determined no jurisdiction for a similar application on this property in the past. If you have any comments, feel free to contain this office. Thank you. 'ncerel , Albert J. Krupski, Jr. President, Board of Trustees AJK:jmd enc. cc: Roy Reynolds, SCDHS S E P — 6 — 9 S W E D 1 4 .0 2 7 H O O D — C O N N O_ R S — .T A C K S O N P ._0 2 _ 7. '! :F7 . +il•. i' I .t.. _ i:lYi .. Mi'i•: ...j j�l�il�l':iA•ti,;!...i �,. •,�.h,r'�' ',i�•1:�+' •Y M ,y�T( � '''i>'.,i: .•o. �'F:`, :;°�",.. .'i�;l;},•'if*i;;.• ..}.,:,,t. ,.',..�; t r .5;;.t. k:.: i1 ` . :��q I�•f,.a: );.�^.1,�•.-ti n - :h;• ..+ 1•' i,.,•:a�.,.1 .-: 7.:" �-- �. h:! 4'`t4..rU ....v:.n+ is J+•', i. .�:::i'i:'.t�i.,. .. nti•,tt;;%iryr•.—qq�• rsL'>'e.,r• :G';.r::-Tv.n'{ dth?7iYtl' Wir4tc9aS:1(..ywri+.'++L�wcvr�"'T�`y� �� r . lr 4 �I'r•`., ' ` .'1,'I00. .�•a)..�.t,-r••r+r Rw�rli't' p , ' wL a special Term., Partozate the Supreme Court of thO,�$St of New York, held in and for the County of Suffolk, at on the Swft day of Jkms, 1992 ; S � PRE S ENT: Hon. g rAAK�IC4 SUPREME COURT OF'-THE' STATE OF 04 YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK j i_ --------------------------X _ ______ In the Matter of the Application of q RI HER CONNOR wand WILLIAM CONNORSf r petitioners, Index No. 89-13214 JUDGMENT ' For a JudgmnpracticePursuant LawoandtiCIO Rules78 • of the Civil1 -against- NEW PORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENTERED: JUL 1 0/1992 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION AT: 0O Respondent. _---------- =----- -----X --------------- petitioners, CHRISTOPHER CONNORS and WILLIAM CONNORs, by C havin their attorneys, Wickham, Wickham & Bressler, P. • # 9 comrnenced �a• proceeding under CPLR Article 78 and the Environmental . for a judgment to set aside conservation- Law section 24-0705(7) of petitioner's application No. 10-88-1572 for responde nt's denial a Freshwater Wetland Permit or to require respondent to proceed ire petitioners' areal property under the condemnation law to acquire ursuant to and the respondent having issued a letter of exemption p 9 the real property at issue- from the l ECL 24=1305 exempting requirements of a freshwater wetlands permit for certain land f fio SEP - 71995 S E P - 6 - 9 S W E D 1 4 = 2 e H O O D - C O N N O R S - J A C K S O N P . 0 3 '.�:,w:•;•i •:r.iti' a�� '+p.. [ ••,r•;�.,a'; "ya•.•' 0.:'i.'Qi •'•'1`y9 � 'P:' ::A- .',r .,.�.r':`"4..r ,?.):y,:.::r r•^,;.f `��?'i!'ll .,.�.! ff-;i..tl �L',r'�^t•� yr��'4 1 1, �y 'i� :.:=.,. �. N ...� rri::-r.J r J..iw�t i: .1 n `tr 'r. td. r tee.�'r•('S r .i1 ^h�i.��j�� _ 2 '+ :r ti:n:n.•....,::: ;v.;.4'! t.e,; `-> .a. 'IJ'i.�;i';:^.=�rtf� �z�" •-��'S� 4Rd�, I PI yJ I ; s uses, including but not limited to the • construction and use of a , one-.family dwell, a the parties having consented to the entry of this judgment A it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the real property which is the subject of this proceeding as more particularly described in the deed recorded' March 31; 1987 at deed Liber 10213� page 13.3 in the office of the Suffolk county Clerk also referred s• to as Suffolk County Tax :Map' number 1000/59/5/29. 3 and subdivision lot number 2 on the final Subdivision map approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals number. .1506 dated March, 1972 is exempt pursuant �. to ECL 24-1305 from having the requirement of a freshwater wetlands permit for ;land uses as referred to in respondent's June 251 1992 correspondence which' uses include but are not. limited to the construction ejnd Use of a one ffamilk dwelling, and it is 'further B. ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED, that based on the f� F foregoing this proceeding is dismissed. E N T E R, , � GRANTED t: nMAUS X s,r.UtH. JUL 1 ]992 J.s.c. Edward A. Roni&ine Clerk of Suffolk County. 4.,-,.e, !.. conjudg77 1 FILED ry JUL 10 t992' EDWARD P.ROMAK CUBW OF SUFFM OOUWY n: New York State RI Water Resources Institute The water program of the Center for the Environment 472 Hollister Hall,Cornell University Tel:(607)255-5941 Ithaca,NY 14853-3501 Fax:(607)255-5945 Email:wri@cce.cornell.edu 22 Augutst 1995 Mr. Albert Krupski pUG 2 51995 Town Hall, Main Road Southold, NY 11971 &I Of � ABOUT: follow-up to phone conversation last week Dear Mr. Krupski: As I mentioned by phone, our Institute staff have no specific experience with this combination. As we also discussed, high water tables are usually a concern for septic systems, and the wetland on the property indicates the presence of a water table near the surface. This is particularly a concern if the dry land's elevation is not much higher than that of standing water in the wetland. The only item from our 1993-94 septic system training project archives that seems relevant to your case is a draft handbook from the New York State Health Department, entitled"Individual Wastewater Treatment Design Handbook." That mixes State legal guidance with technology descriptions. It may now be available; our contact was Kevin Scheuer(518) 458-6706 of the Office of Public Health. This State handbook includes extensive materials about the"mound" systems we discussed by telephone. Those and similar"raised" systems essentially create a filled area above the natural land surface to foster some extra contact time between unsaturated soil and the tile effluent before the effluent reaches the water table. I saw one under construction in New Hampshire in a bayfront lot, which made me link that possibility to the development proposed in your Town. I do not know whether this is permitted in Suffolk County. Hopefully the State information is now available and will be of some value in your efforts to evaluate or help mitigate the effects of the proposed septic system on the wetland. Regards, Steven Pacenka Water Specialist Cornell Center for the ENVIRONMENT �,' �05��r OC,�"oG AUG 2 5 1995 cars ,� TownHa1153U5 M�iA Telephone .Y P.O. Box 1179 (516) 765-1801 Southold. New York 11971 1jig � -SOUTHOLD TGWN CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL At the meeting of the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council held Thursday, August 24, 1995 the following action was taken: No. 1290 Moved by Bruce Loucka, seconded by Stephen Angell, it was RESOLVED to recommend to the Southold Town Board of Trustees DISAPPROVAL of the Wetland Application of WILLIAMD AND CHRISTOPHER CONNORS 59-5-29.3 to construct a single family dwelling. The CAC recommends disapproval for the following reasons 1 . Project is located on Wetlands 2. Lot size is inadequate. 