The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSubject File CHARDS R.CUDDY ATTORNEY AT LAW 445 GRIFFING AVENUE RIVERHEAD,NEW YORK ,ma iI i t,g, ,�ddr(As- TEL: (631)369-8200 P.O.Box 1547 FAX: (631)369-9080 Riverhead,NY 11901 E-mail: charlescuddy@optonline.net July 11, 2024 $v b PB I HL-1 $c., MC HAND DELIVERED RECEIVED ED Heather Lanza, AICP i..._............__ ...._....._.__._.__._.__.,. Town Planning Director JUL1 54375 Main Road Southold,New York 11971illdt� Planning Board Re: Strongs Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, New York SCTM No. 1000-106.00-06.00-10&13.44 Dear Ms. Lanza: Enclosed is a check payable to the Town of Southold in the sum of$85,465.00. While we had agreed to make this payment and are doing so,the payment is made under protest. The applicant has serious misgivings with the report and the FEIS prepared by Hardesty& Hanover. Very truly yours, Charles R. Cuddy CRC:dmc Enclosure x � z"�,, MAILING ADDRESS: Rs PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS P.O. Box 1179 DONALD J.WILCENSKI � �. Southold NY 11971 Chairz OFFICE LOCATION: WILLIAM J. CREMERS Town Hall Annex PIERCE RAFFERTY 54375 State Route 25 JAMES H.RICH III (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) MARTIN H. SIDOR �C U11 � ) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD July 11, 2024 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq, P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: SEAR & Site Plan Determination Adjournment Strong's Storage Buildings (aka Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings) Located at 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, NY SCTM#1000-106-6-13.4 & 10 Zoning District: M-II and R-80 Dear Mr. Cuddy: The Southold Town Planning Board, in response to the letter from Mr. Altman received on July 2, 2024, voted at their meeting held on July 8, 2024 to adjourn two items related to the application referenced above. The first item adjourned was the adoption of the SEQRA Findings Statement, and the second item was the vote on the decision to deny the application. They were adjourned to August 5, 2024 with the condition that we receive a revised site plan application within two weeks (by July 22, 2024). This decision to adjourn was based on the statement in Mr. Altman's letter that the applicant is preparing a revised site plan that will substantially reduce the scale and materially change the scope of the project. The letter also specifically requested the Planning Board delay adopting their Findings Statement until after a revised site plan was submitted and reviewed. Finally, the condition for two weeks to submit the revised plans was chosen based upon my telephone conversation with you on Monday, July 8, 2024 where you stated that revised plans were expected to be ready next week. We look forward to reviewing the revised plans. Please contact the Planning Department with any questions. Resp ctfully, Heather Lanza, AICP Town Planning Director Wrw �u OFFICE LOCATION: ''` MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex �� P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 Southold,NY 11971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Telephone: 631765-1938 Southold, NY 11971 x LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM TOWN OF SOUTHOLD v To: James H. Rich III, Chair 7R7E..0 E 1,._. .._ Town of Southold Planning Board JUL 0 8 2024 From: Mark Terry,AICP .-"SZ5 Assistant Town Planning Director Planning l"�I.Boarn LWRP Coordinator Planning Board Date: July 8, 2024 Re: LWRP Coastal Consistency Review for Strong's Yacht Center SCTM 1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 The proposed action includes the construction of two, one-story buildings of 52,500 SF and 49,000 SF to provide indoor winter storage of larger yachts,up to 86 feet in length, with associated improvements including gravel-based driveways and parking areas, water supply, sewage disposal, site grading, and drainage, landscaping, and lighting. Also proposed is the removal of a pool and patio. The Strong's Yacht Center is situated on a 32.96±-acre parcel located south of Old Mill Road and on the west side of Mattituck Creek on lands zoned M-II (approximately 16.46 acres) and R- 80 (approximately 16.5 acres). Prior to its purchase by Strong's in April 2017,the subject site was known as the Mattituck Inlet Marina and Shipyard which existed as a full-service marina, maintenance, repair and storage operation for over 60 years. As illustrated on the proposed site development plans prepared by Young&Young, the subject property is currently comprised of 40 boat slips with associated ramps and fueling and developed with eight buildings to support the operation of the marina, as well as the sale,maintenance, dockage and storage of boats. The eight existing buildings include the following: • Building 1: One-story residence (1,610 SQ. FT.) • Building 2: Two-story office(2,702 SQ. FT.) • Building 3: One-story storage (17,320 SQ. FT.) • Building 4: One-story storage (169 SQ. FT.) • Building 5: One-story storage(341 SQ. FT.) • Building 6: One-story storage (10,766 SQ. FT.) • Building 7: One-story storage (15,076 SQ. FT.) • Building 8: One-story storage(22,425 SQ. FT.) The two proposed buildings would become Building 9 (49,000 SQ. FT.) and Building 10 (52,500 SQ. FT.). Upon implementation of the proposed action, the total gross floor area of all buildings would increase from 69,245 SQ. FT. to 171,929 SQ. FT. The proposed action has been reviewed to Chapter 268, Waterfront Consistency Review of the Town of Southold Town Code and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) Policy Standards. Based upon the information provided in the submitted documents, as well as the records available to us, it is my recommendation that the proposed action is INCONSISTENT with LWRP policy standards and, therefore, is inconsistent with the LWRP. Policy 1 Foster a pattern of development in the Town of Southold that enhances community character,preserves open space, makes efficient use of infrastructure, makes beneficial use of a coastal location, and minimizes adverse effects of development. Based upon the information provided in the file documents, the removal of trees, adverse impacts to habitats, and significant impact on the quality of life of residents and visitors in the region resulting from noise, vibration, and disruption of daily activities long in duration, the proposed action cannot meet this policy. The proposed action does not 'foster a pattern of development in the Town of Southold that enhances community character,preserves open space, and minimizes adverse effects of development. " The community character impact of the Proposed Action is not the maintenance of an existing maritime aesthetic,but the destruction and excavation of a natural forested area and its replacement with over 100,000 square feet of industrial maritime warehouse. The community character impact of the Proposed Action is the expansion of the existing maritime use and the potential impacts that would have on adjacent uses,namely, the open space and outdoor recreational uses of the Mill Road Preserve and the Mattituck Creek and the low-density residential uses in the surrounding area(FEIS). Policy 2 Preserve historic resources of the Town of Southold. The applicant has not proved that policy"2.1 Maximize preservation and retention of historic resources"has been met and that potential adverse impacts of new development on nearby historic resources have been avoided to the greatest extent practicable. Policy 3 Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of Southold. The visual quality of the landscape is a major contributor to the community character of the Town of Southold. The Town includes different landforms, a variety of upland and shoreline vegetation, a complex land and water interface, well-defined harbors, and historic hamlets. In addition to the many highly scenic natural resources found throughout the Sound, the variety of cultural elements in the landscape and the interplay of the built and natural environments, especially along the waterfront, are of particular importance to the visual quality of the Town (LWRP). The analysis provided relies upon the narrative that the visual nature of the Site is that of a maritime use and that the Proposed Action will continue to have the visual nature of a maritime use. The visual impact of the Proposed Action is not the maintenance of an existing maritime aesthetic,but the destruction of an elevated natural forested aesthetic and its replacement with over 100,000 square feet of industrial maritime warehouse. This narrative is easy to overlook with the lack of a defined ZVI, viewshed analysis, and existing viewpoint photographs with corresponding proposed condition photo simulations. The DEIS visual impact analysis fails to deliver what was required in the scoping document and instead presents an unsubstantiated and narrative of no visual impact that cannot be relied upon(FEIS). As indicated in the FEIS and Findings, the proposed project will result in the physical loss (Forest, Northern Long-Eared Bat (Federally Endangered) habitat, and other bat and wildlife species)), degradation (trees and soils), and functional loss of ecological components (Reduction of Contiguous Woodland and other Habitat Assemblages: Mill Road Preserve.), and does not meet `Policy 6 Protect and restore the quality and function of the Town of Southold's ecosystem". 1. Physical loss of ecological components Physical loss is often the most obvious natural resource impairment to identify. It usually results from discrete actions, such as filling or excavating a wetland or clearing an upland forest community prior to development. The proposed project will destroy a forest community habitat. The LWRP defines habitat destruction as the loss of fish or wildlife use through direct physical alteration, disturbance, or pollution of a designated area or through the indirect effects of these actions on a designated area. Habitat destruction may be indicated by changes in vegetation, substrate, or hydrology, or by increases in runoff, erosion, sedimentation or pollutants. The physical impacts, edge effects to adjacent ecosystems, and construction noise may potentially disrupt or destroy the surrounding ecosystems. 2. Degradation of ecological components Degradation occurs as an adverse change in ecological quality, either as a direct loss originating within the resource area or as an indirect loss originating from nearby activities. Degradation usually occurs over a more extended period of time than physical loss and may be indicated by increased siltation, changes in community composition, or evidence of pollution. Degradation of habitat direct loss originating within the resource area (Parcel) or as an indirect loss originating from nearby activities would occur from removing the forest, habitat assemblages, and documented species, including those with protected status living on the parcel and in the adjacent Mill Road Preserve. 3. Functional loss of ecological components Functional loss can be indicated by a decrease in abundance offish or wildlife, often resulting from a behavioral or physiological avoidance response. Behavioral avoidance can be due to disruptive uses that do not necessarily result in physical changes, but may be related to introduction of recreational activities or predators. Timing of activities can often be critical in determining whether a functional loss is likely to occur. Functional loss can also be manifested in physical terms, such as changes in hydrology. The adverse impacts from removing the forest, habitat assemblages, and documented species, including those with protected status living on the parcel and in the adjacent Mill Road Preserve, are expected. A functional loss would occur. 6.4 Protect vulnerable fish, wildlife, and plant species, and rare ecological communities. The project site adjoins the state-designated Mattituck Inlet Wetlands and Beaches Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat, which is incorporated into Southold's Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP). The proposed project would result in physical loss of wildlife habitat and species. The sub policy Protect vulnerable fish and wildlife species is not met. The proposal fails to protect habitat of listed species identified through field surveys or other methods during all stages of their life cycles. As indicated in the FEIS, fauna with protected status documented to be on or adjacent to the Project Site that were not accurately described in protected status or not sufficiently included in the analysis, or both; specifically, the Piping Plover, the Eastern Box Turtle, the Northern Long Eared Bat, and the Bald Eagle. The protected status of the Northern Long-Eared Bat (NLEB) has been heightened from "threatened" to "endangered"by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service since the drafting of the DEIS. Further: • The DEIS does not discuss the Bald Eagle population that has been documented in the adjacent areas. Additionally,the DEIS does not address the Peregrine Falcon,the Nighthawk, the Common Loon, the Horned Lark, or the Osprey, all species listed under the New York State status of Special Concern. • The analysis does not discuss the impact that the forest edge effect would have on the habitat of documented species with protected status living in the adjacent Mill Road Preserve. • The analysis underrepresents the diversity of birds,bats, and insects living on or adjacent to the Project Site and the impacts that the Proposed Action would have on those populations. • Supporting documentation lacking in detail, quality, or with inconsistencies between the data and how the data is used and presented in the DEIS The proposed project does not meet sub policy I0.4 Minimize adverse impacts of new and expanding water-dependent uses and provide for their safe operation. B, Avoid development of new water-dependent uses at sites that are located outside of the traditional concentrations of water-dependent uses or at sites that exhibit important natural resource values or where the proposed use will cause significant adverse effects on community character, surrounding land and water uses, or scenic quality. The proposed project can potentially cause significant adverse effects on community character, surrounding land and water uses, and scenic quality. Please contact me at(631) 765-1938 if you have any questions regarding the above. OFFICE LOCATION: r MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 ,w Southold,NY 11971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold,NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD July 5, 2024 Charles Cuddy Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Strong's Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: As per the Planning Board letter dated, July 13, 2023, and the agreement that you hold escrow for the consultant to prepare the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the project referenced above, please reimburse the Town of Southold for the amounts paid to Hardesty & Hanover as shown below and attached. • Invoices: 1. 11/14/23 $29,475.00, 2. 1/5/24 $36,410.00, 3. 5/31/24 23 080,00 • Total Paid to Hardesty & Hanover: $88,965.00 • Amount agreed upon for reimbursement: $85,465.00 As per our agreement, we sent a letter on March 29, 2024 requesting reimbursement for invoices 1 & 2, and a subsequent letter was sent on June 14, 2024 requesting reimbursement for invoices 1, 2 & 3. This communication included the detailed invoices for all as requested. We have not, however, received the reimbursements for these invoices. Southold Town Planning Board Page 2 July 5, 2024 Please let us know at your earliest convenience when we can expect the reimbursement for the invoices. Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact the Planning Board office at (631) 765-1938. Respectfully, Heather Lanza, AICP Town Planning Director Encls. &H l October 31, 2023 Heather Lanza Project No: E6219.00 Town of Southold„ SPY Invoice No: 01 54375 Route 25 Southold, MAY 11971 Project F6219 00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEORA - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - FrfraaC._ ircarr� Irfw_1a s . I . Or0 Phase _ _HHLA_ Labor_ ... .... _ ._ _ _ - _ _. ..,.. - -... - .... - _. _ _ -- - - - - .- Task 1000 Review of DEIS &Application Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Brown, Sarah 7/21/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Brawn, Sarah 7/21/2023 U0 225.00 225.00 Meeting with HL; General Application overview Brown, Sarah 8/4/2023 1.00 225 00 225.00 Discussions with Staff; Review of Comments/DEIS Brown, Sarah 8/11/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Review of Cornmenots on DEIS Brawn, Sarah 8/18/2023 1.50 225,00 337.50 Brown, Sarah 8/18/2023 1,00 225,00 225.00 Review of DEIS &.Comments Simpson, Malcolm 8/4/2023 3.00 145,00 435.00 Review of DEIS and IDEIS Comments Simpson, Malcolm 8/4/2023 3.00 145,00 435.00 Review of DEIS and DENS Comments Totals 12.50 2,332.50 1.0 times 2,332.50 2,332.50 1.0 times 2,332.50 2,332.50 Total (Labor 2,332.50 Total this Task $2,332.50 Task _ 1001 Review&Organize Public Comments Professional Personnel Hours fate Amount Brown, Sarah 8/2512023 2.50 225,00 562.50 Brown, Sarah 8/25/2023 2.00 225.00 450,00 Meeting with 1--IL & MT to discuss FEIS and process; Internal review of corr7nients Brown, Sarah 9/1/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Brown, Sarah 9/22/2023 1.00 225.00 225.O0 Project .. =6219 00 Southac. Strargas ryMarina Storage °FQRA.ww...._..�._�..__.�._Ynvo...ice_.,�...ww....W_....�. � Brown, Sarah 9/22/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Discussion with HD_; Status imam o Brawn, Sarah 9/2212O23 1.00 225.00 225.00 Status report; Simpson, MaVr;oVrn 8/25/2023 2,00 145.00 290.00 Review and Organization of Public: Comments Simpson, Malcolm W25/2023 4.00 145.00 580.00 Review and Organization of Public Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9,1/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Review of ODEIS Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/1/2023 6,00 145,00 870.00 Review of ICDIEiS Comments Simpson, MaVcolirry 9/1/2023 10.00 14500 1,450.00 Review of 3DEIS ConrornentsC;(,:)(:)rdination with internal .staff an the review of LIEU'S Comments Simpson, Mallcoirn 9,18/2023 10.00 14500 1„450.00 Review of IKVeiin Comments Sirripson, Maicolrn 9/8/2023 t3.00 14500 1,150.00 Review of(Klein Sarrin Tents Simpson, MaVcolrn 9;15/202:3 4M 14500 580.00 Simpson, Malcolm 91/15/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of Joel Klein letter and organization of comments Simpson, Malcodim 9/15/2023 1,00 145.00 145.00 Review of,Joel Klein Vetter and organization of comments Simpson„ Malcolm 9122/2023 MO 145.00 1,160.00 Review of ICDIEIS (public comments Simpson, Maicoirin 9!22/2023 8.00 14`,00 1,180.00 Review of ICDIEIS publlic corrimentrW Preparation of update merno Simpson, Malcoirn 9/22/2023 11.50 145.00 1,6367.50 Review of Public Cornment.ran CDEIS Simpson, Maicolr7n 3/29/2023 22.50 145.00 3,262.50 Review and catalogue of public comments Simpson, Malcolrn 9/29/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Review and cataiague of public cal-nrr ents Thomas, Radu 9/1/2023 17.00 145,00 2,465 D(:) Thcrrlaas, Radu 9/8/2023 22.00 145.00 3 V 0,;)0 CDEIS:Comirnents review avid summary. Thomas, Radu 9/15/2023 9.00 145,00 1,305M Thornas, Radu 9/22/2023 3.00 145J')G 435.00 Thornas, Radu 9/29/202:3 14.00 145.00 2,030.00 Totals 182.50 27,142,50 1.0 times 27,142.50 27,142.50 1.0 times 27,142.50 27,142.50 Totall Labor 27,142.50 Total this Task $27,14 .50 ...,......,ew.«..............W........a........w,... ....... ,.,,.....,...,,...��,... ............................. .............:.......,,......,.w......... ...........m ,...:....... ....,M.....I.. .....w..w..,��.,..:...,,,................... ....�:..++ Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA Invoice Total this Phase $29,475.00 Total this Invoice $29,475.00 .. �� 3 m December 21, 2023 Heather Lanza Project No; F6219.00 Town of Southold, NY Invoice No: 02 54375 Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA ?r ce- _f --- -t r�k-- - --- Phase HHLA_ _ . Labor- ... _ _ _ ... - - ..,. ,.. .. - - - - _ _. ..._ _. .,.. . - --- _ Task 1001 Review&Organize Public Comments Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Brown, Sarah 10/27/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Summary of FEIS comments Brown, Sarah 11/3/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Meeting with HL&MT Oliveira Demelo, Christian 10/6/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Oliveira Demelo, Christian 10/13/2023 23.50 145.00 3,407.50 Oliveira Demelo, Christian 10/20/2023 19,00 145.00 2,755.00 Oliveira Demelo, Christian 10/27/2023 17.00 145.00 2,465.00 Simpson, Malcolm 10/6/2023 2.00 145,00 290.00 Correspondence with internal staff and review of public comments Simpson, Malcolm 1016/2023 1.00 145.00 145.00 Correspondence with internal staff Simpson, Malcolm 10i6/2023 18.00 145.00 2,610,00 Review of public comments Simpson, Malcolm 10/13/2023 7.00 145.00 1,015,00 Review of Public comments Simpson, Malcolm 10/13/2023 13,00 145.00 1,885.00 Review of public comments Simpson, Malcolm 10/20/2023 32.50 145.00 4,712.50 Simpson, Malcolm 10/27/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of public comments: preparation of internal summary memo; preparation of memo to the Town of Southold Simpson, Malcolm 10/27/2023 8.00 145.00 1,16000 Review of public comments Thomas, Radu 10/6/2023 32.00 145.00 4,64000 Thomas, Radu 10/13/2023 12,00 145.00 1,740,00 Thomas, Radu 10/20/2023 32.00 145.00 4,640.00 Thomas, Radu 10/27/2023 20,00 145.00 2,900.00 Totals 250.00 36,410 00 1.0 times 36,410.00 36,410.00 1.0 times 36,410.00 36,410.00 Total Labor 36,41 .00 Total this Task $36,410.00 '0.: Gir M a v Project �F6219.00 _ Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA Invoice Total this Phase $36,410.00 Total this Invoice $36,410.00 Employee ask Name nvoice ate ours i lea We i ed Amount orrecte orrecte Amount anance Brown rah Review of DEIS Ao lication Invpige#1 _ 712 12023 L00 225�00 225-40 215.00_ 215 - 1Q.QQ1 Brown Sarah Review of DEIS&A olication Invoice#1 7/21/2023 1.00 225-00 225.00= 215,00 15. 0 10.0 Brown,Sarah Review of DEIS&Application Invoice#1 8/4/2023 1.Q0 - 2 5 0 22500 215,00 21 . 0_ 5 t1 .001 m son Malcolm Review of DEIS& licabon Invoice#1 8/41 0 3 3 00 $ 145_00 435,00 12500 375,00 6Q.00 Sim son_Malcolm Revi w of DEIS&A,olication Invoice#1 8-/4--/2023 30q 145.Q0 $ 435.OQ 125.00 m 375.00 $ (60.00) Brown.Sarah Review of DEIS&A ligation Invoi e#1 8/11/2023 1.00 25.00 $ 225.00 _$ 215.00 15-00 $ r10.00 Brown,Sarah _Review of DEIS Application I Invoice#1 811812023 1.50 225,00 337,50' 1500 1 $ 322,50 15.00 Brown Sarah IReview of DEIS&_ Iic Lion Invoice#1 8/18/202 100 225.00 = 22 .00 215.00 i 215,00 1000 Subtotal Review of DEIS&Anolication 12,5032, 2,147.50 1 0 rown.Sarah IReview&Or_anize Public Comments invoice 01 8/25120231 2,50 S 225,00 56250_ 215.00 I 537. 0 $ 25,00 BrownSarah ,Review&Or anize Public Comments Invoice#1 8/25/202 _ 200 S 225,00 L 450.00 215,00 4 0-00 20.00) San son.Malcolm Review&Or ize Public Comment _Invoice#1 8/25/2023 2. 0 145. 2W00 12500_ 25 - $ (40-0 ) Simpsgin,Malcolm IReview&CiLggaize,PULfic Comments Invoice#1 8l2 12_023 4.00 $ 145.00 $ 58000 $ 125-00 I 5 0.00) - Brown-Sarah Review&Or_anize Public C mments invoice#1 11r2023 1.00 225'00 $ 226.00 215. 4 215.00 (10.00) Sim son.Malcolm Review&Organize P blic omments nvoice#1 /1/2023 .00 `45. $ 43 0 ' 125,00 375-00 (MOO) Simeson,Malcolm Review&Or anize Public Comments Invoice#1 9/1l2023 6.00 $ 145.00 $ 87000 1 L_125_00 750,00 $ 1 O-00 Simpson,Malcolm Review&Orcianize Pubic Comments Invoice#1 911/2023 10.0Q 145.00, $ 1,45000 125.00 ` $ 1250.00 200.00 Thomas Radu Review&Or anize Public Comments Invoice#1 9/1/2023 17,00 S 14500 _$ 2-465.00 125,00 2125.QQ $ 340-00 Simpson,Malcolm Review&Or anize Public Comments Invoice#1 9/8/2023 10.00 $ 145 QO $ 1,450.00 125.00 125 . (200-001 SiReview B-00 4 ,00 160.00 1,0000Mam &Oro nine PublicCommons Inv ice#1 9/812023 001 Thomas Radu Review&Or anize Pu lie Comments Invoice#1 9/8/2023 22.00 145.Q0_ 3.190 00 _ 125.0 2Y50,00 44Q. Q Sim son_M Icolm Revie &Or anize Public C mments invoice#1 911512Q2 4.00 14500l 580,00 $ 12500 = 5 .0 800Q) Sim son,Malcolm Review&Organize Public Comments_ Inv ice##1 /1 ; 023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 1 1 5_QO 1 000m $ 1 0-00) m n_Malcolm Review&Orcianize Pu li Comment Invoi e 11 9/15/2023 1_RO-$ 145_pQ 14 ,00 125 00_ - 125-00 $ 120,00) Thomas.Radu Review&Or_ e Public mments Invoice#1 /1 1023 9. 0 145_QO 1305.00 12 ,00 $ 1,125,00 180-00) Brown.Sarah !Review&Or anize Public C mments invoice#1 9/22/2023 1-00. 225,00 $ 225-00 21 .0Q 215-00 (10.00) Brown_Sarah I Review&Or anize Public Comments Invoice#1 9,221,2 23 1.00 S 225.00 225- 0 215,00 S 215.00 (10-00) Brown Sarah I Review&Organize Public Comments Invoi e#1 9/22/2023 1.00 $ 225.00 ° $ 225.00 $ 215-00 S 215,Q0 S (100011 Sim son,M Icolm Review&Or anize Public Comments Invoice#1 /22/2 3 8. 145.00 , 1,160.00 $ 125.00 , 1.0 '1.0} 160.00 Sim son,Malcolm Review& r anise Public Comments Invoice#1 9;2212023 8,00 $ 145.00 1.160.g0 125.00 ' 1.000 t70 1160,00 Sim son.Ma1 aim :R view&Ora ❑i Public mments Invoice#1 - 9122/2023 11.5Q $ 14500 1 1 667.50 125- 1 $ 1,437.50 $ 230.OQ) Thomas Radu 3Revi w&or niz Public Comments Invoice#1 912212023 ,001 14 .Q 4 5.Qq $ 12500 $ 375,0Q (6Q,001 Im son Malcolm Review& r anize Public C mments Invoice#1 9/29/2023 22.50 145.00 $ 3262.50 125.00 2 812 50 450-00) Sim son_Malcolm !Review&Or anize Public Comments Invoice 41 29/ 0 3.00- $ 145.00 $ 435, 125.00 S 37 _00 60-00 Thoma .Radu Review&Organize P blic Comments Invoice#1 9/2912023 1400 $ 14500 2,03000 S 125-00 $ 1=750 ON (2R ql u I Review POrnani7P_ 27.142,501 3 ca77_ 5.00 Total Invoice#1 195.00 $ 29,475.00 $ 25,725.00 $ 3,750.00) Oliveira Demelo Christian !Review&Organize Public Comments invoice lit 10/ 31 3QUO N 00 Sirs son-Malcolm Review&Organize Public Comments Invoice#Z 10/6/2023 2,001 145 00 290-001 125.00 59-00 Sim son Mal olm R view& r-anize Public Comments invoice#2 1 /612023 1.00 145.00 145,00 125.00 125.00 2090 Sim son,Malcolm _Review&Or ani_a Public Comments Invoice#2 1 / 12023 18,0q 145,QQ 2.61Q.00 125.00i 2 2500 360,00 Thomas Radu Review 1,Organize Public Comments Invoice 92 101612023 3200 145,QO 4.640.00 125,00 4 000,04 640 00 Oliveira Demelo-Christian Review&Organize Public Comments invoice#2 10/13/2023 23-5Q 3 407,5 100-001 2 350.OQ 1,0 7. Q) Sim son,Malcolm Review&Organize Public Comments invoice#2 10113/202 7. 0 145 q0 1.015- Q 12500 $75.00 14 - 0 Sim son,Malcolm Review&Organize Public Comments invoice#2 10111,2023 13.00 145,00 1,885,00 125.00 1-62-100 t26000 Thomas du =R view Or-an e Public C mmen- Invoice#2 1 /1 2023 1 0_ 145-0 1 740 00 125.00 1,500.OG 240-00 Oliveira Demelo.Christian Review&Organize Public Comments invoice#2 10/20/2023 19001 145,00 2,755,00 100.00 1.900-00 t855.00 Simpson Malcolm !Review&Oraanize Public Commentsinvoice#2 10/201 023 32_5ol 145-90 4 712-50 25-O 4_ ,5 50,00 Thomas Radu ReyieAJ&Qr anize Public Comments Invoice#2 t /20/2023 32.001 145-QQ 4,640.00 125.00 4 000-0Q 64 .00 Brown.Sarah R vi w& roanize Public Comments Invoice ire 10/27/023 1,001 225,00 22 ,QQ_ 15-00 215.00 10_Qq Oliveira Demelo.Christian Review&Organize Public Comments Invoice#2 10/27/2023 17.Q01 145.00 2.465-00 100.00 1-70 . 0 (76500) Sim son_Malcolm Review&Orqgpi&e Public Comment l,nv,3,ce,,z 1L1/27 23 O1 145-00 1-1 .0 125 0 0 1.00 1 Q-0 Sim n,_Mal Im Review&Or anize Public Comments invoice#t 10/27/2023 80Q 14,5 00 1 16 .0 1 125, 1,0Q0.00 16 _00 Thomas Radu 'Review&Organize Public Comments Invoice lit 1p/27/20 3 20.001 145. 01 2 900.00' 1 5-og 2,500.04 400.00 $rown arah Review&Organize Public-Comments linvoice#2 1 11/3/2023 1.00' 225.0 22 .01 215. 0_ 215,0 1Q__ 0 -Subtotal Review- an' P lic am ents 250.001 36 410.00 a 29 7.5 4 0 Total Invoice#2 250.00 $ 36,410.00 j I $ 29,867.50 Grand Total Invoice#1 &#2 445.00 $ 65,885.00 1 ! $ 55,592.50 $ (10,292.50) r.....bnu 0? i i d, 1Y May 31, 2024 Project No: OOF6219.00 Invoice No: 03 Heather Lanza Town of Southold, NY 54375 Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 Project OOF6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA Professional Services from November 25 2023 to May 10 2024 Phase__._.-.....__.------LA�,___.__LaborM_______..___________________,.--__,._...____.._.._......-_._..-..____.._._.__.________.._.__._.......___- Task 1000 Review of DEIS&Application Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Brown, Sarah 11/17/2023 4.00 215.00 860.00 Brown, Sarah 12/8/2023 1.50 215.00 322.50 Simpson, Malcolm 10/27/2023 8.00 125.00 1,000.00 Review of Scope and DEIS Simpson, Malcolm 10/27/2023 5.00 125.00 625.00 Review of the DEIS Simpson, Malcolm 11/3/2023 15.00 125.00 1,875.00 Review of the DEIS Simpson, Malcolm 11/3/2023 4.00 125.00 500.00 Review of the DEIS: internal communication Simpson, Malcolm 11/17/2023 12.00 125.00 1,500.00 Simpson, Malcolm 11/24/2023 6.00 125.00 750.00 Totals 55.50 7,432.50 1.0 times 7,432.50 7,432.50 1.0 times 7,432.50 7,432.50 C,p'edd $l85 l;it:) Total this Task $7,247.50 Task ___._ 1002 Preparation of FEIS Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Brown, Sarah 12/15/2023 .50 215.00 107.50 Communication with NYSDEC Brown, Sarah 12/15/2023 2.00 215.00 430.00 Meeting with HL&MT; Review of comments Brown, Sarah 12/15/2023 1.00 215.00 215.00 Review of comment responses by PWGC Brown, Sarah 12/22/2023 1.00 215.00 215.00 Brown, Sarah 12/22/2023 1.00 215.00 215.00 Discussion with HL and Preparation of FEIS Brown, Sarah 1/5/2024 .50 215.00 107.50 Brown, Sarah 1/12/2024 50 215.00 107.50 FEIS preparation Brown, Sarah 2/2/2024 .50 215.00 107.50 Discussion w HL Brown, Sarah 3/8/2024 2.00 215.00 430.00 Brown, Sarah 3/29/2024 1.00 215.00 215.00 Meeting with HL Brown, Sarah 4/12/2024 1.00 215.00 215.00 Review of billing and schedule Brown, Sarah 4/19/2024 u50 215.00 107.50 Brown, Sarah 4/19/2024 .50 215.00 107.50 Discussion with HL RE: FEIS Brown, Sarah 4/19/2024 1.00 215.00 215.00 Revisions from Town Comments Brown, Sarah 5/3/2024 3.00 215.00 645.00 Simpson, Malcolm 1/5/2024 8.00 125.00 1,000.00 Preparation of the FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 1/5/2024 4.00 125.00 500.00 Preparation of the FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 1/12/2024 10.50 125.00 1,312.50 Preparation of the FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 1/19/2024 8.00 125.00 1,000.00 Preparation of the FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 1/26/2024 20.50 125.00 2,562.50 Preparation of the FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 1/26/2024 8.00 125.00 1,000.00 Preperation of the FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 2/2/2024 23.00 125.00 2,875.00 FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 2/9/2024 16.00 125.00 2,000.00 Preparation of FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 2/16/2024 24.00 125.00 3,000.00 Simpson, Malcolm 3/8/2024 8.00 125.00 1,000.00 Preparation of the FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 3/22/2024 10.00 125.00 1,250.00 Simpson, Malcolm 3/29/2024 8.00 125.00 1,000.00 FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 3/29/2024 7.00 125.00 875.00 FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 4/19/2024 2.00 125.00 250.00 Simpson, Malcolm 4/19/2024 6.00 125.00 750.00 FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 5/3/2024 10.00 125.00 1,250.00 FEIS Comments and review Thomas, Radu 2/2/2024 7.00 125.00 875.00 Totals 196.00 25,940.00 1MIWWulDdYI1tW Oly �pM r11X/IIAfd. SA JJ 1.0 times 25,940.00 25,940.00 1.0 times 25,940.00 25,940.00 ua dig ft V" U AdjUUU�U�auu :nt -$10,107.50 Total this Task $15,832.50 Total this Phase $23,080.00 Total this Invoice $23,080.00 B ROWN ALTMAN & DI LED , LLP July 1,2024 P8 L MT, #C, C Via Electronic Mail and RECEIVED) IredEx OvernkhtDelkerE -------....... Southold Planning Department AR, 0 2 2024 Southold Town Hall 54375 State Rte. 25 Southold,New York 11971 Planning Board Attn: Heather Lanza,AICP,Planning Director Re: Now York State Environmental Quality Review ("SEQRA') by the Town of Southold ("Town")Planning Board ("PB" or "Lead Agency") in connection with the Application of Strong's Yacht Center,LLC("Strong's"or"Applicant")for Site Plan Approval to construct new boat storage facilities ("Application"or"Project") @ 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, New York (the "Property"); S.C.T.M. No.: 1000-106-6-10 & 13.4 Our File No.: 100-661-001 Dear Heather: We understand that at the July 8, 2024, PB meeting the Board intends to issue a written Findings Statement ("FS") regarding Strong's Application pursuant to the State Environmetal Quality Review Act("SEQRA"), Strong's,as you were informed on June 20,2024,by co-counsel, Charles Cuddy,Esq., is preparing a revised site plan that will substantially reduce the scale of the Project, from two (2) buildings to one (1) building.' Given the foregoing, we ask that the PB adjourn andhold in abeyance its issuance of a FS as the scope of the Project will materially change. Moreover, adjourning the issuance of a FS gives the PB, the Planning Department, and the community the opportunity to consider Strong's revised plan.2 Strong's, once the site, plans for the Modified Building (the "Modified Site Plan") are prepared, requests an in-person meeting with you, the Planning Board Attorney, and/or the Planning Board to discuss the Modified Site Plan. The PB, having eliminated Strong's and its Project team from preparation of the FEIS, must give the Applicant the opportunity to modify the Project, particularly where the Applicant voluntarily plans to substantially reduce the scope of the same. Strong's has the right to amend its Application up to and including the time the PB decides Strong's Application. Allowing Strong's The project civil engineer is working with Strong's as to the location and size of the reduced boat storage facility I building (the "Modified Building"). The Modified Building will, among other things, result in the removal of substantially less soil from the Property. 2 Adjourning and holding in abeyance the issuance of a Findings Statement comports with the June 20, 2024, Resolution of the Suffolk County Planning Commission("SCPC'),wherein the SCPC stated that"[ilt is recommended that the applicant and the Town further consider an alternative that would allow for increased boat storage in a way that eliminate or significantly reduced the amount of required excavation." 1 BROWN � ALTMAN OILED , LLP the opportunity to amend its Application is common practice and denying it the right to do so is arbitrary and capricious. Once modified plans are prepared and we have met with you,. Strong's will submit the same to the PB. The courtesy of your prompt response in advance of the July 8, 2024, PB Meeting is appreciated. Sincerely, BROWN ALTMAN& DILEO,LLP By: .�.,dON.AltQlanEsq. Encl. cc.: Strong's Yacht Center(attn: Jeff Strong; via electronic mail) Charles Cuddy,Esq. (via electronic mail) PWGC(attn:Kim .zennaro,via electronic mail) Planning board Members 2 OFFICE LOCATION: � �� •w„ MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Anne � ,, P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 � ;�„, Southold, NY 11971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) �� "� Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov k �w PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 12, 2024 Charles Cuddy Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Strong's Storage Buildings FEIS Invoices— Request for Reimbursement 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: We are requesting to be reimbursed up to the amount agreed upon by your client for the preparation of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the project referenced above. Please remit payment to the Town of Southold at your earliest convenience. Attached please find the third invoice from our consultant Hardesty & Hanover, along with details, as requested, for the first two invoices sent in March. • Invoices: 1. 11/14/23 $29,475.00, 2. 1/5/24 $36,410.00, 3. 5/31/24 23 080.00 • Total Paid to Hardesty & Hanover: $88,965.00 • Amount agreed upon for reimbursement: $85,465.00 If you have any questions, do not hesitate to call this office at (631) 765-1938. Respectfully, Heather Lanza, AICP Town Planning Director Encls. H&H IS01 Broadi,vra)a f+e\p,.r York.,PV:i 0036 C 212,`"),14,:11 S() rarrnANI,hrarcie styh arnove^r,corn May 31, 2024 Project No: OOF6219.00 Invoice No: 03 Heather Lanza Town of Southold, NY 54375 Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 Project 0OF6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA Professional Services from November 25 2023 to Ma , 10 2024 ______________________ _______-------------------------- Phase__..__.-__._,......HHLA --_,.__Labor--- __________________.,,,_____________.._______,...____,..._.._..____._______._.__,.__.....___.____. Task 1000 Review of DEIS &Application Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Brown, Sarah 11/17/2023 4.00 215.00 860.00 Brown, Sarah 12/8/2023 1.50 215.00 322.50 Simpson, Malcolm 10/27/2023 8.00 125.00 1,000.00 Review of Scope and DEIS Simpson, Malcolm 10/27/2023 5.00 125.00 625.00 Review of the DEIS Simpson, Malcolm 11/3/2023 15.00 125.00 1,875.00 Review of the DEIS Simpson, Malcolm 11/3/2023 4.00 125.00 500.00 Review of the DEIS: internal communication Simpson, Malcolm 11/17/2023 12.00 125.00 1,500.00 Simpson, Malcolm 11/24/2023 6.00 125.00 750.00 Totals 55.50 7,432.50 1.0 times 7,432.50 7,432.50 1.0 times 7,432.50 7,432.50 Credit for Rate Adjustment -$185.00 Total this Task $7,247.50 Task-------------------- 1002 Preparation of FEIS Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Brown, Sarah 12/15/2023 .50 215.00 107.50 Communication with NYSDEC Brown, Sarah 12/15/2023 2.00 215.00 430.00 Meeting with HL&MT;Review of comments Brown, Sarah 12/15/2023 1.00 215.00 215.00 Review of comment responses by PWGC Brown, Sarah 12/22/2023 1.00 215.00 215.00 Brown, Sarah 12/22/2023 1.00 215.00 215.00 1 0 H&H New York, NY IA)036 I )I.L1roaadv,/ay TC 2121)41,.1.:L50 Discussion with HL and Preparation of FEIS Brown, Sarah 1/5/2024 .50 215.00 107.50 Brown, Sarah 1/12/2024 .50 215.00 107.50 FEIS preparation Brown, Sarah 2/2/2024 .50 215.00 107.50 Discussion w HL Brown, Sarah 3/8/2024 2.00 215.00 430.00 Brown, Sarah 3/29/2024 1.00 215.00 215.00 Meeting with HL Brown, Sarah 4/12/2024 1.00 215.00 215.00 Review of billing and schedule Brown, Sarah 4/19/2024 .50 215.00 107.50 Brown, Sarah 4/19/2024 .50 215.00 107.50 Discussion with HL RE: FEIS Brown, Sarah 4/19/2024 1.00 215.00 215.00 Revisions from Town Comments Brown, Sarah 5/3/2024 3.00 215.00 645.00 Simpson, Malcolm 1/5/2024 8.00 125.00 1,000.00 Preparation of the FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 1/5/2024 4.00 125.00 500.00 Preparation of the FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 1/12/2024 10.50 125.00 1,312.50 Preparation of the FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 1/19/2024 8.00 125.00 1,000.00 Preparation of the FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 1/26/2024 20.50 125.00 2,562.50 Preparation of the FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 1/26/2024 8.00 125.00 1,000.00 Preperation of the FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 2/2/2024 23.00 125.00 2,875.00 FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 2/9/2024 16.00 125.00 2,000.00 Preparation of FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 2/16/2024 24.00 125.00 3,000.00 Simpson, Malcolm 3/8/2024 8.00 125.00 1,000.00 Preparation of the FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 3/22/2024 10.00 125.00 1,250.00 Simpson, Malcolm 3/29/2024 8.00 125.00 1,000.00 FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 3/29/2024 7.00 125.00 875.00 FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 4/19/2024 2.00 125.00 250.00 Simpson, Malcolm 4/19/2024 6.00 125.00 750.00 FEIS Simpson, Malcolm 5/3/2024 10.00 125.00 1,250.00 FEIS Comments and review Thomas, Radu 2/2/2024 7.00 125.00 875.00 Totals 196.00 25,940.00 J501.Rrc)adway New York,NY 1.0036 T:212A441.150 �Amm,h a rdea tyhanoveir,coinn 1.0 times 25,940.00 25,940.00 1.0 times 25,940.00 25,940.00 Credit for Rate Adjustment -$10,107.50 Total this Task $15,832.50 Total this Phase $23,080.00 Total this Invoice $23,080.00 o C� C C� 04 W Lr) 4(C Ln It Ln In 10 z:'z z:00 L11 L, 7t Lo z:T v Ic r- C tG q L) c m 61.1 0(A w�n eo-.�0 V-)0 0 6F. w 0 Ge 0 w(A 6g to&.P w w 69 6��p 69,6-)fA 0 6-)of (A fA 6e(A 6A 4A Vk 6% CoWoMoc qc, Co(:� :PC20CCCoCC20 0 C�.In C 0 0 0 Lo 0 0 C!�2 0 0 0 CT U, 2 In C4 "n v" 0 P� 01 r� C,N cli C", ,,4 N 0 Cj(n t, �` ..P�N 000C C14 CN N M Mn CI, M C14 1 on It•IN 0 N M�1-IN N t-�in C�l Cr Ir M cq m r,�I 111 10 10 Lr�0� c�C'4 1`W C,C Lf, w(0 c" F_ -1 IN - It'It - 0,4 Ll! M Le [14 Of Lo CQ N W) L) 2 c 0 60 (A(A E&EF,W(A*A W)#A(F.0(A W)61 0)#A eA #A e-1(A ep.,(F.p be ef:j V )en#4 fq#A ta to 8 Cu.S 8 8 C C 0 C, Cs 0 0 C C C, C C C M C Cu 0 a 0 C 8 0� C�C 0 C,0 0 0 C: Cr C: C: C:C� '.Cr 8 lc�'cl I I p ui Lri th L6 L6 In Lr. 6 in ui ui L6 ui 0 m V�In m 0 0 In c,0 m!�2 ci K Lo Ln 9 141 U,",,,LcQ 4 LcQ n ., rl Lm 1,�Lo L IN IN N C14 IN N cli N IN IN C14 I`C10 CNJI N N N N C"A N N- cli C14 OR(A V.k 0)0 W 6p,V.0#A 0 to EAR(A 0 61.11 0)(A 66 V.�fn W.0 to 6�21 tp(A)&2.1 V.P fA&91 W 69 W W 69 ------------ C,CICCC>Clcu OTCIO C'Coo 0CICO'Cl 0,C,CKOCICIO CIO CIC 'E -6-6,6-6-6-6-6-s -6 Z'S—cD -, C(=)cc C 0 CD COCCICLOC�OcCoccccoo OCD 0 q q,C CI P C,C, �0 0 C:C!C�C5 C 9! -1 q,LCI Lr�q CrC!C!C!C�9 q!C C�C�l c�Ci C!C!Lf'J C:�U�C CD Lo Lri 6 6 1`-Lfi Ln 0 L6 06LOO 6 -L6 6 c�6 L6 Lci 6 Lp,Lr'.I Lri Lril If Lo Pl"LCI C% C%P C,CI 0 LOI Lr. C,C Lr)Cr Ci CP 0 CI Lr. in Lo Lo in o q r�-,u-A"Lo c cIi Ln M M-1 -It 0-co Iq Uz I;r�4 m c 0 Lf) O c�c)cl c,!c,�'N cN c, .a. w c,m .Lo Ln co a,-cc o Iq c,c4"N(c(4,co im a �f N cc cc�Iq 0 03 r._ In Im,c,c, c N. Ls'IT LE(Ni 0D`r Lo M C�h cv CN Cc It IN 0 F - 00 C\�l C-5 M N I,:Nt Ni r c,Ni aD N to Lei W 69 W,W IA 69I 69 L'a U.69 69,V.6q 69l Gf.,69 EA(Al 69 US 61.4(A(Al tl.6-A 69 69 69 Ib 69 6F* 4a 6) 6o m c'!C 0 C Co 0 C. a. 8CCEECCIC CICcCICCC8CcC CC, C`C`CICWCcoCcj CCC�C�qq N7O m C�Sc C C c E q, C, C ACCOCIC i Ln In C!C� C�91 C,C q ol U� Ln Lrl Lo Lrl Ln Lf) Lr. Lo Lr. Lf. . Lo Lr, Lr. In U, LO Lc, Lo Ln C4 N. J!N *Vq��t v q, 'It LrQ Lu,,, -- -1- ;�I V�;�c"NI li 1d z!;i 4 C2 LcQ LrT L4C LN11 L N cm N N Lc\l CJ U.. 6 Ln 6 6 ui 6 ui u IN CNI N! N ClIt C'i (09 U9,69 V. 60 U3 W.p(A W.�(A VD W.V.Y(A CA,WD W W.0 V.�0 w CA" V.,6,64 69 61)U3 of 69 C,C',oln 8 0 10 Q'S's 6"8 ii� Ecoc000c�COCCCCOCCOS C�Cu C,S S cc: Lri S'Cr. cl:CoC C,c Cl C�ED"S"C,�C C, w , , lc � . � I I ..6,� ql1a C C C C 9 C L?C,C�CiC,lt�1:�C 0 Cu.c� R R 0 rF M c"ll C4 C�i ca oi 4 cl,(C t (Y; 00 coi-cn CI5 4 uli M N-W M N M N M N N-N co CO C- 00 NVN U, Lfi 0 M m cl, cr. cl cl. M m m c" m In mi cej In. crlM cej cel -c;-c;3 c) 'cj co C4 N C14 N(N C14 CN C14 C14 cli N N cq N c\I N",J cm N N N Cu C� C, 0 Ci 0 ci a 0 C, 0 0 0 0 C,C,CD OF C F41 cl;(C=l I ccl Z�- -c� - NN (N; cl C141 CIt c'q N1 N cl CC cl) CNI C'4 C4�4 N!Z� N N N N N N '5 �Z.i ic-i i6 LQ c, I cq "'i �cl 26 In It 6 Im C, cm cli CIO CI, 7z- Z C�N 2�04 N N 06 oc ;Ei iij,;5 a�a, !N ak 0 C C� 6 co C14 N N CN cl C C C C c m N N r4 it w au (L a: a� I a I all a d (L V aj C W (D' 10 W larl W a) 0 a) (U 0) Q) w w w w w Ill 0 w t U C S 0 U S L LH U U1.9 Y.