3. 670 of the lot is wetlands. 4. Located in flood zone. 5. Shallow watertable - septic system could impact the groundwater: 350 West Drive, Southold Vote of Council: Ayes: All . Motion carried. 4-- ==M--MU A T7 : G Ale Q e d lu Puo s, August 15, 1 g95 Albert Krupski Board of Trustees,Southold Southold,NY 11971 Dear Mr.Krupski: After a very beautiful weekend in Southold,I write this letter to inform you that my mother and I have yet to receive an acknowledgment of our response to the Connors'requests to relocate our well. Our last letter to Colleen Connors (both letters are attached for your easy reference)outlined some reasonable requirements that the Connors'must meet in exchange for the.relocation of our well at their expense. Basically,we want the Connors'to make a commitment that the their new house would be consistent with the size and locations of other houses in our neighborhood --i.e,have a foot print similar to the footprint of our current house and be an above ground one story house. I think that these dimensions are consistent with the dimensions that you outlined for us during your visit to our house in July. Should they be willing to make such a commitment,preferably by a change to the deed to their property,we are ready and willing to relocate our well at their expense. Unfortunately,to date we have received no response. I trust that you are having an enjoyable summer and wish you the best of luck in this matter. Sincerely, Daniel Schwartz enclosed:responses to Colleen Connors dated June 20 and July 21. Date: June 20, 1995 To: Mrs. Colleen Connors Re: Your letters dated May 8 and June 7, 1995 Dear Mrs. Connors: This letter is to confirm our reciept of your letters dated May 8 and June 7, 1995. Despite my currently busy schedule,I have taken the time to respond to your requests inconsideration of the urgency that required you to send us two letters by registered mail within one month. Unfortunately,our schedule probably will not permit us to attend the working session on June 29 -- we are unable to commit to attend a meeting in Southold on a weekday evening. My mother and I are considering your request and will respond to it more fully as soon as we are able. In order to enable us to better evaluate your proposal,please advise us as to the nature of the house you are hoping to build (how many floors,to support how many families,etc.). Sincerely, Daniel Schwartz 490 Fourth Street Brooklyn,NY 11215 cc:A. Krupski,Jr.,Board of Trustees Daniel Schwartz 490 Fourth Street Brooklyn,NY 11215 July 21, 1995 Ms. Colleen Connors 5 Viking Road PO Box 278 Glenwood Landing,NY 11547 Dear Ms. Connors: We received your letter dated mid July and were relieved that the lack of answer to our phone calls was due to your travels. My mother and I have continued to consider your proposal to relocate our well. At this time we feel that we are open to your request. Unfortunately,we are unable and unwilling to consider it further without having the chance to evaluate the plans for the house you wish to build. Specifically the location and height of the house are of concern. Absent the opportunity to evaluate plans for the house prior to our consent to relocation of our well we have another proposal. In exchange for the right to relocate our well, we request that you permanently change the deed to the property to limit the height of any house built on the property to a one story house. I look forward to hearing from you and enjoy the summer Sincerely, Daniel Schwartz cc: Albert Krupski,Town of Southold Board of Trustees 5 Viking Rd. PO Box 278 Glenwood Landing, NY 11547 August 8, 1995 Board of Trustees, Town of Southold Town Hail 53095 Main Rd. PO Box 1179 ` Southold, NY 11971 ( 7 AttR: Jill Re: Connors 350 West Drive ®v� SCTM#59-5-29.3 Dear Jill, As per our conversation, I have enclosed the completed Full Environmental Assessment form, pages 2, 3, 4&5. Please attach this to our previously submitted application of 8/4/95. 1 trust this will fully complete our application. In addition, I have attached a copy of the Trustees letter dated 8/11194 which states that the application fee would be waived (please refer to paragraph 4.) Finally,to reconfirm my instructions with respects to the survey. I have contacted our surveyor and they will stop by your office to see just where the Trustees had indicated at the,tune meeting,where the best location for the dwelling should be. He will prepare a new survey and stake out accordingly. Thank you for all your help and assistance. It does not go unappreciated. Most sincerely, da, 9--� Colleen Connors CC encl. Albert J. ki,Presid t , �' �� � 4, ':c^ t Town Hall John Holza el, ice Presi ent � � � �; 53095 Main Road William G. Albertson ,� s P.O. Box 1179 Martin H. Garrell r¢ 1 ° j:` outhold, New York 11971 �'" " � Telephone 5 Peter Wenczel � ' p ( 16) 765-1892 Fax 516 765-1823 _few ( ) BOARD OF TO'(Ri'N TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August 11, 1994 . Christopher Connors �'0 � ®f u1Ivi 340 Jericho Tpke. Floral Park, NY 11001 RE: SCTM #1000-59-5-29. 