�? Y s U I L� Y y'Y'Y y y 9 O 0> . . . . . ,2 c U L; Q u.P . y - i C c 5 c 0 Z c c 0 c CP c c cp cv c 0 c o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C - - - . I. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I r c C r CC C ------ cl y x V. 4, 0 V. M U, 2 4 E 4.4.4 4 lq 4 4E Ll4.4 LS 4 V. V.P u 2 g c� c . . . c c C c c c c c c c c c c r c c c c:: c: r c c t a a c C c c a c c c c c c c 1�! d al CL (D 0 C", d) 0 0.1 0 0) (D 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 0 a) 0 (D W 0 W 0 0 0 0 N E! Q C�L a: W 3; a:v Q IE Q G C: (P E E E E E E E E E E E, E E E E: E E E E E 5, E E U E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E; E E E E E E E: E EEE E E E E EEEEEEE EEEEEE E E 08 r r c c c c: c cc 5 6 C, c c a C ci c C c a c , C C 0 0 0 0 a as 0 0 0 as 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C as 0 as C— . . S . s 4 (J L 0 c)0 0 C)C)C)C)0 L)L)C)C)C)C)C)C)()0 S; ! 2, Ul CP Ul U C U C.U C: U C U L)U 0 0 0 0 L)0 0 L)L)L) cm It c c, 0, c c u L; cc a.P sa 9 2 L uL u .2 S�.2 Y.g cn 4.2 . z f z z f f f z f Z Z Z Z B:5:5 B Z:5 Z B Z Z B z Z z zzz-Cl n =I =s =, =I z m = z m m - 2 c c a r r c a Q aL a a.a.a cL o.a ci,a.a cL a a'cLo!LL EL Q.,0-a. (1,0- ll.CL a. 0 D�0-0. 0-M CL 0-CL(L 0. (1,0.0- a.0-0. EL '0 > < < < << <<0 . . . . �Z ce d C Z a.6-0 N N N N N N CK asN (NLi CN CNL UNJ (NL W (D Q.0 W 0.1 W Q) M > 0.(V a) > N N N N N N N N N N N 4 4 .—.— .—.—.— . . F E S1 L� N� . .—�.11.0.1111 a, M f— § C.:.-- .- .- i� 2 a L N N N t� L N N c c' c c� c: c C, C c c c c C c r- c c m a c c a c r- c c c c c a Cc m (c IT a It 0 m m It m cc m m m m (a m m m m m m m M, 5�Lf Ln L/�Lr Lf, o Le 3: 2 It 2 c, = = a m! a m a a• m m a m m co m m m m co LL LL LU LL LL LL LU LU 9 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 21 E� 2 2� D 21 2 2 c2 2 21 2 2 2-a P 2 2 2 P 21 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 S 2 0 cc OCCC MCI >cc ()Cc C)cc cPcc c)c;c 000co 000�000 occocoolocooc0000co 0 E -c -c; el a z .6 j j IIII m & ad,C6 cd 0�06 06 06�16.6.6.6.6 0 cd Q!06 0 od cd 06 0 cId ca cd od 0 od co 0 ca ca 0 > .8.1 2.92.21,2.2?.2�.2; T I A A oj o w S1.5.1 T.0 Q) 0) 0 (D .12 2?A?A,A 1 2 T 2 14 A.9.!R I T 2.!? >� 5;S 3 > >•> >•> > > > >•> > > > M a] a; (D a) CE 0 T (D ID Q W Q 0 0 CT Q 0 0 0 W I.-S,2;9e P�9�SP�P: =.q�.q�,PTK 9�9�.P�9�P�,��S,2�25.��P5!� P�P�Sp��P5�5 9� Ll > 3) i�L; W> >aj, a>) 'o > . . . > > > > > > > > > > > to c� -c r _c: 1 -9, Ev f-� f E,i.E E E E C C c C C 0 C c c S C C cl C 0 0 0 a 0 IS co 6 75 0 -2 0 -Z i 0 u c 0 U U Q L U :3 z U cl E E z -r-r -r L.-r -c -c -0 ak 'Cl-C-C c 7 -R-m -0 cacw c, m -C cu Cc W :2 2 2i M m m m El Ell E E cl m Ili T2 22�2� (D m cei a' a, Cc Cc, Ri It cc w m 6 j cn 4) u)co or. c c:Ica cr. 00, cr)X LIJ e c7lil cloo 010) e c e c U� 0 >1 0 m 0 0 0 0 a C 1 0 0 M C c c 5 a C., Q� �c,, �c� cui �:r c, I Lo w 0 m . 0 w 0, .- a C C a E a E E c E vci a 9 E 'a c' E E a Ful . wo E--w wo E 3c::' -o' ow am E it z =. -cl r , 9 2 2 21 E 2 2 E 2 2 2 c S E 2 2 2 91.91E ' F 51. -0 fr ca co U),I-1 F5'C01 U)f TC-0 U)F- �qcojcr.Ij(nj1cjcr.0jcf)C0�-jcf.qcnjF-j �- W 0�- 1 11 no 0 cy)cn m COUNTY OF SUFFOLK EDWARD P.ROMAINE SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING SARAH LANSDALE COMMISSIONER ELISICCA f� II CHIEF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER W-IMT,, 13CrIMe June 12,2024 RECEIVED SoutholdTown of 53095 Ma n Road u��'��_mw1 .1024 . ..__ P.O. Box 1179 Sout old,NY 11971 �....._9i is-tl b-Td—Y i 46'.. Planning Board Attn: Heather Lanza,Planning Director � Re: Strongs Yacht Center Zoning Action: Site Plan Municipal File No./Public Hearing Date: N/A S.C.T.M. No.: 1000 10600 0600 013004 & 013010 S.C.P.C. File No.: ZSR-24-36 Dear Director Lanza: The Suffolk Planning Commission at its regular meeting on June 5, 2024,reviewed the referral from the Town of Southold entitled, "Strongs Yacht Center" referred to it pursuant to Section A14-14 thru A14-25, Article XIV of the Suffolk County Administrative Code. The attached Resolution signifies action taken by the Commission relative to this application. Very Truly Yours, By Christine DeSalvo Joseph E. Sanzano, Planning Director JES/cd Division of Planning and Environment cc: Mark Terry, Assistant Planning Director H.LEE DENNISON BLDG ■ 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HWY,2nd FI n P.O.BOX 6100■ HAUPPAUGE,NY 11788-0099 is(631)853-5191 File No. SD-24-03 Resolution No. ZSR-24-36 of the Suffolk County Planning Commission Pursuant to Sections A14-14 to thru A14-25 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections A14-14 thru A14-25 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, a referral was received on May 7, 2024 at the offices of the Suffolk County Planning Commission with respect to the application of "Strongs Yacht Center" located in the Town of Southold WHEREAS, said referral was considered by the Suffolk County Planning Commission at its meeting on June 5, 2024, now therefore, be it WHEREAS, said referral was deemed incomplete, now therefore, be it WHEREAS, said referral was then requested to be reconsidered by the Suffolk County Planning Commission, now therefore, be it RESOLVED, pursuant to Section A14-16 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code and Section 239- m 6 of the General Municipal Law, the referring municipality within thirty (30) days after final action, shall file a report with the Suffolk County Planning Commission, and if said action is contrary to this recommendation, set forth the reasons for such contrary action, Be it further RESOLVED, that the Suffolk County Planning Commission deems the Strongs Yacht Center referral Incomplete for the following reason: 1. Additional information is requested from the Town to make a full statement of facts 2. Would like to see some analysis of the alternatives presented in the EIS including those but not limited to that information DATE: 6/5/24 ZSR-24-36 File No.: SD-24-03 Strongs Yacht Center Town of Southold COMMISSION ACTIONS OF INCOMPLETE RESOLUTION AYE NAY ABSTAIN ABSENT _w w..... ..._._......_ _ _._.... ... .... .----------... .www_www................. ......M..__............. BALDWIN, STEPHANIE-At Large X �wwwww........_._� www_._ ....................w._. __. w._.._.......�. _ww.._.._.._w....... _.�___ CASEY, JENNIFER -Town of Huntington X CONDZ.w_..__._. f_....... �_'w —_ __.__www__.___....._ _w__._............................._. _www....._..... ................... ELLA, JOHN -Town of Riverhead X .�._�._..__AVID- .r.. � E w_..X......___. _ __ wwwwwww.....�_...... µDOTY, DAVID-Town of East HamptonYm X..._. ...... ma w.. FINN, JOHN -Town of Smithtown X FLYNN, DANIEL-To wn„of m pt Southaon _.._X w .�w..... wwwww_......._.....................aa.......�..�,...�.____ ... ....-...wwww..—_.�.�,, .www-. ...... _._..�._..... _._._._..........�.__ __.___.__.�. ......._www..............��.__ GALLE, ELIZABETH -Town of Shelter Island X GERSHOWITZ, KEVIN G.-At Large X wwwwwww................ .................__ ..................._............_.__.... ................�. _w........._... ww.._._._..�w_.._......... KA—UFMAN, MICHAEL - Villages under 5,000 X ..KITT ERROL-At Large . ....ww _........._...,...... . �X ._ __www_ ..�.�......�...._. .............................�... LEWIS, .. LASCHECA, _._.____._......o Ba...f.-Babylon ._..............._._ X..�. .. _.... _wwwww._........._..... .. .wwwwwwwwwwa Town MCCARTHY, THOMAS -Town of Southold X ...... MCCARTHY, TIMOTHY-Town of Islip _ X w_ PE" _ ........ LI. ___._.........................v—e _0. www.______....._-_._-- w__._. _�... ....._w _...__. _w_. ..... RRY, SA-Vil w_lages Ove __r 5,000 X ._._wwww VANDENBURG, MICHAEL-To.........._...._. m.��.__�w�w�_..._............� __.._.. _............ _._._._........... __._....................w_w_. .wn of Brookhaven X Motion: Commissioner Kaufman Present: 10 Seconded: Commissioner Thomas McCarthy Absent: 5 Voted: 10 Abstentions: 0 DECISION: Incomplete Date: 6/5/24 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK EDWARD P.ROMAINE SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING SARAH LANSDALE COMMISSIONER ELISA PICCA CHIEF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER June 12,2024 Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Attn: Heather Lanza,Planning Director Re: Strongs Yacht Center Zoning Action: Site Plan Municipal File No./Public Hearing Date: N/A S.C.T.M. No.: 1000 10600 0600 013004 &013010 S.C.P.C. File No.: ZSR-24-30 Dear Director Lanza: The Suffolk Planning Commission at its regular meeting on June 5, 2024,reviewed the referral from the Town of Southold entitled, "Strongs Yacht Center" referred to it pursuant to Section A14-14 thru A14-25, Article XIV of the Suffolk County Administrative Code. The attached Resolution signifies action taken by the Commission relative to this application. Very Truly Yours, By Christine DeSalvo Joseph E. Sanzano, Planning Director JES/cd Division of Planning and Environment cc: Mark Terry, Assistant Planning Director H.LEE DENNISON BLDG 0 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HWY,2nd FI a P.O.BOX 6100■ HAUPPAUGE,NY 11788-0099 a (631)853-5191 File No. SD-24-03 Resolution No. ZSR-24-30 of the Suffolk County Planning Commission Pursuant to Sections A14-14 to thru A14-25 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections A14-14 thru A14-25 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, a referral was received on May 7, 2024 at the offices of the Suffolk County Planning Commission with respect to the application of "Strongs Yacht Center" located in the Town of Southold WHEREAS, said referral was considered by the Suffolk County Planning Commission at its meeting on June 5, 2024, now therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Suffolk County Planning Commission deems the Strongs Yacht Center referral Incomplete DATE: 6/5/24 ZSR-24-30 File No.: SD-24-03 Strongs Yacht Center Town of Southold COMMISSION ACTIONS OF INCOMPLETE RESOLUTION AYE NAY ABSTAIN ABSENT www_..www_.......ww... _.. w _�_w......_.. _ ___. �.._._wwww.__..w_a _ ww...�. ......... BALDWIN, STEPHANIE-At Large X CASEY, JEN�. _ _w_.�......... w_w... w w w__._..m.._. �. ..____................. .__ w_...... .................... NIFER -Town of Huntington X CONDZELLA, JOHN -Town.................._._ ._w._._....... .w_ ................ � .. .......... ..... of Riverhead X DOTY. _,,,,,,,,,,,,,__......�........ ___,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,- _ , ...�__w_........... _......... __ . .._.�....__ wwwwwwwww_......................_. DAVID-Town of East Hampton X _w_ ... ............ . .....__ ....................._,.........w.v_ � ..www_............ ._ ................... FINN, JOHN -Town of Smithtown X wwwwwww ......... - NI E._------T... . 't"'-a"",......,,__._� .....�.ww._ ..... ... .......,,,.___�w_,........ ............... ._ FLYNN, DANIEL-Town of Southampton x ...w_._................ w. ............_._._ .w.......w_ ............_ GALLE, ELIZABETH -Town of Shelter Island X GERSHOWITZ,wKEVIN G.-At Large X .KAUFMAN, MICHAEL - Villages under 5,000 X__. _..............._www_w. KITT, I RROL-At Lar e X WIS, LASCH.E.C.A.'...Townrtof BabylonWWWWWWWWWWW_.................. ._. wwwwww._.._ .....�..wwww....... .............._............ X MCCARTHY, THOMAS -Town of Southold X_.......... _w___ _..wwwww _w MCCART.......ww____ww_..................... Y___.____._.-Town of Is-_lip...................._.._.,.�_.."w.___ X __,,,w....,........._-. . ...__-____. ®___ HY, TIMOTH PERRY.'_.LISA-VillagesµOv. 5,000.............ww...........w. _._ .ww........ ..._.......-.w.www_.._._..... X VANDENBURG, MICHAEL-Town of Brookhaven _.................m _w_............................ ....X__ Motion: Commissioner Kaufman Present: 11 Seconded: Commissioner Thomas McCarthy Absent: 4 Voted: 11 Abstentions: 0 DECISION: Incomplete Date: 6/5/24 From: Lanza, Heather Sent: Tuesday,June 11, 2024 8:34 AM To: Westermann, Caitlin Cc: Michaelis, Jessica; Cummings, Brian A.; Terry, Mark Subject: FW: Strongs Yacht Center-5780 W. Mill Rd, Mattituck, NY Attachments: Strongs_excavation_mit_v1.pdf Sv b-P ff 8i 1�4L I MT', Rc I Me I�i Incoming mail " E C E T V.._e� From: MatthewJ. Ingber<mingber@brownaltman.com> JUN 11, 2024 Sent: Monday,June 10, 20241:50 PM _. To: Lanza, Heather<heather.lanza@town.southold.ny.us> Pout Boarn Cc: David N. Altman<daltman@brownaltman.com> Planning Board Subject:Strongs Yacht Center-5780 W. Mill Rd, Mattituck, NY + 3•y Good afternoon, Ms. Lanza; In connection with the above noted application, attached for the Planning Board's consideration is a copy of a June 7, 2024 letter from Young Associates. The attached presents a phased truck- traffic/excavation mitigation option over two (2) winter seasons. Kindly forward the attached letter to the Suffolk County Planning Commission. Please let us know if you have any comments or questions. Sincerely, Matthew J. Ingber,Esq. Brown Altman&DiLeo,LLP 538 Broadhollow Road,Suite 301 Melville,NY 11747 (516)222-0222 office (516)222-0322 facsimile O At_-rMAN D1LEo . LLP Statement of Confidentiality This electronic message may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please delete it from your system and advise the sender. ATTENTION:This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. t YOUNG ASSOCIATES 631-727-2303 400 Ostrander Avenue,Riverhead,New York 11901 admin@youngengineering.com HOWARD W. YOUNG,Land Surveyor THOMAS C. WOLPERT,Professional Engineer DOUGLAS E.ADAMS,Professional Engineer&Geologist DANIEL A. WEAVER,Land Surveyor June 7,2024 Via email only Strong's Yacht Center Attn: Jeff Strong 5780 West Mill Road Mattituck,NY 11952 Re: Strong's Yacht Center—Site Plan At Mattituck Town of Southold,New York (2017_0165) Dear Mr. Strong: Pursuant to your recent request regarding measures to potentially mitigate truck-trips for the above referenced project,please consider the following as an option. Currently, it is proposed that excavation of material in preparation of the site, is to occur in two (2)phases, continuously through completion. Phase 1 is to remove 123,000 cubic yards of material utilizing a purpose-built haul road, immediately followed by phase 2 for the excavation of the remaining 12,000 cubic yards. An additional mitigation measure to consider could be to split the excavation time period into two (2) consecutive winter seasons. The activity could be from December 1, through April 30 of the first winter, and November 1 through March 30 of the following winter. Essentially 50% of the total proposed excavation of 135,000 cubic yards would be excavated over 2 consecutive winters. This represents a time period of approximately five (5) months, each year, with a yearly excavation volume of 67,500 cubic yards, and 2,050 loaded trucks. The haul road would be utilized as originally proposed. The entire area proposed to be excavated would be cleared as part of the first season, and excavated evenly across the entire site in an effort to minimize the creation of steep slopes. During the second season, the remainder of the excavation would take place. During all excavation activities, an approved Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP) would be utilized and followed, as required. During the period between the two (2) excavation seasons, all disturbed areas would be stabilized using numerous acceptable methods, including straw- spreading/mulching, application of perennial ryegrass and/or hydroseeding, and the implementation of Planning Engineering Land Surveying Architecture temporary sediment basins, all in accordance with the current version of New York State Stormwater Design Manual. Erosion control measures,best management practices, and required compliance inspections,would be required to be implemented, in accordance with the SPDES General Permit (GP-0-20-01). Since suspension of excavation of the first season would coincide with spring,these stabilization techniques would have optimal conditions, and a high success rate. We hope we have provided sufficient information for you to consider this potential truck-traffic mitigation option. Respectfully submitted, Do ]as darns, P ",PG /dea cc: Kim Genaro-Oancea,AICP CEP (kgennaro a@pwgrosser.com) file Planning Engineering Land Surveying architecture From: Lanza, Heather S�bf Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 8:24 AM FS H lr i MT_ 9C MC To: Westermann, Caitlin Cc: Michaelis,Jessica Y 3 Subject: FW: Stron s Yacht Center ("SYC") Attachments: FEIS Memo - Final.pdf uffi"61"d own Planning Board 106 • - 6 - 10 -#- 13. 4 From: David N. Altman <daltman@brownaltman.com> Sent:Wednesday, May 29, 2024 2:30 PM To: Lanza, Heather<heather.lanza@town.southo Id.ny.us> Cc: DeChance, Paul<pauld@southoldtownny.gov>; Charles Cuddy<CharlesCuddy@opton line.net>; Matthew J. Ingber <mingber@brownaltman.com>; Hansley A. Mohan<hmohan@brownaltman.com>;Taylor L. Gonzalez <tonzalez@brownaltman.com> Subject:Strong's Yacht Center("SYC") Good afternoon, Heather: Attached you will find a copy of SYC's submittal, in advance of the 6/10/24 comment period,to the Southold Planning Board (Lead Agency) regarding the FEIS concerning SYC's boat storage facility project. We ask that you provide a copy of the attached to the Planning Board and, in addition,forward a copy of the same to the Suffolk County Planning Commission in advance of its 6/5/24 meeting to consider the FEIS. A hard-copy of the attached will be provided by FeclEx Overnight, and to the Town Board. Kindly contact the undersigned if you have any questions. Best, David N. Altman,Esq. Brown Altman&DiLeo,LLP 538 Broadhollow Road,Suite 301 Melville, NY 11747 (516)222-0222 office (631)987-6741 mobile (516)222-0322 facsimile daltman@brownaltman.comw 0 Brzn`vN AL r'AAN & UiLE-ci , LLP Statement of Confidentiality This electronic message may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please delete it from your system and advise the sender. ATTENTION:This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. ON53B BROADHOLLOW ROAD SUITE 301 . B R❑W N ALTMAN MELVILLE, NEW YORK 1 1 747 8c D i L E o , L L P TEL 51 6-222-0222 I FAX 51 6-222-0322 i KBDA@BROWNALTMAN.COM WWW.BROWNALTMAN.COM May 29, 2024 Via Electronic Mail and FedEx Overnight Delivery James H. Rich III, Chairman Planning Board, Town of Southold Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 Southold,New York 11971 Re: New York State Environmental Quality Review ("SEQRA") by the Town of Southold ("Town") Planning Board ("PB" or "Lead Agency") in connection with the Application of Strong's Yacht Center,LLC("Strong's"or"Applicant")for Site Plan Approval to construct new boat storage facilities ("Application" or"Project") @ 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, New York (the "Property"); S.C.T.M. No.: 1000-106-6-10 & 13.4 Our File No.: 100-661-001 Dear Chairman Rich and Members of the Planning Board: Preliminary Statement In connection with the Application, the Applicant respectfully submits that the Town has failed to satisfy SEQRA's procedural and substantive requirements. In particular, the Lead Agency's May 7, 2024,Final Environmental Impact Statement("FEIS"),prepared by Hardesty& Hanover ("H&H"), does not comply with the "hard look" standard required by SEQRA and, therefore,must be rescinded. Rather, the FEIS is a consciously contrived disregard, on the whole, of SEQRA, such that the Lead Agency has entirely abrogated its statutory obligations. If anything, the FEIS appears to be an almost pathologic effort by the Lead Agency to divorce itself from the Draft Environmental Impact Statement("DEIS"),which was duly accepted by the PB as complete, and create an entirely new Project narrative based purely on unsubstantiated and unfounded speculation. Even more troubling is the Lead Agency's belief that it has no obligation to the Applicant or the public to uphold its statutory obligations under SEQRA. The DEIS consists of thousands of pages of technical data and information, based on studies prepared by nine (9) different professionals of various disciplines, each of whom have previously submitted their work to the Town on other projects. Here,however, H&H,whether deliberately or otherwise, dismisses more than five (5) years of work by the Project team and states, more than forty-one (41) times in the FEIS, that the DEIS is flawed, based on errors, lacks sufficient data or analysis, or words to that effect. Candidly, it is the FEIS that is flawed, erroneous, lacks sufficient data or analysis and is entirely conclusory in its calculated results. 1 BROWN / ALTMAN roc DiLEO , LLP Had H&H and, for that matter, the Lead Agency done their jobs, as mandated by SEQRA the FEIS would provide the proper balanced analysis of the Project mandated by New York State law sufficient to afford the Applicant and the community the procedural and substantive protections that are so painfully and evidently trampled upon in the FEIS. (See 6 NYCRR§617.11 (d)(2); Findings must "weigh and balance relevant environmental impacts with social, economic and other considerations.") In fact, there is no substantive analysis undertaken by H&H in the FEIS. (See Memorandum of Response to Comments, dated May 29, 2024, prepared by PW Grosser Consultants ("PWGC"), for a detailed response to the Reponses to Comments in the FEIS.) The Lead Agency, having taken the responsibility for preparation of the FEIS, literally cut the Applicant out of the response to public comment when preparing the FEIS. Despite repeated requests by the Applicant to participate in the response to public comment and even with written assurance from the Lead Agency that it would involve the Applicant and its Project consultants, the Lead Agency and H&H did not involve the Applicant in preparation of the FEIS. Thus, the Applicant was consciously deprived of the ability to respond to public comment received during the DEIS and to mitigate further potential environmental impacts or to modify the Project. New York State law is clear that "SEQRA's policy of injecting environmental considerations into decision making is effectuated, in part, through strict compliance with the review procedures outlined in the environmental laws and regulations." New York City Coal. to End Lead Poisoning v. hallone, 100 N.Y.2d 337, 348 (2003) (internal citations omitted). Therefore, agencies must strictly comply with SEQRA's procedural mechanisms as anything less "offers an incentive to cut corners and then cure defects only after protracted litigation." Id.;King v. Saratoga Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, 89 N.Y.2d 341, 348 (1996) ("it is clear that strict, not substantial, compliance is required."); FTKS Holdings, LLC v. Town of Southold, 83 Misc.3d 1227(a), 2024 N.Y. Slip Op 50424(U), *2 (Sup Ct, Suffolk County 2024) (`Environmental review procedures require literal, strict compliance."). The Applicant submits that the Town has failed comply, in many ways, with SEQRA regulations in clear violation of established New York State law. As such, the Applicant objects to the PB's acceptance of the FEIS on, among other things, the following grounds: I. THE TOWN WILLFULLY EXCLUDED STRONG'S FROM THE SEQRA PROCESS. The PB, as Lead Agency, violated SEQRA regulations by, among other things, willfully and deliberately excluding Strong's and its Representatives' from the SEQRA process. A lead agency must "make every reasonable effort to involve project sponsors, other agencies and the public in the SEQR process." 6 NYCRR § 617.3(d). In complete disregard of this requirement, ' Representatives include, but is not limited to, PWGC as Strong's environmental consultant and civil engineer, Charles Cuddy, Esq. as legal counsel and the law Firm of Brown Altman & DiLeo, LLP as co- counsel. 2 arN/., BROWN ALTMAN Sc DILE❑ , LLP the Lead Agency and H&H made no effort whatsoever to include Strong's, as the project sponsor, in the preparation of the FEIS and response to public comment received during the DEIS. First, on or about July 14, 2023, the Town took control over the EIS process from Strong's and retained H&H to prepare the FEIS. This effectively eliminated Strong's involvement in the SEQRA process, as it no longer could respond to substantive comments on the Project from the public and involved agencies. Strong's was completely excluded from the SEQRA process as the PB and H&H: (1)ignored Strong's numerous requests to participate in the FEIS process; (2)never requested from Strong's or its Representatives any underlying studies, reports or data that formed the basis of the Draft EIS; and (3) never provided Strong's with an opportunity to revise its plans to mitigate potential environmental impacts. In a September 20, 2023, Memorandum to the Town Planning Director ("Sept. 20, 2023 Memo"), H&H noted that additional input from Stong's and its project team may be required in connection with the preparation of the FEIS. A copy of the Sept. 20, 2023 Memo is annexed as Exhibit"1". As further discussed herein,the Town assured Strong's that it would remain involved in the FEIS process. However, no request for Stong's input was ever made by PB or H&H. On October 26, 2023, our office submitted a letter to the PB with a request to schedule a meeting "to establish, as soon as practicable, those Draft Environmental Impact Statement ("DEIS") Comments that required Strong's input". See Exhibit "2". By correspondence dated November 15, 2023, from the PB Vice-Chair ("Nov. 15, 2023 PB Letter"), Strong's was assured of the following as it related to the PB's preparation of the FEIS: Comments that require Strong's input. A priority for our consultant[H&H] from the start has been for them to identify the comments that will require Strong's input. We realize that it is very important for Strong's to have this information as soon as possible. This will be part of the initial step referenced above that we expect to be completed by mid-December. At the time the Planning Board will provide Strong's with the list of questions and further input required to respond to the DEIS comments. See Nov. 15, 2023, PB Letter, p. 2, a copy of which is annexed as Exhibit"Y (emphasis added). Despite the PB's assurance that Strong's would be involved in the SEQRA process, the same did not occur. Thereafter, by letter dated January 23, 2024, our office reiterated Strong's request to be involved with preparation of the FEIS. (See Exhibit "4" annexed hereto.) The letter states that "Strong's, as the Site Plan applicant, has the information, including expert reports and studies, which are material and formed the basis of the DEIS record. We remain ready to assist the Town and H&H with the FEIS, as it appears there is difficulty with preparation of the same." Id. 3 •�., BROWN / ALTMAN & DiLEO , LLP In the Town's January 31,2024,written response, Strong's was informed that its assistance was not necessary. (See Exhibit "5" annexed hereto.) Strong's was not provided with an explanation by the Lead Agency for the change of heart when a mere two (2) months earlier the Lead Agency assured Strong's that it would be a part of the FEIS process.2 By resolution dated May 7, 2024, the PB found that H&H responded to all substantive comments and deemed the draft FEIS as complete.3 In addition, the FEIS was prepared and reached conclusions on the environmental impact of the Project without H&H ever having reviewed the underlying studies, reports or data that formed the basis of the DEIS record. More importantly, the Applicant was never afforded an opportunity to revise its plans, thus defeating SEQRA's core purpose. As stated by H&H, "[t]he purpose of this FEIS is for the Lead Agency to evaluate and respond to the substantive public comments (both written and verbal)made on the DEIS. SEQRA allows an applicant to modify a project in response to public comment on the DEIS as long any potential environmental impacts on those modifications are described and analyzed in the FEIS." FEIS, p. 3. The very purpose of the FEIS was not accomplished as the Lead Agency never provided Strong's with any opportunity to modify the Project. 2 The Lead Agency is referred to the accompanying Memorandum dated May 29, 2024, prepared by PWGC which details the glaring errors and omissions made by H&H in its preparation of the response to comments received during the DEIS. Comparison of the FEIS, accepted on May 7, 2024, by the Lead Agency, with PWG Memorandum underscores the Lead Agency's decision to proceed with its assessment of the Project out of ignorance. 3 6 NYCRR§ 617.9(a)(2) states: (2) The lead agency will use the final written scope and the standards contained in this section to determine whether to accept the draft EIS as adequate with respect to its scope and content.for the purpose of commencingpublic review. This determination must be made in accordance with the standards in this section within 45 days of receipt of the draft EIS.A draft EIS is adequate with respect to scope and content for the purpose of commencingpublic review if it meets the requirements of the final written scope,sections 617.8(g) of this Part and subdivision (b) of this section, and provides the public and involved agencies with the necessary information to evaluate project impacts, alternatives, and mitigation measures. (i) If the draft EIS is determined to be inadequate, the lead agency must identify in writing the deficiencies and provide this information to the project sponsor. (H) The lead agency must determine whether to accept the resubmitted draft EIS within 30 days of its receipt. The determination of adequacy of a resubmitted draft EIS must be based solely on the written list of deficiencies provided by the lead agency following the previous review,unless changes are proposed for the project, there is newly discovered information, or there is a change in circumstances related to the project. It should be noted on May 7, 2024, the Applicant, by legal counsel, appeared at the May 7, 2024 Planning Board meeting and objected to the Lead Agency's acceptance of the FEIS. See Beth Young, Southold Accepts Final Environmental Impact Statement on Strongs Yacht Center Boat Storage, Expects Decision This Summer, EAST END BEACON(May 8,2024)annexed hereto as Exhibit"6". 4 BROWN / ALTMAN Sc DILE❑ , LLP It must also be noted that the FEIS materially misstates the facts and in certain instances is patently disingenuous. H&H states that the "Applicant has not modified any aspects of the Proposed Action. Therefore, the Lead Agency's evaluations and responses to comments provided within this FEIS are based on the information provided in the DEIS." As heretofore stated, Strong's was not provided with an opportunity to modify the Project. The inclusion of this misstatement of fact renders the entire FEIS substantially prejudicial to Strong's and its Project. The public and involved agencies are incorrectly led to believe that Strong's either did not consider or elected to ignore the potential environmental impacts of the Project. Moreover, the FEIS, as written, appears to stand for the proposition that any and all environmental impacts must be mitigated or eliminated, which is contrary to SEQRA and the holdings of New York's courts. SEQRA does not require perfection in the EIS process, as the State Legislature recognized that a project has some environmental impact. (See SEQRA Handbook(p. 127,Item 1)). Similarly,the courts have held that an applicant need not exhaustively consider potential mitigation measures or every conceivable environmental impact, as the same is not feasible and would result in an interminable review process.Aldrich v. Pattison, 486 N.Y.S.2d 23 (1985) The Lead Agency's failure to strictly follow SEQRA's procedural regulations violates established New York law and has compromised the six(6)year-long environmental review of the Application. As such, the FEIS must be rescinded. II. THE FEIS FAILS TO COMPLY WITH SEQRA REGULATIONS AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED. The FEIS is incomplete and should not have been accepted by the PB. We note that the FEIS is facially incomplete as it suffers from, without limitation, the following SEQRA deficiencies: 1. SEQRA requires a FEIS to include, among other things, copies or a summary of the substantive comments received and their source. See 6 NYCRR § 617.9(b)(8). A "full hearing record should be attached as an appendix to the FEIS and must be made available for public review along with any other referenced material." See THE SEQR HANDBOOK 135 (4th ed. 2020) (hereinafter, the "SEQR Handbook"). H&H states that the FEIS provides "[t]he transcripts of the public hearing and the written comments received are all included in the Appendix A- Public Comments of this FEIS." See FEIS, p. 3. However, Appendix A of the FEIS only contains a chart summarizing the substantive comments, which fails to indicate the source material. Further, H&H fails to provide a hearing transcript or hearing summary. As such, the FEIS that was accepted by the Lead Agency on May 7, 2024, and made publicly available is incomplete. 2. The FEIS fails to respond to all substantive comments as required by 6 NYCRR § 617.9(b)(8). As detailed in PWGC's Memorandum submitted herewith as Exhibit"7", 5 BROWN / ALTMAN Sc DILEO , LLP the Lead Agency and H&H fail to take a hard look at this Project as substantive comments are not addressed or utterly lack a factually and/or legally sufficient response. For example, the May 23, 2023, letter from the Town of Riverhead that was filed with the Lead Agency requests that coring samples of the Sound Avenue right-of- way be performed and the Lead Agency strongly consider the inclusion of such information in the FEIS. To Strong's knowledge and based on the information provided in the FEIS, coring samples on Sound Avenue was not done. Further, the Town of Riverhead's May 23, 2023, letter was not included by H&H in the FEIS or attached in an appendix. III. THE FEIS FAILS TO PROVIDE A REASONED ELABORATION OF THE BASIS FOR ITS DETERMINATION. Pursuant to SEQRA, New York law requires a lead agency to: (1) identify the relevant areas of environmental concern; (2) that the lead agency take a hard look at the relevant areas of environmental concern; and (3) that it provide a "reasoned elaboration of the basis for its determination." See, e.g.,Jackson v. New York State Urb. Dev. Corp., 67 N.Y.2d 400, 417 (1986). The FEIS utterly fails to provide any reasoned elaboration, analysis or scientific evidence in the FEIS to substantiate the baseless conclusions set forth therein. (See Exhibit 6 annexed hereto.) It should be noted that in in Falcon Grp. Ltd. Liab. Co. v. Town/Vill. of Harrison Planning Bd., 131 A.D.3d 1237 (2d Dept. 2015), the Appellate Division, Second Department, held that the trial court properly annulled a planning board's findings statement as unsupported by the evidence. The court found that the"Board's conclusions in the findings statement were based, at least in part, on factual findings which were contradicted by the scientific and technical analyses included in the FEIS and not otherwise supported by empirical evidence in the record." Id. at 473. As in Flacon Grp., supra, this FEIS is not supported by empirical evidence, lacks reasoned analysis, is conclusory, speculative, and divorced from the record comprising the DEIS. It is evident that H&H,as the preparer of the FEIS,did so entirely without ever performing its own scientific studies or having reviewed the DEIS record. (See also, Exhibit 6 annexed hereto; PWGC Memorandum at p. 33 —43.) Further, the FEIS is materially misleading and does not adhere to best practices regarding expert data. In such instances where there are differences between the project sponsor's and lead agency's experts regarding interpretation of a technical issues, "[p]roviding both positions allows a reviewer to reach an independent determination regarding the impact." See SEQR Handbook at p. 129. The accepted FEIS makes numerous claims that the DEIS suffers from flaws in either the methodology used or in its conclusions. However, H&H pro-offers this bald-faced conclusion without sufficient evidence as it never performed its own scientific studies or reviewed the underlying DEIS base data. Notwithstanding the lack of scientific and technical due diligence, the FEIS repeats the following statement in approximately forty (40) responses: "Due to there being other large adverse impacts that are neither avoided nor minimized nor mitigated to the 6 •�. BROWN - W4, ALTMAN DILE❑ , LLP maximum extent practicable, the lead agency does not need definitive answers on this topic." SEQRA does not relieve the Lead Agency, as the preparer of the FEIS, from undertaking its own substantive analysis. The SEQR Handbook expressly provides at page 129, Item 7, that: It is the lead agency's responsibility to clearly define major, substantive deficiencies so that the sponsor can make revisions responding to those comments. The goal of the lead agency in its review of the submitted draft EIS should be to advance the review of the proposed project to the public review phase. Therefore, a lead agency should provide adequate guidance in the initial description of deficiencies to enable the project sponsor to develop an acceptable draft EIS with one revision effort, and only reject a resubmission if that resubmitted draft EIS still contains errors or omissions that are essential to the public's understanding of the proposed project. The Lead Agency duly accepted the DEIS, further compounding H&H's inexplicable failure to provide sufficient evidence of the alleged inadequacies in the preparation of the DEIS. The Lead Agency's actions, taken together with the glaring inadequacies of the FEIS, and the refusal to communicate with the Applicant and its experts, leads to the conclusion that the FEIS fails to make a reasoned elaboration as required by law. IV. H&H'S INVOLVEMENT WAS IMPROPER AND HAS UNDULY DELAYED THE PREPARATION OF THE FEIS. It was improper for H&H to undertake preparation of the FEIS due to its dual engagement with the Town and lack of expertise as an environmental consultant. On September 20, 2022, the Town entered into a professional services agreement with ZoneCo,LLC,as a consultant to perform a comprehensive update to the Town's Zoning Code and Zoning Map (Chapter 280 of the Town Code). Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, the Town permitted ZoneCo, LLC to retain H&H as a sub-consultant. Based on a Zoning Diagnostic Report dated September 20, 2023, appearing on the Town's Website, the proposed update to the Town's Zoning Code includes an amendment that eliminates the Applicant's boat storage use from the Marine lI zoning district. Accordingly, the draft zoning ordinance update, as currently written, has a significant adverse impact on the pending Application, as boat storage use would require a Change of Zone application to the Town Board. On August 1,2023, the Town entered into another agreement to retain H&H as a consultant to perform services required to prepare the FEIS at issue. Despite H&H's ongoing involvement in the update to the Town Code, which includes changes that will negatively impact the Application, the PB failed to identify any potential conflict when it retained H&H to prepare the FEIS. Moreover, the Town failed to disclosure H&H's dual engagement to the Applicant, 7 � •-M., BROWN / ALTMAN & DiLEO , LLP effectively denying the Applicant the opportunity to object to H&H's involvement in this matter. Although H&H was retained by the Town on August 2023,the Applicant was not aware of H&H's involvement in both capacities until after a March 21, 2024, meeting with the Town Planner and the PB Attorney. The Town's decision to retain H&H to prepare the FEIS is, arguably, dubious based on the fact none of H&H's listed services, as noted on its website, include environmental consulting. Therefore, H&H appears to lack experience reviewing and preparing environmental impact statements. Further, itemized invoices from H&H for the work allegedly already performed regarding preparation of the FEIS fail to account for the preparation of the FEIS, itself, and fail to address services rendered from November 25, 2023, to the present. On March 29, 2024,in response to the Applicant's written request, the Town provided only two (2) invoices from H&H for the work it allegedly performed in connection with the FEIS. Upon review of the invoices, it was readily apparent that H&H's invoices lacked sufficient detail or, in some instances, contained no detail at all. Copies of the H&H invoices and Brown Altman & DiLeo, LLP correspondence are annexed hereto as Exhibits "8" and "9", respectively. Given the extensive deficiencies in the FEIS, and H&H's cursory, conclusory and repetitive responses to DEIS comments,it is questionable whether H&H read the DEIS record. "To avoid or minimize disputes, the lead agency should provide the project sponsor with reasonably detailed statements justifying review costs." See SEQR Handbook at p. 152 (emphasis added). Pursuant to 6 NYCRR § 617.13(f), an applicant may make a written request to the lead agency setting forth the reasons why it feels that such fees are inequitable. The Applicant reserves all rights under the law to challenge the H&H invoices and any future invoices. Under 6 NYCRR § 617.9(5), "the lead agency must prepare or cause to be prepared, and must file a final EIS, within 45 calendar days after the close of any hearing or within 60 calendar days after the filing of the draft EIS, whichever occurs later." However, 6 NYCRR §617.9(5)(11) provides that the final date for preparation and filing of the FEIS may be extended "if it is determined that additional time is necessary to prepare the statement adequately."Although H&H allegedly began its involvement in the preparation of the FEIS in August 2023, the FEIS was not completed until May 2024. Whereas SEQR regulations provide for either a 45 or 60 calendar day window to file the FEIS, H&H did not file the FEIS until nine (9) months after it was retained by the PB. While the Applicant acknowledges that H&H would have needed sufficient time to review all the relevant documents and information in the DEIS to prepare the FEIS, the Lead Agency's refusal to coordinate efforts with the Applicant or its experts and the lack of detail in H&H's invoices raises significant questions as to the quality and efficiency of H&H's handling of the FEIS. It is also worth noting that H&H's invoices indicate that a total of only 4 employees worked on preparing the FEIS. In H&H's proposal to the Town to perform the update to the Town Code, it was noted that H&H's firmwide staff size is approximately 455 employees. Based on H&H's lack of expertise as an environmental consultant, the excessive amount of time spent preparing the FEIS, and the vagueness of H&H's invoices, it is reasonable to conclude that the SEQRA process has been utilized by the PB as a delay tactic to stall the 8 Id11101�A, BROWN ALTMAN & DiLEO , LLP Application. The fact that the Town is currently working with H&H to revise the Town Code to virtually eliminate the existing permitted use from the Mll Zoning District substantiates the foregoing. We ask that the Lead Agency take note of the SEQRA violations as part of the evaluation of the FEIS and in any future findings statement. Thank you for your consideration and we respectfully reserve all remedies in law and equity to protect our rights. Sincerely, BROWN ALTMAN& DILEO, LLP By: (.David N. Altman, Esq.