3 Dear Mr. Connors: This note represents our thoughts in addition to the resolution passed by the Board during our last meeting on July 28, 1994. We wanted to emphasize the significance of the alternative we proposed in our resolution as an alternative to expensive and time consuming litigation. We' think the site problems can be addressed by some additional time and effort and we suggest setting up a meeting at your convenience. We would certainly be interested in entertaining a new proposal from you that called for an alternative sanitary system in the one-story dwelling, e.g. a composting toilet (clivus multrum) . To satisfy Board of Health requirements, a gray water septic system would also have to be part of the plan. To minimize fill on the wetland, it could be located on the upland portion of the property provided the appropriate distance from your neighbor' s well could be maintained. This would require relocation of your neighbor' s well. We suggest you work with your neighbor to drill a new well. Perhaps you could enter into discussion with that neighbor and find a way to cover the cost of a new well, probably a few thousand dollars at most. We would be glad to help with the discussion. Should you be interested in resolving this technical difficulty and. discussing the matter with us, we would be happy to set up a meeting that included all parties concerned. Assuming successful resolution, we would then entertain a new application, waiving the fees and. expediting the process. That way; you could get on with the construction of the one-family dwelling that you want. Let us know as soon as possible how you feel about this idea. We look .forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Martin H. Garrell, � er Board of Trustees U MHG:jmd cc: Town Attorney Wickham, Wickham & Bressler x -Irin.����_ 5 Viking Rd. PO Box 278 Glenwood Landing, NY 11547 August 4, 1995 Mr. Albert J. Krupski, President Q Board of Trustees, Town of Southold Town Hall AM - TM uu rr 53095 Main Rd. PO Box 1179 AM - T M Southold, NY 11971 Re: Connors 350 West Drive TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCTM#59-5-29.3 Dear Mr. Krupski, Enclosed you will find a new application as requested. I have completed same to the best of my ability. Please review and let me know if there is any additional information you need. Complying with your letters of 8/11/94, 4/28/95 and Judge Cohalan's decision of 4/5/95,we have been diligently working on trying to accommodate the Trustees preferential location of the septic system to the N/E comer of our property. As you know,this requires the cooperation and approval of the neighboring landowner to relocate their existing well (at our expense)to a distance of 100'from both our septic system as well as their own. In addition,we would also need the approval of the SCHD. We regret to advise,that to date,we have not been able to obtain a firm response with respects to the possible relocation'of the neighboring well to accommodate your desired location of our septic system. After numerous letters to and from our neighbor, we have not been able to make direct contact. The most we have received thus far is a maybe, IF we were to permanently change.our,deed to limit the dwelling to a one story house. We have already submitted proposals for the only two remaining possible locations of the septic system.These were submitted for the June 29, 1995 monthly meeting for your review. One has the septic system location in the N/W comer for which we already have SCHD approval. This location adjoins the neighboring land which has already been filled in and would just extend the amount of improved land by the length of the septic system. Although this location has previously been denied by the Trustees,We have since then reduced the amount of fill, reduced the size of the dwelling, proposed a self-composting toilet and gray water septic system*. This proposal uses only approximately 38%of our total land usage (which in total is only 1/2 acre.) The second proposal locates the septic system in the S/E corner of the property. If this would be a more desirable location,we ask that you help to coordinate this with the SCHD. As we do not have a permit from them for this location. i We thank you for all your efforts and hope that we can continue to work towards our final goal of obtaining a Trustee Wetlands Permit without any further undo delay. Most sincerely, Colleen Connors CC encl. cc: Judge Cohalan index#20674-94 *We ask that you re-review your position on the clivis multrim type toilet system. According to our environmental impact statement,the SCHD and other evidences given to the Trustees, the use of a standard black water system would be less of an environmental threat than that of a self composting toilet and a gray water system. Thank you. J Daniel Schwartz 490 Fourth Street Brooklyn, NY 11215 July 21, 1995 JUL 2 S 1995 Ms. Colleen Connors 5 Viking Road PO Box 278 y`- "r r Glenwood Landing,NY 11547 Dear Ms. Connors: We received your letter dated mid July and were relieved that the lack of answer to our phone calls was due to your travels. My mother and I have continued to consider your proposal to relocate our well. At this time we feel that we are open to your request. Unfortunately, we are unable and unwilling to consider it further without having the chance to evaluate the plans for the house you wish to build. Specifically the location and height of the house are of concern. Absent the opportunity to evaluate plans for the house prior to our consent to relocation of our well we have another proposal. In exchange for the right to relocate our well, we request that you permanently change the deed to the property to limit the height of any house built on the property to a one story house. I look forward to hearing from you and enjoy the summer Sincerely, Daniel Schwartz cc: Albert Krupski,Town of Southold Board of Trustees -Tuu — 2 6 - 95 W E D 1 1 = 00 H O O D — COHHOFZS - -TACKSOH P . 