----- Encl. cc.: Strong's Yacht Center(attn: Jeff Strong; w/encls.; via electronic mail) Charles Cuddy, Esq. (w/encls.; via electronic mail) PWGC (attn: Kim Gennaro, w/encls.; via electronic mail) Southold Town Attorney Paul DeChance, Esq. (w/encls.; via federal express) Southold Town Supervisor Hon. Albert J. Krupski,Jr. (w/encls.; via federal express) Southold Town Board Members(w/ends.; via federal express) Town of Southold Town Clerk Hon. Denis Noncarrow(w/encls.;via federal express) Suffolk County Planning Commission(attn: Jennifer Casey,Chair; w/encls.; via electronic mail) Suffolk County Planning Commission(attn: Christine DeSalvo; w/encls.; via electronic mail) 9 EXHIBIT 1 ' ' 555 Theodore Fremd Ave,Suite C-301. Rye,NY 10590 H&H T:914.967.6540 www.hai-destyhanover.com 9/20/2023 Received MEMORANDUM Southold Town Planning Department To: Heather Lanza,AICP,Town Planning Director Date: September 20, 2023 Subject: Strong's Yacht Center Final Environmental Impact Statement Preparation — Progress Update As requested, we are currently reviewing and cataloging the 1,488 pages of public comments received on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS) and the Revised DEIS to be included in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). The comments received are included in the following documents: • A 623-page collection of comments on the DEIS; and • The 328-page Joel Klein 5/15/23 comment letter; and • A 186-page 6/5/23 public hearing transcript; and • A 145-page 5/15/23 public hearing transcript; and • The 94-page North Fork Audubon Society 5/26/23 comment letter; and • The 6-page NPV review memo; and • The 106-page Reed Super 7/10/23 comment letter. Our process has been to read through these documents to identify the individual substantive comments they contain. Once a comment is identified, it is highlighted in the original text and given a unique ID number.That question is then catalogued in a spreadsheet.The ID number also assigns the comment to the corresponding chapter of the DEIS. As an example: ID# Source Document Page Comment(Original) Number 2.4-1 Joel Klein 5-15-23 1 DEIS Appendix N conflates the Project"site"with the Ecology Project"Area" resulting in significant distortions in the I ecological analyses included in the DEIS. Section 2.4 of the DEIS is titled 'Ecological Resources' and identifies the existing ecological conditions, the potential ecological impacts of the proposed project, and the mitigation measures to those ecological impacts. The comment is given a comment ID#of 2.4-1 to identify which section of the DEIS it refers to and to order it within the collection of ecology related comments. Our next steps will be to complete the review and catalogue of public comments and to identify which comments repeat and can be organized together. It is possible that many comments received are some reiterations of comment 2.4-1 and they will be grouped and share one comprehensive answer. The FEIS will take form as a collection of these comments and their answers. As you know, an FEIS is the Lead Agency's document. Because it is intended to present the Lead Agency's--,and not the Applicant's---responses to comments on the DEIS, the substantive comments identified will be included in the FEIS and we will prepare responses on behalf of the Planning Board. As we continue to catalog the substantive comments, we will keep you and the Board informed on topic areas included in the DEIS that may need additional input from the Applicant or may require additional analysis. As these areas are identified, it may be necessary for the Board to first engage in additional substantive discussions on the Proposed Action itself. The outcome of those discussions could very well affect the way in which some responses to comments are written in the draft of the proposed FEIS. The Planning Board may also find that it needs additional input from other Involved Agencies. As we continue to work, we would recommend that we set-up another meeting to discuss our progress and estimated timeline. We look forward to discussing the project with you. Sarah L. Brown,AICP Associate, Principal Planner Malcolm M. Simpson Planner EXHIBIT 2 1 538 SROADHOLLOw ROAD SUITE 301 JOIN BROWN k, I MELVILLE, NEW YORK 1 1 747 A-LTMAN Sc DiLEO L, LP TEL 51 6-222-O222 FAx 51 6-ZZZ-1332Z KBDA@BROWNALTMAN.COM www.E3ROWNALTMAN.COM October 26, 2023 Via Electronic Mail and A Fetffi"r. Qverni,Yht Deliv F erL) ---'(, ' __ VED James H. Rich III,Vice-Chairman 1)C r 2, Illy 23 Planning Board, Town of Southold S-66thold ()w Town Hall Annex Planning Board 54375 State Route 25 Southold,New York 11971 Re: In the Matter of the Application of Strong Yacht Center ("Strong's")for Site Plan Approval(the"Site Plan Application")from the Southold Planning Board(the"PB" or the "Town")) to construct new boat storage facilities @ 5 780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, New York(the "Property"); S.C.TM No.: Dist. 1000, Sec. 016, Blk. 06, Lots 010 and 013.004 Our File No.: 100-661-001 Dear Vice-Chairman Rich and Fellow Members of the Planning Board: Our firm is co-counsel with Charles Cuddy, Esq., concerning Strong's pending Site Plan Application to develop two (2) new boat storage buildings at the Property. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement ("DEIS") public comment period, as you know, ended on July 10, 2023. New York State Environmental Quality Review Act("SEQRA") provides that the PB, as lead agency, must prepare or cause to be prepared and must file a final EIS ("FEIS") within forty-five (45) days after the close of any hearing or within sixty (60) days after the filing of the DEIS, whichever occurs later. 6 NYRCC 617.9(a)(5). The PB is beyond its statutory time-period to prepare and/or file a FEIS regarding the Site Plan Application.1 The last communication Strong's received from the Town,dated September 20,2023 (copy enclosed) (the "Sept. 20, 2023 Memo), indicates that the PB's consultant, Hardesty & Hanover ("H&H"),is cataloging substantive comments to the DEIS made during the public comment period (hereinafter, "DEIS Comments"). The Sept. 20, 2023 Memo also stated that H&H "will prepare responses [to the public comment] on behalf of the PB". We have not received any further communication from the Town. The absence of communication and objective progress regarding the Site Plan application is concerning. Further, H&H's Sept. 20, 2023 Memo correctly notes that additional input from Stong's and its project team may be required. Respectfully, input from Strong's is essential. While we recognize that the PB, as lead agency, is responsible for the adequacy and accuracy of the FEIS, practically,the applicant(Strong's)prepares the FEIS as the party that conducted the due diligence 1 PB did not request,nor has it issued written notice extending its time to prepare a FEIS. 6 NYCRR 617.9(a)(5)(ii). iR❑WN .., .. ALTMAN & WIN, ' DiLEO , LLP ............ ................... . and expert analysis resulting in the DEIS. As you know, responding to DEIS Comment is more than a simple written answer to a comment. Often, the applicant's experts are required to conduct additional study/analysis and provide further data/findings. In the instant Site Plan Application, Strong's and its project team prepared the studies and findings comprising the DEIS and their input is required to respond to DEIS Comments. It is imperative that we establish,as soon as practicable,those DEIS Comments that require Strong's input and the extent of such input. Further, expert reports and studies submitted by Strong's were prepared on behalf of and paid for by Strong's and, as such, there are proprietary and possible privilege considerations to be addressed. We ask that you promptly contact us so we can schedule a meeting to discuss the status of H&H's cataloging of DEIS Comments, commencement of the FEIS process and proper responses to DEIS Comments. We look forward to hearing from you and working with you to advance this Site Plan Application. Very truly yours, Brown Altman& DiLeo, LLP By: M ' Aa�v N.Altman cc.: Southold Planning Dept. (attn: Heather Lanza, Planning Director; via electronic mail and regular mail) Paul DeChance, Esq., Southold Town Attorney (via electronic mail and regular mail) Strong's Yacht Center(attn: Jeff Strong, via electronic mail) Charles Cuddy, Esq. (via electronic mail) PWGC (attn: Kim Gennaro and Katelyn Kaim, via electronic mail, respectively) 2 555 Theodore Fremd Ave,Suite C-301 Rye,NY 10580 T:914.967,6540 H&H www.liardestyhanover.com 9/20/2023 Received MEMORANDUM Southold Town Planning Department To: Heather Lanza,AICP,Town Planning Director Date; September 20, 2023 Subject: Strong's Yacht Center Final Environmental Impact Statement Preparation — Progress Update As requested, we are currently reviewing and cataloging the 1,488 pages of public comments received on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS)and the Revised DEIS to be included in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). The comments received are included in the following documents: • A 623-page collection of comments on the DEIS;and • The 328-page Joel Klein 5/15/23 comment letter; and • A 186-page 615/23 public hearing transcript; and • A 145-page 5/15/23 public hearing transcript;and • The 94-page North Fork Audubon Society 5/26/23 comment letter;and • The 6-page NPV review memo; and • The 106-page Reed Super 7/10/23 comment letter. Our process has been to read through these documents to identify the individual substantive comments they contain. Once a comment is identified, it is highlighted in the original text and given a unique ID number.That question is then catalogued in a spreadsheet.The ID number also assigns the comment to the corresponding chapter of the DEIS.As an example: ID# Source Document Page Comment(Original) Number 2.4-1 Joel Klein 5-15-23 1 DEIS Appendix N conflates the Project"site"with the Ecology Project"Area"resulting in significant distortionsin the ecological analyses included in the DEIS. Section 2.4 of the DEIS is titled `Ecological Resources' and identifies the existing ecological conditions, the potential ecological impacts of the proposed project, and the mitigation measures to those ecological impacts.The comment is given a comment ID#of 2.4-1 to identify which section of the DEIS it refers to and to order it within the collection of ecology related comments. Our next steps will be to complete the review and catalogue of public comments and to identify which comments repeat and can be organized together. It is possible that many comments received are some reiterations of comment 2.4-1 and they will be grouped and share one comprehensive answer. The FEIS will take form as a collection of these comments and their answers. As you know, an FEIS is the Lead Agency's document. Because it is intended to present the Lead Agency's--and not the Applicant's--4esponses to comments on the DEIS, the substantive comments identified will be included in the FEIS and we will prepare responses on behalf of the Planning Board. As we continue to catalog the substantive comments, we will keep you and the Board informed on topic areas included in the DEIS that may need additional input from the Applicant or may require additional analysis. As these areas are identified, it may be necessary for the Board to first engage in additional substantive discussions on the Proposed Action itself. The outcome of those discussions could very well affect the way in which some responses to comments are written in the draft of the proposed FEIS. The Planning Board may also find that it needs additional input from other Involved Agencies. As we continue to work, we would recommend that we set-up another meeting to discuss our progress and estimated timeline. We look forward to discussing the project with you. Sarah L. Brown,AICP Associate, Principal Planner Malcolm M. Simpson Planner 01-MB ( W N.. S38 SROADHOLLQW ROAD - SUITE 301 ,21 MELVILLE, NEW YQREC 1 1 747 Al_TMAN & TEL S 1 6-222-0222 FAX 51 6-222-0322 D I L E D , !_ L P . KBDA@BROWNALTMAN.COM www.E3ROWNALTMAN.COM October 26, 2023 Via Electronic Mail and FedEx Overnight Delivery James H. Rich III, Vice-Chairman Planning Board, Town of Southold Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 Southold,New York 11971 Re: In the Matter of the Application of Strong Yacht Center("Strong's")for Site Plan Approval(the"Site Plan Application")from the Southold Planning Board(the"PB" or the "Town")) to construct new boat storage facilities @ 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, New York(the "Property"); S.C.T.M. No.: Dist. 1000, Sec. 016, Blk. 06, Lots 010 and 013.004 Our File No.: 100-661-001 Dear Vice-Chairman Rich and Fellow Members of the Planning Board: Our firm is co-counsel with Charles Cuddy, Esq., concerning Strong's pending Site Plan Application to develop two (2) new boat storage buildings at the Property. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement ("DEIS") public comment period, as you know, ended on July 10, 2023. New York State Environmental Quality Review Act ("SEQRA") provides that the PB, as lead agency, must prepare or cause to be prepared and must file a final EIS ("FEIS") within forty-five (45) days after the close of any hearing or within sixty (60) days after the filing of the DEIS, whichever occurs later. 6 NYRCC 617.9(a)(5). The PB is beyond its statutory time-period to prepare and/or file a FEIS regarding the Site Plan Application.I The last communication Strong's received from the Town,dated September 20,2023 (copy enclosed) (the "Sept. 20, 2023 Memo), indicates that the PB's consultant, Hardesty & Hanover ("H&H"),is cataloging substantive comments to the DEIS made during the public comment period (hereinafter, "DEIS Comments"). The Sept. 20, 2023 Memo also stated that H&H "will prepare responses [to the public comment] on behalf of the PB". We have not received any further communication from the Town. The absence of communication and objective progress regarding the Site Plan application is concerning. Further, H&H's Sept. 20, 2023 Memo correctly notes that additional input from Stong's and its project team may be required. Respectfully, input from Strong's is essential. While we recognize that the PB, as lead agency, is responsible for the adequacy and accuracy of the FEIS, practically,the applicant(Strong's)prepares the FEIS as the party that conducted the due diligence 1 PB did not request,nor has it issued written notice extending its time to prepare a FEIS. 6 NYCRR 6179(a)(5)(ii). BROWN ALTMAN & DILEO , LLP and expert analysis resulting in the DEIS. As you know, responding to DEIS Comment is more than a simple written answer to a comment. Often,the applicant's experts are required to conduct additional study/analysis and provide further data/findings. In the instant Site Plan Application, Strong's and its project team prepared the studies and findings comprising the DEIS and their input is required to respond to DEIS Comments. It is imperative that we establish,as soon as practicable,those DEIS Comments that require Strong's input and the extent of such input. Further, expert reports and studies submitted by Strong's were prepared on behalf of and paid for by Strong's and, as such, there are proprietary and possible privilege considerations to be addressed. We ask that you promptly contact us so we can schedule a meeting to discuss the status of H&H's cataloging of DEIS Comments, commencement of the FEIS process and proper responses to DEIS Comments. We look forward to hearing from you and working with you to advance this Site Plan Application. Very truly yours, Brown Altman& DiLeo, LLP -11 By: av N.Altman cc.: Southold Planning Dept. (attn: Heather Lanza, Planning Director; via electronic mail and regular mail) Paul DeChance, Esq., Southold Town Attorney (via electronic mail and regular mail) Strong's Yacht Center(attn: Jeff Strong, via electronic mail) Charles Cuddy, Esq. (via electronic mail) PWGC (attn: Kim Gennaro and Katelyn Kaim, via electronic mail, respectively) 2 555 Theodore Frenid Ave,Suite C-301 Rye,NY 10580 H&H 7:914.967.6540 www.hardcstyhanc)ver.corn 9/20/2023 Received MEMORANDUM Southold Town Planning Department To: Heather Lanza, AICP,Town Planning Director Date: September 20, 2023 Subject: Strong's Yacht Center Final Environmental Impact Statement Preparation — Progress Update As requested, we are currently reviewing and cataloging the 1,488 pages of public comments received on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS)and the Revised DEIS to be included in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). The comments received are included in the following documents: • A 623-page collection of comments on the DEIS;and • The 328-page Joel Klein 5/15/23 comment letter; and • A 186-page 6/5/23 public hearing transcript;and • A 145-page 5/15/23 public hearing transcript; and • The 94-page North Fork Audubon Society 5126/23 comment letter;and • The 6-page NPV review memo; and • The 106-page Reed Super 7/10/23 comment letter. Our process has been to read through these documents to identify the individual substantive comments they contain. Once a comment is identified, it is highlighted in the original text and given a unique ID number.That question is then catalogued in a spreadsheet.The ID number also assigns the comment to the corresponding chapter of the DEIS.As an example: ID# Source Document Page Comment(Original) Number 2.4-1 Joel Klein 5-15-23 1 DEIS Appendix N conflates the Project"site"with the Ecology Project"Area"resulting in significant distortionsin the 1 -1 ecological analyses included in the DEIS. I Section 2.4 of the DEIS is titled 'Ecological Resources' and identifies the existing ecological conditions, the potential ecological impacts of the proposed project, and the mitigation measures to those ecological impacts.The comment is given a comment ID#of 2.4-1 to identify which section of the DEIS it refers to and to order it within the collection of ecology related comments. Our next steps will be to complete the review and catalogue of public comments and to identify which comments repeat and can be organized together. It is possible that many comments received are EXHIBIT 3 OFFICE LOCATION: MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex qf soll/p, P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Telephone: 631 765-1938 Southold, NY vvww.southoldtownny.gov 'roum, PLANNING BOARD OFFICE November 15, 2023 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD David N.Altman, Esq. Brown,Altman & DiLeo LLP 538 Broadhollow Road, Suite 301 Melville,NY 11747 Re: Strong's Boatyard Buildings Site Plan Application 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr.Altman: In response to your letter dated October 26, 2023, we offer the following: I. Timeline for preparing the Final Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS). The Planning Board is diligently moving forward with their consultant to prepare the FEIS. As we have indicated, and as is readily seen in the public record, the large volume of comments is what is causing the Board to require more time to complete the FEIS than is suggested in the SEQRA guidelines. The consultant has let us know they have just completed(as of Monday,November 6, 2023) sorting and cataloging the 1,780 comments received. The next step is for our consultant to analyze the comments to identify those that are substantive and to determine what if any, additional information is needed to complete the FEIS. We hope to have this step completed by mid-December. Due to the volume of comments, we expect it to be some months before the FEIS is completed. The Planning Board will require at least an additional four months to complete the FEIS. This timeline is subject to change depending on the nature and extent of any further information or analysis that might be required to answer the comments. Southold Town Planning Board Page 2 November 15,2023 2. Comments that require Strong's input. A priority for our consultant from the start has been for them to identify the comments that will require Strong's input. We realize it is very important for Strong's to have this information as soon as possible. This will be part of the initial step referenced above that we expect to be completed by mid-December.At that time the Planning Board will provide Strong's with the list of questions and further input required to respond to the DEIS comments. Please consider this a formal request to extend the time required to complete the FEIS so that all necessary responses and input may be included. Please be assured that the Planning Board is committed to moving this site plan application along as quickly as possible. Feel free to call Planning Director Heather Lanza for updates or to answer any questions on the progress discussed above. Sincerely, 2- James H. Rich III Vice Chairman cc. Charles Cuddy, Esq. EXHIBIT 4 538 BROADHOLLOw ROAD SUITE 301 BROWN MELVILLE, NEW YORK 1 1 747 ALTMAN TEL 51 6-222-0222 � FAx 51 6-222-0322 1 1 11 L"I EO , LL 11 P KBOA9BROWNALTMAN.COM I WWW.BROWNALTMAN.COM January 23, 2024 is'.)t-41 PSI I-il- I N-F, 8C I mc Via Electronic Mail and r,edEx Overnt�gyht DeliverJames H. Rich III Vice-Chairman Planning Board, Town of Southold JAN 2 5Z024.........a. Town Hall Amex 54375 State Route 25 Planning Board Southold,New York 11971 Q. - Re: In the Matter of the Application of Strong Yacht Center("Strong's")for Site Plan Approval(the"Site Plan Application")from the Southold Planning Board(the"PB" or the "Town")) to construct new boat storage facilities @ 5 780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, New York(the "Property"); S.C.T.M. No.: Dist. 1000, Sec. 016, Blk. 06, Lots 010 and 013.004 Our File No.: 100-661-001 Dear Vice-Chairman Rich and Fellow Members of the Planning Board: We are following up regarding the status of Hardesty& Hanover's ("H&H")progress with preparation of a Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS"). After our November 14, 2023, correspondence (copy enclosed), the Planning Director advised us to reach out after the holidays. Now, more than seven(7) months after the close of the DEIS public comment period we have not heard from the Town or H&H. Further, we have spoken with Strong's project environmental consultant who has worked on many environmental impact statements, including projects with more extensive records than this matter, and been advised that organization of the substantive questions from the DEIS should have been completed months ago. Strong's, as the Site Plan applicant, has the information, including expert reports and studies, which are material and formed the basis of the DEIS record. We remain ready to assist the Town and H&H with the FEIS, as it appears there is difficulty with preparation of the same. As a reminder, 6 NYCRR Part 617.9(A)(5) requires that the "lead agency must prepare or cause to be prepared, and must file a final EIS,within 45 days after the close of any hearing or within 60 calendar days after the filing of the draft EIS, which ever occurs later." If more time is needed than permitted under Part 617.9(A)(5), the law generally imposes a reasonable time frame, not a period without durational.limitation. (See SEQRA Handbook; Chapter 6.) Respectfully, sufficient time was given, and we need to move forward. k BROWN ALTMAN & DILE❑ , L L P We respectfully ask that you contact us to discuss preparation of the FEIS. We look forward to hearing from you. Very sincerely yours, Brown Altman& DiLeo, LLP BYZ. a „_ _._ ...> d N.Altman cc.: Southold Planning Dept. (attn: Heather Lanza, Planning Director; via electronic mail and regular mail) Paul DeChance, Esq., Southold Town Attorney (via electronic mail and regular mail) Strong's Yacht Center(attn: Jeff Strong, via electronic mail) Charles Cuddy, Esq. (via electronic mail) PWGC (attn: Kim Gennaro and Katelyn Kaim, via electronic mail, respectively) 2 EXHIBIT 5 OFFICE LOCATION: MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex P.O.Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 �O��Of SOUTy�� Southold, NY 11971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY � � Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.s outh of dt ownny.gov is PLANNING BOARD OFFICE January 31, 2024 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD David N.Altman, Esq. Brown,Altman& DiLeo LLP 538 Broadhollow Road, Suite 301 Melville,NY 11747 Re: Strong's Boatyard Buildings Site Plan Application 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr.Altman: We appreciate your offer of assistance, but it will not be necessary. The Planning Board's consultant, H&H, is working diligently on preparing the FEIS, and the Town is in regular contact with them. They are malting good progress.As you know, the large volume of comments caused this process to take much longer than the 45 days suggested as the time frame in the SEQRA regulations. We are committed to completing this process as quickly as possible. Thank you for your patience. Ytc�.ely�--�' James H. Rich III Chairman CC. Charles Cuddy, Esq. EXHIBIT 6 5/28/24, 10:47 AM Southold Accepts Final Environmental Impact Statement on Strongs Yacht Center Boat Storage, Expects Decision This Summer... , East End eacon T1eivs 1br tale millSunrise tt; Powered by Or5ted Home > Government > Southold Accepts Final Environmental Impact Statement On Strongs Yacht Center Boat Storage, Expects Decision This Summer 1.± l _NT SOUTHOLD ACCEPTS FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Uiv b i HUiv ;S YACHT CENTER BOAT -� EXPECTS DECISION THIS SUMMEI M May 8,2024 A Beth Young 0 1010 Pictured Above: Strong's Yacht Center, with the hill where the new boat storage buildings behind the existing buildings, as seen from across Mattituck Inlet. https://www.eastend beacon.com/southold-accepts-final-environmental-impact-statement-on-strongs-yacht-center-boat-storage-expects-decision-this... 1/13 5/28/24, 10:47 AM Southold Accepts Final Environmental Impact Statement on Strongs Yacht Center Boat Storage, Expects Decision This Summer... —. .-.. -. .. ..-. .--.. .. ..r---- ------. . .—. .- 1. ---I -. .-.- r--.. .-- --.- . .-.. ..-• --- •----- .. . -. r.—. . -- build two large yacht storage buildings at Strong's Yacht Center in Mattituck on Monday evening. Board members said they will now forward the FEIS to the Suffolk County Planning Commission for comment before they issue their findings statement and final decision on the site plan, a process that could take "a couple of months" Southold Planning Board members said Monday that while the soonest they could issue a Findings Statement was 10 days after they accepted the FEIS, the Planning Commission will not meet again until June 5, after the Southold Planning Board's next scheduled meeting on June 3, necessitating the extended time frame. The Yacht Center has proposed to excavate about 124,000 cubic yards of sand from a hillside overlooking Mattituck Inlet at Strong's Yacht Center on West Mill Road in order to build two roughly 50,000-square-feet heated yacht storage buildings. It's a proposal that has galvanized the North Fork community, which turned out in force at two public hearings on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) prepared by Strong's consultants, P.W. Grosser Consulting, Inc. last spring, with many arguing that the project would have a major impact on the environment, and many others arguing that the Strong family's expanding marina business has been an economic engine driving the North Fork. The Southold Town Planning Board is the Lead Agency coordinating review of the project according to the rules of the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act, known as SEQRA. After receiving a massive amount of public comment, Southold Town hired the consulting firm of Hardesty & Hanover of Melville to prepare a Final Environmental Impact Statement responding to the comments, which was received by the town Planning Department May 3. Here are the FEIS documents. Read Our Coverage of the May 15, 2023 hearing: https://www.eastend beacon.com/southold-accepts-fi naI-envi ron mental-impact-statement-on-strongs-yacht-center-boat-sto rag e-expects-decision-this... 2/13 5/28/24, 10:47 AM Southold Accepts Final Environmental Impact Statement on Strongs Yacht Center Boat Storage, Expects Decision This Summer... s � ti I SS r. Strong's Yacht Storage Project Brings Out Environmentalists and Boat & Business Owners Pictured Above: Strong's Yacht Center, with the hill where the new boat storage buildings behind the existing buildings, as seek from across Mattituck Inlet.A mixed bag of residents for ... Continue reading rA East End Beacon 0 Read Our Coverage of the June 5, 2023 hearing: A https://www.eastend beacon.com/southold-accepts-fi naI-envi ron mental-impact-statement-on-strongs-yacht-center-boat-sto rag e-expects-decision-this... 3/13 5/28/24, 10:47 AM Southold Accepts Final Environmental Impact Statement on Strongs Yacht Center Boat Storage, Expects Decision This Summer... LZ i .AW Strong's Yacht Storage Proposal Continues to Divide Southold Pictured Above: Strong's Yacht Center, with the hill where the new boat storage buildings behind the existing buildings on the right, with the Old Mill Inn, which is slated to ... Continue reading a East End Beacon p While SEQRA allows applicants to modify their projects in response to public comment, Hardesty & Hanover said in the FEIS that "the applicant has not modified any aspects of the proposed action," and the FEIS focused instead on evaluating the comments, finding many of them to be substantive. The FEIS points out numerous deficiencies in the DEIS, finding "flaws in the methodology" of environmental, noise and construction impact analysis, incomplete descriptions of flora and fauna on and adjacent to the site, a lack of "sufficient detail on jobs estimated to be created;' inconsistencies in the project construction schedule and flaws in the way construction trips have been estimated, as well as no analysis of a phased construction plan in which one of the two buildings is constructed first. The report also noted that the DEIS "does not adequately address the risk of, or the contingency plans for structure or hillside collapse during construction. To demonstrate that all impacts have been mitigated to the greatest extent practic this information would be necessary." https://www.eastend beacon.com/southold-accepts-fi naI-envi ron mental-impact-statement-on-strongs-yacht-center-boat-sto rag e-expects-decision-this... 4/13 5/28/24, 10:47 AM Southold Accepts Final Environmental Impact Statement on Strongs Yacht Center Boat Storage, Expects Decision This Summer... -• •— • -—-- • —• •. —---- — —r--. -.. .-. .- -. -. .-.. -. .. ..-. .---- --. .--. ---.-. . -. .-- - . . ... ... -0 permit is not required for the proposed excavation and removal of approximately 124,921 cubic yards of material;' and that a Tidal Wetland Permit for the project obtained from the DEC in January of 2020 "was premature and can only be granted after the SEQRA review of the project has been concluded." Charles Cuddy, the attorney for Strong's Yacht Center, attempted to address the Planning Board before they accepted the FEIS, calling out "deficiency in the whole process;' and adding that the applicant "never had a chance to comment on the public comments" Board members told him it was an inappropriate time for him to speak, but said they'd been advised by counsel that they had followed the procedure correctly, before voting to accept the document. Jeff Strong, President of Strong's Marine, said Wednesday that it was a bit too early for him to comment on the FEIS. Save Mattituck Inlet, a community group that has been urging members of the public to speak up about the project, said their group "encourages everyone to read the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Strongs Marine Yacht Warehouse project." "They will see for themselves that their nearly 1,800 thoughtful comments are being taken seriously and can make a difference;' said Anne Sherwood Pundyk, Co-Chair of the Save Mattituck Inlet Steering Committee. "Since we came together in 2020 as fellow neighbors and members of the Mattituck community, SMI has sought to encourage others to get involved in the oversight of development in and around Mattituck Inlet. We have worked to support the Southold Town Planning Department's review of this project." Keep Independent News on the East End The Beacon is able to provide all of our content online free of charge thanks to support from our readers. Be a vital part of keeping our community informed! https://www.eastend beacon.com/southold-accepts-fi naI-envi ron mental-impact-statement-on-strongs-yacht-center-boat-sto rag e-expects-decision-this... 5/13 5/28/24, 10:47 AM Southold Accepts Final Environmental Impact Statement on Strongs Yacht Center Boat Storage, Expects Decision This Summer... Dell I TUUI I' IS d1I dVVdlU-VVIIII III18 IUld1 JUUI I IdIIbL VVIIU IIds UeelI LUVel II18 LI w CdbL End since the 19905. She began her career at the Sag Harbor Express and, after receiving her Masters from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, has reported for the Southampton Press, the East Hampton Press and the Times/Review Media Group. She founded the East End Beacon website in 2013, and a print edition in 2017. Beth was born and raised on the North Fork. In her spare time, she tinkers with bicycles, tries not to drown in the Peconic Bay and hopes to grow the perfect tomato. You can send her a message at editor@eastendbeacon.com I RELATED ARTICLES ENVIRONMENT TOP STORIES GOVERNMENT TOP STORIES Governor Signs Bill Allowing HOUSIN( TOP STORIES State Plans Support for Kelp Farming in East End Hunting in Southold Southold Hears Two Waters fM August 10,2022 A Beth Young Cutchogue Housing Pitches December 7,2021 A Beth Young It February 25,2022 A Beth Young 4 This Morning's Bulletin — 5.8.24 This Morning's Bulletin — 5.9.24 ► Leave a Reply Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked Comment* https://www.eastend beacon.com/southold-accepts-fi naI-envi ron mental-impact-statement-on-strongs-yacht-center-boat-sto rag e-expects-decision-this... 6/13 5/28/24, 10:47 AM Southold Accepts Final Environmental Impact Statement on Strongs Yacht Center Boat Storage, Expects Decision This Summer... Email Website Please prove you're human: five + 6 = L'� Select Language Powered by Go gle Translate A https://www.eastend beacon.com/southold-accepts-fi naI-envi ron mental-impact-statement-on-strongs-yacht-center-boat-sto rag e-expects-decision-this... 7/13 5/28/24, 10:47 AM Southold Accepts Final Environmental Impact Statement on Strongs Yacht Center Boat Storage, Expects Decision This Summer... - North Fork Real Estate SpcCialist Call me today for your FREE Comparable Market Analysis Suzette Reiss Lia. R. E. Salesperson 631 . 298.6147 FM 516.815. 5657 ODouglasLffiman I LATEST STORIES TH0.EE MILE RARSOR.ATrORDABLE RENTALAPARTMI Applications are Being Accepted for Three Mile Harbor Apartments 290 THREE MILE HARBOR R EAST HAMPTONNY I May 28,2024 Beth Young THE GREEN AT GARDINER'nP011 ,e n f I Ali nn � �° 'r. This Morning's Bulletin — 5.28.24 L May 28,2024 Beth Young https://www.eastend beacon.com/southold-accepts-fi naI-envi ron mental-impact-statement-on-strongs-yacht-center-boat-sto rag e-expects-decision-this... 8/13 5/28/24, 10:47 AM Southold Accepts Final Environmental Impact Statement on Strongs Yacht Center Boat Storage, Expects Decision This Summer... iaJAiY1dNL f i t Letter: Sharing Concerns About Battery Energy Storage In May 24,2024 East End Beacon 0 BRUCE E . SAUL , LCSW- R COUNSELING & PSYCHOTHERAPY INDIVIDUALS, COUPLES FAMILIES 631 -871 -9933 SHELTER ISLAND OFFICE VIDEO SESSIONS INSTAGRAM A https://www.eastend beacon.com/southold-accepts-fi naI-envi ron mental-impact-statement-on-strongs-yacht-center-boat-sto rag e-expects-decision-this... 9/13 5/28/24, 10:47 AM Southold Accepts Final Environmental Impact Statement on Strongs Yacht Center Boat Storage, Expects Decision This Summer... Upcoming Events May May16@8:OOpm - June 2@2:30pm 16 "Follies" at North Fork Community Theatre May May23@7:OOpm - June 9@2:30pm 23 "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum" opens at Hampton Theatre Company May May 28 @ 7:00 pm - June 16 @ 2:00 pm 28 "The Subject Was Roses" Opens at Bay Street Theater May 11:00 am 29 Ribbon-Cutting for Riverside Maritime Trail Park May 3:00 pm - 6:30 pm o 31 Greenport Farmers Market in Mitchell Park View Calendar https://www.eastend beacon.com/southold-accepts-final-environmental-impact-statement-on-strongs-yacht-center-boat-storage-expects-decision-thi... 11/13 5/28/24, 10:47 AM Southold Accepts Final Environmental Impact Statement on Strongs Yacht Center Boat Storage, Expects Decision This Summer... Stories that M. sue�cuiet rataw A50 h i MORNING BULLETINS MORNING BULLETIN This Morning's Bulletin — 5.24.24 M May 24,2024 a Beth Young Good Morning! ■ We're expecting patchy fog before 9 a.m. today, with otherwise mostly sunny skies and a high temperature near 82 degrees, with a calm wind becoming southwest 5 to 7 miles per hour in the afternoon. It will be mostly clear overnight, with a low around 51. We're expecting This Morning's Bulletin — 5.23.24 ■`'� ,�.�� , -- May 23,2024 Beth Young Ti •J y¢ https://www.eastend beacon.com/southold-accepts-fi naI-envi ron mental-impact-statement-on-strongs-yacht-center-boat-sto rag e-expects-decision-thi... 12/13 5/28/24, 10:47 AM Southold Accepts Final Environmental Impact Statement on Strongs Yacht Center Boat Storage, Expects Decision This Summer... `wwi This Morning's Bulletin — 5.21.24 In May 21,2024 Beth Young 2024 East End Beacon About the Beacon Contact Us Our Staff A https://www.eastend beacon.com/southold-accepts-fi naI-envi ron mental-impact-statement-on-strongs-yacht-center-boat-sto rag e-expects-decision-thi... 13/13 EXHIBIT 7 OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS May 29, 2024 James H. Rich III, Chairman and Members of the Planning Board,Town of Southold Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 Southold,New York 11971 Re: Final Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS) Application of Strong's Yacht Center- Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck,Town of Southold,Suffolk County,NY Dear Chairman Rich and Board Members: As the environmental consultants to Strong's Yacht Center, LLC., the Project Sponsor, and lead preparers of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), we have reviewed the Final Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS)prepared by Hardesty&Hanover(H&H)and accepted by the Town of Southold Planning Board on May 6, 2024. Based on our review of the FEIS, the responses contain factually inaccurate, patently false and/or misleading claims. In many responses,there appears to be a lack of the understanding of the project application and history of the review process. The FEIS responses, in their entirety, consist of conclusory statements without any corresponding data or substantive analysis or documentation to demonstrate the baseless claims. Section I. of this letter addresses these responses. Additionally, as detailed in Section II. of this letter, the FEIS and its acceptance fails to comply with the implementing regulations of State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) as well as The SEQR Handbook, Fourth Edition, 2020, published by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation'. 'As excerpted from p. 3, Section A. The SEQR Handbook-What is it?"The SEQR Handbook is one of five key documents that every SEQR practitioner should be familiar with.The other four key documents are: 1.the statute,ECL Article 8; 2.the regulations,6 NYCRR 617; 3.the environmental assessment form workbooks;and 4.the SEQR Cookbook." � � � � � � � IST' 631.589.6353�w. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS I. RESPONSES THAT ARE FACTUALLY INACCURATE.PATENTLY FALSE,MISLEADING ANDIOR WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE ANALYSIS Page 3 -Purpose of the FEIS The FEIS states, "The purpose of this FEIS is for the Lead Agency to evaluate and respond to the substantive public comments (both written and verbal)made on the DEIS.SEQRA allows an applicant to modify a project in response to public comment on the DEIS as long as any potential environmental impacts of those modifications are described and analyzed in the FEIS. The Applicant has not modified any aspects of the Proposed Action. (emphasis added) Therefore, the Lead Agency' s evaluations and responses to comments provided within this FEIS are based on the information provided in the DEIS." This is patently false. Neither the Project Sponsor nor its consultants were afforded the opportunity to modify the project,to present any further mitigation to the proposed plan, or to participate in any of the responses to public and agency comments. Page 3 -Purpose of the FEIS The FEIS states, "The transcripts of the public hearings and the written comments received are all included in the Appendix A- Public Comments of this FEIS." This is incorrect. The public hearing transcripts are not included in Appendix A. It will be demonstrated later in this comment letter that it appears the preparer did not review the public hearing transcripts,which has led to inaccurate claims in the FEIS. Page 7-Comments on Lighting Impacts The FEIS states, "The DEIS states that the proposed lighting will comply with the Town lighting code requirements but does not include sufficient information to demonstrate that the Proposed Action would not have a significant impact as a result of lighting, particularly as it relates to impacts associated with community character, aesthetics, and ecology. The submitted plans do not include existing lighting levels to evaluate the cumulative impacts of the Proposed Action or information on how the proposed lights would operate." The DEIS included a photometric analysis of the potential lighting impacts on the sheet entitled "Details"in Appendix B. That photometric analysis illustrates the footcandles (i.e.,lighting intensity) from the proposed lighting fixtures. Additionally, the potential impacts of the proposed lighting on community character, aesthetics and ecology were included in the DEIS in the various impacts sections (2.4.2 [ecology], 3.1.2 [land use],and 3.4.2 [aesthetics]). Furthermore, pursuant to the guidance set forth in NYSDEC's SEQR Handbook (p. 128, Item 2.What is the basis for determining the adequacy of a draft EIS?), "The draft EIS should identify and discuss all significant environmental issues related to the action; however, the draft EIS will not necessarily provide a final resolution of any issues. Since one of the major purposes of a draft EIS is to give the public an opportunity to comment on the environmental issues raised, as well as the possible � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAGC CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS alternatives and mitigation offered to address those issues, settling on a resolution of one or more issues prior to public review would be counter to the intent of SEOR. (emphasis added)" Page 9 -Comments on the Propane Tanks The FEIS states, "The Application proposes to heat the two storage buildings using radiant floor heating fueled by liquid propane gas supplied by four 2,000-gallon tanks stored on Site. The heating system proposed would constitute a stationary emissions source. The DEIS does not discuss how often these tanks must be refilled." First,the frequency of filling the tanks was not requested in the Amended Final Scope dated April 5, 2021. Second,the frequency of filling the tanks for heating in the winter would be entirely dependent upon the winter season temperature and climate and, therefore, cannot be determined without a purely speculative response. Page 10 -Comments on the Boat Schedule The FEIS states. "The DEIS does not present a detailed plan or schedule for the removal of the boats from the water. The DEIS states that the arrival and departure of the boats from the facility will be controlled by facility staff and that they expect approximately one or two boats per day but do not discuss how many days a week this is expected, over what timeline, how this will affect existing operations,what would occur in the event of a rush at the end of a given season,or the potential bottle neck of having only two haul out slips." This response completely ignores the Boat (Vessel) Study included in Appendix M, Section 1.4.2 of the DEIS entitled "Operations," Section 3.3.2 entitled "Transportation." Excerpts from these respective documents are included below: • As stated in Section 1.4.2 of the DEIS: "Once the yachts arrive, they would be lifted from Mattituck Creek at the existing lift station and moved to the boat storage buildings. In the spring,the yachts would be launched back into Mattituck Creek.The hours of operation would be the same as existing conditions, i.e., 8:00 am to 4:30 pm Monday through Friday and by appointment only on Saturday during the same hours." • As stated in the Boat Vessel Study (Section 2.2.1), "The boats will arrive to the facility at the close of boating season (i.e., October-November) via Mattituck Inlet,be lifted from Mattituck Creek using the 85-ton travelift, be prepped for storage, and moved to the boat storage buildings. This operation would remain the same as those under existing conditions and no new equipment would be required. At the beginning of the next boating season (i.e., April- May), the boats will be removed from storage, returned to Mattituck Creek via the 85-ton travelift,and exit through Mattituck Inlet at the beginning of the boating season." • Further stated in the Boat Vessel Study (Section 2.2.1), "...It is estimated that approximately 88 boats per off-season would be stored in the new buildings. Accordingly, given a 12-week timeframe for entry to storage in the Fall and the same timeframe to remove boats from storage in the Spring, this equates to an average of approximately 7 boats per week or � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAGC CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS between one and two boats per day. It must be noted that SYC will maintain a schedule for all boats entering or leaving the storage facility. As such, this schedule of one-to-two boats per day can and would be controlled by SYC. With one-to-two boats per day, there would be no queuing in the Creek." • Section 3.3.2 of the DEIS also states, "Regarding traffic for boats stored on-site, SYC will maintain a schedule for vessels coming in and out of storage, thus, the arrival of a crew in delivering a vessel to SYC or removing a vessel is controlled by SYC. As indicated in the Boat (Vessel) Study,approximately one-to-two boats per day are anticipated for the fall and spring season, with approximately 90 percent of the yachts being handled by SYC staff or for-hire captains and the remaining 10 percent being owner-operated(i.e.,the yacht owner drives the vessel). As such,the trips associated with such would not be noticeable." Overall,this response demonstrates the complete disregard for all information provided in the DEIS and suggests a focus on only a select number of impact issues. Page 14,Comment regarding OPRHP and Construction Protection Plan The HIS states that "There is no indication that the Construction Protection Plan, included in the vibration report(DEIS Appendix R),was reviewed or approved by OPRHP." This response clearly demonstrates that H&H did not review the public hearing transcript from June 5, 2023 or the correspondence sent directly to the Town after acceptance of the DEIS. As presented by this firm at the public hearing on June 5, 2023 (see pages 73-74 of the transcript), this firm provided the Construction Protection Plan to OPRHP on May 8, 2023 (after acceptance of the DEIS). In correspondence dated May 26, 2023, OPRHP indicated: "We have reviewed the...Vibration Report - which includes the Construction Protection Plan - dated November 3, 2022. Based on that review, it is the OPRHP's opinion that the project, as described, will have No Adverse Impact on historic or archaeological resources provided the following condition is met: The Construction Protection Plan will be implemented as described in the Vibration Report." Mark Terry, Town of Southold Planning Department was copied on this correspondence. A copy is attached and below. � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS New York State Parks,Recreation and Historic Preservation KATHY HOCHUL ERIK KULLESEID Governor Commissioner May 26,2023 Charles Vandrei Agency Historic Preservation Officer NYS Environmental Conservation Division of Lands and Forests 625 Broadway Albany,NY 12233-4255 Re: DEC Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildirgs 5780 W Mill Rd,Mattituck,Suffolk County 21PR04396 Dear Charles Vandrei: Thank you for your continued consultation with the Division for Historic Preservation of the Office of Parks,Recreation and Historic Preservation(OPRHP). We have reviewed the submitted materials in accordance with the New York State Histonc Preservation Act of 1980 (Section 14.09 of the New York State Parks,Recreation and Historic Preservation Law). These comments are those of the Division for Historic Preservation and relate only to Historic/Cultural resources. We have reviewed the submission received on May 8,2023,including the Vibration Report— which includes the Construction Protection Plan—dated November 3,2022.Based on that review,it is the OPRHP's opinion that the project,as described,will have No Adverse Impact on historic or archaeological resources provided the following condition is met: • The Construction Protection Plan will be implemented as described in the Vibration Report. Should you be unable to meet this condition,consultation with our office will resume,If you have any questions,you can call or e-mail me at the contact information below. Sincerely, f-S-06� Robyn Sedgwick Historic Site Restoration Coordinator e-mail: robvn.sedowick5parks.nv.coy. cc:M.Terry—Town of Southold CRIS List New York State ice of Parks,Recreation and Historic Preservation DNI&on for Historic Preservation,Peebles Island,PO Box 189,Waterforo,New York 1218M189 (518)237-8643•httpsl/parks.ny.gavlahpo Overall, this response demonstrates the complete disregard for all information in the public record and suggests a focus on only a select number of impact issues. Page 15,Comment regarding Petroleum Storage The HIS includes a comment indicating that the site contains more than 20,000 gallons of petroleum and is,therefore,prohibited under the Town of Southold Town Code. Rather than correct the inaccurate claim,the FEIS response states: "The intent of the zoning district is for the Southold Town Board or Southold Zoning Board of Appeals to answer. The question of whether or not this violates Town Code § 280- 111(H) because it would store more than 20,000 gallons of petroleum would need further evaluation. Due to there being other large adverse impacts � � � � � � � �RN 1.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS that are neither avoided nor minimized nor mitigated to the maximum extent practicable, the lead agency does not need definitive answers on this topic. See Sections 3.3, 3.7, and 3.10 of the FEIS for detailed discussions of the construction related unmitigated impacts of the Proposed Action." This response demonstrates that the preparer of the DEIS focused on a select number of issues and did not fully review the DEIS. The DEIS clearly states in Section 2.2.1 that there is one 2,000-gallon tank for gasoline and one 6,000-gallon tank for diesel fuel. This totals 8,000 gallons. Additionally,the Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS)Article 12 Permit is included in Appendix J of the DEIS. Page 22,Comment related to Suffolk County Water Authority(SCWA) and SCDHS In response to comments related to SCWA and SCDHS,the FEIS states,"The DEIS does not accurately represent the status of correspondence with the Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS) or the Suffolk County Water Authority (SCWA). The most recent correspondence with the SCDHS (Appendix J of the DEIS),dated January 26,2022,includes a`Notice of Non-Conformance'and a request for additional information. The DEIS states that consultations with the SCDHS are ongoing and that the Application has requested a variance from design flow standards." At the time of preparation of the DEIS,consultations were ongoing as stated and thus,were accurately described. It is unclear why the FEIS would include such a response. The FEIS response also indicates "The only correspondence with the SCWA included in the DEIS (Appendix K) is a response letter from the SCWA (it does not include the Applicant's request letter), dated October 20, 2017, and only confirms that a water main extension of approximately 76S feet would be required in order to serve the property. It does not,as the DEIS states, discuss the viability of adjacent landowners to connect to the water main extension. It does list surrounding tax parcels and identify if water service is available, if more information would be needed to determine if water service is available, and if those parcels are connected. Neither the SCWA correspondence letter nor the DEIS analyzes the viability of connecting those parcels as a result of the Proposed Action. This response demonstrates the preparer's lack of understanding of SCWA consultation requests and reply correspondence. The list of properties included in Appendix K, following the SCWA letter,was provided by SCWA to identify those properties that could be connected via application to the SCWA. The analysis of connecting those parcels was not required in the Final Scope,nor is it relevant to the project application. The SCWA maintains jurisdiction over the public water supply and would determine the viability of connection at the time of the application. Page 28,Comments related to Boat Activities The FEIS summarizes the comment as follows: Boating maintenance activities are tightly associated with a strong recreation community on Long Island Sound. They are necessary for safe and functioning vessels for people to respectfully enjoy the waterbody. These activities, however, can introduce pollutants to surface and groundwater,leading to serious environmental degradation.The FEIS should describe hazardous material disposal and pollution response reporting to necessary � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS authorities, such as the local fire department and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Region 1 spill response team. In response, the FEIS states: "The DEIS states that no changes are proposed to chemical storage volumes are anticipated as part of the Proposed Action despite the addition of 88 yachts,all of which would be larger than the boats currently stored on the Site. The DEIS also states that repair, maintenance, fueling, washing, and detailing of boats would occur in the same manner as they currently do on Site. It is not clear if these activities will occur in the same locations on the Site as they do currently or if these activities are currently conducted on the Site and that they will occur in the same ways but inside the proposed buildings, as other elements of the DEIS would suggest" First, the commentator asked for a description on how hazardous material disposal and pollution response is reported. This response does not, in any way, address the comment. Second, the Boat (Vessel) Study addressed this comment in Section 5.5 -New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Spills Hotline. This response is another indication of the failure to review the DEIS in its entirety. Page 28,Comment related to No Discharge Zone and Pump Out The FEIS includes a comment indicating that the"significant jump in numbers could create a scenario where there is no longer compliance with NDZ [No Discharge Zone] sewage management standards. The FEIS responds to comment as follows: "The DEIS states that as the Site currently operates a pump-out vessel and that all customers will be obligated to comply with the State and Federal discharge and exhaust standards and No Discharge Zones.The DEIS goes on to note that there would be no associated impacts to the waters of Mattituck Harbor and Mattituck Inlet. This is insufficient information to demonstrate that there will be no significant impacts to Mattituck Harbor and Mattituck Inlet. There is no information provided in the DEIS on existing pump out capabilities or capacity and how that would be impacted by the Proposed Action.There is no information provided in the DEIS on contingencies for accidental or unauthorized dumping of sewage. Without the noted information, it cannot be determined that the Proposed Action will not exceed current capacities, therefore resulting in impacts the surrounding waters." The response to the comment demonstrates a lack of understanding of maritime practices and regulations. The response also demonstrates selective review of the DEIS. The Boat (Vessel) Study included in Appendix M of the DEIS discusses No Discharge Zones in Section 3.2.5.As excerpted from this section, "All boaters utilizing Mattituck Harbor and the Long Island Sound are responsible for understanding that these areas are No Discharge Zones for sewage (i.e.,no discharge of sewage from boats may take place).All sewage must be held in on-board holding tanks and are to be emptied either at a pump station or by a pump-out boat. For vessels arriving to SYC for storage, all holding tanks would be emptied by SYC's pump-out boat." Further, the monitoring and enforcement of Mattituck Creek and Inlet are clearly described in Section 5.0 of the Boat (Vessel) Study. Review of this section would have made it clear that the US Coast Guard and Southold Bay Constable have the jurisdiction of monitoring and enforcement within Mattituck Creek,not the Project Sponsor. � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAGC CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTION- Page 29,Comments related to Ecology- Flora and Fauna In response to the comments,the FEIS indicates: "Fauna with protected status documented to be on or adjacent to the Project Site that were not accurately described in protected status or not sufficiently included in the analysis,or both; specifically,the Piping Plover,the Eastern Box Turtle,the Northern Long Eared Bat, and the Bald Eagle." The Ecological Impacts and Impact Analysis prepared by William P. Bowman, Ph.D. included in Appendix N of the DEIS addressed the Piping Plover,Eastern Box Turtle,and the Northern Long Eared Bat. It is understood that during preparation of the FEIS over a period of 10 months, the protected status for the Northern Long Eared Bat changed from threatened to endangered; however, the measures to protect these species (i.e., clearing of trees only to occur between December 1 and February 28) remains the same. The FEIS states "No bat surveys were performed to determine if NLEBs are present on the Project Site or within the immediate area. The removal of 634 trees from the Site may result in the destruction of habitat and the degradation of adjacent habitat from edge effects is of a heightened concern considering the change in status. Table 4 in Appendix N of the DEIS indicates that Northern Long-Eared Bats are expected to occur on the subject property due to the presence of suitable habitat. Section 2c of Appendix N of the DEIS discusses potential impacts to Northern Long-Eared Bats and indicates that the project will comply with all NYSDEC measures to protect this species (i.e.clearing of trees between December 1 and February 1). As stated in the DEIS, the availability of summer habitat is not limiting for northern long-eared bat. Accordingly, loss of summer habitat is not recognized as a threat to the conservation of this species (USFWS, 2016); rather, white-nose syndrome is the primary threat to northern long-eared bat within its summer habitats. Regarding the Bald Eagle,the bald eagle was not and is not identified by the NYNHP as having known habitat on or in the vicinity of the project. No bald eagles were observed using the trees on the site as habitat during extensive field investigations. While fly overs of the site or transient use of the forest trees for perching by bald eagles are feasible, no significant impacts to this large-ranged species and its population on eastern Long Island are expected to result from the proposed action. In response to the comments, the FEIS indicates: `Additionally, the DEIS does not address the Peregrine Falcon,the Nighthawk,the Common Loon,the Horned Lark,or the Osprey,all species listed under the New York State status of Special Concern." Similar to the bald eagle, no peregrine falcons were observed using the forests and upland habitats on the site during extensive field investigations. While fly overs to the site and foraging over the waters, shoreline, and wetlands of Mattituck Creek are feasible, no significant impacts to this highly motile species that does not inhabit forest habitats are expected. Common nighthawks do not nest in the mature forest habitats and successional forest and shrubland that comprise most of the site. This species nests on bare ground in open areas including gravel bars,forest clearings and open pine woodlands,coastal sand dunes and beaches,and sparsely vegetated grasslands, and on gravel roofs in urban areas (NYNHP, 2024). This species forages in open areas near water, wetlands, and forest. Common nighthawks may be expected to forage over the waters, wetlands, and shorelines of Mattituck Creek; however, such foraging would not be impacted by the proposed action and no impacts to this species are expected to result from the 631.589.6353 WWW.PWGROSSER.COM PWGC.INFO@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS proposed action. Horned larks inhabit habitats with short, sparse grassed and barren ground including agricultural fields and hayfields. Suitable habitat for this species is not present at the site and therefore no impacts to this species are expected to result from the proposed action. Common loons utilize the waters of Mattituck Creek, Mattituck Inlet, and Long Island Sound as overwintering habitat. Ospreys forage for fish in the waters of Mattituck Creek and may perch in large trees on the site proximal to the shoreline,but no osprey nests are present on the property. No significant impacts to these species that utilize only the adjacent waters of Mattituck Creek and not the site's upland forest habitats are expected to result from the proposed action. The FEIS states that"the analysis underrepresents the diversity of birds, bats, and insects living on or adjacent to the Project Site and the impacts that the Proposed Action would have on those populations" but does not provide specific comments regarding potential species that are not represented. The DEIS provides a comprehensive inventory of the plant and wildlife species observed or expected to occur on the site including 120 plant species, 91 birds, 20 mammals (including four bat species),and three herpetiles. Inventory of insect species present on the site was not required in the Final Scope, nor are insect inventories and impact assessment typically included in DEIS completed under SEQRA. The FEIS states that"the analysis does not discuss the impact that the forest edge effect would have on the habitat of documented species with protected status living in the adjacent Mill Road Preserve". Sections 2a and 2b of Appendix N of the DEIS discuss potential impacts of the action to forests, wildlife,and Mill Road Preserve including edge effects. Page 31, Comment related to Preferred Alternative being inconsistent with Comprehensive Plan The FEIS responds to the comment that "The preferred alternative is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan" with excerpted sections of the Comprehensive Plan and how the proposed action does not comply. The individual sections are addressed below: Land Use and Zoning Goal 5: Protect Town Character In the discussion of"Land Use and Zoning Goal 5: Protect Town Character," the preparer of the FEIS seems to ignore the fact that the proposed action is to be undertaken on property zoned for the proposed use. As excerpted from Section 280-54 of the Zoning Code, the intent of the M-1I zoning district is "...to provide a waterfront location for a wide range of water-dependent and water-related uses,which are those uses which require or benefit from direct access to or location in marine or tidal waters and which, in general, are located on major waterways, open bayfronts or the Long Island Sound." The preparer also ignores the goals and objectives of the Town's Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP), specifically Working Coast Policy 10 (Protect Southold's water-dependent uses and promote siting of new water dependent uses in suitable locations) which specifically recognizes "that Mattituck Inlet and Creek, identified by the state as a regional Maritime Center, Mill Creek and the Village of Greenport are the primary focus of maritime activity within the Town of Southold. The intent of this policy is to protect existing water-dependent commercial, industrial, and recreational 631.589.6353 WWW.PWGROSSER.COM PWGC.INFO@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS uses and to enhance the economic viability of water-dependent uses by ensuring adequate provision of infrastructure for water-dependent uses and their efficient operation:' As guided by the NYSDEC in the SEQR Handbook (p. 84, Item 29. How can a lead agency determine whether an impact upon community character may be significant?), "Community character relates not only to the built and natural environments of a community,but also to how people function within and perceive that community. Evaluation of potential impacts upon community or neighborhood character is often difficult to define by quantitative measures.Courts have supported reliance upon a municipality's comprehensive plan and zoning as expressions of the community's desired future state or character....In addition, if other resource-focused plans such as Local Waterfront Revitalization Plans (LWRP), Greenway plans, or Heritage Area plans have been adopted, those plans may further articulate desired future uses within the planning area." (emphasis added) Land Use and Zoning Goal 6: Protect Natural Resources and Environment In the discussion of"Land Use and Zoning Goal 6: Protect Natural Resources and Environment," the FEIS indicates that the proposed "mitigation measures are not sufficient and do not protect the natural resources and environment of the Town,and instead attempt to mitigate the damages caused by the Proposed Action:' First,by its very definition in 6 NYCRR§617.2, mitigation means a way to avoid or minimize adverse environmental impacts. This statement in the FEIS suggests that a proposed action can have no impacts when, in fact, the SEQR Handbook recognizes that "certain adverse environmental impacts can be expected to occur regardless of the mitigation measures employed; for example, there is typically permanent loss of vegetation when building a new facility and any related parking." (p. 120, Item 35. If an adverse environmental impact cannot be avoided or fully mitigated,how must the EIS discuss that impact?) Second,the FEIS fails to recognize that the proposed development complies with all of the bulk and dimensional requirements for the M-II zoning district. Finally, Sections 4.2 and 4.3 of the DEIS identifies the unavoidable impacts and the irretrievable and irreversible commitment of resources and presents mitigation measures to lessen and minimize the adverse impacts, not completely avoid the impact. The FEIS response seems to imply that the DEIS attempted to mislead the impacts, and in doing so, the FEIS merely misleads the reader on the very purpose of a DEIS and the intent of SEQR. Land Use and Zoning Goal 7: Economic Prosperity In the discussion of"Land Use and Zoning Goal 7: Economic Prosperity;'the FEIS indicates that"There are flaws in the MEIC,which is the foundation of the job creation analysis in the DEIS, including the overestimation of existing jobs, the lack of clarity between full-time and part-time and all year or seasonal workers,and the inherent difference in business revenue between SYC and the marinas used to create the economic multipliers in the MEIC. These flaws undermine the assertions in the DEIS regarding the economic benefits of the Proposed Action." � � � � � � � IST' 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS This response provides no data, no explanation of the asserted overestimations, and the inherent differences that cause a finding that the DEIS analysis is incorrect. Community Character Goal 2: Protect Cultural Resources In the discussion of "Community Character Goal 2: Protect Cultural Resources," the FEIS fails to recognize the May 26, 2023 correspondence from OPRHP, which was provided to the Town of Southold Planning Department and presented to the Town of Southold Planning Board at the June 5, 2023 public hearing. The OPRHP correspondence dated May 26, 2023, which is included earlier in this letter and attached,indicated: "We have reviewed the...Vibration Report-which includes the Construction Protection Plan - dated November 3, 2022. Based on that review, it is the OPRHP's opinion that the project, as described, will have No Adverse Impact on historic or archaeological resources provided the following condition is met: The Construction Protection Plan will be implemented as described in the Vibration Report" Finally,the FEIS fails to consider the zoning of the site,i.e.,M-II,which has the stated intent for water- related and water-dependent uses. While it is recognized that the portion of the site to be developed is of a higher elevation and contains ecological communities that do not exist on the developed portion of the site, the fact here is that the entirety of the property is zoned for maritime use. The FEIS response improperly suggests that community character is defined solely by the natural environment, and completely ignores the other factors to be considered when evaluating the character of a community. Community Character Goal 4: Protect Natural Heritage In the discussion of"Community Character Goal 4: Protect Natural Heritage," the FEIS states: "The Proposed Project is designed to accommodate 88 large yachts which cannot be stored in the existing buildings on the Site. This is not an expansion in kind as presented in the DEIS but specifically designed to expand the kinds of maritime uses on the site.In this case,88 large boats which are larger than what would otherwise be in the Mattituck Creek." This response clearly disregards the narrative and photographs provided in the Boat (Vessel) Study (included in Appendix M of the DEIS). The existing marina accommodates boats and yachts 18-to- 133± feet in length with the majority between 40± feet to 60± feet(Section 2.1.2 of the Boat [Vessel] Study).The photographs that documented the larger boats (Figures 4a-4f in the Boat [Vessel] Study) are included below. � � � � � � � IST' 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS Al ' z9!'� x. Figure 4a: View of existing yachts measuring 105 feet(left)and 76 feet(right). z- L Wk- Figure 4b: View of existing yacht measuring 105 feet. � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS dd Figure 4c: View of existing yachts measuring 70 feet(left)and 65 feet(right). � Y _ 4 r� - _ r Figure 4d: View looking south -From south to north, theyachts on the outer docks measure 105 feet,110 feet,105 feet,and 116 feet. The yacht docked east-west measures 68 feet. The two yachts on land at the bottom of the photograph measure 46 feet and 54 feet. � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS i d Figure 4e: View looking north-Photograph is the same as above but looking north. Photograph illustratesyachts,from north to south,measuring 116 feet, 105 feet, 110 feet and 105 feet. Figure 4f 84 foot commercial vessel hauled via Travelift. � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS The FEIS response also dismisses the visual impact analysis in the DEIS with supporting photographs in Appendix Q of the DEIS, which illustrated yachts within the Creek and at the SYC dock. The view from a kayak of a 95-foot yacht in front of SYC dockage and buildings is included below. Viewpoint from kayak of 95 footyacht in front of SYC dockage and buildings,facing west(Photograph taken July 20,2021). Community Character Goal 5: Protect Unique Character of Individual Hamlets In the discussion of"Community Character Goal 5: Protect Unique Character of Individual Hamlets," the FEIS states: "The community character impact of the Proposed Action is the expansion of the existing maritime use and the potential impacts that would have on adjacent uses, namely,the open space and outdoor recreational uses of the Mill Road Preserve and the Mattituck Creek and the low- density residential uses in the surrounding area."The DEIS presents analyses of the potential impacts on open space,outdoor recreational uses,and the surrounding residential uses,and the FEIS presents no supporting documentation,data or analysis to support the aforementioned conclusive statements. Natural Resources and the Environment - Water Resources Goal 1: Conserve Water Quality and Natural Resources and the Environment-Water Resources Goal 3: Protect Water Quality In the discussion of"Natural Resources and the Environment - Water Resources Goal 1: Conserve Water Quality"and"Natural Resources and the Environment-Water Resources Goal 3: Protect Water Quality," the FEIS states: "The proposed action has the potential to impact ground water quality through excavation and introduction of new contaminants and the increase in use intensity would increase the water use on Site." The FEIS presents no supporting documentation, data or analysis to support the aforementioned conclusory statements. Furthermore, the FEIS response fails to � � � � � � � IST' 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAGC CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS recognize that the Suffolk County Water Authority is the water supplier,which has determined there to be adequate supply for the proposed development application. Natural Resources and the Environment- Land Resources Goal 1: Protect Soils and Geologic Features In the discussion of"Natural Resources and the Environment- Land Resources Goal 1: Protect Soils and Geologic Features;' the FEIS provides: "The DEIS states that the Proposed Action would correct existing slope failures that are the result of previous dredged spoil placements. The DEIS has not presented compelling evidence that the Site has hosted the placement of dredge spoil deposits. Additionally,the Proposed Action includes the excavation and removal of 135,000 cubic yards of cut material. There are concerns regarding the slope stability during the excavation because of the ambiguity of the proposed slope angle during excavation and the structure of the soils to be removed. This does not constitute the protection of soils and geologic features.' First, this response fails to recognize the Phase 113 Archaeological Assessment (October 2021), the Supplemental Phase 113 Archaeological Assessment(January 2022),as well as the review by OPRHP. In OPRHP's review,there was an initial question on the Phase 113 Archaeological Assessment(October 2021)raised in correspondence dated December 3,2021 indicating: "OPRHP has reviewed the report of the geotechnical investigation and does not agree that there is definitive evidence of fill in the southern portion of the APE. OPRHP recommends the excavation of 7.5-meter-interval Phase 113 shovel tests in the southern portion of the APE." A Supplemental Phase 113 was then prepared (January 2022) and submitted to OPRHP. In correspondence dated January 24, 2022, OPRHP indicating the following: "We have reviewed the report of the supplemental Phase IB archaeological investigation (No. 22SR00015) and no archaeological sites were identified. It is OPRHP's opinion that no additional archaeological investigation is needed." All of the OPRHP correspondence was included in Appendix T of the DEIS. Second,it was incumbent upon the lead agency to identify any major substantive deficiencies during review of the DEIS in order for the Project Sponsor to address.Instead,the FEIS response merely sets forth a conclusory statement with no documentation,data, or borings or engineering analysis. Natural Resources and the Environment- Land Resources Goal 10: Reduce Light Pollution In the discussion of"Natural Resources and the Environment- Land Resources Goal 10: Reduce Light Pollution,"the FEIS states: "The DEIS states that as the Proposed Action will conform with the Town Lighting Code it will reduce light pollution. The introduction of new buildings with outdoor lighting will not reduce light pollution." This is patently false. The DEIS does not state this. As excerpted from the section of the DEIS that specifically addresses this policy(see Table 30 of the DEIS),it states: "As indicated earlier in this section of the DEIS, the proposed site lighting plan has been designed in accordance with Chapter 172 of the Town Code (Outdoor Lighting). As such,the proposed action would be consistent with this goal from the 2020 Comprehensive Plan:" � � � � � � � 631.589.6353 • WWW.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS The narrative earlier in the section of the DEIS indicates: "As described in Section 3.4.2 of this DEIS, the proposed site lighting would consist of light poles and building fixtures as shown on the Details sheet(see Appendix C). To mitigate light trespass and glare, all lighting would be shielded and directed downwards at an intensity compliant with Chapter 172 of the Town Code (Outdoor Lighting). The photometric analysis illustrated on the Details sheet (see Appendix C) demonstrates that the proposed design would not result in any off-site or trespass lighting." Page 35,Comment related to Project's Inconsistency with LWRP The FEIS response states: "The analysis of the Proposed Action's compliance with the LWRP in the DEIS has ignored or misinterpreted core tenants of the LWRP.The Preferred Alternative presented in the DEIS is largely inconsistent with the recommendations of the LWRP because,due to topographical issues,the area of the Site proposed for development should not be considered 'water adjacent' as it does not provide direct access to the water without significant alteration and disturbance.The LWRP does support continued maritime use of coastal areas but not at the expense of natural resources, coastal resiliency, and public enjoyment of coastal areas, all of which may be threatened or compromised by the Proposed Action." Table 31 of the DEIS included a consistency analysis with all of the LWRP policies. Nothing was ignored or misinterpreted. Page 36,Comments related to Human Health The FEIS response states: "The DEIS states that the Proposed Action would not require the modification of current quantities of antifouling paint stored on-site as painting would not be offered to customers storing yachts in the proposed buildings, but the DEIS does not make this statement regarding Gelcoat refinishing services or other maintenance activities. The DEIS does not provide sufficient information on the existing operations regarding the storage and use of chemicals on Site and how the Proposed 88 yachts would be integrated into these operations." It is unclear why gelcoat refinishing services was pointed out here, but the DEIS makes it explicitly clear that the proposed action would not require SYC to modify its current quantities of chemicals stored on-site nor require additional chemicals be stored on-site. Additionally, Section 3.2.1 of the DEIS details the existing storage and use of chemicals. It is also unclear why there have been no requests for information from the Project Sponsor in order to address the comment. Pages 37 and 38,Comments related to Errors in Methodology for the Traffic Impact Study First, it was incumbent upon the lead agency to identify any major substantive deficiencies during review of the DEIS in order for the Project Sponsor to address.It must be stated that the Traffic Impact Study was prepared in accordance with the Amended Final Scope adopted on April 5, 2021, was revised pursuant to the Lead's review of the DEIS December 2021, and accepted as adequate and complete with the DEIS Revised November 2022. � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAGC CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS Second, the FEIS explicitly states 41 times that traffic is one of three impact issues that have "construction related unmitigated impacts" and, therefore, it is unclear why there is no substantive analysis. Finally,it is questionable why the preparer of the FEIS did not request any information from the Project Sponsor or its consultants related to the traffic impact study. Page 39,Comments related to Flaws in Marine Traffic Analysis The FEIS states: "The DEIS contains deficient, vague or missing analysis with respect to impacts to the marine traffic including motorized and unmotorized vessels, kayakers, paddleboarders, and impact to marshes from boat wakes make a determination of no significant impacts with respect to them impossible. The DEIS acknowledges that the increase in boat traffic and the increase in boat sizes on the Mattituck Creek will have adverse impacts as a result of vessel wakes but does not categorize or analyze these impacts. These vessel wakes would impact the erosion of the shores,the wetlands, and be felt by recreational members of the public on kayaks, paddle boards, or other smaller craft. The DEIS addresses these impacts by describing the area as a "no wake zone' and describing the authorities responsible for enforcing no wake zones. The DEIS does not describe the difference in wake sizes from existing marine traffic to the sizes of the 88 yachts proposed to utilize the Proposed Action, or the difference in wake regularity on erosion and wetlands as a result of increased traffic. The DEIS proposes no mitigation measures for the impacts that are alluded to but not described in detail as a result of vessel wake. The DEIS is deficient in several ways regarding marine traffic impacts:' This response fails to identify the"deficient,vague or missing analyses." Also, the DEIS acknowledged the increase in boat traffic as nominal, so the statement in the FEIS response is completely misleading.As stated throughout the DEIS and in the Boat(Vessel) Study,the projected 88 vessels would arrive and leave the site via Mattituck Creek over a 12-week period in the spring and fall months. When averaged over the period of arrival or departure,the projected number of boats average seven (7) boats per week or one-to-two boats per day. With approximately 547 boats active in Mattituck Creek on a peak season day,even if the increase of one-to-two boats per day were to occur on a peak season day,this would equate to 0.18-to-0.36 percent increase in boat traffic, which is nominal and would not impact tidal marshes due to vessel traffic. Regarding the increase in boat size, the DEIS did not indicate an increase in boat sizes on the Mattituck Creek. This is patently false. The DEIS identified that yachts upwards of 133± feet already utilize the Creek because they dock at the SYC marina. Photographs were also presented in the DEIS and, again,herein. Finally, it was incumbent upon the lead agency to identify any major substantive deficiencies during review of the DEIS in order for the Project Sponsor to address. It is also unclear why the preparer of the FEIS did not request any information from the Project Sponsor or its consultants related to such impact issue. � � � � � � � IST' 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS Page 35.Comments related to Community Character The FEIS summarizes the comments as follows: "The methodology and analysis are flawed, vague, and underestimates the impacts of the Proposed Action,particularly the construction of the Proposed Action,to community character." In response, the FEIS states: "The community character impact of the Proposed Action is the expansion of the existing maritime use and the potential impacts that would have on adjacent uses, namely, the open space and outdoor recreational uses of the Mill Road Preserve and the Mattituck Creek and the low-density residential uses in the surrounding area. The DEIS analysis does not meaningfully address the potential impacts to community character that could be associated with the construction of the Proposed Action,the increase in boats using the Mattituck Creek,the increase in the size of boats using the Mattituck Creek,or the expansion of the maritime use of the Site." This response misrepresents the contents of the DEIS and the project scope as there would be no increase in the size of the boats in Mattituck Creek and the increase of one-to-two boats per day on a peak season day would equate to 0.18-to-0.36 percent increase in boat traffic,which is nominal.The DEIS evaluated the temporary construction-related impacts as well as the post-development impacts on surrounding residential uses,the Mill Road Preserve,users of Mattituck Creek,and the viewshed. This response, again, highlights the FEIS preparer's resort and reliance on unfounded and unsupported conclusory statements,without any substantive analysis. Page 43,Comments related to Open Space The FEIS summarizes the comments as follows: "the analysis of impacts to open spaces is flawed, vague,and underestimates the impacts." In response, the FEIS states: "The DEIS states that the open spaces surrounding the Site will have higher usage in the warmer months of the year but does not present any information to support the claim,does not give any information or consideration to what degree the usage would diminish in the colder months, and uses this assumption as the basis to disregard six months of potential use of surrounding open space in the DEIS analysis." This response demonstrates a lack of understanding of the project. The assumption that usage is highest between April and September coincides with the peak activity months at the site; thus, this assumption evaluates the maximum potential impact to users of the Mill Road Preserve. During the winter months, the vessels would be stored indoors in a climate-controlled building. Any activities related to those vessels would occur indoors; thus, having no impact to users at the Mill Road Preserve. The FEIS further states in response to the