0 1 9 d N (516) 4ss-3330 JUL 2 6 1996 (718) 347-0146 I N S U R A N C E ..._...___ O__ ��_._-. TO Ut�N OF S®UTNDLD �3.40 JERICHO TURNPIKE i FLORAL PARK, N.Y. 1 1001 ' FACIMILE COVER PAGE DATE s • i f Please d6l�vei the following-1- pages with cover sheet to: as soon as possible. If you do not receive all of the pages, or if other problems occur, please telephone ( 516) 488 3330 or ( 718) 347 0146 as soon as possible. Comments: ` d,'J r� OV f/ _ /�2.T a n/J i Thank you for your assistance. Sent by: ; f G Time: Our Fax Number is : (516 ) 775 0831 i ens Ada JUL0- 26 - 9S W E D 1 1 Q 1 H O O 30 - 00N1-410FZS3 _T CKSON P _ 0 2 July 9, 1995 5 Viking Rd. PO Box 278 Glenwood Landing,NY 11547 Mr. Daniel Schwartz&Mrs.Sydney Schwartz 490 Fourth St. Brooklyn, NY 11215 Dear Mr. Schwartz&Mrs. Schwartz, Thank you'for'your response of 6/20/96 and a special thank you for meeting with the Town Trustees on July t1 d. I am embarrassed to be contacting you again in such a short period of time.-but my family and I Will be away from 7/10-7/21 and in the event you tried to reach us by phone, It would be to no avail. In your letter and according to the Trustees you are concerned with the size of the,house. In all honesty,we do not have the exact plans as yet. There are a few plans we are working on. l can tell you,that the house will be,smaller than 1500 sq.It. We'are contemplating using the same plans as oor old house.at 705 Leeton Dr.,That house has a base floor living space of 1100 sq.ft. I am also working on a plan that would be of a split level design where one side of the house would be two story. The actual house size would be approximately 30x30(three levels of 15x30. As to the number of famiUes, , .will definitely be,a one family, although the property is owned jointly between my husband lad I and his parents. If you have any other concerns,we would be.more then happy to Meet with you and discuss It personally. Once again,we can't thank you enough for taking the time to meet with the Trustees. We took forward to hearing from you. Most sincerely, Colleen Connors o i N •p JAMES MANOS U ATTORNEY AT LAW A 51995 2147 LAKE DRIVE _ P.O. BOX 1543 TOWNv(�F SOUTH SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 `Y 516-765-1316 July 5, 1995 Mr. Albert J. Krupski , Jr. , President Southold Board of Trustees Town Hall , 53095 Main Road, P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Re: Matter of Connors Dear Mr. Krupski , Mr. Holzapfel was quite correct in giving 150 feet as the minimum separation distance between wells and septic systems. This is provided for under the new SCHDS standards which Roy Reynolds said will be promulgated shortly. The new standards also continues the separation requirement of 100 feet between leaching pools and surface waters. The uplands portion of my property is large enough to accommodate a well and leaching pools with a minimum distance of 150 feet between the two and still fulfill the 100 foot separation distance between those leaching pools and the seasonal surface waters on the northerly side of the property. The pools would be located in the most southerly corner of my property since they are required to be a minimum of 100 feet from the seasonal surface waters on S"4-ck the northerly part 'of my property. The well would have to be 150 C O+ feet to the north of the leach pools. Placement of leaching pools in the NE corner (lower right quadrant) of the Connors' property which as you know would locate the pools immediately adjacent to seasonal surface waters on my property, would mean that I would have the further constraint of the 150 foot separation requirement from the Connor pools for my well . There would be no place I could locate the well . I believe that my property as a consequence of the above would be unbuildable. Very truly yours, JM:ng COPY i -a r i ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING AND SANITATION Fourth Edition 3 r JOSEPH A. SALVATO, P.E., DEE Assistant Commissioner, Division of Sanitary Engineering(Retired) New York State Department of Health,Albany,N.Y. Sanitary and Public Health Engineer f a? u t i t A WILEY-INTERSCIENCE PUBLICATION JOHN WILEY & SONS, INC. New York • Chichester • Brisbane • Toronto • Singapore i y -....i,�,tfJl •rFjX:,i,,,L.:�r H3,sw..s -rae,�?�F' ep't`k't'1P1sAic- rn.,>., .r: ''�eptle - k w *" Wtlliwtiteer Household Household Effluent fv.{ Contt{tnents (Community)' Wastewater` Efiluentd Gray Water Black Water' Rest Area" Color nonseptic Gray septic Blackish 3.5 Odor nonseptic Musty septic HzS 4.5 Temperature(°F) 55°to 90°" 63 Total Solids 800 968 820 528 621 Total vol. Solids 425 514 Suspended Solids 200 376 101 162 77 165 Vol. Sus. Solids 130 Settleable Solids 5 pH 7.5 8.1 7.4 6.8 7.8 8.2 Total Nitrogen 40 84 36 11.3 153 140 Organic Nitrogen 25 Ammonia Nitrogen 0.5 64 12 1.7 138 Nitrate Nitrogen 0.5 0.12 0.12 0.22 0.6 Total Phosphate 15 61 15 1.4 18.6 29 Total Bacteria,,. per 0 ml 30 X 10' 76 X 106 Total Coliform, ✓ MPN per 100 ml 30 X 106 110 X 106 24 X 106g 0.25 X 106 Fecal Coliform,xer �/ �r I00. 1 1.4 X 106 0.04 X 106 BOD 5-day 200 435 _ 140 . 149 90 165 SOD 709 675 c366 258 ✓ 405 Total Organic Carbon 125 97 Grease 65 °Average,in mg/1 unless otherwise noted. "Peter F. Atkins, "Water Pollution By Domestic Wastes,"Selection and Operation of Small Wastewater Treatment Facilities—Training Manual. Charles E. Sponagle, U.S. EPA,Cincinnati, Oh.,April 1973,p. 3-3. K.S.Watson,R. P. Farrell,and J.S.Anderson, "The Contribution from the Individual Home to the Sewer System,"J. Water Pollution Control Fed.,December 1967,pp. 2039-2054. I. A.Salvato,Jr., "Experience with Subsurface Sand Filters,"Sewage Ind. Wades,27,8,909-916(August 1955). `Septic tank effluent.The higher concentration of coliform bacteria in the gray water effluent are attributed to the large amounts of undigested organic matter in kitchen wastewater. t/ IM.Brandes,Characieri.wics o E uents froin Separate Septic Tanks Treating Grev Water and Black Water frorn the Same House,M' istry of the Environment,Toronto,Canada,October 1977. A pp.9 and 27. %Z "Robert O.Sylvester and Robert W.Seabloom,Rest Area Wastewater Disposal, University of Washington,Seattle,Wa.,January 1972,p. 30. "For the Central States zone in United States. _- � - N. - i4 S� - - - - _--'•T".i .. •- ..? -Y:. ,2 :_+-r!