comments: `Additionally, errors and inconsistencies in the proposed construction schedule contradicts the statements made in the DEIS narrative regarding time of year for the proposed excavation.The DEIS also uses the temporary nature of the construction to excuse all impacts associated with construction on the surrounding open spaces without � � � � � � � IST' 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS referencing any information on the magnitude of the impacts that could be anticipated on the surrounding open spaces as a result of construction:' The FEIS makes this unsubstantiated claim of the errors in the construction schedule without any indication of the actual error or inconsistencies. In fact,this same sentence is repeated in six different responses. The DEIS evaluated the construction-related impacts of the proposed action and includes 29 mitigation measures to avoid or minimize the impacts on the surrounding land uses, the natural environment, and the built environment. The 29 mitigation measures address noise, traffic, roadways, pedestrian safety, air quality, fugitive dust, vibrations, historic resources, ecological resources, erosion, and stormwater runoff. The claim that the DEIS did not include any information on the magnitude of the impacts on the surrounding open spaces is patently false. Quantitative analyses of the projected noise levels, vibrations, traffic, and air emissions were summarized in the DEIS and all technical reports were included in the appendices. The FEIS further states: "The DEIS also dismisses the potential impacts of operations on the use of surrounding open spaces,providing no discussion on the potential impacts to open space that could be induced as a result of increasing the number and size of boats using the Mattituck Creek to access the Site.The analysis of the potential impacts to open spaces relies on the data and analysis provided in other sections of the DEIS (Noise,Visual Impacts,Ecology,Traffic), all of which have inherent flaws in their methodology and analysis and cannot be relied upon to determine the potential impacts to open spaces. The analysis of open spaces in the DEIS relies upon the analyses of the various impact issues, and to avoid repetition,the appropriate sections where details can be found are referenced. Page 43-44, Comment related to Noise data in DEIS The FEIS states: A revised Acoustic Report was included in Appendix R of the Revised DEIS.However, the narrative portion of the DEIS makes no mention of the revised report and was not updated or revised to reflect the changes in underlying data. In addition, the analysis in the DEIS presents outdated data, demonstrating that it has not been modified with the updated information. Out of the eighteen (18) tables in the Acoustic Report that show the data on sound levels, fifteen (15) of those tables contain changes that show increases in noise levels.These changes were not addressed in the DEIS and the analysis and conclusions regarding noise levels and impacts were not updated." It appears that this response claims that the revised DEIS should have discussed both Acoustic Reports (original and revised), and explain what was performed and findings in 2021, and in 2022, and showed the change. What the preparer of the FEIS fails to recognize is that the Acoustic Report and corresponding sections of the DEIS were revised pursuant to the Lead's review of the DEIS December 2021, and provided with red-lined versions of the Acoustic Report and DEIS (see December 1, 2022, transmittal letter to the Town of Southold Planning Board). The lead agency accepted the DEIS and Acoustic Report as adequate and complete. Therefore,this response is invalid. � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS Page 44,Comments related to Noise Methodology The FEIS summarizes the comments as follows: "Flawed methodology in the collection of ambient noise levels, the modeling of receptor locations and vibration impacts, the use of NYSDOT Noise Impact criteria,and the use of other standards, equations,multipliers, and estimates." In response,the FEIS states: "Of particular concern are the following: -The receptor locations chosen for analysis appear to be both insufficient in number and chosen in location making the baseline ambient noise data collected unsatisfactory for the purposes of analysis. -The failure to categorize the Mill Road Preserve as an Activity Category A Location as it is lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose. -The failure to adequately collect ambient noise data under existing conditions both at the Site and along the construction truck route makes it impossible to adequately analyze the potential noise impacts. -The construction timeframe and noise data collection timeframe do not match in terms of seasonality making the comparison of ambient noise collected and anticipated impacts inconsistent. - The acoustic report does not account for all construction equipment proposed to be used making the potential impacts identified appear less than what would likely occur. The numerous flaws in methodology put into doubt the adequacy and validity of any analysis on noise related impacts presented in the DEIS." First, the preparer of the FEIS fails to recognize that the Acoustic Report was prepared in accordance with the Amended Final Scope adopted on April 5, 2021,was revised pursuant to the Lead's review of the DEIS December 2021, and accepted as adequate and complete with the DEIS Revised November 2022. Second, the methodologies of data collection and noise modeling were described in detail. As excerpted from the DEIS: "The acoustic analysis included the collection of existing sound level readings at the subject property as well as readings along the planned truck route for the excavation and construction phases. These existing sound levels served as the background sound levels for the area that were incorporated into all noise predictions completed for the proposed project."Therefore,the statement that:"The failure to adequately collect ambient noise data under existing conditions both at the Site and along the construction truck route makes it impossible to adequately analyze the potential noise impacts" is patently false. Third,the statement that: "The construction timeframe and noise data collection timeframe do not match in terms of seasonality making the comparison of ambient noise collected and anticipated � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAGC CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS impacts inconsistent"is absurd. As excerpted from the DEIS: "The measured sound levels were used in conjunction with: (1) the traffic data generated in the TIS to assess the potential increases in traffic noise both during construction and in the Build condition, and (2) the equipment types and utilization factors provided by Red Rock Industries to develop a construction noise model.Any potential increases in sound levels at the receiving locations evaluated due to increased vehicle/truck passbys, construction activities, and final sound levels with the new development have been considered for the proposed project. Calculations were completed using SoundPLAN Version 8.2 acoustic modelling software (SoundPLAN). Traffic calculations were completed using the Federal Highway Administration's TNM 2.5 noise model inside SoundPLAN, and construction noise sources used standardized acoustic data available from the FTA Guidelines. SoundPLAN constructs a 3-D model for all areas analyzed by importing ground elevation data through Google Earth. Using the elevation data,a 3-D Digital Ground Model ("DGM") of the terrain is constructed. Once the DGM is constructed, building height and location information, and roadway information are imported. Additionally, surface composition (soft or hard ground, or water) is considered in the DGM in order to consider soft ground attenuation, reflections from buildings, and propagation over water. Depending on the specific situation analyzed, the DGM is updated to indicate changes in the elevation which would occur through the construction process, such as the excavation and retaining wall construction proposed (see Figure 6 in the Acoustic Report). It is also noted that all calculations completed for the project included frequency-dependent data for accurate calculation of barrier effects/diffraction, although only overall sound pressure levels are presented for each receiving location to simplify the results and compare the results to the Town of Southold Noise Ordinance (Chapter 180),NYSDEC criteria and NYSDOT criteria(as summarized below). Using the computer-generated model,an existing noise model for traffic was also developed for existing peak traffic generation.Along with the background sound levels collected,these baseline noise levels served as the existing condition sound levels to which the Build Condition predicted sound levels were compared." Finally, the statement that "The acoustic report does not account for all construction equipment proposed to be used making the potential impacts identified appear less than what would likely occur" demands details on what equipment the preparer is referring to. This FEIS response concludes with the following: `Additionally, as discussed in greater detail in Section 3.3 Transportation and Section 3.10 Construction of the FEIS, the proposed construction traffic represents a large adverse impact that cannot be minimized or mitigated as the DEIS represents that the excavation is required for the Project and the excavated material to be removed from the site can only be reduced by 10%at the cost of greater ecological impacts and the Mattituck Inlet is insufficient to remove the material by barge. Construction traffic would have an impact on traffic along the haul truck route, noise and vibration at the Site and along the haul truck route, and these impacts would also affect the community character,the public use of open spaces, and quality of life.The DEIS states the excavation would require 4,S00 truckloads, resulting in 9,000 truck trips, � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAGC CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS 80 truck trips a day, at an average rate of 8 truck trips per hour.This would continue for ten hours a day,five days a week,at least 22 weeks.The nature and duration of the traffic and noise generated by the proposed excavation represents a large adverse impact that cannot be mitigated. There are multiple reasons or errors in the DEIS that suggest that the number of truck trips for the excavation would be greater than the numbers presented in the DEIS, but further investigation is not required because the numbers presented in the DEIS represent a large adverse impact that is not able to be avoided or minimized or mitigated to the maximum extent practicable." It is noteworthy that the DEIS included technical studies by professional engineers and acoustic specialists, which included mitigation measures to minimize the noise and traffic-related impacts. This response that"large adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated" dismisses the technical studies in their entirety and fails to offer any substantive analysis or data to substantiate the claims. It is also noteworthy that the failure to include the Project Sponsor and its consultants in the preparation of the FEIS is counter to the process. Page 45.Comments relating to Noise and Quality of Life.Wildlife.and Preserve The FEIS responses to the comments include false and misleading statements. The FEIS response indicates "The DEIS does not address the significance of the impacts to the five residences identified that would be subjected to noise levels that exceed the NYSDOT recommended levels (NYSDOT criteria for Road Noise Levels)." It is unclear how the preparer could make such a statement. The Acoustic Report included the analysis of 18 receiver locations, including the five residences. During construction,the projected noise levels at the 18 receiver locations were included in Tables 39 and 40. The DEIS indicates: "...there would be a significant increase in noise at receivers R1-R16 for at least one phase of construction for either the peak hour or 8-hour Leq. For Receivers R1- R8,the increases are predominantly due to sound created at the Project Site from construction activities. These increases would be considered a significant impact,as defined by the NYSDEC criteria,during the periods of construction. The construction-related noise impacts would be limited to the times and days specified, which are permitted by Town Code, and would be temporary. For receivers R9-R18, any increase in the sound levels would be dependent on additional traffic, which is highest during the excavation phases.Sound levels are higher than recommended by the NYSDOT at receivers R10-R14 during the excavation phases, and during all construction at receivers R14 and R15. However, as noted in Section 3.6.3 of the Acoustic Report and in Section 3.7.1 of this DEIS, the NYSDOT criteria are not standards, and these increases are temporary only during construction. Additionally, it should be noted that all sound levels included in the above tables represent exterior sound levels. Based on NYSDOT criteria,the sound levels in interior spaces would be 20-25 dB less than the levels shown. As excavation is proposed for mid-December through May, the majority of this period would see most residents indoors and would minimize the impact to quality of life. If the reduction of 20 dB is applied to the traffic data for receivers R10-R14, which exceed the outdoor recommendations from the NYSDOT, the interior � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAGC CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS recommendations (see Category E of Table 2 in the Acoustic Report) for interior noise levels are met and would be within the NYSDOT recommended criteria for those receivers. For the construction phase,the impacts would occur from late-March to late-September,when outdoor activities are occurring. While there would be temporary increases in noise levels during this period,the proposed project would comply with the permitted times set forth in Chapter 180 of the Town Code. To mitigate noise impacts to surrounding properties and wildlife during the excavation and construction phases,the following measures would be implemented: •Any vehicle which requires the use of a back-up alarm will use a white noise back-up alarm instead of a single tone beep. • All trucks and drivers will be instructed to disengage all Jake Brake mechanisms once turning on to Cox Neck Rod from County Route 48. •All trucks utilized would be Tier 4 certified by EPA standards." In the post-development,the projected noise levels at the 18 receiver locations were included in Table 41. The DEIS indicated that no receiving locations would exceed 6 dBA above the Existing Condition sound levels. NYSDEC evaluation criteria categorizes this as no impact. The greatest predicted increase would be 4 dBA at the residence at Receiver R2. Furthermore, the projected sound levels also meet the conditions of the Noise Code at all receiving locations.The results of the analysis show that in a"Build Condition"that mitigation measures would not be required. The FEIS response then goes on to state: "There is no substantial discussion of how the noise levels would impact local wildlife:'Again, it is unclear how such a statement could be made given that the impacts to wildlife were addressed in Section 2.4.2 of the DEIS. As excerpted from the DEIS: "The potential for the proposed action to generate noise from construction activities, vehicular traffic, and operation of the proposed boat storage facility is analyzed in detail in the Acoustic Report(see Appendix R).The analysis indicated existing noise conditions within the natural ecological communities on the subject property are between 40-45 dBA. Analysis of potential noise levels at nearby residential sites (such as 5106 West Mill Road, 800 North Drive, and 805 North Drive) indicated that noise levels in the property's natural areas may increase temporarily during project construction to 66 dBA during tree removal/grubbing(in December), 76 dBA during excavation phases (between December to June), and 71 dBA during building and drainage construction phases (between June to November). Under the proposed build conditions, noise levels are expected to increase slightly by 3-4 dBA from 40- 45 dBA to 44-48 dBA. Under proposed build conditions, sound levels will not increase by more than 6 dBA above existing conditions and, therefore, is consistent with "no impact" following NYSDEC standards for impacts to human receptors. As there are no standards for wildlife,the human standards were applied. Noise pollution associated with industrial activities, roads, and major highways has been found to result in ecological impacts such as lower bird breeding densities and poorer body 631.589.6353 WWW.PWGROSSER.COM PWGC.INFO@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS condition. For example,chronic industrial noise levels of 75-90 dBA generated by compressor stations on natural gas pipelines in Alberta, Canada resulted in a 15 percent decrease in the observed breeding ovenbirds pairs(Seiurus aurocapilla)in forests adjacent to the compressor stations and 15-to-66-percent decrease in other species including red-breasted nuthatch (Sitta canadensis), red-eyed vireo (Vireo olivaceous), and yellow-rumped warbler (Dendroica coronata). Anthropogenic noise was also found to increase stress and reduce body condition in songbirds,but not adversely impact survivorship,in urban habitats compared to more rural habitats. Simulated roadway noise that increased noise levels (Leq) by 11-20 dBA experienced by birds was found to alter the species composition and abundance of the avian community, alter foraging and nesting behavior, and reduce nestling body condition. Potential impacts to birds adjacent to these industrial facilities and simulated roadway noise was attributed to increasing stress levels; noise interference with bird songs used to attract mates and defend breeding territories; and altered foraging and nesting behavior. Over the long term, the maximum projected noise levels would remain under 50 dBA and would not increase by more than 4 dBA compared to existing conditions. This increase in sound levels is less intense than the industrial sources and simulated roadway noise that have been documented in the scientific literature to adversely impact birds; thus, no long-term noise-related impacts to birds and bird habitat expected to result from the operation of the proposed boat storage facility. Potential noise levels during daytime construction hours over the 12-month construction period (45-76 dBA compared to 44 dBA under existing conditions) slightly overlap with the range of the chronic industrial levels (75-90 dBA) that have been found to impact bird breeding productivity (Habib et al, 2007) and are similar to the change in sound levels (11- 20 dBA) that have been found to adversely impact bird community composition and abundance, foraging and nesting behavior, and body condition. It should be noted that potential noise impacts during construction would only occur during daytime construction hours and noise levels would return to background conditions;in contrast,studies identifying adverse impacts to birds due to noise have analyzed more continuous noise associated with industrial facilities and large roadways. However,due to the increase in daytime noise levels, it is expected that a temporary reduction in the habitat quality provided by the adjacent forest for bird reproduction would occur during the construction period. Mitigation measures to lessen the magnitude of short-term, noise-related impacts during construction to neighbors are discussed in the Acoustic Report and include the use of white noise back-up alarms rather than single,tone beeps;no use of Jake Brake mechanisms on site; and use of dump trucks that meet USEPA Tier 4 standards. These mitigation measures would serve to reduce potential impacts to birds and wildlife by decreasing high frequency noise." The FEIS response continues with: "The DEIS does not completely address the significance of the impacts identified to the Mill Road Preserve and the public use and enjoyment of it." Without any details offered by the preparer of the FEIS,it is unclear what was not completely addressed. 631.589.6353 WWW.PWGROSSER.COM PWGC.INFO@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS The FEIS response continues with: "The DEIS does not address the unmitigated large adverse impact associated with the noise of the construction truck traffic along the truck route as a result of the cumulative effect of the nature and duration of the noise. As discussed in more detail in Section 3.3 Transportation and 3.10 Construction of the FEIS,the construction traffic is underrepresented in the DEIS and the duration of construction traffic and the noise it would generate would be of a longer duration than what is presented in the DEIS. This impact is not mitigated as the excavation and construction proposed is required for the Proposed Action. The impact can only be minimized by reducing the material to be removed from the Site by 10%and this would incur additional ecological impacts and increase the area of disturbance of the Project. The impact cannot be mitigated using barges to remove the excavated material as the DEIS states the Mattituck Inlet is not suitable for the navigation of the barges needed to remove the material." This response was addressed above. The FEIS response concludes with the following: "The gaps in the analysis of the identified impacts within the DEIS result in the conclusion that there are impacts that have not been identified or mitigated pertaining to noise and that the impacts identified will be more significant than they are reported to be in the DEIS and that they cannot be sufficiently mitigated to the maximum extent practicable." This entirely conclusory response lacks any substantive data, analysis, or details to substantiate the claims. Page 46,Comments related to Noise Mitigation Measures The FEIS response states: "The mitigation measures proposed for the noise impacts identified in the DEIS lack specificity, particularly related to self-monitoring and the enforceability. The monitoring program proposed appears to delay intervention until overly redundant evidence is identified to demonstrate that construction activities are the cause for the exceedance of thresholds but neglects the significance of those thresholds having been exceeded. There does not appear to be any contingency for modification to operations should exceedance of those thresholds be found to be consistently the fault of construction activities." There was no noise monitoring program proposed as a part of the DEIS. Noise mitigation measures included limiting the hours of construction to hours consistent with the Town of Southold's Noise Ordinance, limiting construction activities on Saturdays, using white noise back-up alarms for all equipment, disengaging jake brake mechanisms, and using only Tier 4 dump trucks. It is assumed that the preparer is referring to the vibration mitigation plan which was accepted by SHPO.Any delay in intervention during vibration monitoring is only proposed to confirm that any exceedances are due to construction activities.Instantaneous intervention is unrealistic.The FEIS preparer also notes that "there does not appear to be any contingency for modification to operations should exceedance of those thresholds be found to be consistently the fault of construction activities." This comment is false.The Vibration Report notes on Page 24 that"procedures such as minimizing vehicle speeds near the Water Tower and Building can be put in place if necessary to mitigate vibration during construction." � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAGC CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTION- Page 46,Comments related to Air Quality The FEIS response states: "The air quality impact analysis presented in the DEIS does not provide the detail required to verify the conclusions it presents.The analysis in the DEIS also makes assumptions on trip length and does not accurately classify the haul truck vehicle type. This, among other errors like the misclassification of vehicle classes and the underestimation of the number of vehicle trips, are inherent flaws that undermine the conclusions of the analysis and suggest that the impacts would be greater than they are represented to be." The air quality analysis is a 158-page report included in Appendix S of the DEIS. Section 3.8 of the DEIS is a summary of the air quality analysis, which is consistent with the SEQR Handbook (p. 98, "EISs should be written in plain language that can be read and understood by all. Highly technical material should be summarized in the text of the EIS and,if that technical material must be presented in its entirety,it should be included as an appendix.") The assertion that the DEIS makes assumptions on trip length and does not accurately classify the haul truck type is unclear. Trips for what activity?Regarding haul truck type,the DEIS makes it clear that although the Applicant has committed to utilizing trucks and equipment that are all Tier 4 compliant,the analysis evaluated trucks and equipment that are equipped with engines that are Tier 3 or Tier 4 compliant for a conservative analysis of air quality impact assessment. The FEIS indicates there is an underestimation of the number of vehicle trips; however, there is no counter data or analysis of any kind provided by the FEIS preparer to substantiate the claim. Page 47,Comments related to Socio-Economic Impacts The FEIS states: "Tax revenue to the Town of Southold is overvalued and no evidence is presented to suggest that the Proposed Action would increase boat sales and increase sales tax or that new sales would be located in New York State. There are flaws in the MEIC, including the overestimation of existing jobs,the lack of clarity between full-time and part-time and all year or seasonal workers,and the inherent difference in business revenue between SYC and the marinas used to create the economic multipliers in the MEIC,diminish the validity of the estimated impacts." This FEIS response provides no substantive data to support the claims that there are flaws in any of the analyses included in the DEIS. The FEIS further states:"There is insufficient information provided to demonstrate that the Proposed Action would not put strain on existing emergency services.The plans do not show an unobstructed aerial fire apparatus access road and there is no confirmation from the correspondence from the Fire Marshal that the lack of an aerial fire apparatus access road was deemed suitable. The DEIS does not address if a sprinkler system is proposed as required in the comment made by the Fire Marshal.The DEIS does not discuss compliance with Chapter 36 (Marinas) of the New York State Fire Code or the NFPA 303 (Fire Protection Standards for Marinas and Boatyards):' This response, again, completely ignores the DEIS. Consultations were undertaken with both the Mattituck Fire Department and the Southold Fire Marshal,which included the preparation of a Fire Safety Plan. As excerpted from the DEIS: � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS • In correspondence dated June 24, 2021, James Easton, Southold Fire Marshal provided measures and items to consider during the design, construction and maintenance of the proposed project to manage the risk of a fire event. In said correspondence,the Fire Marshal recommended a 150-foot Fire Department access area from all exterior walls of the two proposed buildings, and a fire safety plan. (see attached) • SYC has developed a Fire Safety Plan, which provides hazard locations, utility and water supply information, and emergency procedures for its employees. (see attached) • In correspondence dated July 27, 2021, Chief Ed Rittberg of the Mattituck Fire Department indicated that the Mattituck Fire Department"has the capability to handle any fire situation on the proposed plan with the additional hydrant that is being installed." (see attached and below) � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS • . Chief Secretary ED RITTBERG BRIAN WILLIAMS First Assistant Chief Treasurer JAMES COX JR. THERESA WELLS Second Assistant Chief Sergeant-at-Arms ROBERT M.HAAS ROBERT SHAW Chaplain Home of NY State JAMES L.MURPHY Fireman of the Year 1973 9 1974 MATTITUCK FIRE DEPARTMENT July 27,2021 pn PWGC J� v Attn:Kim Gennaro-Oancea 630 Johnson Ave Suite 7 JUL 3 0 2�� Bohemia,NY 11716 )U (� Re:Strong's Yacht Center L Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 Mill Rd,Mattituck NY 11952 Dear Ms.Gennaro-Oancea, The Mattituck Fire Department Chiefs have reviewed the proposal of the two additional buildings with fire suppression systems and nearby additional propane tanks.Mattituck Fire Department has the capability to handle any fire situation on the proposed plan with the additional hydrant that is being installed. If you require any additional information please do not hesitate to contact me at 631-949- 9991. Sincerely, Ed Rittberg Chief of Department Mattituck Fire Department P.O.Box 136•1000 Pike Street•Mattituck,NY 11952-0666 Main(631)298-8833-Fax(631)298.1904-Chiefs(631)298-8852•Fax(631)298.8858 www.mattituckfd.ora ' 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 631.589.6353 • WWW.PWGROSSER.COM PWGC.INFO@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS • In correspondence dated August 19, 2021, the Southold Fire Marshal indicated that"I am in agreement with Chief Rittberg that emergency access is adequate"; however,implementation of the Fire Safety Plan was still recommended (see attached and below). TOWN OF SOUTHOLD � `=4 FIRE MARSHAL Town Hall Annex 54375 Main Road P.O.Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 Telephone(631)765-1802 Fax(631)765-9502 Email jamesenasoutholdtownny.EOv Kim Gennaro-Oancea,Vice President P.W.Grosser Consulting,Inc. 630 Johnson Ave,Suite 7 Bohemia,NY 11716 August 19,2021 Re: Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 Mill Rd,Mattituck Fire Safety Evaluation Dear Ms.Gennaro-Oancea: I am in receipt of your letter dated August 4,2021 as well as Chief Rittberg's letter dated July 27,2021. 1 am in agreement with Chief Rittberg that emergency access is adequate. A fire safety plan is recommended however not required by Code for these occupancies. Please feel free to contact me with any additional comments/concerns. Regards, Sw.wae-Fiw6�o.at A% James Easton Fire Marshal Town of Southold ' 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 631.589.6353 • WWW.PWGROSSER.COM PWGC.INFO@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS Page 48.Comments related to Socio-Economic Impacts and Taxes The FEIS response further provides: "The DEIS states that the increase in property taxes would be estimated at $59,450 based on the 2020-2021 tax rate, but also that the property would be eligible for the 485-b Business Investment Exemption which has a sliding scale over 10 years. The DEIS does not provide further detail for what this would mean for the additional tax revenues to the Town as a result of the Project." This response is patently false or shows that the preparer limited its review of the DEIS to select sections. In the Executive Summary and Section 1.3.2 of the DEIS, it states: "Consultations were undertaken with the Southold Assessor for post-development tax revenue. In correspondence dated June 25, 2021, the Southold Assessor advised that the increase in the Assessed Value would be approximately$41,000. With no exemptions the increase in the property taxes would be estimated at$59,450 based on the 2020-21 tax rate. However,the property would be eligible for the 485-b Business Investment Exemption,which is based on a sliding scale over 10 years. For the first 3 years, there would be a 50 percent reduction for the increased assessment attributable to the two new buildings. For each year after, the reduction would decrease as follows: Year 4: 40 percent Year 5: 30 percent,Year 6: 20 percent, Years 7 thru 9: 10 percent, and Year 10: 5 percent." (emphasis added) Page 49,Comments related to Fire Safety and Hydrants The FEIS responses indicate that the "mitigation measures proposed are insufficient, particularly in regard to fire safety. The proposed hydrant is not close enough to the proposed buildings:' This response ignores the fact (as explained above) that the plans were reviewed by the Southold Fire Marshal.This FEIS also fails to recognize that the lead agency has not issued any site plan comments for consideration by the Project Sponsor. Page 50,Comments related to Construction Mitigation The FEIS summarizes the comments as follows: "Construction related impacts including noise, dust, vibration, truck traffic, and excavation and clearing would create significant impacts on the local environment and resident quality of life and these impacts are not accurately described, adequately analyzed,and insufficiently mitigated." The FEIS response provides the same conclusory statements of errors and deficiencies,and the same unsupported and unsubstantiated claims that are inherent throughout the document. Pages 51-56, Comments related to Construction and Archaeological and Historic Impacts The FEIS indicates that there are inherent flaws in the methodology of the archeological impact analysis and historic resource analysis,and the mitigation is not sufficient, as described in the DEIS. These are interesting claims given that all historic and archaeological assessments that were performed were done in coordination with and at the direction of the historic and archaeological � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAGC CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTION- units of the NYS OPRHP. Also, all work was performed and authored by Matthew D. Spigelman, PhD (RPA#36587230) of ACME Heritage Consultants and Carol S.Weed, M.A. (RPA#989090). In correspondence dated January 24, 2022, OPRHP indicated "no additional archaeological investigation is needed." _J NEWYORK Parks,Recreation, 'j_- lYs1'.na and Historic Preservation KATHY HOCHUL ERIK KULLESEID Governor Commissioner January 24,2022 Mr.Charles Vandrei Agency Historic Preservation Officer NYS Environmental Conservation Division of Lands and Forests 625 Broadway Albany,NY 12233-4255 Re: DEC Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 W Mill Rd,Mattituck,Suffolk County,NY 11952 21PR04396 Dear Mr.Vandrei: Thank you for requesting the comments of the Division for Historic Preservation of the Office of Parks,Recreation and Historic Preservation(OPRHP). We have reviewed the submitted materials in accordance with the New York State Historic Preservation Act of 1980(Section 14.09 of the New York Parks,Recreation and Historic Preservation Law). These comments are those of the Division for Historic Preservation and relate only to Historic/Cultural resources. We have reviewed the report of the supplemental Phase IS archaeological investigation(No. 22SR00015)and no archaeological sites were identified. It is OPRHP's opinion that no additional archaeological investigation is needed. Please note that OPRHP is still evaluating the project's potential to impact historic architectural resources. If further correspondence is required regarding this project,please refer to the OPRHP Project Review(PR)number noted above. If you have any questions,please contact me via email. Sincerely, Tim Lloyd,Ph.D. Scientist-Archaeology timothy.11oyd@parks.ny.gov via e-mail only New York State Office of Parks,Recreation and Historic Preservation Division for Hlstonc Preservation,Peebles Island PO Box 189,Waterford,New York 12188-0189 (518)237-8643•hops://perks.ny.gov/shpo In correspondence dated May 26,2023 and included earlier in this letter, OPRHP indicated"...it is the OPRHP's opinion that the project, as described, will have No Adverse Impact on historic or � � � � � � � �RN 1.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS archaeological resources provided the following condition is met: The Construction Protection Plan will be implemented as described in the Vibration Report" All of the OPRHP correspondence is attached. Furthermore,there are inaccuracies in the response to the Vibration Reportin the response from the preparer of the FEIS.The Preparer is correct in noting that the methodologies provided in the Federal Transit Administration's Transit Noise Impact Assessment Manual. However,the use of the 0.12 in/s vibration threshold has nothing to do with where the structure is located and is selected based on the structure itself.The Preparer in the same response notes that"standards for historic structures from other sources are as low as 0.8 in/s."A threshold of 0.8 in/s is significantly larger than the 0.12 in/s proposed. The Preparer also calls into question the use of the FTA Guidelines.As noted in the FTA Guidelines,in Table 5.3, "Vibration levels are generally higher in stiff clay-type soil than in loose sandy soil." The methodology in the FTA Guidelines presents a standardized assessment for a wide range of vibration propagation conditions,which would be anticipated to be lessened by Long Island's typical sandy soil structure. Therefore, the FTA Guidelines present what is anticipated to be an overprediction of vibration transfer. Page 56,Comments related to Other Required Sections The FEIS summarizes the comments as follows: "The DEIS has not adequately addressed an analyzed the growth inducing aspects of the Proposed Action." The response to the comments is as follows: "The DEIS does not address the potential growth inducing impacts of the haul road. Due to there being other large adverse impacts that are neither avoided nor minimized nor mitigated to the maximum extent practicable, the lead agency does not need definitive answers on this topic. See Sections 3.3, 3.7, and 3.10 of the FEIS for detailed discussions of the construction- related unmitigated impacts of the Proposed Action." As indicated in the DEIS, after Phase 1 of the construction is complete, the haul road would be retained only as an emergency access road by police, fire, or ambulance vehicles, as necessary. It is unclear how this has any growth inducing aspects. Page 57.Comments related to Alternatives The FEIS responses provide the same conclusory statements of errors and deficiencies,and the same unsupported and unsubstantiated claims that are inherent throughout the document. � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS II. FEIS IS DEFICIENT PURSUANT TO THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT AND ITS IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS AT 6 NYCRR PART 617 AND NYSDEC SEAR HANDBOOK,FOURTH EDITION,2020 General Comment Neither the Project Sponsor nor its consultants were afforded the opportunity to modify the project, to present any further mitigation to the proposed plan, or to participate in any of the responses to public and agency comments. This is counter to the role of the project sponsor in the SEQR process. As set forth in the SEQR Handbook (p. 64, Item 1. Which steps in the SEQR process are the responsibility of the project sponsor?): Project sponsors are responsible for the following... • Preparing a draft EIS. Alternatively, the applicant may request that the lead agency, at the expense of the applicant,prepare the draft EIS(but the lead agency has no obligation to do so); • Submitting and revising, as needed, a draft EIS for acceptance by the lead agency for public review; • Providing additional information during public review if required by the lead agency. (This may, in limited circumstances, require preparation of a supplemental EIS.) • Participating, as appropriate, in a SEQR hearing on the draft EIS, if one is held; • Assisting the lead agency in answering substantive questions raised during the public review period that must be responded to in the final EIS; • Preparing additional elements of the final EIS, as may be required by the lead agency; General Comment The FEIS includes 105 comments. In response to 41 of the 105 comments,the following is included: "Due to there being other large adverse impacts that are neither avoided nor minimized nor mitigated to the maximum extent practicable, the lead agency does not need definitive answers on this topic. See Sections 3.3, 3.7, and 3.10 of the FEIS for detailed discussions of the construction related unmitigated impacts of the Proposed Action." Pursuant to 6 NYCRR§617.9(b)(8): A final EIS must consist of the following: the draft EIS, including any revisions or supplements to it,• copies or a summary of the substantive comments received and their source (whether or not the comments were received in the context of a hearing);and the lead agency's responses to all substantive comments..." The dismissal of select impact issues because other impacts are considered to be larger does not satisfy the lead agency's responsibility for a proper FEIS. � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT * PAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS General Comment Throughout the FEIS, the responses are merely conclusory statements of errors in methodology, insufficient data, deficiencies in analyses, and unsubstantiated claims of impacts without any substance. Pursuant to the SEQR Handbook, Fourth Edition (p. 131, Item 1.), 1. What is a final EIS? A final EIS consists of • The draft EIS, •Any necessary corrections or revisions to the draft EIS, (emphasis added) • Copies or a summary of all substantive comments received, indicating their source (correspondence, hearing, etc.), and • The lead agency's responses to substantive comments. Without any data, corrections or revisions to the analyses,the FEIS in its entirety is flawed. General Comment The FEIS fails to recognize that the DEIS and all of the technical reports were prepared in accordance with the Amended Final Scope adopted on April 5, 2021,were revised pursuant to the lead's review of the DEIS December 2021, and were accepted as adequate and complete with the DEIS Revised November 2022. Pursuant to 6 NYCRR§617.9(a)(2): (2) The lead agency will use the final written scope and the standards contained in this section to determine whether to accept the draft EIS as adequate with respect to its scope and content for the purpose of commencing public review. This determination must be made in accordance with the standards in this section within 45 days of receipt of the draft EIS. A draft EIS is adequate with respect to scope and content for the purpose of commencing public review if it meets the requirements of the final written scope,sections 617.8(g)of this Part and subdivision (b)of this section, and provides the public and involved agencies with the necessary information to evaluate project impacts, alternatives, and mitigation measures. (i) If the draft EIS is determined to be inadequate, the lead agency must identify in writing the deficiencies and provide this information to the project sponsor. (ii) The lead agency must determine whether to accept the resubmitted draft EIS within 30 days of its receipt. The determination of adequacy of a resubmitted draft EIS must be based solely on the written list of deficiencies provided by the lead agency following the previous review, unless changes are proposed for the project, there is newly discovered information, or there is a change in circumstances related to the project. � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT * PAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS Page 3 -Purpose of the FEIS The FEIS states, "The purpose of this FEIS is for the Lead Agency to evaluate and respond to the substantive public comments (both written and verbal)made on the DEIS.SEQRA allows an applicant to modify a project in response to public comment on the DEIS as long as any potential environmental impacts of those modifications are described and analyzed in the FEIS. The Applicant has not modified any aspects of the Proposed Action.Therefore,the Lead Agency's evaluations and responses to comments provided within this FEIS are based on the information provided in the DEIS." (emphasis added) The FEIS cannot be based solely on the DEIS without any further analysis, corrections, or revisions, out of convenience to achieve a predetermined result. When the comments require additional technical analyses,or supplemental data,it is the responsibility of the preparer to perform such work. Additionally,the preparer made no requests to the Project Sponsor or its consultants for any project- related information. Page 3 -Purpose of the FEIS The FEIS states,"The Town of Southold Planning Board has received electronic mails ("e-mails") and correspondence either in general support or general opposition to the proposed action that did not raise any substantive issues. Although no substantive comments were raised in these communications,these e-mails and letters are included in Appendix A-Public Comment of this FEIS." The letters in general support were received from commercial fisherman that rely upon the SYC facilities, as well as residents and community businesses in support of the application for various reasons stated. The failure of the FEIS to disclose the benefits of the project to residents and community members is counter to the balancing test required of the lead agency. Pursuant to 6 NYCRR §617.11 (d)(2), Findings must "weigh and balance relevant environmental impacts with social, economic and other considerations." In fact, as noted later in this letter, the social and economic benefits fail to be recognized in this FEIS. Page 11 -Comment 4.0-2 The FEIS includes Comment 4.0-2: "The DEIS lacks many different studies that are essential to conducting a proper SEQRA review. Additionally, the analysis in the DEIS is inadequate. Too many crucial elements are missing and, as discussed in the sections above, the DEIS cherry-picks information and does not take a hard look at the impacts of the proposed project.The Planning Board, as lead agency, is responsible for the FEIS and these inadequacies must be addressed." In response,the FEIS indicates the following: "The DEIS lacks certain studies and information. Due to there being other large adverse impacts that are neither avoided nor minimized nor mitigated to the maximum extent practicable, the lead agency does not need definitive answers on this topic. See Sections 3.3, 3.7,and 3.10 of the FEIS for detailed discussions of the construction related unmitigated impacts of the Proposed Action." First,this comment makes no reference to the"different studies"that are lacking. As set forth by the NYSDEC in its SEQR Handbook(p. 136,Item 7.How does the lead agency decide which comments are � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAGC CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS substantive?), "...Speculative comments, or assertions that are not supported by reasonable observations or data, need no response." It would seem appropriate for the FEIS to have a response of"Comment Noted"as it does in 15 other responses.Instead,the FEIS parrots the comments without any further detail, analysis, or reasoned elaboration by the Preparer. Page 11 - Objectives and Benefits - Comments related to Market Demand for Climate- Controlled Storage for the Maintenance of Electrical Systems The FEIS summarizes the following comment: "The stated purpose of the project in the DEIS, to provide climate- controlled storage space, is not essential for maintaining electrical systems of boats and the DEIS fails to present a case for market demand beyond the assertions and desires of the Applicant." In response,the FEIS states: Comments Noted. First, this response clearly ignores the NYSDEC guidance set forth in the SEQR Handbook (p. 136, Item 7. How does the lead agency decide which comments are substantive?),to wit: "When a subject has been raised frequently, even if the issue is not relevant to the proposed action, it is good practice to address that topic at least briefly." This market demand is one of the main objectives and benefits of the proposed action and the FEIS response provides no substantive data to support the claim. Second,the objectives and benefits of an action are essential to the lead agency's findings. As stated in the implementing regulations of SEQRA,at§617.11(d): "(d)Findings must. (1)consider the relevant environmental impacts,facts and conclusions disclosed in the final EIS; (2) weigh and balance relevant environmental impacts with social, economic and other considerations; (3)provide a rationale for the agency's decision; (4)certify that the requirements of this Part have been met;and (5)certify that consistent with social, economic and other essential considerations from among the reasonable alternatives available, the action is one that avoids or minimizes adverse environmental impacts to the maximum extent practicable, and that adverse environmental impacts will be avoided or minimized to the maximum extent practicable by incorporating as conditions to the decision those mitigative measures that were identified as practicable." Pages 11-12 -Comments related to the Tax Benefits The FEIS summarizes comments related to the tax benefits as follows: "The Proposed Action will not benefit the community.The taxes and increases to employment are overstated or overrepresented in the DEIS. The Applicant will benefit by catering to the owners of multimillion dollar yachts who will largely be people from outside the community." In response, the FEIS indicates: "The DEIS lacks sufficient detail on jobs estimated to be created, and there are methodological errors in the Marina � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAGC CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS Economic Impact Calculator (MEIC) used to estimate the economic benefits of the Proposed Action. There are flaws in the MEIC,including the overestimation of existing jobs,the lack of clarity between full-time and part-time and all year or seasonal workers, and the inherent difference in business revenue between SYC and the marinas used to create the economic multipliers in the MEIC. Due to there being other large adverse impacts that are neither avoided nor minimized nor mitigated to the maximum extent practicable, the lead agency does not need definitive answers on this topic. See Sections 3.3,3.7,and 3.10 of the FEIS for detailed discussions of the construction related unmitigated impacts of the Proposed Action" First, several sections of the DEIS indicate the job types to be created. Of notable importance is the subsection within Project Objective and Benefits (Section 1.3) entitled "Job Creation and Increased Tax Revenue," the DEIS states: "Upon implementation of the proposed action, an additional 11 full- time positions are expected to be created. The types of jobs to be created include boat maintenance, machinery operators, engine technicians, wood and fiberglass re-finishing personnel, and administration. The salary ranges for the new full-time positions could be expected from approximately$50,000 to$125,000.`Therefore,the statement that the DEIS lacks sufficient detail on jobs estimated to be created is patently false. Second, the FEIS indicates that there are "methodological errors" and "flaws" in the MEIC without, again,providing any supporting data or quantitative analysis. Finally, the response that due to there being other large adverse impacts, the lead agency does not need definitive answers is counter to SEQRA. As noted earlier, a lead agency is to weigh the impacts and the benefits in its Findings. Without addressing this response,proper Findings cannot be issued. This response also claims that a project cannot have adverse impacts and fails to substantiate the benefits of the project.This is counter to the stated intent and purpose of SEQRA,at§617.1(d): "Itwas the intention of the Legislature that the protection and enhancement of the environment, human and community resources should begiven appropriate weight with social and economic considerations in determining public policy, and that those factors be considered together in reaching decisions on proposed activities. Accordingly, it is the intention of this Part that a suitable balance of social, economic and environmental factors be incorporated into the planning and decision-making processes of State, regional and local agencies. It is not the intention of SEQR that environmental factors be the sole consideration in decision-making." Page 13 -Comment regarding Location of Haul Out and Fueling Comment 1.4-10 includes two questions - where the boats will be put in and out of the water, and where the boats be fueled for storage. In response, the FEIS states: "Section 1.4.2 Operations of the DEIS does not provide specific answers to these questions. The DEIS does state that there are no modifications proposed to the existing haul out slips or the existing buildings and operations." The response to his comment clearly demonstrates that the preparer of the FEIS has failed to review the entirety of the DEIS, including its appendices, which provides site plans showing locations, photographs as well as narrative descriptions of the locations of both the ramps and fueling station. � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT * PAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS Page 14-Comment regarding the Extraction of Sand The FEIS summarizes the following comments regarding the Improper Extraction of Resources: Concerns have been raised regarding the potential exploitation of valuable sand resources. The removal of the hillside could yield substantial profits from the sale of sand (the DEIS states that 63 percent of the material has been identified as quality sand). In response, the FEIS questions the need for a mining permit from the NYSDEC, which in no way responds to the comments. Furthermore, the FEIS improperly states that "The correspondence to the NYSDEC from the Applicant dated April 19, 2021 (DEIS Appendix I) requests confirmation from the NYSDEC that a mining permit is not required for the proposed excavation and removal of approximately 124,921 cubic yards of material. There is no response from the NYSDEC included in the DEIS and this has not been confirmed by the NYSDEC." Clearly, the preparer of the FEIS did not read the DEIS, which explicitly states in Section 3.10.3 that "Mr. Robert W. Yager, Mined Land Reclamation Specialist, II of the NYSDEC has visited the subject property and has advised that a mining permit was not required for future work as long as the work was being completed in accordance with a Site Plan approved by the Town..." Further,the NYSDEC is an involved agency and it is our understanding that the NYSDEC has not submitted any other information to the contrary. Pursuant to §617.9(b)(8) as well as the SEQR Handbook (pages 135 and 136), the lead agency is responsible for the adequacy and accuracy of the final EIS, regardless of who prepares it. Pages 15-16 -Comments related to Soils The FEIS states,"Without additional boring samples,it cannot be determined whether or not there is the need for more excavation to provide the improvement required for foundation bearing as described in the PWGC Geotechnical Memo. This would further increase the impacts associated with the removal of excavated material described in the DEIS and,as is described in the 3.3 Transportation Section of the FEIS, these impacts are already both severe and understated. With the information provided,the full extent of adverse impacts associated with what is labeled as Tm soils as a result of the Proposed Action cannot be determined. Due to there being other large adverse impacts that are neither avoided nor minimized nor mitigated to the maximum extent practicable, the lead agency does not need definitive answers on this topic. See Sections 3.3, 3.7,and 3.10 of the FEIS for detailed discussions of the construction related unmitigated impacts of the Proposed Action." First, the lead agency accepted the DEIS without the aforementioned issues or comments. It is understood that the preparer of the FEIS is different from the Town's consultant which reviewed the DEIS and determined the document to be adequate and complete for public review. However, this response clearly demonstrates the Preparer's lack of understanding of the SEQR regulations and SEQR Handbook, which is "...one of five key documents that every SEQR practitioner should be familiar with:' (p. 2) � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAGC CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTION- As stated in the SEQR Handbook(p. 129, Item 7): "It is the lead agency's responsibility to clearly define major, substantive deficiencies so that the sponsor can make revisions responding to those comments. (emphasis added) The goal of the lead agency in its review of the submitted draft EIS should be to advance the review of the proposed project to the public review phase. Therefore, a lead agency should provide adequate guidance in the initial description of deficiencies to enable the project sponsor to develop an acceptable draft EIS with one revision effort,and only reject a resubmission if that resubmitted draft EIS still contains errors or omissions that are essential to the public's understanding of the proposed project:" The SEQR Handbook(p. 127, Item 1) also states: "The regulations do not demand that the draft EIS be perfect—that would be an unreasonable expectation." Second, if additional information is required to determine an impact, the appropriate time to do so would have been in this FEIS. The FEIS does not provide any additional substantive analyses for this or any impact issue,as the Preparer evidently decided to forego its obligations as imposed by SEQRA. The response to the comment also states: A letter from Tim Lloyd of the NYS Department of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation dated December 3, 2021, agrees that the PWGC geotechnical memo does not present definitive evidence of fill in the southern portion of the 'Area of Potential Effect:... Mitigation for the excavation, treatment, or removal of these soils is not provided and measures to do so would further increase the impacts associated with the removal of excavated material described in the DEIS and,as is described in the 3.3 Transportation Section of the FEIS,these impacts are already both severe and understated. Without this information, the full extent of significant environmental impacts associated with soils classified as Fd, 'Potential Dredged Spoil', or 'Stratum 3' cannot be determined." Once again, this response demonstrates the deliberate "cherry-picking" of the DEIS and select extraction of narrative. First,the initial correspondence dated December 3,2021,stated:"OPRHP has reviewed the report of the geotechnical investigation and does not agree that there is definitive evidence of fill in the southern portion of the APE. OPRHP recommends the excavation of 7.S-meter- interval Phase IB shovel tests in the southern portion of the APE:' (emphasis added) What is not considered in the FEIS response is the additional work undertaken and submitted to OPRHP,which resulted in correspondence dated January 24, 2022 indicating the following: "We have reviewed the report of the supplemental Phase IB archaeological investigation (No. 22SR00015) and no archaeological sites were identified. It is OPRHP's opinion that no additional archaeological investigation is needed." A snapshot of the December 3, 2021, letter is included below to document the omission.A snapshot of the January 24, 2022,letter was included earlier which documents resolution of the matter. All of the OPRHP correspondence was included in Appendix T of the DEIS. � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS NEW YORK Parks,Recreation, STATE Or OTI NTUNITI and Historic Preservation KATHY HOCHUL ERIK KULLESEID Governor Commissioner December 03,2021 Mr.Charles Vandrei Agency Historic Preservation Officer NYS Environmental Conservation Division of Lands and Forests 625 Broadway Albany,NY 12233-4255 Re: DEC Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 W Mill Rd,Mattituck,Suffolk County,NY 11952 21 PR04396 Dear Mr.Vandrei: Thank you for requesting the comments of the Division for Historic Preservation of the Office of Parks,Recreation and Historic Preservation(OPRHP). We have reviewed the submitted materials in accordance with the New York State Historic Preservation Act of 1980(Section 14.09 of the New York Parks,Recreation and Historic Preservation Law). These comments are those of the Division for Historic Preservation and relate only to Historic/Cultural resources. We have reviewed the report of the Phase IB archaeological survey(21SR00609),as well as the Geotechnical Engineering Memo Report(dated 8/13/2021). No archaeological sites were identified as a result of the Phase IB archaeological survey. However,the Phase IB report states that shovel tests were not excavated in the southern portion of the project's Area of Potential Effects(APE)because the"southern area was confirmed through geotechnical work to be fill"(Page 8). OPRHP has reviewed the report of the geotechnical investigation and does not agree that there is definitive evidence of fill in the southern portion of the APE. OPRHP recommends the excavation of 7.5-meter-interval Phase IB shovel tests in the southern portion of the APE. If further correspondence is required regarding this project,please refer to the OPRHP Project Review(PR)number noted above. If you have any questions,please contact me via email. Sincerely, Tim Lloyd,Ph.D. Scientist-Archaeology timothy.Iloyd@parks.ny.gov via e-mail only New York State Office of Parks,Recreation and Historic Preservation Division for Historic Preservation,Peebles Island,PO Box 189,Waterford,New York 12188-0189 (518)237-8643•https://parks.ny.gov/shpo GROSSERMoe, 1NSULTING, INC - P.W. GROSSER CONSULTING11 1 1 631.5B9.6353 • WWW.PWGROSSER.COM • PWGC.INFO@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS Pages 18-20, Comments related to Figure 6 (Soils) and Slope Stability It was incumbent upon the lead agency to identify any major substantive deficiencies during review of the DEIS in order for the Project Sponsor to address.Additionally, as this FEIS fails to provide any substantive or quantitative analyses, and there have been no requests for information from the Sponsor, the lead agency has not allowed the Project Sponsor the opportunity to address the comment. Page 20,Comment related to Retaining Wall The FEIS states,"It is not explained why the majority of the retaining wall shelves are proposed to be "filled with topsoil to allow for seeding by wildlife" or how this process would not be susceptible to the proliferation of invasive species and issues of erosion and sedimentation of the adjacent wetlands and surface waters." It was incumbent upon the lead agency to identify any major substantive deficiencies during review of the DEIS in order for the Project Sponsor to address.Additionally, as this FEIS fails to provide any substantive or quantitative analyses, and there have been no requests for information from the Sponsor,the lead agency has not allowed the Sponsor the opportunity to address the comment. Pages 20-21, Comment related to Suffolk County Planning Commission and Excavation The comment relates to the March 2S,2020 Suffolk County Planning Commission Staff Report,which was based upon referral materials transmitted during coordinated review initiated by the Planning Board,as lead agency, on February 10, 2020.At that time,none of the technical analyses,reports and documentation,included in the DEIS,were prepared and,thus,unavailable to SCPC Staff. It is also the Sponsor's understanding that the SCPC has received the Final Scope and DEIS and has not issued any comments. The response provided by the Preparer includes the same general language about discrepancies without any detail or substantive analysis. As indicated above,it was incumbent upon the lead agency to identify any major substantive deficiencies during review of the DEIS in order for the Sponsor to address. Finally, the preparer made no attempt during preparation of the FEIS to obtain additional information or clarification from the Project Sponsor or its consultants. Page 21,Comment related to Dust Suppression The comment relates to the methods of dust suppression during construction. The FEIS provides what the DEIS describes as the methods of dust suppression but concludes with the following sentence: The Site Development Plans (DEIS Appendix C) provide details for a rip-rap base at the construction site entrances and exits but does not show proposed locations. However,the Preparer made no attempt during preparation of the FEIS to obtain additional information or clarification from the Project Sponsor or its consultants. � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS Page 22,Comment related to Water Usage The FEIS states, "The DEIS has not adequately justified the proposed 18 gpd estimate...Based on the information provided in the DEIS, it is not clear if there is an accurate assessment of the proposed water usage:' As noted throughout, the Preparer made no attempt during preparation of the FEIS to obtain additional information or clarification from the Project Sponsor or its consultants. It is noteworthy that the SCDHS Board of Review granted the variance on September 14, 2023. Pages 23-24, Comment related to Groundwater Modeling The FEIS summarizes the comments as follows:"There is missing information regarding the modeling of water usage, ground water flow, and the impacts of excavation and sea level rise on groundwater to determine if there is a significant environmental impact associated with water as a result of Proposed Action.' In response, the FEIS includes a series of conclusive statements about errors in the DEIS that were questions posed by the former consultant to the Town, NPV,in correspondence dated June 26, 2023. For example,NPV asks: "The groundwater model used by project consultants predicts a groundwater travel time of 4 to 4. S years from the western boundary of the proposed excavation area to Mattituck Creek based on a particle's expected curvilinear path from 40 feet below the water table to the Creek. How was this depth and path determined?" The FEIS response reads as follows: "The ground water model used predicts a ground water travel time of four to four and a half years from the western boundary of the excavation area to the Mattituck Creek based on a particle' s expected curvilinear path from 40 feet below the water table to the creek. It is not clear how this depth and path was determined."This repeats the comment of the former consultant and does not address the comment, indicating the absence of any analysis by the Preparer of the FEIS. Another example from NPV's correspondence: "If a volatile organic compound or other chemical that is lighter than water is released into the ground wouldn't this pollutant remain at the interface of the water table and vadose zone and reach the creek much sooner, especially if it is from the septic systems or leaching galleys? If so,what would be the time of travel of a VOC to the Creek?" The FEIS response reads: "The Town' s consultant also estimates that any contaminants released that are lighter than water would reach the creek much sooner than the estimated two to three years:' This response clearly does not address the comments and offers no technical analysis to support this conclusory statement. Page 24,Comment related to Water QualitX The FEIS summarizes the comments as follows,"Insufficient analysis on the impacts to ground water quality and the quality of water in Mattituck Inlet as a result of forest destruction,excavation,and the increased intensity of maritime industrial use of the water and water adjacent areas." � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAGC CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS The response includes a series of conclusory statements about errors in the DEIS and does not address any of the comments. The response fails to recognize the Boat (Vessel) Study, 20 years of surface water quality data provided by the SCDHS Office of Ecology - Bureau of Marine Resources, and analysis of the eight-year period from which the Project Sponsor acquired the site. Pages 27-28, Comments related to Flooding and Climate Change The FEIS responses indicate flaws in methodology and analysis without any recommended methodology, analysis or data. It is the lead agency's responsibility to respond to comments with substantive data,provide a revised analysis,and not blindly agree with the commentators. Pages 40 and 41.Comment related to Visual Impact Analysis The FEIS states,"The visual impact analysis presented in the DEIS does not satisfy the scope as it does not define a ZVI"and"The DEIS visual impact analysis fails to deliver whatwas required in the scoping document and instead presents an unsubstantiated and dubious narrative of no visual impact that cannot be relied upon." It was incumbent upon the lead agency to identify any major substantive deficiencies during review of the DEIS in order for the Project Sponsor to address. The DEIS was deemed adequate and complete with respect to the Final Scope. It is also unclear why the Preparer of the FEIS did not request any information from the Project Sponsor, or its consultants related to such impact issue. Rather, the FEIS responses are merely conclusory statements without any substantive analysis. ------------------------------------- As the Board is aware,the preparation of the DEIS,including revisions, occurred over a period of two (2) years in coordination with the former consultant to the Town of Southold Planning Board, NPV. The work was performed by nine (9) professional firms (many of which have performed technical services on behalf of the Town),each selected for expertise in particular subject matters,and resulted in thousands of pages of technical reports, analyses and plans. Respectfully, the 58-page FEIS (inclusive of title page,table of contents and comments)prepared by H&H and accepted by the Board has failed to consider the professional work performed by the Project Sponsor, fails to properly address the public and agency comments received on the extensive work performed, and by elimination of the Project Sponsor from the FEIS preparation over a period of ten (10) months,is not at all consistent with intent and purpose of the SEQR review. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Respectfully, P.W. GROSSER CONSULTING,INC. Kim A. Gennaro-Oancea, M.S.,AICP CEP Vice President � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS cc: Town of Southold Town Board Town of Southold Town Clerk, Denis Noncarrow Suffolk County Dept. of Economic Development and Planning,Attn:Joseph Sanzano, Director Suffolk County Planning Commission,Attn: Thomas J.McCarthy Suffolk County Planning Commission,Attn: Jennifer Casey, Chair David N.Altman, Esq. Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. Jeff Strong, Strong's Yacht Center, � � � � � � � 631.589.6353�W. W.PWGROSSER.COM�ENGINE�ERH O@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • MONTICELLO • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPRHP Correspondence NSEVIiY4]RK Parks, Recreation, TA7E pF OP1111 NlTy and Historic Preservation ANDREW M. CUOMO ERIK KULLESEID Governor Commissioner July 29, 2021 Mr. Charles Vandrei Agency Historic Preservation Officer NYS Environmental Conservation Division of Lands and Forests 625 Broadway Albany, NY 12233-4255 Re: DEC Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 W Mill Rd, Mattituck, Suffolk County 21 PR04396 Dear Mr. Vandrei: Thank you for requesting the comments of the Division for Historic Preservation of the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP). We have reviewed the submitted materials in accordance with the New York State Historic Preservation Act of 1980 (section 14.09 of the New York Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law). These comments are those of the Division for Historic Preservation and relate only to Historic/Cultural resources. They do not include potential environmental impacts to New York State Parkland that may be involved in or near your project. Such impacts must be considered as part of the environmental review of the project pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (New York Environmental Conservation Law Article 8) and its implementing regulations (6NYCRR Part 617). We note that the proposed undertaking is adjacent to Water Tower and Building (3380 West Mill Road), which is eligible for listing in the State and National Registers of Historic Places. We have reviewed the submission received on July 6, 2021, including the Reconnaissance Level Historic Resources Survey dated July 2021. Based on that review, the OPRHP has no building/above ground historic resources concerns. Before a determination can be rendered by this office, consultation with our Archaeology Unit must continue. Please see and respond to Tim Lloyd's request for additional information via the response wheel in CRIS. If you have any questions, I can be reached at (518) 268-2170. Sincerely, Robyn Sedgwick Historic Site Restoration Coordinator e-mail: robyn.sedgwick@parks.ny.gov via e-mail only cc: M. Terry—Town of Southold C. Cuddy— Owner CRIS List Division for Historic Preservation P.O.Box 189,Waterford, New York 12188-0189•(518)237-8643•parks.ny.gov NSEVIiYORK Parks, Recreation TA7E pF , __ OP1111 NlTy and Historic Preservation KATHY HOCHUL ERIK KULLESEID Governor Commissioner December 03, 2021 Mr. Charles Vandrei Agency Historic Preservation Officer NYS Environmental Conservation Division of Lands and Forests 625 Broadway Albany, NY 12233-4255 Re: DEC Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 W Mill Rd, Mattituck, Suffolk County, NY 11952 21 PR04396 Dear Mr. Vandrei: Thank you for requesting the comments of the Division for Historic Preservation of the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP). We have reviewed the submitted materials in accordance with the New York State Historic Preservation Act of 1980 (Section 14.09 of the New York Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law). These comments are those of the Division for Historic Preservation and relate only to Historic/Cultural resources. We have reviewed the report of the Phase IB archaeological survey (21SR00609), as well as the Geotechnical Engineering Memo Report (dated 8/13/2021). No archaeological sites were identified as a result of the Phase IB archaeological survey. However, the Phase IB report states that shovel tests were not excavated in the southern portion of the project's Area of Potential Effects (APE) because the "southern area was confirmed through geotechnical work to be fill" (Page 8). OPRHP has reviewed the report of the geotechnical investigation and does not agree that there is definitive evidence of fill in the southern portion of the APE. OPRHP recommends the excavation of 7.5-meter-interval Phase IB shovel tests in the southern portion of the APE. If further correspondence is required regarding this project, please refer to the OPRHP Project Review (PR) number noted above. If you have any questions, please contact me via email. Sincerely, Tim Lloyd, Ph.D. Scientist- Archaeology timothy.11oyd@parks.ny.gov via e-mail only New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Division for Historic Preservation,Peebles Island, PO Box 189,Waterford, New York 12188-0189 (518)237-8643•https://parks.ny.gov/shpo NSEVIiYORK Parks, Recreation TA7E pF , __ OP1111 NlTy and Historic Preservation KATHY HOCHUL ERIK KULLESEID Governor Commissioner January 24, 2022 Mr. Charles Vandrei Agency Historic Preservation Officer NYS Environmental Conservation Division of Lands and Forests 625 Broadway Albany, NY 12233-4255 Re: DEC Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 W Mill Rd, Mattituck, Suffolk County, NY 11952 21 PR04396 Dear Mr. Vandrei: Thank you for requesting the comments of the Division for Historic Preservation of the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP). We have reviewed the submitted materials in accordance with the New York State Historic Preservation Act of 1980 (Section 14.09 of the New York Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law). These comments are those of the Division for Historic Preservation and relate only to Historic/Cultural resources. We have reviewed the report of the supplemental Phase IB archaeological investigation (No. 22SR00015) and no archaeological sites were identified. It is OPRHP's opinion that no additional archaeological investigation is needed. Please note that OPRHP is still evaluating the project's potential to impact historic architectural resources. If further correspondence is required regarding this project, please refer to the OPRHP Project Review (PR) number noted above. If you have any questions, please contact me via email. Sincerely, Tim Lloyd, Ph.D. Scientist- Archaeology timothy.11oyd@parks.ny.gov via e-mail only New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Division for Historic Preservation,Peebles Island, PO Box 189,Waterford, New York 12188-0189 (518)237-8643•https://parks.ny.gov/shpo rye YaRK Parks, Recreation, STATE 0r 4Pp4}R lllrY and Historic Preservation KATHY HOCHUL ERIK KULLESEID Governor Commissioner April 8, 2022 Mr. Charles Vandrei Agency Historic Preservation Officer NYS Environmental Conservation Division of Lands and Forests 625 Broadway Albany, NY 12233-4255 Re: DEC Strong's Yacht Center- Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 W Mill Rd, Town of Mattituck, Suffolk County 21 PR04396 Dear Mr. Vandrei: Thank you for requesting the comments of the Division for Historic Preservation of the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP). We continue to review the project in accordance with the New York State Historic Preservation Act of 1980 (Section 14.09 of the New York Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law). These comments are those of the Division for Historic Preservation and relate only to Historic/Cultural resources. OPRHP has concerns regarding potential impacts to historic architectural resources as a result of vibrations from construction vehicles. OPRHP recommends the preparation and implementation of a Construction Protection Plan for the following two structures, which have been determined by OPRHP to be eligible for listing in the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places. Structure Name Address OPRHP No. Mattituck Creek Tide Mill / Old Mill Restaurant 5775 West Mill Road 10310.000348 The Water Tower and Building 3380 West Mill Road 10310.001551 If you have any questions, I can be reached at nancy.herter@parks.ny.gov. Sincerely, X;r,�r��,,r-�-,t Nancy Herter Director, Technical Preservation Services Bureau New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Division for Historic Preservation, Peebles Island, PO Box 189,Waterford, New York 12188-0189 (518)237-8643-https://parks.ny.gov/shpo New York State Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation KATHY HOCHUL ERIK KULLESEID Governor Commissioner May 26, 2023 Charles Vandrei Agency Historic Preservation Officer NYS Environmental Conservation Division of Lands and Forests 625 Broadway Albany, NY 12233-4255 Re: DEC Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 W Mill Rd, Mattituck, Suffolk County 21 PR04396 Dear Charles Vandrei: Thank you for your continued consultation with the Division for Historic Preservation of the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP). We have reviewed the submitted materials in accordance with the New York State Historic Preservation Act of 1980 (Section 14.09 of the New York State Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law). These comments are those of the Division for Historic Preservation and relate only to Historic/Cultural resources. We have reviewed the submission received on May 8, 2023, including the Vibration Report— which includes the Construction Protection Plan —dated November 3, 2022. Based on that review, it is the OPRHP's opinion that the project, as described, will have No Adverse Impact on historic or archaeological resources provided the following condition is met: • The Construction Protection Plan will be implemented as described in the Vibration Report. Should you be unable to meet this condition, consultation with our office will resume. If you have any questions, you can call or e-mail me at the contact information below. Sincerely, - Robyn Sedgwick Historic Site Restoration Coordinator e-mail: robyn.sedgwick(@parks.ny.gov cc: M. Terry—Town of Southold CRIS List New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Division for Historic Preservation, Peebles Island, PO Box 189,Waterford, New York 12188-0189 (518)237-8643•https:Hparks.ny.gov/shpo Mattituck Fire Department Correspondence * PAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS June 17, 2021 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL—RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Chief Ed Rittburg Mattituck Fire Department P.O. Box 136 Mattituck NY 11952 Re: Environmental Review—Request for Information Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 Mill Road, Mattituck,Town of Southold Chief Rittburg: P.W. Grosser Consulting (PWGC) is serving as the environmental consultant to Strong's Yacht Center, LLC (the applicant) which is proposing the construction of two, single-level buildings with elevated roofs, at 49,000 square feet (SF) and 52,500 SF, for the indoor winter storage of yachts at the existing Strong's Yacht Center (SYC). The Town of Southold Planning Board is reviewing the application and has required the applicant to prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). As part of the DEIS, the Town Planning Board has required that the applicant consult with the Mattituck Fire Department to "discuss the threat of fire and explosion on site from all ignitable sources. Include the evaluation of potential fire hazards, and if the Mattituck Fire Department is adequately equipped to respond to a fire at the site.This is of special concern given the size of the structures and the combustibles within the stored boats." As such, we are requesting confirmation that the Mattituck Fire Department is equipped to provide fire protection services at the site. A description of the applicant's proposal follows, and copies of the proposed site development plans are enclosed. As noted, the proposed development includes two new storage buildings at the SYC property. The proposed development project requires modification of the land area and elevations to the west of the existing maritime-use buildings for placement of the two new buildings. The proposed boat storage buildings would be equipped with radiant floor heating requiring the installation of four(4) 2,000-gallon Liquid Propane (LP) tanks (see the enclosed Utility Plan [Sheet 4 of 13]). Overall, it is estimated that approximately 88 yachts would be stored in the off-season in the two buildings. Also proposed is an extension of the public water main (Suffolk County Water Authority) from Naugles Drive for on-site connection for potable supply, installation of a new hydrant on the west side of West Mill Road, utilization of three existing on-site wells for irrigation only, and replacement/upgrades to the on-site sanitary systems. P.W. GROSSER CONSULTING, INC. PH0NE: 631.589.6353 630 JOHNSON AVENUE,STE 7 P.W. GROSSER CONSULTING ENGINEER$ HYDROGEOLOGIST, P.C. PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA, NY 11716 LONG ISLAND . MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • SYRACUSE • SEATTLE • SHELTON * PAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS Regarding fire protection, a new hydrant would be installed (see Utility Plan [Sheet 5 of 13]) and the proposed buildings would be equipped with fire warning and fire suppression systems. Access to the subject property is from the eastern terminus of West Mill Road and as part of the proposed development, the existing internal driveway would be extended for vehicular access to the proposed new buildings. Also,a temporary haul road from West Mill Road across the undeveloped lands to the SYC property would be installed for use during construction and would remain in place; however, gated to prevent unauthorized access. As such, access to the site would be provided via the existing driveway from West Mill Road and emergency access from the higher elevation would be available from the haul road off Mill Road. Based on the above project description and enclosed plans, we are respectfully requesting your comments in writing on whether the Mattituck Fire Department can serve the proposed development. If you have any questions or comments related to this request, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at kgennaro@pwgrosser.com. Further note that the applicant, Jeff Strong,would be willing to meet with you to review the plans and address any concerns related to the proposed development. Thank you in advance for your assistance in this matter. Regards, P.W.GROSSER CONSULTING 1 ---- Kim Gennaro-Oancea, M.S.,AICP CEP Vice President enc. cc:J. Strong P.W. GROSSER CONSULTING, INC. PH0NE: 631.589.6353 630 JOHNSON AVENUE,STE 7 P.W. GROSSER CONSULTING ENGINEER$ HYDROGEOLOGIST, P.C. PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA, NY 11716 LONG ISLAND . MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • SYRACUSE • SEATTLE • SHELTON ad \\e0ea°r °cC)ad ,f Oa. OL m fl. ova R° d ? O L� O • S 0 East`Road m +� ! Central Drive o � _ R°aa ,3 •� aPJe�ae coop dh° Road m G rare c / °od • , �4r ��a oaa ° a ao\\� awe 4s Qod Oae�R. gays ew PvenU �.Ol e� ,q w °O - `. Miller Road Nz, p o F f�•�; .. A °� � da gym. � � 0'° d2�P�eroe ° o aoJe�' �a� e�Yceet P�eoJe �` • -�a\\�°°a� _ ` � Oee`O waS�pha�ia R°aa `oL°�d , •. e �� o °rP�eoUe Jet e •NeW SuffolkA�enue O o So�ad P ° �q, `" *,` as �• r Y e , 9L A COh 1- o �o i4s6 oh Jill lip 111 - 1 111 111 111 111 111 ,r IN ram. �..r.... �-.. •.,-e .`rc aea�c.� �� P'°^-... _ v..�.Ra..�+ux- --•�..-tea kl' :Oar .rrwr >•w w, Y'� � "�� yg ,•� '� �S l IIi � ..�w:+s.a..w w.w r.w ..... - •'� � t1�M '�� -ggy III I, / _may k t il+s�i rf! � 'eC'd .r.-c�w�.i'�-rury^Y'�w.eieaarueya. ya FFs�„°p� f R, e�.xvrraiee G141.rICATCIY g 1 I RLam� 1'��r ra spa•.ce. I f x _ �' ' i•gee�a".� rrm.'Aw se� •e-•r �' .�g�,,,�.a=r' ..,",,: 1 BOAT STOR.4 9JrLDINSS La.,e• '' '��r 57R4N5'5 Y+4Gl+T CENTER -.. ..One �2 �'=ry'�+. ' rs nc•lm�s..