�y�Ii;;,FRWWFt _�..-.ry _ _ ^iCiCJ'w•ii3'15Bf..>T.wLii.�:u�ixv."�c-... �/w Stream Pollution and Recovery 481 ite permit min,urban and rural land runoff, infiltration, and percolation through the soil V the groundwater. The pollutants may contain organic and inorganic chemicals, e or man-, ..Vd pathogens. Specific potential sources are pesticides, fertilizers, and sediments ,al, or ra- *m agricultural activities; manure spreading, barnyards, loafing barns, and pen e SWIMS. gables; logging, skidding, and logging roads; highway and other construction, land clearing,and land development;surface mining,dredging,oil and gas drilling, later poV, mine tailings; land disposal of sludge, wastewater, and industrial wastes; landfill Trial, and -leachate; concentration of failing septic tank systems on small lots; runoff from ,easurable. ts and parking lots; pesticides and fertilizers from lawns and golf courses; .. that Igream channelization, dredging, stream bank modification, and flow regulation y modification; spills, contaminated sediments, uncovered stored and applied de- ti sourcTea l of 'kin hich pol- g agents; salt water intrusion, leaking underground petroleum and chemical ' storage tanks; industry stack and motor vehicle emission deposition. 19 vehicle," Control of nonpoint pollution, including atmospheric deposition, remains a chal- lenge and must start with source prevention and control. Major preventive measures -ta is dis- am land-use controls and land management (erosion control, conservation tillage, a water- animal waste storage, integrated pest management, and retention basins). Farm .id wastes operators, for example, can implement a plan developed in cooperation with their Soil Conservation Service and the Conservation District. Technical and financial )wly. Ex-, ;.assistance is also available from the USDA Soil Conservation Service and others. the ability. The Soil Conservation Service has a computerized information system (GIS) to :i tempermake soil, topographic, land use, and other pertinent data available. Less toxic 'demicals must be formulated and used in lesser amounts in conjunction with s When, integrated pest management. See Chapter 10. . sewer. Storm-water runoff and combined sewer overflows containing sediment, oil, ;ewer and- SP:ase,and other toxic materials can be passed through retention basins to minimize a combi-_ Ow pollution load on receiving streams. The EPA requires cities with a population r than 100,000 to prepare a management program to control storm sewer and sportatio -ment "Combined sewer overflows and obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination slant, System(NPDES)permit. See Combined Sewer Overflow and Separate Storm Sew- this chapter. a is :ter. Th FoRution Measurement bon diox— 5�day BOD is the best single re-strength measure of wastewater or polluted water m ce, the}; degradable wastes. However, organic and inorganic loading, aquatic organisms including animal life(benthos).in the bottom sediments, the COD where , Mcated,the dissolved oxygen, and the sanitary survey taken all together with the D(carbonaceous and nitrogenous) are the best indicators of organic water pol- n. Dissolved oxygen is the best indicator of a water body's ability to support le aquatic life and its waste assimilation capacity. Other chemical, physical, biological parameters, such as bioassay and diversity of species, provide ad- water information, particularly in relation to chemical pollution. Total and fecal ,sition int Source Assessment t Report,New York State Dept.of Environmental Conservation,Albany, gt September 1988,pp. 1-6,7. Date: June 20, 1995 6 1995 4 To: Mrs.Colleen Connors TOWN OF 1O UTH O L D Re: Your letters dated May S and June 7, 1995 � -- - - --- Dear Mrs. Connors: This letter is to confirm our reciept of your letters dated May S and June 7, 1995. Despite my currently busy schedule,I have taken the time to respond to your requests inconsideration of the urgency that required you to send us two letters by registered mail within one month. Unfortunately,our schedule probably will not permit us to attend the working session on June 29 -- we are unable to commit to attend a meeting in Southold on a weekday evening. My mother and I are considering your request and will respond to it more fully as soon as we are able. In order to enable us to better evaluate your proposal,please advise us as to the nature of the house you are hoping to build (how many floors,to support how many families,etc.). Sincerely, Daniel Schwartz 490 Fourth Street Brooklyn,NY 11215 cc:A.Krupski,Jr.,Board of Trustees d 5 Viking Rd. PO Box 278 JUN — 8 M Glenwood Landing, NY 11547 June 7, 1995 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Mr. Daniel L. Schwartz& Mrs. Sydney Schwartz 490 Fourth Street Brooklyn, NY 11215 Re: Connors 350 West Drive Southold, NY Dear Mr. Schwartz& Mrs. Schwartz, I am writing to you once again as a follow up to my letter dated May 8, 1995. First, I would like to start by inviting you to a work session with the Town of Southold Trustees on Thursday, ,Dune 29th, 6:00pm at the Town Hall. The Trustees' have agreed to hold this work session and my hope is that we can come up with a feasible plan that will be accepted. As stated in my previous letter,.the Trustees' would like us to propose putting in a gray water septic system in the N/E comer of our property. We cannot however, make this proposal without your approval to re-locate your