�..o...,w saro�e r Jn itl rl'�W� SrlfelR Gv,•.�,Knr.Yam. &EMERAL LA'foVr -� Me.ar wy roe �.e•9 a.a xa Cw �. e s -•�•ep�WC_--.•� ._ �. In ae x j:,"=m+'mp wr`I STRONG YACHT CENTER w Y — _ - _ Al aax FF r TIGAl 91�n.AkTiwa --� _i et y`'~ / �a�$ •� �r ��++ sucveroA.a cecnsiuT� 7 � IIIj a �.�o-xri,,ems .�'� �rY, w.• ne:� - �, COAT sraRAae dI.LGIN69 l \yynnN•\.pn Np Jr\'I\' 5T� 'J Y/�.GF0 �w �y 9.ma's ee Ydp'ip.il w.Ma4cu< +eF LASMIGAM Mff ALU6M+gdvr PLAbmNs T �r1l ce nNMN3 OtloibATICW -— � ..o.s...«r« f ..,. 1,'� y ��.i!+. _1 +,zwrrf•...t we.•+vr.vrin v.,.. rr.ar � r m r ✓j '�i jr � � r� ti� _ ' -a.cX4M, _ Y [ter, . "•`*�+ar m. - t P I M««.///k G 4, �M1_�_z�� PAOF+pyECr �a -- �w-�..,.. -♦ ` P: � �� - �y � It - 1 JJ 4 K� rn•�� - - �r i _� Y °JAtv2YpRy C1'ATI��Gsrzn+ fsroar -^ti=..w ��% ✓1p t x, a a. ro '"'" FF V. .. I _ �-_ ITmr - 4• yy tr«1 'i 3111 � 'ans✓.xx cn. %.uc:a t,7R.aMa6E R.M a«m« �.i��. j f +e�a .erg�� ,.7- T•�7 ..�y y�».e e r i-,ram i•a++-` x•a.:+r,r ,s -w-.cMs.rr.wa.� .a wvy ! : - - I � �4 5Aro nRT pffiI6N CM/rYN-•.ik i L/CGIL.TOK6 5 _ ODD T==.1- � 1 V nrn.ri ��'AY+ee ndv Ph1:�1N6 1✓!G'�1 i AMO1J I.Ifi�JR A4✓.9 f�+�1 I '� I � 1 � •� an r7 r . y . 3 - _ LJI .. Mv �+ I •_ fir � L i --m°�Lsren,srwry f I �� wee® � ��,. ��• w rm..r.�.r»+e 1 •�► r •. i 7A y 9DAT 9rf7R.A6--BJ:LCIN69 $TRON515 YACHT GEWER I�^'��, � � � S.NeIK Lc.n•.y'Yn wa �� - '• Ia y + 11r1r_ITY PLMl 10 ZM— s:eernaaY*'ea n tee-.was- �r�- , I wtl w•Jewyl}..a.�as Maa ro+ �Ivd w+r-W-qy 7��o•araa ro. J C1Jy� ,r xew ..r I+xe DATA r v srv+rshR•r°eTru�n� :r...� rr w•_a.�.,,w..+mu+. ouq _ _ ..._ _ stilun+a+•adV*%G+RVLA a GAL^a.LATmMA _ `-. r eo-fra.:t •+c=.v+ 'a.ne�rnsr s".e. °kvEe:aNlr+'lu*W,� 7-1 --- � �w+ct�rni.N10 a.�-� a.z �w ac.sec•rv.�� ss rm - •c aa.•ro� �.�•emw.x nen LC •` fl�+� �k MAN �•�.ie.��_ _ 'il `Y� � ... yy9. 1 �y✓ y�.:..��"�, -�"S.eX.4-C.. Td�Wliwl[Y t.±�+rr e aso.a r-ax ry i _ Q alKiRs ufst cAnaK~ �• 4m=w= HV6DIXi6�.evexn•ufafrt.+aura[af°.+4 S'L'lt{' - '""* r "••` "",•'r--w.+c ..n rrol.u�!rcaeww f ,tee • -•�maw.o.� { I y - ♦M. yIdl BK,C.is 1PP4W�� I ' t � �-�r�� -� f� -Yy _ 4 •i, _- eaAT sTc7Rh'6�BJ:LGI1:6s •i. f 4a•x pso' OR xa' f� ' ! y___ f 9l•H.t7Nb"a YACHT CENTER �w wE °�•y {]i t 1-0s pa UTILITY P,AK -gl`1 .....,v ,r. SAW PMI*k MTMA 11�..".i'.=.CMS Zaw w�.�a�rr -r.vnxs�...a _s-f'+Y/-�+�v,.v:.c,w.a. .J�.q..asr r.•1 .na,e a.vvwevrt �rYo�.,e�Ye,r _ aa.e�.,Tia a�i+.ae`r.r�l Q rs � cesMl GAswe*�&ahnTMRi 3mL+K, r7 Hralca.Ltic'laerr�varAlrr arsrm no.i sauna,:... .. - 3 ro.�sv�-rc�rr+•.v,r•*e rss+ •air.-.z.s.r -.r. ,. .,ee� � s•r,e rRAT�6 R�,d511B YRS hitZtT iAA]INbY wnrgmina.r_--._i ,r,rurmei,.ws 1-t'RGA:4140.rJM�P^JI!AC.CC4S Ne]4E6 ..arwv u-� ;.' evYpRNJIJG FliIL�rl4[7�MNTARY S.'snim MPS w'raeur w, s t wsti.•s uw,.ir�rn W,.i,N —1 -'.�ys'.�- p�jRClssy:2R'�T"GAnQk TR.Ma S lmls ale sWvct •••�••�, .. -.- ms..nwn: GC1-IWXAL OW-L.0 fiMRAN 1 �•,•• '9VtYCrW.b cd.�IrlcA*+a1 Gi_L/V4yZRAI ♦.�,IGC K 1 14" •3 YWT64�CVIGL�LVmR MA1!Y fAD3GMR LRw L ,,arse } *_- a 1Ef !I x"I as . . ...F «•_� �. A w°"� �•`a-��- •ia�-r�•.• - � � rarPFt a`�-Awrrdxr oEra11..5 I rs`r �.ye� '��4�•,,.(-•ems - - - WCW WHEMRAIRA E PtM CAOSSOW PILAL .sus IGAL SiMITARY LB'C#.MAVVGI=9ET+4� s"aass.Sear b xrr. .x I wtt-- 1f }J ws°s..w.`nww Ila S1 t—=�_ - oaarSraucnsTael �y a„�a FFE4r; .. -L"�'�`�-��~'��-�_ .nw�l. • p .. �CK+'rG.b10LL SY,+�T 9"ic9 --.-� �L L e,6 A A Z µ. ..a-.a..A.. 6 w LI*HrINS NOTES k 0. C. _ 'f f jJ �� •-�9t1Y k nun rrnarzv .r +wLti�a�r 6.1.64,'4.6 w.1 A 6,:,L.Ya:.1.i..1, .6 e6uAw ---�.'Lf.�.: 9 AriiKY%e G2RM+GAnpt d ;16 sws�ams.:asss.taa.w L a 9..•;A,1«.1r6�L'1w .:sr..:.i.�.i�w'. .:�.:.6.:a.s,1 - 370L d2P,9'AVErEffr^.EG'1Oh r � e Fp vi-WRf] • l�p+0.+ I I im sn�Fb.f•kq Pr�'S'P'i Ac ro JI - � _ L JI._4 i'.� a..r�'Wn,IL'f�7 GQRIvIGA4iR1 a..x^ &7Ar SrOMACMM dliLGll:Ss 5TRf7Nfi'5 1 GENTHZ—,0 �' S�Malk EEV+' 'bn tee.+ F 'RESCA DIlMN'A's'G' F:P)C-,JRhiN&'a D' IRA %S cXT&I aA}IN b VI&S� SEIM"Apa r la y yyit 6 r' 't` r ,l _ it eati.,rn ._1 ` } rr ! � �" i n• �� 1 a+alruRa caerrac+vnar k f - 5acvervny cean•Iw.r.cr! * BOAT aroRA6e einiclrree M" ,y'� •'� �� r J r -. •, V 5TRONSS'fAr-HT CENTER PXl$TjN& MW $ •. tea..-r ...vv>__.sec_ c. ..,mo- aa. yec•�c c+r,.s- wsTd�mm n�pm .a+•xm ser yy _ 't.i �-�-._�' � n��ww...e.. e:..� a-e• ron ��,a_na.y�a+crrro. n�.e a, n,Ina v.riaa ro a � .ow.:c.`fie d�.n�,v: f�. � s`• 'v d r � w II siVG a..,a.�y 9 ♦w,•ep ne a. �- � a rR 1�*� �'` lI^�-j''.` tom'-._."�_�..�---�.�._.✓`- I + awsr-.,..� ,a- 1��' r I� 4 r .. •� ' 1 I _{ v-s �AAll Cgbc PAT^ _ � �".H � r y i a-..zu V•r.Vs i[�I�MM'C'q S�.� 1EMPORARYSTOCKMLE AREA 7�++ FOR CONSTRUCTIO4 OF RETAMIINO WALL DURING PHASE t µ DECONSTTMICT HAUL pp 9 MAY EVERGREEN PORTION OF ROAD WRING PHASE 8 � I � EVERGREEN RETMWING— / WALL DHRIMO RHASE 1 '} u. EXCAVATION LIMB � , OF PHASE T1Nd—.. I0.80 ACI e�.s,m Ts� _ iWIIBRb L�KT9`+G^-IOk f ► PHASE TWO:EXCAVATE REMAMIING {r ► •t'? i ► y MAIL FOR PROJECT ,� " � ! y i7 ►+ _ .Lw. . -Y" ► 17,OOPt CY f R'MADE TEMPORARY NRIIL ► i L _ `--ROAD ICOHSTRUCTED PRMSR TO j EXCAVATION ACTMnF8 -er�owwr+'H+u�w sec rn+ .f;'� -- ► --- - _ J �� = sma•2rvn�cecn=Ic..row s j ' r� OF EVER E EVERGREEN PHASE ONE:EXCAVATEMNM t � OF EVERGREEN RETAPNHd GOWN TO ELEVATIDM l9 _WALL DURING PHASE S 123'"tCY a L ► EXCAVATION LIMB- "_OF PHASE ONE .hj` 1 r s . E7T9 AC) f ' f BOAT 9T(?Ii1416S BJ:LOINb9 r1 -_—. # •-„� - 5TRON&S YA.C.HT CFWMZ g, _ �, ( FF saTcle ca,»y w.r area ExGAVA-nrlN r%A5;NS,"N, ' R.sw+I sa.i ron or irn�a� 1. _- Wrt TEMPORARY STOCKPILE AREA . ..,�..w` - FOR CON$TRUCTION OF wL .,.lcm'IV 01 ^c-a.:. ,t o RETNNING WALL DURING PHASE 7 !I -ivy 6 a o.""F=�, � *wvlrw'4+MAP 0'3mr. ` wa un.§every 5,M4- -•s�.�_w.s�_�.•:-�:=_-.r_r-�v�t=.•_s" aa=.er_-_ ___ �a�r-rr'zr�:�s�--e.-�x sers_�r�sr._ '�y4 Ir4 �•"° (�,,YY'' 'YIl 'a 14 n . > { Cf• r:' -_-- •- CLEAREOAREA �+_- y ,� 'I�MP*•ORS LHiTIFtGhT1IXJ CRF iii• T`�.. :�. �2 IMDENINO-% ]{ \--STABIL.UE1 RCAgMdULOER ',F�. "j '; , • '1� ' �� 'x '� E(OAT SYpP 4SE&11L.I�IN6S IF 4#*,-. •F] 5rreow�S vtr c�rlrt,� • _ .�_ 'f. 1 ,� .,,1 ' ' ++_ ae rclsiwev,T—ar sa W � �. �� T�' �� 7\♦'J'y- �!.� - �.�_$ �+•-`•� - �' ,� ? saran cew,ny R.w rew. ARM ?'& �r 11 HAUL RDAD PI.,W j 1 /- - ' M .i.`�y� -�',i►`�,�1 °t�.,n `� ,� Ays� m.w,c,.��a��oa ...aAw o.. a� ^11 A V ��•��i�l� T 17, •�,'7'S,r. 1 A«aa n+.wa.. a SIM A TroiT eel, r� PHASE 1)) ll _ - 1 • .•- �_ •,••� Em i�Y Hur.GG6TWGTIGN LriT4AJ5G[N� ' �� -."�•*�,,rc'..• +ea`".""'�.ry'. '-.st � d ..n.'a-�� -- t d �� `,� 3 _ - p� �,,;� -.., ;-m'•9�., �ti`+� II •� k �f ' caacrrFrE - aoaTs7Aq °�a'?agv �L`*' r { •Yd 1 p r .rr ,.,..:^.+-eb €grlIPIENiNEM�CLE n. �' / �' i- � '•-• :.�.. � - �• -.sT- FlIELINGiSTFC�N68.. -Cpµ,TiNCfK}N --= r�T 'td@BSI—t!!qt s+`e^'++.°1 /(/ ��N .r wsl�ecs C+6erthCArla1 �E4 &7A7 9TGRAd".151.LGl1:b5 5TRONW5 YA.C,4T GEWER i 8lPMFOE WiW F mawncd 'r V Ce—Win va^i -LAN tSiFEKEI +! � x �cr�rrrxas_ N r r- ' r swochvE FtiFw yf�._,,, _ g�e.vler � c T a uvt.w.Pouaman cc+ra.-�_r;:sus nusH 1/1LCT�aa*x*Kx+ •f .�.6s� + ;y."`k �3' I a + I e:. w .. RRET 71 0 C' p' 6 1 1 w Em,+T sronaae aU.Lcihss it `n (esr• ew 5TRON5'5 CENTER � �'."v�� I + - �•M� .le`— _._..+1-. f{11 ^ `whale fw+.iry kw•'•ml ws*rs r�x�ae `l ..-wi..s�•� i ��w�-.� -:no Na�+Rw-�ai 1� - f�E4 y Iy }i� �.�:''� —_ 5'ABl�lff.1 GORS.IiC�!B.TR:YCE � ", � � � xrw ,•C =aa�c:,e:;:.era:as:,c.r�=a«nasc�.�..�.x�n:x�caxae•�sszs�;sr�asacrsc..Auas.sx^ssetw.ms�s+ssrasFrsxwes:�c-7c,�r- r Qu -------------- r'�;� t I q � '� RURSlIiS CgRT�IGA710N der._ 71 BOAT jT ;' mvw.yar»M ar aRJCrOKS c8e,IIWAT ` a r 6Yrr?a+ SUD.. 1 1 k i ++ ±4TS7(;ggG6 tul-kv r f 1-.glYq pe EOAT STORAGE EUILVING5 5Tf2O 5 YACHT CENTER v-W-k,T—0 sm-4 ld 1 (}� MPoik C.p"w Nara Yak AEMAL OVVZLAY � . o '��a'ebnsEln i:M l �,� IaL19 a...io. r rw•pr,lam. / a'!T.n wcaad NrAleA >.e+J-Ye�on�+PF"5M*p�lrnyw M r ��' rM •a VAIXTTITUCk Chief' Secretary ED RITTBERG BRIAN WILLIAMS First Assistant Chief Treasurer JAMES COX JR. THERESA WELLS Second Assistant Chief Sergeant-at-Arms ROBERT M.HAAS ROBERT SHAW Chaplain Home of NY State JAMES L.MURPHY Fireman of the rear 1973 6 1974 MATTITUCK FIRE DEPARTMENT July 27, 2021 PWGC I f �L-iE�3 Attn. Kim Gennaro-Oancea 630 Johnson Ave Suite 7 LLJUL3 2021 Bohemia, NY 11716 Re: Strong's Yacht Center Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 Mill Rd, Mattituck NY 11952 Dear Ms. Gennaro-Oancea, The Mattituck Fire Department Chiefs have reviewed the proposal of the two additional buildings with fire suppression systems and nearby additional propane tanks. Mattituck Fire Department has the capability to handle any fire situation on the proposed plan with the additional hydrant that is being installed. If you require any additional information please do not hesitate to contact me at 631-949- 9991. Sincerely, Ed Rittberg Chief of Department Mattituck Fire Department P.O.Box 136 • 1000 Pike Street • Mattituck,NY 11952-0666 Alain(631)298-8833 • Fax(631)298-1904 • Chiefs(631)298-8852 • Fax(631)298-8858 www rnattituckfd.ora Southold Fire Marshal Correspondence * PAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS June 17, 2021 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL—RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED James Easton, Fire Marshal Town of Southold Town Hall Annex Building 54375 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Environmental Review—Request for Information Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 Mill Road, Mattituck,Town of Southold Fire Marshal Easton: P.W. Grosser Consulting (PWGC) is serving as the environmental consultant to Strong's Yacht Center, LLC (the applicant) which is proposing the construction of two, single-level buildings with elevated roofs, at 49,000 square feet (SF) and 52,500 SF, for the indoor winter storage of yachts at the existing Strong's Yacht Center (SYC). The Town of Southold Planning Board is reviewing the application and has required the applicant to prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). As part of the DEIS, the Town Planning Board has required that the applicant consult with the Mattituck Fire Department to "discuss the threat of fire and explosion on site from all ignitable sources. Include the evaluation of potential fire hazards, and if the Mattituck Fire Department is adequately equipped to respond to a fire at the site. This is of special concern given the size of the structures and the combustibles within the stored boats." We have corresponded with the Mattituck Fire Department, but we are also seeking your input on the proposed development. A description of the applicant's proposal follows, and copies of the proposed site development plans are enclosed. As noted, the proposed development includes two new storage buildings at the SYC property. The proposed development project requires modification of the land area and elevations to the west of the existing maritime-use buildings for placement of the two new buildings. The proposed boat storage buildings would be equipped with radiant floor heating requiring the installation of four(4) 2,000-gallon Liquid Propane (LP) tanks (see the enclosed Utility Plan [Sheet 4 of 13]). Overall, it is estimated that approximately 88 yachts would be stored in the off-season in the two buildings. Also proposed is an extension of the public water main (Suffolk County Water Authority) from Naugles Drive for on-site connection for potable supply, installation of a new hydrant on the west side of West Mill Road, utilization of three existing on-site wells for irrigation only, and replacement/upgrades to the on-site sanitary systems. P.W. GROSSER CONSULTING, INC. PH0NE: 631.589.6353 630 JOHNSON AVENUE,STE 7 P.W. GROSSER CONSULTING ENGINEER$ HYDROGEOLOGIST, P.C. PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA, NY 11716 LONG ISLAND . MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • SYRACUSE • SEATTLE • SHELTON * PAW CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS Regarding fire protection, a new hydrant would be installed (see Utility Plan [Sheet 5 of 13]) and the proposed buildings would be equipped with fire warning and fire suppression systems. Access to the subject property is from the eastern terminus of West Mill Road and as part of the proposed development, the existing internal driveway would be extended for vehicular access to the proposed new buildings. Also,a temporary haul road from West Mill Road across the undeveloped lands to the SYC property would be installed for use during construction and would remain in place; however, gated to prevent unauthorized access. As such, access to the site would be provided via the existing driveway from West Mill Road and emergency access from the higher elevation would be available from the haul road off Mill Road. Based on the above project description and enclosed plans, we are respectfully requesting your comments. If you have any questions or comments related to this request, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at kgennaro@pwgrosser.com. Further note that the applicant, Jeff Strong, would be willing to meet with you to review the plans and address any concerns related to the proposed development. Thank you in advance for your assistance in this matter. Regards, P.W. GROSSER CONSULTING Kim Gennaro-Oancea, M.S.,AICP CEP Vice President enc. cc:J. Strong P.W. GROSSER CONSULTING, INC. PH0NE: 631.589.6353 630 JOHNSON AVENUE,STE 7 P.W. GROSSER CONSULTING ENGINEER$ HYDROGEOLOGIST, P.C. PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA, NY 11716 LONG ISLAND . MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • SYRACUSE • SEATTLE • SHELTON ad \\e0ea°r °cC)ad ,f Oa. OL m fl. ova R° d ? O L� O • S 0 East`Road m +� ! Central Drive o � _ R°aa ,3 •� aPJe�ae coop dh° Road m G rare c / °od • , �4r ��a oaa ° a ao\\� awe 4s Qod Oae�R. gays ew PvenU �.Ol e� ,q w °O - `. Miller Road Nz, p o F f�•�; .. A °� � da gym. � � 0'° d2�P�eroe ° o aoJe�' �a� e�Yceet P�eoJe �` • -�a\\�°°a� _ ` � Oee`O waS�pha�ia R°aa `oL°�d , •. e �� o °rP�eoUe Jet e •NeW SuffolkA�enue O o So�ad P ° �q, `" *,` as �• r Y e , 9L A COh 1- o �o i4s6 oh Jill lip 111 - 1 111 111 111 111 111 ,r IN ram. �..r.... �-.. •.,-e .`rc aea�c.� �� P'°^-... _ v..�.Ra..�+ux- --•�..-tea kl' :Oar .rrwr >•w w, Y'� � "�� yg ,•� '� �S l IIi � ..�w:+s.a..w w.w r.w ..... - •'� � t1�M '�� -ggy III I, / _may k t il+s�i rf! � 'eC'd .r.-c�w�.i'�-rury^Y'�w.eieaarueya. ya FFs�„°p� f R, e�.xvrraiee G141.rICATCIY g 1 I RLam� 1'��r ra spa•.ce. I f x _ �' ' i•gee�a".� rrm.'Aw se� •e-•r �' .�g�,,,�.a=r' ..,",,: 1 BOAT STOR.4 9JrLDINSS La.,e• '' '��r 57R4N5'5 Y+4Gl+T CENTER -.. ..One �2 �'=ry'�+. ' rs nc•lm�s..�..o...,w saro�e r Jn itl rl'�W� SrlfelR Gv,•.�,Knr.Yam. &EMERAL LA'foVr -� Me.ar wy roe �.e•9 a.a xa Cw �. e s -•�•ep�WC_--.•� ._ �. In ae x j:,"=m+'mp wr`I STRONG YACHT CENTER w Y — _ - _ Al aax FF r TIGAl 91�n.AkTiwa --� _i et y`'~ / �a�$ •� �r ��++ sucveroA.a cecnsiuT� 7 � IIIj a �.�o-xri,,ems .�'� �rY, w.• ne:� - �, COAT sraRAae dI.LGIN69 l \yynnN•\.pn Np Jr\'I\' 5T� 'J Y/�.GF0 �w �y 9.ma's ee Ydp'ip.il w.Ma4cu< +eF LASMIGAM Mff ALU6M+gdvr PLAbmNs T �r1l ce nNMN3 OtloibATICW -— � ..o.s...«r« f ..,. 1,'� y ��.i!+. _1 +,zwrrf•...t we.•+vr.vrin v.,.. rr.ar � r m r ✓j '�i jr � � r� ti� _ ' -a.cX4M, _ Y [ter, . "•`*�+ar m. - t P I M««.///k G 4, �M1_�_z�� PAOF+pyECr �a -- �w-�..,.. -♦ ` P: � �� - �y � It - 1 JJ 4 K� rn•�� - - �r i _� Y °JAtv2YpRy C1'ATI��Gsrzn+ fsroar -^ti=..w ��% ✓1p t x, a a. ro '"'" FF V. .. I _ �-_ ITmr - 4• yy tr«1 'i 3111 � 'ans✓.xx cn. %.uc:a t,7R.aMa6E R.M a«m« �.i��. j f +e�a .erg�� ,.7- T•�7 ..�y y�».e e r i-,ram i•a++-` x•a.:+r,r ,s -w-.cMs.rr.wa.� .a wvy ! : - - I � �4 5Aro nRT pffiI6N CM/rYN-•.ik i L/CGIL.TOK6 5 _ ODD T==.1- � 1 V nrn.ri ��'AY+ee ndv Ph1:�1N6 1✓!G'�1 i AMO1J I.Ifi�JR A4✓.9 f�+�1 I '� I � 1 � •� an r7 r . y . 3 - _ LJI .. Mv �+ I •_ fir � L i --m°�Lsren,srwry f I �� wee® � ��,. ��• w rm..r.�.r»+e 1 •�► r •. i 7A y 9DAT 9rf7R.A6--BJ:LCIN69 $TRON515 YACHT GEWER I�^'��, � � � S.NeIK Lc.n•.y'Yn wa �� - '• Ia y + 11r1r_ITY PLMl 10 ZM— s:eernaaY*'ea n tee-.was- �r�- , I wtl w•Jewyl}..a.�as Maa ro+ �Ivd w+r-W-qy 7��o•araa ro. J C1Jy� ,r xew ..r I+xe DATA r v srv+rshR•r°eTru�n� :r...� rr w•_a.�.,,w..+mu+. ouq _ _ ..._ _ stilun+a+•adV*%G+RVLA a GAL^a.LATmMA _ `-. r eo-fra.:t •+c=.v+ 'a.ne�rnsr s".e. °kvEe:aNlr+'lu*W,� 7-1 --- � �w+ct�rni.N10 a.�-� a.z �w ac.sec•rv.�� ss rm - •c aa.•ro� �.�•emw.x nen LC •` fl�+� �k MAN �•�.ie.��_ _ 'il `Y� � ... yy9. 1 �y✓ y�.:..��"�, -�"S.eX.4-C.. Td�Wliwl[Y t.±�+rr e aso.a r-ax ry i _ Q alKiRs ufst cAnaK~ �• 4m=w= HV6DIXi6�.evexn•ufafrt.+aura[af°.+4 S'L'lt{' - '""* r "••` "",•'r--w.+c ..n rrol.u�!rcaeww f ,tee • -•�maw.o.� { I y - ♦M. yIdl BK,C.is 1PP4W�� I ' t � �-�r�� -� f� -Yy _ 4 •i, _- eaAT sTc7Rh'6�BJ:LGI1:6s •i. f 4a•x pso' OR xa' f� ' ! y___ f 9l•H.t7Nb"a YACHT CENTER �w wE °�•y {]i t 1-0s pa UTILITY P,AK -gl`1 .....,v ,r. SAW PMI*k MTMA 11�..".i'.=.CMS Zaw w�.�a�rr -r.vnxs�...a _s-f'+Y/-�+�v,.v:.c,w.a. .J�.q..asr r.•1 .na,e a.vvwevrt �rYo�.,e�Ye,r _ aa.e�.,Tia a�i+.ae`r.r�l Q rs � cesMl GAswe*�&ahnTMRi 3mL+K, r7 Hralca.Ltic'laerr�varAlrr arsrm no.i sauna,:... .. - 3 ro.�sv�-rc�rr+•.v,r•*e rss+ •air.-.z.s.r -.r. ,. .,ee� � s•r,e rRAT�6 R�,d511B YRS hitZtT iAA]INbY wnrgmina.r_--._i ,r,rurmei,.ws 1-t'RGA:4140.rJM�P^JI!AC.CC4S Ne]4E6 ..arwv u-� ;.' evYpRNJIJG FliIL�rl4[7�MNTARY S.'snim MPS w'raeur w, s t wsti.•s uw,.ir�rn W,.i,N —1 -'.�ys'.�- p�jRClssy:2R'�T"GAnQk TR.Ma S lmls ale sWvct •••�••�, .. -.- ms..nwn: GC1-IWXAL OW-L.0 fiMRAN 1 �•,•• '9VtYCrW.b cd.�IrlcA*+a1 Gi_L/V4yZRAI ♦.�,IGC K 1 14" •3 YWT64�CVIGL�LVmR MA1!Y fAD3GMR LRw L ,,arse } *_- a 1Ef !I x"I as . . ...F «•_� �. A w°"� �•`a-��- •ia�-r�•.• - � � rarPFt a`�-Awrrdxr oEra11..5 I rs`r �.ye� '��4�•,,.(-•ems - - - WCW WHEMRAIRA E PtM CAOSSOW PILAL .sus IGAL SiMITARY LB'C#.MAVVGI=9ET+4� s"aass.Sear b xrr. .x I wtt-- 1f }J ws°s..w.`nww Ila S1 t—=�_ - oaarSraucnsTael �y a„�a FFE4r; .. -L"�'�`�-��~'��-�_ .nw�l. • p .. �CK+'rG.b10LL SY,+�T 9"ic9 --.-� �L L e,6 A A Z µ. ..a-.a..A.. 6 w LI*HrINS NOTES k 0. C. _ 'f f jJ �� •-�9t1Y k nun rrnarzv .r +wLti�a�r 6.1.64,'4.6 w.1 A 6,:,L.Ya:.1.i..1, .6 e6uAw ---�.'Lf.�.: 9 AriiKY%e G2RM+GAnpt d ;16 sws�ams.:asss.taa.w L a 9..•;A,1«.1r6�L'1w .:sr..:.i.�.i�w'. .:�.:.6.:a.s,1 - 370L d2P,9'AVErEffr^.EG'1Oh r � e Fp vi-WRf] • l�p+0.+ I I im sn�Fb.f•kq Pr�'S'P'i Ac ro JI - � _ L JI._4 i'.� a..r�'Wn,IL'f�7 GQRIvIGA4iR1 a..x^ &7Ar SrOMACMM dliLGll:Ss 5TRf7Nfi'5 1 GENTHZ—,0 �' S�Malk EEV+' 'bn tee.+ F 'RESCA DIlMN'A's'G' F:P)C-,JRhiN&'a D' IRA %S cXT&I aA}IN b VI&S� SEIM"Apa r la y yyit 6 r' 't` r ,l _ it eati.,rn ._1 ` } rr ! � �" i n• �� 1 a+alruRa caerrac+vnar k f - 5acvervny cean•Iw.r.cr! * BOAT aroRA6e einiclrree M" ,y'� •'� �� r J r -. •, V 5TRONSS'fAr-HT CENTER PXl$TjN& MW $ •. tea..-r ...vv>__.sec_ c. ..,mo- aa. yec•�c c+r,.s- wsTd�mm n�pm .a+•xm ser yy _ 't.i �-�-._�' � n��ww...e.. e:..� a-e• ron ��,a_na.y�a+crrro. n�.e a, n,Ina v.riaa ro a � .ow.:c.`fie d�.n�,v: f�. � s`• 'v d r � w II siVG a..,a.�y 9 ♦w,•ep ne a. �- � a rR 1�*� �'` lI^�-j''.` tom'-._."�_�..�---�.�._.✓`- I + awsr-.,..� ,a- 1��' r I� 4 r .. •� ' 1 I _{ v-s �AAll Cgbc PAT^ _ � �".H � r y i a-..zu V•r.Vs i[�I�MM'C'q S�.� 1EMPORARYSTOCKMLE AREA 7�++ FOR CONSTRUCTIO4 OF RETAMIINO WALL DURING PHASE t µ DECONSTTMICT HAUL pp 9 MAY EVERGREEN PORTION OF ROAD WRING PHASE 8 � I � EVERGREEN RETMWING— / WALL DHRIMO RHASE 1 '} u. EXCAVATION LIMB � , OF PHASE T1Nd—.. I0.80 ACI e�.s,m Ts� _ iWIIBRb L�KT9`+G^-IOk f ► PHASE TWO:EXCAVATE REMAMIING {r ► •t'? i ► y MAIL FOR PROJECT ,� " � ! y i7 ►+ _ .Lw. . -Y" ► 17,OOPt CY f R'MADE TEMPORARY NRIIL ► i L _ `--ROAD ICOHSTRUCTED PRMSR TO j EXCAVATION ACTMnF8 -er�owwr+'H+u�w sec rn+ .f;'� -- ► --- - _ J �� = sma•2rvn�cecn=Ic..row s j ' r� OF EVER E EVERGREEN PHASE ONE:EXCAVATEMNM t � OF EVERGREEN RETAPNHd GOWN TO ELEVATIDM l9 _WALL DURING PHASE S 123'"tCY a L ► EXCAVATION LIMB- "_OF PHASE ONE .hj` 1 r s . E7T9 AC) f ' f BOAT 9T(?Ii1416S BJ:LOINb9 r1 -_—. # •-„� - 5TRON&S YA.C.HT CFWMZ g, _ �, ( FF saTcle ca,»y w.r area ExGAVA-nrlN r%A5;NS,"N, ' R.sw+I sa.i ron or irn�a� 1. _- Wrt TEMPORARY STOCKPILE AREA . ..,�..w` - FOR CON$TRUCTION OF wL .,.lcm'IV 01 ^c-a.:. ,t o RETNNING WALL DURING PHASE 7 !I -ivy 6 a o.""F=�, � *wvlrw'4+MAP 0'3mr. ` wa un.§every 5,M4- 113 1�'y .�l�f }' ` rrr `y' n•ll� i / Y..T.f 1 YY' �' ♦ y E .'d^� fit;"6 r.�r nt.+ •ik �_ ^`4•`'•• �1�� 1l� ' /J r r _ CLEARED ---- --- � `cLenEYE o AREA 1 t i � u„w.e ynev>°.•o�s racnE=�wmeH=- �STABELE2ED RCA SHDULDER �- r $qA.T$10ftA4E BUILD@7E• STRON&S YACHT CENTER � - 1 1 � yen os o •4 • i ! xab E'.7p- m a SIM A TroiT eel, r� PHASE 1)) ll _ - 1 • .•- �_ •,••� Em i�Y Hur.GG6TWGTIGN LriT4AJ5G[N� ' �� -."�•*�,,rc'..• +ea`".""'�.ry'. '-.st � d ..n.'a-�� -- t d �� `,� 3 _ - p� �,,;� -.., ;-m'•9�., �ti`+� II •� k �f ' caacrrFrE - aoaTs7Aq °�a'?agv �L`*' r { •Yd 1 p r .rr ,.,..:^.+-eb €grlIPIENiNEM�CLE n. �' / �' i- � '•-• :.�.. � - �• -.sT- FlIELINGiSTFC�N68.. -Cpµ,TiNCfK}N --= r�T 'td@BSI—t!!qt s+`e^'++.°1 /(/ ��N .r wsl�ecs C+6erthCArla1 �E4 &7A7 9TGRAd".151.LGl1:b5 5TRONW5 YA.C,4T GEWER i 8lPMFOE WiW F mawncd 'r V Ce—Win va^i -LAN tSiFEKEI +! � x �cr�rrrxas_ N r r- ' r swochvE FtiFw yf�._,,, _ g�e.vler � c T a uvt.w.Pouaman cc+ra.-�_r;:sus nusH 1/1LCT�aa*x*Kx+ •f .�.6s� + ;y."`k �3' I a + I e:. w .. RRET 71 0 C' p' 6 1 1 w Em,+T sronaae aU.Lcihss it `n (esr• ew 5TRON5'5 CENTER � �'."v�� I + - �•M� .le`— _._..+1-. f{11 ^ `whale fw+.iry kw•'•ml ws*rs r�x�ae `l ..-wi..s�•� i ��w�-.� -:no Na�+Rw-�ai 1� - f�E4 y Iy }i� �.�:''� —_ 5'ABl�lff.1 GORS.IiC�!B.TR:YCE � ", � � � xrw ,•C =aa�c:,e:;:.era:as:,c.r�=a«nasc�.�..�.x�n:x�caxae•�sszs�;sr�asacrsc..Auas.sx^ssetw.ms�s+ssrasFrsxwes:�c-7c,�r- r Qu -------------- r'�;� t I q � '� RURSlIiS CgRT�IGA710N der._ 71 BOAT jT ;' mvw.yar»M ar aRJCrOKS c8e,IIWAT ` a r 6Yrr?a+ SUD.. 1 1 k i ++ ±4TS7(;ggG6 tul-kv r f 1-.glYq pe EOAT STORAGE EUILVING5 5Tf2O 5 YACHT CENTER v-W-k,T—0 sm-4 ld 1 (}� MPoik C.p"w Nara Yak AEMAL OVVZLAY � . o '��a'ebnsEln i:M l �,� IaL19 a...io. r rw•pr,lam. / a'!T.n wcaad NrAleA >.e+J-Ye�on�+PF"5M*p�lrnyw M r ��' rM •a Town Hall Annex �suFFoc o �� , Telephone (631) 765-1802 54375 Main Road Fax (631) 765-9502 P. O. Box 1179 lei jamese@southoldtownny.gov Southold,NY 11971-0959 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE MARSHAL Kim Gennaro-Oancea, Vice President P.W. Grosser Consulting, Inc. 630 Johnson Ave, Suite 7 Bohemia, NY 11716 June 24, 2021 Re: Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 Mill Rd, Mattituck Fire Safety Evaluation Fire hazards common to these type of occupancies include poor storage practices, obstruction of fire sprinklers by stock, lack of inspection, testing and maintenance of fire protection equipment, electrical hazards, improper housekeeping, etc. Many of these hazards can be addressed during the building design phase, the proper maintenance of electrical/mechanical/fire protection equipment, and frequent fire safety inspections. The protection of the building and its occupants is achieved by using both passive and active fire protection features. Proper design, installation and maintenance of passive and active fire protection systems are best ways to safeguard the property, its occupants and first responders from a fire event. Passive fire protection is achieved by protecting the essential building structural elements from the effects of heat and fire in an effort to eliminate or delay fire spread and structural failure/collapse. Steps can be taken during the design process to maximize passive fire protection by including appropriate types of building materials, fire rated assemblies, opening protectives and through-penetration protection. Having properly designed and maintained paths of egress provide building occupants a safe and efficient way to leave the building in the event of an emergency. Active fire protection systems are the suppression and detection systems that detect, alert building occupants and control a fire. These systems include but are not limited to automatic fire extinguishing systems, fire detection systems and smoke/heat removal systems. Special care should be taken during the design process of these systems as the size of the buildings and occupancy type will trigger specific requirements. In addition to a balance between passive and active fire protection, here are some specific items that should be visited in an effort to manage the risk of a fire event: Adhere to requirements of the 2020 NYS Fire Code Chapter 32: High-Piled Combustible Storage. 1 o Operating Permits obtained after periodic fire safety inspections are required by building code. o Identify the commodity classification of material(s)being stored to ensure the applicable safety features are provided. • Approved"NO SMOKING" signs shall be conspicuously posted in accordance with Section 310 of the 2020 NYS Fire Code. • Provide fire protection features as required by Table 3206.2 of the 2020 NYS Fire Code. • An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 13. Design of the sprinkler system should include but is not limited to: o Evaluation of water supply—is the capacity/location adequate for firefighting efforts. o What are the area(sq. ft.) limitations of the sprinkler system? o What is the hazard level of the building? Classification of commodities? o What are the specific design features required found in Chapters 12, 15, 17 and 20? • Per NFPA, when a boat is to be dry-stored for the season or stored indoors for an extended period of time, the following precautions should be taken: o The vessel shall be inspected for any hazardous materials or conditions that could exist, and corrective action shall be taken. o Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and compressed natural gas (CNG) cylinders, reserve supplies of stove alcohol or kerosene, and charcoal shall be removed from the premises or stored in a separate, designated safe area. o All portable fuel tanks shall be removed from the premises or emptied and, if emptied the cap shall be removed and the tank left open to the atmosphere. • Per NFPA, where boats are stored in multilevel racks, either inside or outside, for seasonal storage or for in-out operation, the following precautions should be taken: o Drain plugs shall be removed (in sprinklered buildings). o Batteries shall be disconnected or the master batter switch turned off. o Fuel tank valves shall be closed. o Repairs to boats that are on racks in a dry storage building shall be prohibited. o The charging of batteries shall be prohibited in a dry storage building. o Open flame heaters shall not be used in boat storage areas. o The use of portable heaters in boat storage areas shall be prohibited. o No unattended electrical equipment shall be in use aboard boats. o Class I flammable liquids shall not be stored in an indoor boat storage area. o Work performed on boats stored indoors shall be performed by qualified personnel. o Facility management shall maintain control over all personnel access to storage facilities. • Propane tanks should be installed, separated and protected from vehicle impact as required in NFPA 58. • Fire Department access shall be provided within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of all buildings. • Although not required by code for this occupancy, it is recommended a fire safety plan be developed and trained upon by employees. 2 • Building owners should ensure that inspection, testing and maintenance of fire protection and life safety systems are conducted in accordance with NYS Fire Code and applicable NFPA standards. Please feel free to contact me with any additional comments/concerns. Regards, yawwe'j' e��V*v James Easton Fire Marshal Town of Southold 3 `4, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ate �� -Y FIRE MARSHAL Town Hall Annex 54375 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1802 Fax (631) 765-9502 Email iamesegsoutholdtownny.gov Kim Gennaro-Oancea, Vice President P.W. Grosser Consulting, Inc. 630 Johnson Ave, Suite 7 Bohemia,NY 11716 August 19, 2021 Re: Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 Mill Rd, Mattituck Fire Safety Evaluation Dear Ms. Gennaro-Oancea: I am in receipt of your letter dated August 4, 2021 as well as Chief Rittberg's letter dated July 27, 2021. I am in agreement with Chief Rittberg that emergency access is adequate. A fire safety plan is recommended however not required by Code for these occupancies. Please feel free to contact me with any additional comments/concerns. Regards, Y—$I e�-Ab-(y James Easton Fire Marshal Town of Southold Fire Safety Plan Strong's Marine Yacht Center 5780 W Mill Road Mattituck, NY 11952 (631) 298-4480 Emergency Contacts: Ted Webb: (631) 599-9463 or Sarah Hassildine (631) 508-6192 Fire Safety Plan Building/Site Layout Information • Nine total buildings on the property • Buildings are designated by number and description 0 1—Wood Shop, Mechanic Shop, Parts Room, Attic Canvas Shop &Storage 0 2—Boats& Equipment Storage 0 3—Boat Storage (Old hanger style building) 0 4—Boat Storage 0 5—Boat Storage 0 6—Boat Storage 0 7—Boat Storage 0 8—Fiberglass Shop 0 9—Main Office, 2 floors and small basement Hazards Locations • Above ground Gas (2000 gallon max) and Diesel (8000 gallon max) Storage Tanks located outside the North side of Building 1, Mechanic Shop • Waste Oil Heather located in back West side of Building 1, Mechanic Shop • Battery storage located in Building 3, South side (#2 side), indoors • Assorted supplies, paints, lubes, cleaners located in Building 1, Parts Room • All hazards on the property are properly labeled, stored, and accessible Utility Information • Building 1-7- Electric service located at each entrance of • Building 9—Main Office service panel located West side of the door, indoors • Electric meters are located on the Northeast corner of the main property entrance Water Supply • Primary: Hydrant supply to property at Main entrance from Naugles Dr. to Cox Neck direct to Yacht Center • Water Draft from Mattituck Inlet Creek Occupancy Information • Daytime hours—Strong's employees &Sub Contractors year round • Summer Season - Daytime and evening hours Dockage/Transient customers September 2, 2021 Evacuation Needs • Strong's employees &Sub Contractors on property • Boat dockage customers on docks A—F Emergency Procedure • All Strong's employees on location are issued a radio for communication throughout the Yacht Center property • In case of a fire all employees are instructed to make an announcement over the radio indicating the location of the fire (building, dock, shop etc.) and asking to call 911 • The person covering the Main Office will contact 911 regarding the emergency • If we determine it is necessary to shut down power to our location we will notify the PSEG emergency #at 1 (800)490-0075 • All employees are educated on the location of fire extinguishers and trained to use them to extinguish the fire if manageable • All employees are instructed to meet at the main entrance gate of the Yacht Center property in case of any emergency • All dockage customers or Sub Contractors on location will be notified and evacuated to the main entrance gate • All buildings have 2 exits (front and rear door)for exiting the building in an emergency • Employees have been instructed on the escape routes for all buildings September 2, 2021 Go,:gle Maps _ v r c M��• n ' � N„�'�IAa111w.A i g1u+y 31a1�u'1 e O a i 'v1■a' 3 µ:lllwc•v (%)tnIPtlGpl D;CK LW = �,. 511c1y L Ywd Ctrdm N a �Y • .3d o- >F Go gle cc, runs Q Map data 02020 Google 200 RL_----j Home Set location Work �fCS Set location Light traffic in this area No delays nearby MATTITUCK, INLET Z .. E utx:lc F lxxac a DDT , C DOCK l)1 l)] F) E d F I J B lxx c s 1, \� AmcK o k u 1 D11 k9 \7 LS V7 10 )J Al Ns b] 110 C6 G7 111: 111 Fil A 0 1 �� • 7m)•0 Maki,111e • bl �J • �( X%4 Q� x out l drj / 7 it IV b de , k YACHT CENTER h/k l/�" — EXHIBIT 8 OFFICE LOCATION: r MAILING ADDRESS: 54375 State Route 25 �� a P.O.Box 11 1 Town Hall Annex �""�� Southold, NY 1971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY 1 �,�� i� " 8g tool Telephone: 631 765-1938 k www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 29, 2024 Charles Cuddy Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Strong's Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: As per the Planning Board letter dated, July 13, 2023, and the agreement that you hold escrow for the consultant to prepare the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the project referenced above, please reimburse the Town of Southold for the amounts paid to Harvesty & Hanover as shown below and attached. Invoice #1 - $29,475.00, 11/14/23 Invoice #2 - $36,410.00, 1/5/2024 Please, if you have any questions, do not hesitate to call this office at (631) 765-1938. Respectfully, Heather Lanza, AICP Town Planning Director Encls. Vendor No. Check No. Town of Southold, New York - Payment Voucher Entered by Vendor Name Vendor Address Audit Date Hardesty & Hanover 1501 Broadway Vendor Telephone Number New York, NY 10036 Town Clerk Vendor Contact Invoice Invoice Invoice Net Purchase Order Number Date Total Discount Amount Claimed Number Description of Goods or Services General Ledger Fund and Account Number --P—ro-fe—ssional Services 1 $29,475.00 $29,475.00 TBR 23-615 7/1/23 -9/29/23 B.8020.4.500.300 Application, and review and organize Public Comments Payee Certification Department Certification The undersigned(Claimant)(Acting on behalf of the above named claimant) I hereby certify that the materials above specified have been received by me does hereby certify that the foregoing claim is true and correct,that no part has in good condition without substitution,the services properly been paid,except as therein stated,that the balance therein stated is actually performed and that the quantities thereof have been verified with the exceptions due and owing,and that taxes from which the Town is exempt are excluded. or discrepancies noted,and payment is approved Signature Title Si nature lt" Company Name Date Titled aq4l t VA Datc l t ( Z &H 1501 Broadway New York,NY 10036 T:212.944.1150 www.hardestyhanover.coni October 31, 2023 Heather Lanza Project No: F6219.00 Town of Southold, NY Invoice No: 01 54375 Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA Professional Services from July 1 2023 to September 29, 2023 Phase HHLA Labor - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Task 1000 Review of DEIS &Application Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Brown, Sarah 7/21/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Brown, Sarah 7/21/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Meeting with HL; General Application overview Brown, Sarah 8/4/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Discussions with Staff; Review of Comments/DEIS Brown, Sarah 8/11/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Review of Comments on DEIS Brown, Sarah 8/18/2023 1.50 225.00 337.50 Brown, Sarah 8/18/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Review of DEIS & Comments Simpson, Malcolm 8/4/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Review of DEIS and DEIS Comments Simpson, Malcolm 8/4/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Review of DEIS and DEIS Comments Totals 12.50 2,332.50 1.0 times 2,332.50 2,332.50 1.0 times 2,332.50 2,332.50 Total Labor 2,332.50 Total this Task $2,332.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Task 1001 Review& Organize Public Comments Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Brown, Sarah 8/25/2023 2.50 225.00 562.50 Brown, Sarah 8/25/2023 2.00 225.00 450.00 Meeting with HL & MT to discuss FEIS and process; Internal review of comments Brown, Sarah 9/1/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Brown, Sarah 9/22/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 &H 1501 Broadway New York,NY 10036 T:212.944.1150 www.hardestyhanover.com Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA Invoice Brown, Sarah 9/22/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Discussion with HL; Status memo Brown, Sarah 9/22/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Status report; Simpson, Malcolm 8/25/2023 2.00 145.00 290.00 Review and Organization of Public Comments Simpson, Malcolm 8/25/2023 4.00 145.00 580.00 Review and Organization of Public Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/1/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Review of DEIS Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/1/2023 6.00 145.00 870.00 Review of DEIS Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/1/2023 10.00 145.00 1,450.00 Review of DEIS CommentsCoordination with internal staff on the review of DEIS Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/8/2023 10.00 145.00 1,450.00 Review of Klein Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/8/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of Klein Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/15/2023 4.00 145.00 580.00 Simpson, Malcolm 9/15/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of Joel Klein letter and organization of comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/15/2023 1.00 145.00 145.00 Review of Joel Klein letter and organization of comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/22/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of DEIS public comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/22/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of DEIS public comments Preparation of update memo Simpson, Malcolm 9/22/2023 11.50 145.00 1,667.50 Review of Public Comment on DEIS Simpson, Malcolm 9/29/2023 22.50 145.00 3,262.50 Review and catalogue of public comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/29/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Review and catalogue of public comments Thomas, Radu 9/1/2023 17.00 145.00 2,465.00 Thomas, Radu 9/8/2023 22.00 145.00 3,190.00 DEIS:Comments review and summary. Thomas, Radu 9/15/2023 9.00 145.00 1,305.00 Thomas, Radu 9/22/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Thomas, Radu 9/29/2023 14.00 145.00 2,030.00 Totals 182.50 27,142.50 1.0 times 27,142.50 27,142.50 1.0 times 27,142.50 27,142.50 Total Labor 27,142.50 Total this Task $27,142.50 Page 2 &H 1501 Broadway New York,NY 10036 T:212.944.1150 www.hardestyhanover.com Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA Invoice Total this Phase $29,475.00 Total this Invoice $29,475.00 Page 3 Vendor No. Check No. Town of Southold, New York - Payment Voucher Entered by Vendor Name Vendor Address Audit Date Hardesty& Hanover 1501 Broadway Vendor Telephone Number New York, NY 10036 Town Clerk Vendor Contact Invoice Invoice Invoice Net Purchase Order Number Date Total Discount Amount Claimed Number Description of Goods or Services General Ledger Fund and Account Number --7-rotessional Services 2 $36,410.00 $36,410.00 TBR 23-615 9/30/23 - 11/24/23 B.8020.4.500.300 Payee Certification Department Certification The undersigned(Claimant) on behalf of the above named claimant) I hereby certify that the materials above specified have been received by me does hereby certify that the foregoing claim is true and correct,that no part has in good condition without substitution,the services properly been paid,except as therein stated,that the balance therein stated is actually performed and that the quantities thereof have been verified with the exceptions due and owing,and that taxes from which the Town is exempt are excluded. or discrepancies noted,and payment is approved. Signature Title Signature7�--�---- Company Name bate Title VIftl t 2 [Wt)ate 11 r5 1-16 ZI-A B &H 1501 Broadway New York,NY 10036 T:212.944.1150 www.hardestyhanover.corn December 21, 2023 Heather Lanza Project No: F6219.00 Town of Southold, NY Invoice No: 02 54375 Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA Professional Services from September 30 2023 to November 24, 2023 Phase HHLA Labor Task 1001 Review& Organize Public Comments Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Brown, Sarah 10/27/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Summary of FEIS comments Brown, Sarah 11/3/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Meeting with HL & MT Oliveira Demelo, Christian 10/6/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Oliveira Demelo, Christian 10/13/2023 23.50 145.00 3,407.50 Oliveira Demelo, Christian 10/20/2023 19.00 145.00 2,755.00 Oliveira Demelo, Christian 10/27/2023 17.00 145.00 2,465.00 Simpson, Malcolm 10/6/2023 2.00 145.00 290.00 Correspondence with internal staff and review of public comments Simpson, Malcolm 10/6/2023 1.00 145.00 145.00 Correspondence with internal staff Simpson, Malcolm 10/6/2023 18.00 145.00 2,610.00 Review of public comments Simpson, Malcolm 10/13/2023 7.00 145.00 1,015.00 Review of Public comments Simpson, Malcolm 10/13/2023 13.00 145.00 1,885.00 Review of public comments Simpson, Malcolm 10/20/2023 32.50 145.00 4,712.50 Simpson, Malcolm 10/27/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of public comments: preparation of internal summary memo; preparation of memo to the Town of Southold Simpson, Malcolm 10/27/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of public comments Thomas, Radu 10/6/2023 32.00 145.00 4,640.00 Thomas, Radu 10/13/2023 12.00 145.00 1,740.00 Thomas, Radu 10/20/2023 32.00 145.00 4,640.00 Thomas, Radu 10/27/2023 20.00 145.00 2,900.00 Totals 250.00 36,410.00 1.0 times 36,410.00 36,410.00 1.0 times 36,410.00 36,410.00 Total Labor 36,410.00 Total this Task $36,410.00 &H 1501 Broadway New York,NY 10036 T:212.944.1150 www.hardestyhanover.com Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA Invoice Total this Phase $36,410.00 Total this Invoice $36,410.00 Page 2 RESOLUTION 2023-615 ADOPTED DOC ID: 19309 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2023-615 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON DULY 5, 2023: RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby accepts the proposal of Hardesty&Hanover in the amount of$99,930.00 for the Planning Board SEQRA Consultant for the Final Environmental Impact Statement preparation for Strong's Storage Buildings. Funds are available in B.8020.4.500.300 Planning, SEQRA Consultants. Denis Nonearrow Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED (5 TO 01 MOVER: Greg Doroski, Councilman SECONDER:Brian O. Mealy, Councilman AYES: Nappa,Doroski,Mealy, Doherty,Evans RECUSED: Scott A. Russell EXHIBIT 9 I a MR BROWN 53B BROADHOLLOW ROAD SUITE 301 .• MELVILLE, NEW FORK 1 1 747 ALTMAN & D I L E❑ , LLP TEL 51 6-222-0222 FAX 51 6-222-0322 KBDA(7 BROWNALTMAN.CoM WWW.BROWNALTMAN.COM March 28, 2024 Sub F Via Electronic Mail and P G , 1i F,edf."x Overni ht Deliver James H. Rich III Vice-Chairman RECEIV.MAR 29 _,.... Planning Board, Town of Southold Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 _, _._.-,o��tllolcl n .