well.. We tried to contact you by phone over the Memorial Day weekend, but to no avail. We did leave a message on your answering machine in Southold, but to date have not heard.a response. We understand the position you are put in is not easy and are sorry. It is not by our choice and we too are in an awful position and can.only hope that you are understanding. Finally, for all parties concerned, we ask that you put in writing your response and of course, if you wish to contact us by phone, please feel free to do so. Our home# is 516 671-8751. Thanking you once again, I am, Very truly yours,. Colleen Connors Cc cc: A. Krupski, Jr. Board of Trustees CERTIFIED MAIL#Z185 605526 r �• j Co L` co i=�l Y t7�c�� �yl-—I Yvt�c�t"�nf 6 p t���rA oe c��t�6 �nl do ck.s y, LL N n K(J o\J w ►� vn �w�t � — v cL �, � u, 9 0� U- ------_--------------1---'------ _.I ._..Ct�.... '�D _W(Tl� /h��� �►rilw�r�tiF-noel -� - --�w+Cwc tz' - -To eROVIr,� (dv2- } P�evtt�c7otiJ P>�i s,/tL/A-ri0tJ -- - -- -- --- .__.._... - --._.._._- - ----- -- -------- LA - -r-- ------------- -- -- - _- - - - - s,� d� mow. Twtis Ww� r�tv�s IfJ l�fi'1]w.� T� lM�h1t vtai7.� doss o 6 Q c 6 r+nJ (A IIA s 4 l�dy >'c W t G ►J t~I rc' `f V w �- ---- . ..._...... -------- !— --- �� z TFfc ��4Tu-26(_ {�✓�13,r�-r �Til o� -- - C} Io �jT�fa2��)1s� W L�1 t✓i)\.7 ) 5, ---- - - - �TFI� C��N� $ ;(Ju/tiG+ s�t� �}� is ko� (� I�+o�r �,�;�'va.� - - - -- - - --- U- - ---- -_ ---- ----- - __--- -- -- - 6_o k l S.lk C��J dN� z (��1 j i-�w {'1lt t S t�1�l lJ ati� STq,urs l l�C S °-4 E'YI)s -(N6Nw Wt} ic(t Qvlwii (kovt&, `Tl4,�- T(�u s�w� s� �c��c�� H t~ N� $ �.e4�w�2 `114 GG� �f�ure� is Us�>J. �c�c��1 ,� ssuwt� --------- -- ---- - 11k� �J1+)c(f }�c2ou�sl(T III; Cprur�dr�5 '' Iq �Tl}w 7('ct[sTc��S - ------------ -i4TT"w tJTi o rJ , `T1l (`s 6 o rG __----------- - - -- ----- -----------------—_------------- - --—�"-- ------- ---)—� Gor iN Vk o wk-r OK)_....Too 1/ ARcr.,, I{� �i, _ 19 4 3 I ��I>JIr7�Ow��r.��� C�onlswRdAr,u� �r�t~ (- �.oy.� Ilv\(3o��zo75�a, �I�N✓� -T-y 7v �j 4 SU 5 V I�.�l� I J' >^t. W ri-,S g cti.m o vt;E I� s -n+4, Lj IIJ.-- 11,61_pgk45s. S4 N0 IfJpicez- "ti 0 10 `n� .._. i GIs Soc� ri��tti,� To�r�! �aw(c�/ Tot,c,oc� i ---. ...._ ..- --- ------- �N10ors 14,Rv1� i�Ur � . TSorvTK�s /7SSnc/r� r; s To � K - -- -- `�--- ] IM I`f��� TN;-� tC>��a6v L �I�L �/'i st�i— -_ - l - ----- ...__..... - -- -- - -- ---- O�SIi31c Il�� 0 lflfJiAVri,I&1�9i�� , I(f� Y11itiiVfarVrb(� �{c ��OsSrr�rr.� r 6 �_ _ ---- -- - _- �tisol�e�� INLtN( .01� _►N ( s ..�(rw LJou�� ��'c�� 117r . �R�i3►.�wtS , �. ��t�-►1�6 Povc� S (J v,� 'Iv 3w Pw �ct� IOo t!� (tow� � Sc f(wv�'�r ti � l.��.�,t,. �t- !o o ram, _. _�wf-��ao�2s ���N� s �- S�.F�b�.� ��.��-y� , ��4�. �Qr�r�c��. Is ro ,�►�,��.� ....--..- 1 - /�C�o � ►r� �� rri'w ,3tC,17 �k�/SncrCs _ I�wI/L �4NG�w�r�rJ WRS NO Ilvt (J.fZ�a ,U r `k Fly 0 M- rJ NJ��2aVV1 ��N't�i kc w t,c �O�J Grti A rJ ► S .S u w\w,,:�o u Lz ST n rJ �0 �/U�l w'Z �tcJZN �Jl�rJ ft J LTu2w �E(��1��cP+r�� W Hv d(.lM s _.... - - ..._.._... --......,._..--..__._....._.._...... -- - _ _..._........_.----.....-_--..__....----- _ -_-.. -.. .-.._...._......-- _..... _..... . -- -- - -.................................. 1 3L4,L, �� v�` >f�T��r� � G ili7S� �ffIS `� it Tl¢w C�NrVv�is 6✓fj>v NU-2/ i r Okl�l� I� ay O D�� o i h4� �u.r�� U H�t-T:L/-� � II19c2�r. _.. .. ...._. .. .... _._..__.....-..............__..._._........-._.................._-.._.....---.._. .�.. ........._...__...... - -----..- - T�,u-.S�Zv 1v . ........ ........_........_ ... _ ... .. ._. ....._.._...... ..............._....._._._....... .. -... --....._.....................— --- .._....... - - ----------------_.._.... - - -- - ... { - - __ ..... .................. ................................ ..._._.....-..._..----.._..._......._ --... -- - -- - I .. i I _..... .. .�..-- ----------..... _._..... . . ................................... ............................ -..... ....._..,........ ........- - ... ....... - -....- --........ H.S. Ref.# 87 SO 93_ 41 lJ E f/N/SHED rN .r GRADE e/7.2S O 0i 7.3 14/FBtR •S JUMAR N S£PrAf $,f 4.S 1.Prer..ler) T wo• •!O.0 •t= � m TAN.' }2' AdEMOMAIE � W rAW F.+ orae °1,e 1 .• \o GRADING PLAN moo• elf' SIN VEY FOR �F 1��'. :: �5 �. . CHRIS TOPHER CONNERS PROPOSED CONC. RETAW/NG 0 C 4V / WALL 1 p r h �� {+� ;' A T SOUTHOLD TO KW OF SOUTHOLD SLIFFOLK COUNTY, N.Y.Test Hale � _ • �. �..�_: -- y - P = .• 3. ,. VW- 59- 05-29.3 �._..y cNX Scale. 1 = 40 Aug. 3.1, 1992 Nov. 31993 (B.O.H revisions) "s\ ; '° `�. Q�� July 15, 1994• ( Fill Revision) z7 O `rs June 21 1995 (Revised) w e w��r G oo c� -o \ •' aQ�X Aug. 30, 1995 (Revised) 4 � p1�e� Sept. 27, 1995 (wetlands (lags) / en rP. Sand Q �T L.4 \ C -0- The locations-of wells and cesspools shown hereon are from fled observations , and or from data obtained from others. �_lN n Septic Syystem 10 be Equipped`\ —�, , with a Composling Toilet SEP 2 71995- !J ' �a�E 0r fQE1V y0 I AREA =20,000sq.ft. S ;' 01- Sui1THOLD, el. 7.6 =proposed elevation = WETLANDS FLAG BY SOUTHOLD TOWN —6— =proposed contour TRUSTEE REPRESENTA TIVE SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES FOR APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION ONLY ESTIMATED FILL = '34C cu.yds. FEMA FLOOD ZONE A EL /1 Prepared in accordance with the minimum ` Y.S. L1C. NO. 496/8 DATE HS.REF. NO. B ' 93 by therds for L.I.A.L!Seand pproved ands as llshed adopted -PEC ORS, P.C. The locations of wells and cesspools for such use by The New York Slate Land (516) 76 - 20 shown hereon are from field observations Title Association. P. 0. BOX 909 APPROVED and or from data obtained from others MAIN ROAD ' ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCEDTOALaV.Lt SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 92-245 a H.S. Ref.# R10-94-0071 a,o Loll 1 NOTES SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM DESIGN ei�o e,,�5 FAN/S/!ED rK, `� INCL UDING WA L 6RAAe ei s c�F.r o 0/7.o ' BY' JOSF_PH. FISCHETTI, P.E. �4 6 PioP, ;• 4 O HOBART ,ROAD 6a /o' W01/1 . +3 N c SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 raNr ROM SePr�� �� g 9• L•P.(een/er) Z (5161 765-2954 O �� ►� 9 c,ecvNo WAree7 — — — —e/ /,2 OF NE-1,� JC P; 2 h ;7e-,j �' Pee 1'�9des: FK GRADE �V y Selo Fisc,y� GRADING PLAN . �', .fl G �° T Tow•, Tv3fee, �1 kP \3 4 O .... � O O No• 05251 p ac 3 A , f SURVEY FOR CHRIS TOPHER CONNERS -D CONC. RETAINING 'ALL, �10 o AT SOUTHOLD '\ o el c.s �enc�ed o .�� , �` -e= ,o ��,, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD i•e" .///h c/a a,-� a c tow °` � h SUFFOLK COUNTY, N. Y, b / \ �• o 3' 1000 - 59 - 05 - 29.3 Q "ruafeoc. ccbcr a J\ �,, +` e• � SCe7/@% 1"= 40" n �� "3 I�'M1^ a►`` Aug. 31, 1992 At No v. 3, 1993 (B.OW re visions) q19 ,3 July l5, 1994- ( Fill Revision) P June 21,1995 ( Revised. ) o �\ Aug. 301 1995 (Revised) pf. 27,1995 (Wetlands Flags) COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICESO t. 15, 1995 (Revised) �' O 1. 23 1995 (re visions 8 addit. 1 �� ,t rAN APPROVAL OF COS+ST.RiJ„TION ONLY �2 5 1 D c. 21, 1995 (Revised) o �P �a GATE �' � °ttS �'U 71 APPRO IVED ,ells and cesspools -,�, EXPIRES ME'YEARS FROM DATE OF APPROVAL-JA 051994 1•� �,`�`�' from fled observallons )btalned from others. , ccon , �r i OeC(l in it �! awl iCE2 -cards 1. C a'� ite�-ietiv 1 LJml 1 13a4s�/ �� 10 Bog �o fje removed horn sep'i . sys ,�: ��� _ _. area encom/oceas/�9 /'s�ainin4 Wa// SKQ Ec"' 7t7 TTi�C rl:=j �.�/_.U,�c f/N/SNED -R4oe J� OK xV t/S - GRAAf I IEW O S7 $f Frk 5 Z 4 �rac G .8 GAWW.0 WA MR? TAW do F,�c .RAVE �V .�`�,o ' GRADING PLAN /3 REaA � �L h°• � �• SURVEYFOR CHRIS TOPHER CONNE! PROPOSED CONC RETANNG WALL ao �• �7 ,�� \ AT SOU/HOLD0 OUTHO LO� TOVN OF`3 y t Hole =��,V , . h ,\\ _ SUFFOLK COUNTY N. Y � 11000 - 59 - 05-29.3 ,o.. ,y �, \ ' J !' �� �'• 9`yL�k Scale: 1"- 40' Aug. 31, 1992 6/own � C No v. A W93 (B.O.H re vi, ...,Mn n E�y July 15, 1994 ( Fill Re visio. �' s 3 a - K . . �: tij E� June 21, 1995 (Revised) IC3 /r! n00✓S� - o• O�n ' Sand Q OT GG �° P a S • . � . v a` coo,oC 0` ti 5• �`0 v The locations o1 wells and cesspools shown hereon are from field observations and or from data obtained from others. Se tic S stem to be Equipped \ pp y ` �r`-��� {-�.. -;' PEE OF NEB/ With a Composting Toilet �, D AREA =20,000&q. ft. el. 7.8 = proposed elevation 6— = proposed contour rgW'Y DUARTMENT QF HfALTH $iR"Crs H.S. Ref.# 87 SO 93 „R` C/S FiN/SHED rh el 73, f 3 RESAR _` N 5.7 ae SEPr� 5_L 4-S L.P(crnler) r TB/A i•e- ae• # 1 P QG Q.: •t G ® �a CROP MO WArRE7 'WA rERPROOFM WArERPRAAR7r/ 'SZC'nr T''W FF4 GRADCSZC FF4 GRADC Z.Q GRADING PLAN REDAR i Q` t 3 REm, c,� SURVEY FOR CHRISTOPHER CONNERS PROPO WED ALL CONC. RETAINING ,�`�`�`►" O F,• ' . ;,`€?` , �`,\ AT SOU THOLD TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SUFFOLK COUNTY, N. Y. Test H61e h \ - - - � .Z.." ~ t' �. 1000 59 05 29.3 toa,�y � 3 �\ 3;0• _' Scale. 1//= 401 91.1�,>< k Aug. 31, 1992 Nov. 3,1993 (�OW revisions) July 15 1994• ( Fill Revision) ® 0% June 21, 1995 (Revised) Co- o '� / wcale ti� o. ! Aug. 30, 1995 (Revised) "4 Sept. 27, 1995 (wetlands flags) Oct. 15otes C � , 1995 (Revised) scs n oc 4 p` NO OCT 16 K396 The locations of wells and cesspools �.� � =r.• shown hereon are from field observations l �f��=4,-;:; n a a I� and or from data obtained from others. TOE yid ��� Septic System to be Equipped \ With a Composting Toilet AREA =20 000sq. ft. el. 7.8 = rop osed elevalion p p � = WETLANDS FLAG BY SDUTHOLD TOWN �`� z• eejer O,p 6— = proposed conlour TRUSTEE REPRESENTATIVE �o�"': SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES ESTIMA TED FILL =• -340 :cu.yds. FOR APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION ONLY FEMA FLOOD ZONE A EL ll Prepared in accordance with the minimum +.. J ' p , �= L'� i�/. .S. UC. NO. 49618 87 s0 93 standards for title surveys as established "- ! DATE roc REF. NO. by the L.I.A.L.S and approved and adopted P /� " `RVE , P.C. The localions of .wells and cesspools for such use-by The New York State Land (5 f -49� shown hereon are from field observations Tif/e Associafion. P. X APPROVED and or from data obtained from others. MA/N D! ELEVA77 NJs ARE REFERENCED To xay.A SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 92-245 (2) A H.S. Ref.# 87 SO 93 �uo e/a •AIV1.5HED rw is'l4oe CAME e17.a. ty 73 04R£dlR )• o �`7 $£PrIe * J AQIAR N " TANY .e. �8 `Z • _` 7FJlt110AmAuw OF1111 r'`"" FW a4,,ne �j" � o \ . GRADING PLAN ell d3 REBA °. - — r fir.. 'I• �"�y � / -o_ o��: . -.�.\ .J MEW .e-ac #J IEDAR` �,4' \� SL)R VEY•FOR G O P� �� Mya�ri, r% L �� CHRIS TOPHER CONNERS PROPOSED CONC. RETAINING `` v_ Fi• _a A T SOUTHOLD WALL. �IO r'� �" i� \ _ �y�° air. s' '� \ TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Test Hole e�' ',Q rP ;" ~ _ "'` `� y ' SUFFOLK COUNTY, N. Y. b 59 - 05 - 29.3 Scale. 1 = 40 1G Aug. 3 •k� /.G .a/own w ���-o \o \° �, / C �'c! .. `b •.b � w . f 1992 Nov. 3, 1993 (E.O.H revisions) July 15, 1994, ( Fill Revision) o s �� / June 217 1995 (Revised) t0G1 �ej Aug. 30, 1995 (Revised) $esnd 4 O"ell �� x (J Cw 9 The locations of wells and cesspools shown hereon are from field observations _ and or from data obtained from others. Septic System to be EgWpped y Wl1h a Composting Toilet AUG 3 0 1995 AREA =20,000s q. ft. _ el. 7.8 = proposed elevation �� Q� SOUTH®LD _ 6— = proposed contour �P�E�F �F��� SUFFO R COUNTY APPROVAL A MENTROF HEALTH LTH SERVICES ESTIMATED FILL =• •340 cu.yds. r o�N T ^^E,2� ��'� FEMA FLOOD ZONE A EL ll Prepared in accordance with the minimum N. LIC. NO. 49618 g7 so 93 standards for title surveys as established DATE u& REF. NO. by the L.I.A.L.S. and approved and adopted PECD 1C li' OR , P.C. The locations of wells and cesspools for such use by The New York Stale Land (516) .?F5 7���0 shown hereon are from field observafions Title Association. P. 0: �,OXa• � , and or from data obtained from others. MAIN t3�' —'—,I,--S'v�� APPROVED SOUTH �f'YV:'r 97/ ELEVA 77ONS ARE REFERENCED TO A&V.Q re v is e cL /o�2 s�9� 92-245 (2) A 4- H.S. Re%# 87 SO 93 Fiv GQ4DE `�V e/S A/N/SH ED , GRADE e/7-E. rw O \ �I7.3 t•ac- #aI�AR N •e SE PT/C $.= 4.8 L•P,(crn�er) `Z . � TANr �.e. ce• C&CIIAO WArEe7 tZ m SEMX TM WE �C M MADE 0 • �� GRADING PLAN �� lfi 4 r- C,Q• SURVEY FOR -o- pP�'t� s\ w `� aP - "ya�r� 0q. L� ., CHRISTOPHER CONNERS PROPOSED CONC. RETAINING �`Q1 Sv' F,• WALL \5� \ ` . _� AT SOUTHOLD o�\� � fi, -: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Test Hole a -a�� o: . 4" �` � - `� SUFFOLK COUNTY N. Y. \ �• Pf h �-1 x 1000 - 59 - 05 - 29.3 Coc►nry 7 � .�` O, a 3!- he4 SCa/e: 1"= 40' Sand \ ti'i -o ,11 a•t3Grow,,n e .. ? �4�o}•o a- - 4' ��� 4 c� k � � }- '• ��• Y -k � Aug. 31, 1992 Nov. 3, 1993 (B.O H revisions) 27 B.-own ems. 0- 0L11s� e����,� ;� Q� ,3 July 15, 1994. ( Fill Revision) - G o / June 21, 1995 (Revised) w�r�r ��� �J �;oe��► C Aug. 30, 1995 (Revised) • "� 3 ' /�1 eye ►4 Sept. 27, 1995 (wetlands flags) 1 Q1� �v O� 5 C�1 The locations. of wells and cesspools shown hereon are from field observations and or from data obtained from others. Septic System to be Equipped` 2y With a Composting Toile) F[!SEP _ 271 AREA -20 000s . ft. .� ' q 14E6'V y el. 7.6 = proposed elevation = WETLANDS FLAG BY SOUTHOLD TOWN ��ti t. MEr2�F� 6— = proposed conlour TRUSTEE REPRESENTA TIVE SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES ESTIMATED FILL =. "340 cu. ds. — FOR APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION ONLY y m�D FEMA FLOOD ZONE A EL Il Prepared in accordance with the minimum ^,, N.Y.S. LIC. NO. 49618 DATE HS REF. NO. g7 50 93 standards for title surveys as established by the L.I.A.L.S. and approved and adopted The locations of wells and cesspools for such use by The New York State Land P 1 � � ORS, P.C. shown hereon are from field observations Title Assoclat/on. q g and or from data obtained from others. MA APPROVED ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCED TO a ava rev/se d 2s/9.. SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 92-245 (2) A / H.S. Ref.# 87 SO 93 a_11FLA Y. e!S F/N/SHED ray J V GRADE B!7.3 F/N. GRADE O 8 Prep- r O i X \ 5 SE a 5 L_Peen/e 4 REBAR TAklK . + 3REB 2'O.0 S 2'O.r- GROUND WAT�27 ` _r) Z Z MEMBRANE WATERPROOFING SEP77C TAW �NaE `G �,e`�o GRADING PLAN SVE , ,N Vv (A Z25., 03 Rean "`�- • Z z y fi P ��° a ® SUR VEY O *3 REBAR 8 O.a #3 REBAR Cr�' �` A CHRIS TOPHER CONNERS e1 PROPOSED CONC. RETAINING Q1`GJ`' , F•' ,''{° ' tit:° ;� r :, AT SOUTHOLD WALL �� .�o �' `P/ ' �: keyeot`' % TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SUFFOLK COUNTY, N. Y. Test Hole �.a o �o` - ;' h - - - o c� . 3� 1000 59 05 29.3 ? �+ $ 3! Scale. 1" = 401 Sand ti� a *: ti ,P� Aug. 31, 1992 No v. 3, 1993 (B.OW re visions) luly 57 1994• ( Fill Revision) 27 �QG ��o �\ -o `k��� ' -e�g � `�P ,/ \� 3 June 21,1995 ( Revised ) p► e� s C Sanoc 4 0" o �- �1 The locations of wells and cesspools P shown hereon are from field observations and or from data obtained from others. '\ Septic System to he Equipped ` � I FV GIOH,�l l 1�1 With a Compostirg. Toilet y�� AREA =20,000sq. ft. -- 9661977r el. 7.8 = proposed elevation ° 6— = proposed-contour r °_ : !, [ �_I s ` SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES ESTIMATED FILL = 400 cu.yds. n � .: FOR APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION ONLY Prepared in accordance with the minimum ��� . FEMA FLOOD ZONE A 7 EL ll P , -- � N.Y.N.Y.S. LIC. NO. 49618 87 SO 93 standards for title surveys as established DATE MS. REF. No. by the L.I.A.L.S. and approved and adopted PECO - EYORS, P.C. The locations of wells and cesspools for such use by The New York State Land (516) 765 - 5020 shown hereon are from field observations Title Association. P. 0. BOX 909 and or from data obtained from others. MAIN ROAD APPROVED SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 ELEVA TONS ARE REFERENCED TO N.G.V.D. rev/s��G i o�L S��.� 92-245 ( 1 ) H.S. Ref.# 87 SO 93 EL 1/FM A A go � Tw F/-- G eA0.1 /y 0 el 7.3 e/Z s F/N/S H ED TW +k 3 REUR N N 0� �•e SEPr/C •y 9 L"P(cen�er) `` TANS f2 o.0 sro.0 ` 9 MEMBRANE 9 . �0 � 8''t'j°) \n- WATERPROOFING SEPT!C TAf a FIN. GRADE �1C,O �O ` � � GRADING PLAN dF3 REBAR 8'O.C. #3 REBAR �Q All / SURVEY FOR r ! '�� a�? � \� 4 CHRI�S TOPHER CONNERS PROPOSED CONC. RETAINING o1`�j�P , �'• ' off ��` \ A T SOUTHOLD WALL �� � 3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SUFFOLK COUNTY N. Y. • Test Hole � \ _ 9P., �. �� .o \. G 3 y 1000 - 59 - 05 - 29.3 Scale: 1" - 40' sated \q� Aug. 31, 1992 Nov. 3, 1993 (B O.H revisions) July 15, 1994• ( Fill Revision) 2.7 June 21,1995 ( -Revised I G��► oo.� Aug. 30, 1995 (Revised) warmer 0�. Sept. 27,1995 (Wetlands Flags) Oct. 15, 1995 (Re vise d) Oct. -23, 1995 (revisions 8 addit. ) 9 All The locations of wells and cesspools - shown hereon are from field observations and or from data obtained from others. TOTAL AREA = 20,000sq,ft. c QF P"EJ AREA OF WETLANDS = 13 500s .ff* ��` �� el. 7.8 proposed elevollon ' q S �,N T. MFr2 D.p ---6— = proposed conlour SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES .ESTIMA TED FILL 510t cu. ds FOR APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION ONLY Y -EMA FLOOD ZONE A7 EL 1I �. .��. Prepared In accordance with the minimum i �:/V.Y,�S. C. NO. 49618 8� so 93 �� -- � andards for lllle- surveys as established DATE �� REF. No: + the. L.I.A.L.S. and approved and adopted PECO C� ARV �'rD,q P.C. The locations of wells and cesspools UU Oct2 510 r such use by The New York Stale Land 15/61 7 <`fI shown hereon are from held observations Ills .AssociQl/on. P. O. B r� S APPROVED and or from data obtained from others. A MAIN ROAD �ITOWN ®� �,��THOL® SOUTHOLD N.Y. 11971 ELEYATIOrfVS ARE REFERENCED TO /K6i.V0. .�'cu/.i�i G ra�'Z.`•?jar�. � 92 245