- 1�ow Southold,New York 11971 Planning Board Re: In the Matter of the Application of Strong s Yacht Center("Strong's")for Site Plan Approval(the"Site Plan Application"),from the Southold Planning Board(the"PB" or the "Town")) to construct new boat storage facilities @ 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, New York(the "Property"); S.C.TM. No.: Dist. 1000, Sec. 016, Blk. 06, Lots 010 and 013.004 Our File No.: 100-661-001 Dear Vice-Chairman Rich and Fellow Members of the Planning Board: We are advised that your consultant, Hardesty & Hanover("H&H"), has been working on the Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS") regarding Strong's Site Plan Application. However, we have not been provided with any information regarding the FEIS, including H&H's efforts to prepare the same. As you know, Strong's deposited the sum of$85,000.00 in escrow with our co-counsel, Charles Cuddy, Esq., to pay for H&H's services. To date, we have not received an itemized invoice from the Town and/or H&H. We,therefore, respectfully request that detailed invoice(s)for all of H&H's services, including a monthly summary of all work completed to date, be provided to us by April 5,2024. We greatly appreciate your courtesy and cooperation with respect to our request. Very truly yours, Brown Altman& DiLeo, LLP I —7 y: .. , a d N.Altman 1 cc.:: Southold Planning Dept. (attn: Heather Lanza, Planning Director; via electronic mail and regular mail) Strong's Yacht Center(attn: Jeff Strong, via electronic mail) Charles Cuddy, Esq. (via electronic mail) PWGC (attn: Kim Gennaro and Katelyn Kaim, via electronic mail,respectively) 538 BROADHOLLOW ROAD SUITE 301 BROWN MELVILLE, NEW YORK 1 1 747 ALTMAN & TEL 51 G-222-0222 FAX 51 6-222-0322 DILEO , LLP � KHDA@BROWNALTMAN.COM WWW.BROWNA,LTMAN.COM April 1, 2024 P L Sv b-P "ia le tro nic Aliaril, OnIt ....-.. ._...... Southold Planning Department APR Southold Town Hall () ) 54375 State Rte. 25 Southold,New York 11971 Planning Board Attn: Heather Lanza,AICP, Planning Director Re: In the Matter of the Application of Strong Yacht Center("Strong's"),for Site Plan Approval(the"Site Plan Application")from the Southold Planning Board(the"PB" or the "Town")) to construct new boat storage facilities a 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, New York(the "Property"); S.C.T.M. No.: Dist. 1000, Sec. 016, Blk. 06, Lots 010 and 01 3.004 Our File No.: 100-661-001 Dear Heather: We are in receipt of your March 29, 2024, email correspondence (copy enclosed) in connection with Strong's request for copies of Hardesty & Hanover's ("H&FF') itemized invoices (copy enclosed) for work performed regarding preparation of the Final Environmental Impact Statement("FEIS")concerning the Site Plan Application. Respectfully,the invoices provided lack sufficient detail and certain entries have no detail at all. By example, H&H's Invoice# 2 contains the following time entries for a Thomas Radu: (i) 10/6/23 —32 hrs. a $145.00 per hr. =$4,640.00; (ii) 10/13/23 — 12 hrs. @ $145.00 per lu-. =$1,740.00; (iii) 10/20/23 —32 hrs. @$145.00 per hr. = $4,640.00; and (iv) 10/27/23 — 20 hrs. @ $145.00 per hr. = $2,900.00. Similar entries, wholly without description, were also made on Invoice # 2 for Chirstian Oliveira Demelo on 10/6/23, 10/13/23, 10/20/23, and 10/27/23. What is more baffling is that there are time entries made that exceed a twenty-four (24) hour day (see Invoice# 2—Malcom Simpson, 10/20/23;Thomas Radu, 10/20/23). At least seven (7) entries on Invoices # 1 and # 2 exceed fifteen (15) hours, such that it is evident that H&H is block-billing. Invoice # 2 covers the billing period of September 30, 2023, to November 24, 2023, however there is only one (1) time entry for the month of November 2023, to wit, November 3, 2023, by Sarah Brown. Otherwise, no work appears to have been done in November 2023. Without casting aspersions, it is reasonable to conclude given H&H's lack of work on the FEIS in November 2023, that it was perhaps focused on Southold's planned Zoning Ordinance update rather than the task at hand, the FEIS. 1 BROWN A LTMAN & DiLEO , LLP Mofeover'H&H's invoices fail to address services rendered g re ardin preparation of the g FEIS itself, including work done to address comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. We have not been provided with any detailed invoice(s) for work, labor, or services performed by H&H after Invoice # 2's billing period. As such, we respectfully request H&H's invoices covering all work, labor, and services provided from November 25, 2023, to the present be promptly provided. After we receive all H&H's Invoices and have been given the opportunity to review the same, a meeting is in order to discuss H&H's billing and the substance of its time spent preparing the FEIS. Thank you,in advance, for your time and cooperation and we look forward to hearing from you. S ineerely, Brown Altman &DiLeo, LLP By, _. �.. s, Dav d N.Altman �µM Encls. cc.: Charles Cuddy, Esq. (w/encls.; via electronic mail) Strong's Yacht Center(attn: Jeff Strong; w/encls.; via electronic mail) PWGC (attn: Kim Gennaro, w/encls.; via electronic mail, respectively) 2 From: Lanza, Heather Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 12:36 PM To: Charles Cuddy (chariescuddy@optonline.net); David N.Altman Cc: Squicciarini,James Subject: Strongs Marine Storage Buildings. Invoices FEIS work Attachments: HH Strongs Invoice 2.pdf; HH Strongs Invoice 1.pdf; Letter to Cuddy HH Invoices.pdf . ............................................ ............. ....................... ....... .......... ---—----- CAUTION:This email originated from outside of Brown Altman&DiLeo, LLP. Do not click links or open unexpected attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. '.....-------------........ ... ...... . ........ Hello Charles and David, I apologize it took us a week to get these to you. As you can see from the email chain below, I asked our office administrator to search for any invoices from Hardesty & Hanover, and send them to me soon after our meeting. We had it all ready to send Monday but I was booked solid all week (meetings, including two night meetings), and didn't have a chance to review the cover letter until this morning. Typically when the Town is being reimbursed by an applicant, we hold the money in a Deferred Revenue account. This one is out of the ordinary because you are holding the money in escrow. That is what caused us to not send the invoices right away. As you can see from the detailed invoices, the consultant has been working steadily on this since July. I have asked the consultant to produce another invoice for us to cover the more recent work. Also, we expect to have a draft of the FEIS to bring to the Planning Board for their review on April 22 nd. They will need time to review it, so I can't say when they will formally accept it, but it should not be too long after that. The only uncertainty in the timing after that is whether the Planning Board has edits they want to see, and to what extent. Progress is being made and this is a priority for us to finish. Does this satisfy your FOIL request? svbp Heather Lanza,A[CP PSI f4Lj/Vrt � 1361/,1 C Town Planning Director I____ Southold Town Planning RECEIVE D , 54375 State Route 25 P.O.Box 1179 APR 0 1 2024 Southold,New York 11971 Phone: (631)765-1938 Planning Board E-mail: lh� L _ Igitholdtowni 11,gc OFFICE LOCATION: r MAILING ADDRESS: 54375 State Route 25 �� a P.O.Box 11 1 Town Hall Annex �""�� Southold, NY 1971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY 1 �,�� i� " 8g tool Telephone: 631 765-1938 k www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 29, 2024 Charles Cuddy Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Strong's Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: As per the Planning Board letter dated, July 13, 2023, and the agreement that you hold escrow for the consultant to prepare the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the project referenced above, please reimburse the Town of Southold for the amounts paid to Harvesty & Hanover as shown below and attached. Invoice #1 - $29,475.00, 11/14/23 Invoice #2 - $36,410.00, 1/5/2024 Please, if you have any questions, do not hesitate to call this office at (631) 765-1938. Respectfully, Heather Lanza, AICP Town Planning Director Encls. Vendor No. Check No. Town of Southold, New York - Payment Voucher Entered by Vendor Name Vendor Address Audit Date 1-ardes & Hanover 1501 Broadway Vendor Telephone Number New York, NY 10036 Town Clerk Vendor Contact Invoice Invoice Invoice Net Purchase Order Number Date Total Discount Amount Claimed Number Description of Goods or services General Ledger Fund and Account Number ro essionaservices 1 $29,475.00 $29,475.00 TBR 23-615 7/1/23 -9/29/23 B.8020.4.500.300 Application, and review and organize Public Comments Payee Certification Department Certification The undersigned(' ){Acting on behalf of the above named claimant) I hereby certify that the materials above specified have been received by me does hereby certify that the foregoing claim is true and correct,that no part has in good condition without substitution,the services properly been paid,except as therein stated,that the balance therein stated is actually performed and that the quantities thereof have been verified with the exceptions due and owing,and that taxes from which the Town is exempt are excluded- or discrepancies noted,and payment is approved_ signatum Title signature #Y Company Name Date Title t -M Date ' `1� r _ 1:212.944.:1]SO wn� fiir #usCyiiaricvei r:nini October 31, 2023 Heather Lanza Project No: F6219.00 Town of Southold, NY Invoice No: 01 54375 Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA L Tonal -- fray? . ►2�± --- - . . - - .... .. - Phase HHLA .... _ Labor - - - - - - .. ---- .. - - ... _ ,_., _. _ -- _» _. .. - - Task 1000 Review of DEIS &Application Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Brown, Sarah 7/21/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Brown, Sarah 7/21/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Meeting with HL; General Application overview Brown, Sarah 8/4/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Discussions with Staff; Review of Comments/DEIS Brown, Sarah 8/11/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Review of Comments on DEIS Brown, Sarah 8/18/2023 1.50 225.00 337.50 Brown, Sarah 8/18/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Review of DEIS & Comments Simpson, Malcolm 8/4/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Review of DEIS and DEIS Comments Simpson, Malcolm 8/4/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Review of DEIS and DEIS Comments Totals 12.50 2,332.50 1.0 times 2,332.50 2,332.50 1.0 times 2,332.50 2,332.50 Total Labor 2,332.50 Total this Task $2,332.50 Task 1001 _ Review& Organize Public Comments Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Brown, Sarah 8/25/2023 2.50 225.00 562.50 Brown, Sarah 8/25/2023 2.00 225.00 450.00 Meeting with HL & MT to discuss FEIS and process; Internal review of comments Brown, Sarah 9/1/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Brown, Sarah 9/22/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 II�II' iu^^uo:::„mmw�iw I�III k n ggg irc^ AIMM i I I�I� Ilk a IIuV Now Y;rrl., NY 10016 -":1.).'MI 1,15G, nw"nr,h,IrC r�slyj-�ZtI,I �pr,crarr� Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA Invoice Brown, Sarah 9/22/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Discussion with HL; Status memo Brown, Sarah 9/22/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Status report; Simpson, Malcolm 8/25/2023 2.00 145.00 290.00 Review and Organization of Public Comments Simpson, Malcolm 8/25/2023 4.00 145.00 580.00 Review and Organization of Public Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/1/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Review of DEIS Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/1/2023 6.00 145.00 870.00 Review of DEIS Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/1/2023 10.00 145.00 1,450.00 Review of DEIS CommentsCoordination with internal staff on the review of DEIS Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/8/2023 10.00 145.00 1,450.00 Review of Klein Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/8/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of Klein Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/15/2023 4.00 145.00 580.00 Simpson, Malcolm 9/15/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of Joel Klein letter and organization of comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/15/2023 1.00 145.00 145.00 Review of Joel Klein letter and organization of comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/22/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of DEIS public comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/22/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of DEIS public comments Preparation of update memo Simpson, Malcolm 9/22/2023 11.50 145.00 1,667.50 Review of Public Comment on DEIS Simpson, Malcolm 9/29/2023 22.50 145.00 3,262.50 Review and catalogue of public comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/29/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Review and catalogue of public comments Thomas, Radu 9/1/2023 17.00 145.00 2,465.00 Thomas, Radu 9/8/2023 22.00 145.00 3,190.00 DEIS:Comments review and summary. Thomas, Radu 9/15/2023 9.00 145.00 1,305.00 Thomas, Radu 9/22/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Thomas, Radu 9/29/2023 14.00 145.00 2,030.00 Totals 182.50 27,142.50 1.0 times 27,142.50 27,142.50 1.0 times 27,142.50 27,142.50 Total Labor 27,142.50 Total this Task $27,142.50 Page 2 N I gjq p 'Stitititi�ll � �� 1"aO:I f'Srcr�adway www rirr Q��si�h i�crer aru� Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA Invoice Total this Phase $29,475.00 Total this Invoice $29,475.00 Page 3 Vendor No. Check No. Town of Southold, New York - Payment Voucher Entered by Vendor Name Vendor Address Audit Date Hardesty& Hanover 1501 Broadwa Vendor Telephone Number New York, NY 10036 Town Clerk Vendor Contact Invoice Invoice Invoice Net Purchase Order Number Date Total Discount Amount Claimed Number Description of Goods or Services General Ledger Fund and Account Number Professional services 2 $36,410.00 $36,410.00 TBR 23-615 9/30/23 - 11/24/23 B.8020.4.500.300 Payee Certification Department Certification The undersigned's)(Acting on behalf of the above named claimant) I hereby certify that the materials above specified have been received by me does hereby certify that the foregoing claim is true and correct,that no part has in good condition without substitution,the services properly been paid,except as therein stated,that the balance therein stated is actually performed and that the quantities thereof have been verified with the exceptions due and owing,and that taxes from which the Town is exempt are excluded. or discrepancies noted,and payment is approved. I > - Signature Title Signature Company Name Date Title ate l b� ;t-I IIII�uuugp� ltlll ulH&H liy�nmgm 1.501. Bimadway ii New York, NY 1,0036 :212,9344,11,50 www.fhardes'Pyl'7arraver.corn December 21, 2023 Heather Lanza Project No: F6219.00 Town of Southold, NY Invoice No: 02 54375 Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA r t a x !1 tomb& Aµ r.24, 9. - - - _ - _ - _.. Phase .. .. .HHLA Labor... Task 1001 Review& Organize Public Comments Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Brown, Sarah 10/27/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Summary of FEIS comments Brown, Sarah 11/3/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Meeting with HL & MT Oliveira Demelo, Christian 10/6/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Oliveira Demelo, Christian 10/13/2023 23.50 145.00 3,407.50 Oliveira Demelo, Christian 10/20/2023 19.00 145.00 2,755.00 Oliveira Demelo, Christian 10/27/2023 17.00 145.00 2,465.00 Simpson, Malcolm 10/6/2023 2.00 145.00 290.00 Correspondence with internal staff and review of public comments Simpson, Malcolm 10/6/2023 1.00 145.00 145.00 Correspondence with internal staff Simpson, Malcolm 10/6/2023 18.00 145.00 2,610.00 Review of public comments Simpson, Malcolm 10/13/2023 7.00 145.00 1,015.00 Review of Public comments Simpson, Malcolm 10/13/2023 13.00 145.00 1,885.00 Review of public comments Simpson, Malcolm 10/20/2023 32.50 145.00 4,712.50 Simpson, Malcolm 10/27/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of public comments: preparation of internal summary memo; preparation of memo to the Town of Southold Simpson, Malcolm 10/27/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of public comments Thomas, Radu 10/6/2023 32.00 145.00 4,640.00 Thomas, Radu 10/13/2023 12.00 145.00 1,740.00 Thomas, Radu 10/20/2023 32.00 145.00 4,640.00 Thomas, Radu 10/27/2023 20.00 145.00 2,900.00 Totals 250.00 36,410.00 1.0 times 36,410.00 36,410.00 1.0 times 36,410.00 36,410.00 Total Labor 36,410.00 Total this Task $36,410.00 H&H mN 1501 Broadway New York,NY 10036 1:21.2..9 44,1150 www,har lrstyhanaunr.carn Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA Invoice Total this Phase $36,410.00 Total this Invoice $36,410.00 Page 2 OFFICE LOCATION: MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 4 Southold,NY 11971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) °V Southold, NY b Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.s outholdt ownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD May 7, 2024 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: SEAR—Accept Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Located at 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, NY SCTM#1000-106-6-13.4 & 10 Zoning District: M-II and R-80 Dear Mr. Cuddy: The Southold Town Planning Board adopted the following resolution at a meeting held on May 6, 2024: WHEREAS, this site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, as lead agency and pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, found the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the application referenced above to be adequate and acceptable for public review on March 13, 2023, held the requisite public hearing and public comment period, reviewed all comments and completed a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS); and WHEREAS, upon review of the FEIS, the Southold Town Planning Board finds that it responds to all substantive comments, is complete, and will facilitate the preparation of findings; therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board accepts the Final Environmental Impact Statement entitled "Final Environmental Impact Statement for Strong's Yacht Center-Proposed Boat Storage Buildings" dated May, 2024, and hereby authorizes and directs the Planning Board Chairman to submit the Notice of Completion pursuant to Part 617.12 of the SEQRA regulations within five business days of this resolution. If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this resolution, please contact the Planning Board Office. espectfully, , James H. Rich III Chairman Note: The Final Environmental Impact Statement is available on the Southold Town Website at the following address. Link: https://www.southoldtownny.gov/270/Environmental-Impact-Statements cc: Albert J. Kruspki, Southold Town Supervisor Tim Hubbard, Riverhead Town Supervisor Southold Town Clerk for Southold Town Board Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Engineer Southold Town Highway Department Southold Tree Committee Mattituck Fire District Suffolk County Department of Health Services Suffolk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Commission Suffolk County Legislator Catherine Stark Sheri Aicher, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Michelle Gibbons, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation NYS Natural Heritage Program Environmental Notice Bulletin Town Website File 538 BROADHOLLOW ROAD SUITE 301 BROWN MELVILLE, NEW YORK 1 1 747 ALTMAN & TEL 51 G-222-0222 FAX 51 6-222-0322 DILEO , LLP � KHDA@BROWNALTMAN.COM WWW.BROWNALTMAN.COM April 1, 2024 FS L Sv b-P REC EDJ Ilia Electronic ail nI _.. _. .... __..m.... .......... Southold Planning Department APR Southold Town Hall () ) 54375 State Rte. 25 Tir, n. .. Southold,New York 11971 Planning Board Attn: Heather Lanza,AICP, Planning Director Re: In the Matter of the Application of Strong s Yacht Center("Strong's"),for Site Plan Approval(the"Site Plan Application")from the Southold Planning Board(the"PB" or the "Town")) to construct new boat storage facilities a 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, Nevi, York(the "Property"); S.C.T.M. No.: Dist. 1000, Sec. 016, Blk. 06, Lots 010 and 01 3.004 Our File No.: 100-661-001 Dear Heather: We are in receipt of your March 29, 2024, email correspondence (copy enclosed) in connection with Strong's request for copies of Hardesty & Hanover's ("H&FF') itemized invoices (copy enclosed) for work performed regarding preparation of the Final Environmental Impact Statement("FEIS")concerning the Site Plan Application. Respectfully,the invoices provided lack sufficient detail and certain entries have no detail at all. By example, H&H's Invoice# 2 contains the following time entries for a Thomas Radu: (i) 10/6/23 —32 hrs. a $145.00 per hr. =$4,640.00; (ii) 10/13/23 — 12 hrs. @ $145.00 per hr. =$1,740.00; (iii) 10/20/23 —32 hrs. @$145.00 per hr. = $4,640.00; and (iv) 10/27/23 — 20 hrs. @ $145.00 per hr. = $2,900.00. Similar entries, wholly without description, were also made on Invoice # 2 for Chirstian Oliveira Demelo on 10/6/23, 10/13/23, 10/20/23, and 10/27/23. What is more baffling is that there are time entries made that exceed a twenty-four (24) hour day (see Invoice# 2—Malcom Simpson, 10/20/23;Thomas Radu, 10/20/23). At least seven (7) entries on Invoices # 1 and # 2 exceed fifteen (15) hours, such that it is evident that H&H is block-billing. Invoice # 2 covers the billing period of September 30, 2023, to November 24, 2023, however there is only one (1) time entry for the month of November 2023, to wit, November 3, 2023, by Sarah Brown. Otherwise, no work appears to have been done in November 2023. Without casting aspersions, it is reasonable to conclude given H&H's lack of work on the FEIS in November 2023, that it was perhaps focused on Southold's planned Zoning Ordinance update rather than the task at hand, the FEIS. 1 BROWN A LTMAN & DILEO , LLP Mdfedver'H&H's invoices fail to address services rendered g re ardin preparation of the g FEIS itself, including work done to address comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. We have not been provided with any detailed invoice(s) for work, labor, or services performed by H&H after Invoice # 2's billing period. As such, we respectfully request H&H's invoices covering all work, labor, and services provided from November 25, 2023, to the present be promptly provided. After we receive all H&H's Invoices and have been given the opportunity to review the same, a meeting is in order to discuss H&H's billing and the substance of its time spent preparing the FEIS. Thank you,in advance, for your time and cooperation and we look forward to hearing from you. S ineerely, Brown Altman &DiLeo, LLP 13y Da)�v d N.A1tman o Encls. cc.: Charles Cuddy, Esq. (w/encls.; via electronic mail) Strong's Yacht Center(attn: Jeff Strong; w/encls.; via electronic mail) PWGC (attn: Kim Gennaro, w/encls.; via electronic mail, respectively) 2 From: Lanza, Heather Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 12:36 PM To: Charles Cuddy (charlescuddy@optonline.net); David N.Altman Cc: Squicciarini,James Subject: Strongs Marine Storage Buildings. Invoices FEIS work Attachments: HH Strongs Invoice 2.pdf; HH Strongs Invoice 1.pdf; Letter to Cuddy HH Invoices.pdf CAUTION.This email originated from outside of Brown Altman&DiLeo LLP. Do not click links or open u p .� �........ p nex ected attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe Hello Charles and David, I apologize it took us a week to get these to you. As you can see from the email chain below, I asked our office administrator to search for any invoices from Hardesty & Hanover, and send them to me soon after our meeting. We had it all ready to send Monday but I was booked solid all week (meetings, including two night meetings), and didn't have a chance to review the cover letter until this morning. Typically when the Town is being reimbursed by an applicant, we hold the money in a Deferred Revenue account. This one is out of the ordinary because you are holding the money in escrow. That is what caused us to not send the invoices right away. As you can see from the detailed invoices, the consultant has been working steadily on this since July. I have asked the consultant to produce another invoice for us to cover the more recent work. Also, we expect to have a draft of the FEIS to bring to the Planning Board for their review on April 22"d. They will need time to review it, so I can't say when they will formally accept it, but it should not be too long after that. The only uncertainty in the timing after that is whether the Planning Board has edits they want to see, and to what extent. Progress is being made and this is a priority for us to finish. Does this satisfy your FOIL request? svbp Heather Lanza,AICP PSI}{Lo M C Town Planning Director ----�_ . „ Southold Town Planning RECEIVE D , 54375 State Route 25 P.O.Box 1179 APR 0 1 2024 Southold,New York 11971 d �o�da."B`�an Phone: (631)765-1938 Planning Board E-mail: �� cl:r. rl� , tltgrllcrat�a ccr _ J i OFFICE L . MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex P.O.Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 � ° Southold, NY 11971 � " � ��wr (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) �� " Southold, NY � '�� Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov urm PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 29, 2024 Charles Cuddy Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Strong's Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: As per the Planning Board letter dated, July 13, 2023, and the agreement that you hold escrow for the consultant to prepare the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the project referenced above, please reimburse the Town of Southold for the amounts paid to Harvesty & Hanover as shown below and attached. Invoice #1 - $29,475.00, 11/14/23 Invoice #2 - $36,410.00, 1/5/2024 Please, if you have any questions, do not hesitate to call this office at (631) 765-1938. Respectfully, Heather Lanza, AICP Town Planning Director Encls. Vendor No. Check No. Town of Southold, New York - Payment Voucher Entered by Vendor Name Vendor Address Audit Date 1-ardes & Hanover 1501 Broadway Vendor Telephone Number New York, NY 10036 Town Clerk Vendor Contact Invoice Invoice Invoice Net Purchase Order Number Date Total Discount Amount Claimed Number Description of Goods or services General Ledger Fund and Account Number ro essionaservices 1 $29,475.00 $29,475.00 TBR 23-615 7/1/23 -9/29/23 B.8020.4.500.300 Application, and review and organize Public Comments Payee Certification Department Certification The undersigned(' ){Acting on behalf of the above named claimant) I hereby certify that the materials above specified have been received by me does hereby certify that the foregoing claim is true and correct,that no part has in good condition without substitution,the services properly been paid,except as therein stated,that the balance therein stated is actually performed and that the quantities thereof have been verified with the exceptions due and owing,and that taxes from which the Town is exempt are excluded- or discrepancies noted,and payment is approved_ Sigr:aturt Title Signature Company Name Date Title tWO t�t Daicit `1� I r , _ 1 01� I,roadi/ay I-d&H New Yoi l<, NY I DO,iE 7:1.1.2.944....150 vAIWI/li,irrle lyhanover r:rrrur October 31, 2023 Heather Lanza Project No: F6219.00 Town of Southold, NY Invoice No: 01 54375 Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA L Tonal - fray? .°1�., ►2� --- - . . _. - Phase HHLA .... _ Labor - - ... -...-... ... .... - ._ _ ,,... - ... .. -- - - _. .. - Task 1000 Review of DEIS &Application Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Brown, Sarah 7/21/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Brown, Sarah 7/21/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Meeting with HL; General Application overview Brown, Sarah 8/4/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Discussions with Staff; Review of Comments/DEIS Brown, Sarah 8/11/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Review of Comments on DEIS Brown, Sarah 8/18/2023 1.50 225.00 337.50 Brown, Sarah 8/18/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Review of DEIS & Comments Simpson, Malcolm 8/4/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Review of DEIS and DEIS Comments Simpson, Malcolm 8/4/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Review of DEIS and DEIS Comments Totals 12.50 2,332.50 1.0 times 2,332.50 2,332.50 1.0 times 2,332.50 2,332.50 Total Labor 2,332.50 Total this Task $2,332.50 Task _ 1001 _ Review& Organize Public Comments Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Brown, Sarah 8/25/2023 2.50 225.00 562.50 Brown, Sarah 8/25/2023 2.00 225.00 450.00 Meeting with HL & MT to discuss FEIS and process; Internal review of comments Brown, Sarah 9/1/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Brown, Sarah 9/22/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 U 1,501, I'r 4 rr t'1�nir3 y Now Yl y<, NY 1001,E 71) `v4,1 1.'J"0 rn(tnrvV,h°;r CI e<,l Y h ai')0'/ 11,C0rY) Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA Invoice Brown, Sarah 9/22/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Discussion with HL; Status memo Brown, Sarah 9/22/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Status report; Simpson, Malcolm 8/25/2023 2.00 145.00 290.00 Review and Organization of Public Comments Simpson, Malcolm 8/25/2023 4.00 145.00 580.00 Review and Organization of Public Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/1/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Review of DEIS Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/1/2023 6.00 145.00 870.00 Review of DEIS Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/1/2023 10.00 145.00 1,450.00 Review of DEIS CommentsCoordination with internal staff on the review of DEIS Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/8/2023 10.00 145.00 1,450.00 Review of Klein Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/8/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of Klein Comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/15/2023 4.00 145.00 580.00 Simpson, Malcolm 9/15/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of Joel Klein letter and organization of comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/15/2023 1.00 145.00 145.00 Review of Joel Klein letter and organization of comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/22/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of DEIS public comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/22/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of DEIS public comments Preparation of update memo Simpson, Malcolm 9/22/2023 11.50 145.00 1,667.50 Review of Public Comment on DEIS Simpson, Malcolm 9/29/2023 22.50 145.00 3,262.50 Review and catalogue of public comments Simpson, Malcolm 9/29/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Review and catalogue of public comments Thomas, Radu 9/1/2023 17.00 145.00 2,465.00 Thomas, Radu 9/8/2023 22.00 145.00 3,190.00 DEIS:Comments review and summary. Thomas, Radu 9/15/2023 9.00 145.00 1,305.00 Thomas, Radu 9/22/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Thomas, Radu 9/29/2023 14.00 145.00 2,030.00 Totals 182.50 27,142.50 1.0 times 27,142.50 27,142.50 1.0 times 27,142.50 27,142.50 Total Labor 27,142.50 Total this Task $27,142.50 Page 2 H&H 1" )l f'4roodwdy p'`MeVv`llodk, IkY 1,0036 1];' Cass 1 11..;d WWW h,3rdestys,1110VOO'C0111� Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA Invoice Total this Phase $29,475.00 Total this Invoice $29,475.00 Page 3 RESOLUTION 2023-615 ADOPTED DOC ID: 19309 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2023-615 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON JULY 5, 2023: RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby accepts the proposal of Hardesty & Hanover in the amount of$99,930.00 for the Planning Board SEQRA Consultant for the Final Environmental Impact Statement preparation for Strong's Storage Buildings. Funds are available in B.8020.4.500.300 Planning, SEQRA Consultants. Denis Noncarrow Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED [5 TO 01 MOVER: Greg Doroski, Councilman SECONDER:Brian O. Mealy, Councilman AYES: Nappa, Doroski, Mealy, Doherty, Evans RECUSED: Scott A. Russell Vendor No. Check No. Town of Southold, New York - Payment Voucher Entered by Vendor Name Vendor Address Audit Date -Hardesty& Hanover 1501 Broadwa Vendor Telephone Number New York, NY 10036 Town Clerk Vendor Contact Invoice Invoice Invoice Net Purchase Order Number Date Total Discount Amount Claimed Number Description of Goods or Services General Ledger Fund and Account Number Protessiona ervi 2 $36,410.00 1 $36,410.00 ITBR 23-615 9/30/23 - 11/24/23 B.8020.4.500.300 Payee Certification Department Certification The undersigned's)(Acting on behalf of the above named claimant) I hereby certify that the materials above specified have been received by me does hereby certify that the foregoing claim is true and correct,that no part has in good condition without substitution,the services properly been paid,except as therein stated,that the balance therein stated is actually performed and that the quantities thereof have been verified with the exceptions due and owing,and that taxes from which the Town is exempt are excluded. or discrepancies noted,and payment is approved. Signature Title Signature Company Name Date Title ate l °'�ci'..t-i H&H 1`501. Bira;aadway New York, NY 1,0036 I:2,12,9 4,11,50 www.Ihardestyl'7arraver.corn December 21, 2023 Heather Lanza Project No: F6219.00 Town of Southold, NY Invoice No: 02 54375 Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA Phase .. .. .HHLA Labor... Task 1001 Review& Organize Public Comments Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Brown, Sarah 10/27/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Summary of FEIS comments Brown, Sarah 11/3/2023 1.00 225.00 225.00 Meeting with HL & MT Oliveira Demelo, Christian 10/6/2023 3.00 145.00 435.00 Oliveira Demelo, Christian 10/13/2023 23.50 145.00 3,407.50 Oliveira Demelo, Christian 10/20/2023 19.00 145.00 2,755.00 Oliveira Demelo, Christian 10/27/2023 17.00 145.00 2,465.00 Simpson, Malcolm 10/6/2023 2.00 145.00 290.00 Correspondence with internal staff and review of public comments Simpson, Malcolm 10/6/2023 1.00 145.00 145.00 Correspondence with internal staff Simpson, Malcolm 10/6/2023 18.00 145.00 2,610.00 Review of public comments Simpson, Malcolm 10/13/2023 7.00 145.00 1,015.00 Review of Public comments Simpson, Malcolm 10/13/2023 13.00 145.00 1,885.00 Review of public comments Simpson, Malcolm 10/20/2023 32.50 145.00 4,712.50 Simpson, Malcolm 10/27/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of public comments: preparation of internal summary memo; preparation of memo to the Town of Southold Simpson, Malcolm 10/27/2023 8.00 145.00 1,160.00 Review of public comments Thomas, Radu 10/6/2023 32.00 145.00 4,640.00 Thomas, Radu 10/13/2023 12.00 145.00 1,740.00 Thomas, Radu 10/20/2023 32.00 145.00 4,640.00 Thomas, Radu 10/27/2023 20.00 145.00 2,900.00 Totals 250.00 36,410.00 1.0 times 36,410.00 36,410.00 1.0 times 36,410.00 36,410.00 Total Labor 36,410.00 Total this Task $36,410.00 H&H 1501 Broadway New York,NY 10036 t:21.2..9 44,1150 www.hardestylhanover.carrl Project F6219.00 Southold: Strong's Marina Storage SEQRA Invoice Total this Phase $36,410.00 Total this Invoice $36,410.00 Page 2 RESOLUTION 2023-615 a ADOPTED DOC ID: 19309 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2023-615 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON DULY 5, 2023: RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby accepts the proposal of Hardesty&Hanover in the amount of$99,930.00 for the Planning Board SEQRA Consultant for the Final Environmental Impact Statement preparation for Strong's Storage Buildings. Funds are available in B.8020.4.500.300 Planning, SEQRA Consultants. Denis Nonearrow Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED (5 TO 01 MOVER: Greg Doroski, Councilman SECONDER:Brian O. Mealy, Councilman AYES: Nappa,Doroski,Mealy, Doherty,Evans RECUSED: Scott A. Russell I a V, BROWN 53B BROADHOLLOW ROAD SUITE 301 WIN, MELVILLE, NEW FORK 1 1 747 ALTMAN & D I L E❑ , LLP TEL 51 6-222-0222 FAX 51 6-222-0322 KBDA(7 BROWNALTMAN.CoM WWW.BROWNALTMAN.COM March 28, 2024 Sub F Via Electronic Mail and P G , 1i LIB C F,edEx Overni ht Deliver James H. Rich III Vice-Chairman RECEIVED �� .µ. Planning Board, Town of Southoldµ Town Hall Annex , 9 2024 54375 State Route 25 _ ...o��tllo_.-, lcl 1"own Southold,New York 11971 Planning Board Re: In the Matter of the Application of Strong s Yacht Center("Strong's")for Site Plan Approval(the"Site Plan Application"),from the Southold Planning Board(the"PB" or the "Town")) to construct new boat storage facilities @ 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, New York(the "Property"); S.C.TM. No.: Dist. 1000, Sec. 016, Blk. 06, Lots 010 and 013.004 Our File No.: 100-661-001 Dear Vice-Chairman Rich and Fellow Members of the Planning Board: We are advised that your consultant, Hardesty & Hanover("H&H"), has been working on the Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS") regarding Strong's Site Plan Application. However, we have not been provided with any information regarding the FEIS, including H&H's efforts to prepare the same. As you know, Strong's deposited the sum of$85,000.00 in escrow with our co-counsel, Charles Cuddy, Esq., to pay for H&H's services. To date, we have not received an itemized invoice from the Town and/or H&H. We,therefore, respectfully request that detailed invoice(s)for all of H&H's services, including a monthly summary of all work completed to date, be provided to us by April 5,2024. We greatly appreciate your courtesy and cooperation with respect to our request. Very truly yours, Brown Altman& DiLeo, LLP IcyID, _ .:..:.....'""" _.... . d N.Altman cc.:: Southold Planning Dept. (attn: Heather Lanza, Planning Director; via electronic mail and regular mail) Strong's Yacht Center(attn: Jeff Strong, via electronic mail) Charles Cuddy, Esq. (via electronic mail) PWGC (attn: Kim Gennaro and Katelyn Kaim, via electronic mail,respectively) OFFICE LOCATION: „ :rr MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex ,., w P.O.Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 Southold,uthold, NY 11971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtowrmy.gov Nil PLANNING BOARD OFFICE January 31, 2024 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD David N.Altman, Esq. Brown,Altman& DiLeo LLP 538 Broadhollow Road, Suite 301 Melville,NY 11747 Re: Strong's Boatyard Buildings Site Plan Application 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr.Altman: We appreciate your offer of assistance, but it will not be necessary. The Planning Board's consultant, H&H, is working diligently on preparing the FEIS, and the Town is in regular contact with them. They are making good progress.As you know, the large volume of comments caused this process to take much longer than the 45 days suggested as the time frame in the SEQRA regulations. We are committed to completing this process as quickly as possible. Thank you for your patience. Yteer ly , James H. Rich III Chairman CC. Charles Cuddy, Esq. 538 BROADHOLLOw ROAD SUITE 301 BROWN MELVILLE, NEW YORK 1 1 747 ALTMAN TEL 51 6-222-0222 � FAx 51 6-222-0322 0 1 L I'll EO , LLP P KBOA9BROWNALTMAN.COM I WWW.BROWNALTMAN.r-OM January 23, 2024 is'.)t-41 PSI 1-i I- , N-F, sc ,/Vt C Via Electronic Mail and riedEx Overnight Delivery RECEIVED James H. Rich III,Vice-Chairman Planning Board, Town of Southold JAN 2 5 �024 Town Hall Amex '566�ffidrd VII, 54375 State Route 25 Planning Board Southold,New York 11971 ...... 10(0. - (0 - 10 -t Re: In the Matter of the Application of Strong Yacht Center("Strong's")for Site Plan Approval(the"Site Plan Application")from the Southold Planning Board(the"PB" or the "Town")) to construct new boat storage facilities @ 5 780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, New York(the "Property"); S.C.T.M. No.: Dist. 1000, Sec. 016, Blk. 06, Lots 010 and 013.004 Our File No.: 100-661-001 Dear Vice-Chairman Rich and Fellow Members of the Planning Board: We are following up regarding the status of Hardesty& Hanover's ("H&H")progress with preparation of a Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS"). After our November 14, 2023, correspondence (copy enclosed), the Planning Director advised us to reach out after the holidays. Now, more than seven(7) months after the close of the DEIS public comment period we have not heard from the Town or H&H. Further, we have spoken with Strong's project environmental consultant who has worked on many environmental impact statements, including projects with more extensive records than this matter, and been advised that organization of the substantive questions from the DEIS should have been completed months ago. Strong's, as the Site Plan applicant, has the information, including expert reports and studies, which are material and formed the basis of the DEIS record. We remain ready to assist the Town and H&H with the FEIS, as it appears there is difficulty with preparation of the same. As a reminder, 6 NYCRR Part 617.9(A)(5) requires that the "lead agency must prepare or cause to be prepared, and must file a final EIS,within 45 days after the close of any hearing or within 60 calendar days after the filing of the draft EIS, which ever occurs later." If more time is needed than permitted under Part 617.9(A)(5), the law generally imposes a reasonable time frame, not a period without durational.limitation. (See SEQRA Handbook; Chapter 6.) Respectfully, sufficient time was given, and we need to move forward. k B R O W N µ. ALTMAN & DALE LLP We respectfully ask that you contact us to discuss preparation of the FEIS. We look forward to hearing from you. Very sincerely yours, Brown Altman& DiLeo, LLP Za d N.Altman cc.: Southold Planning Dept. (attn: Heather Lanza, Planning Director; via electronic mail and regular mail) Paul DeChance, Esq., Southold Town Attorney (via electronic mail and regular mail) Strong's Yacht Center(attn: Jeff Strong, via electronic mail) Charles Cuddy, Esq. (via electronic mail) PWGC (attn: Kim Gennaro and Katelyn Kaim, via electronic mail, respectively) 2 SUPER L,AW GROUP, LLC January 8, 2024 WRITERS DIRECT DIAL: 212-242-2355, ext. 1 EMAIL: reed@superlawgroup.com Via Electronic Mail Town of Southold Planning Board J v 54375 Main Road F Q I H L rI �M BC Southold,NY 11971 ��M C Re: Strong's Boatyard Buildings Site Plan Application EnC� -IV" 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck ED 8 2024, SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 ) g .. ootIt fd,t6iur Dear Vice Chairman Rich and Members of the Planning Board: Planning Board On behalf of Save Mattituck Inlet, we are writing to respond to two letters submitted by representatives of Strong's Yacht Center. First, in reference to the October 26, 2023 letter from Strong's attorney David Altman, please be advised that there is no firm deadline for the Planning Board to complete the FEIS. The SEQRA regulations authorize the lead agency to unilaterally extend the nominal time period for completing an FEIS (i.e., 45 days after the close of the hearing) if it: (a) determines that additional time is necessary to prepare the statement adequately, or(b) identifies problems with the proposed action requiring material reconsideration or modification. See 6 NYCRR § 617.9(a)(5)(ii). Mr. Altman's letter cited Section 617.9(a)(5), but conveniently omitted Subsection(ii) of that regulation. Moreover, as the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ("NYSDEC") explains in The SEAR Handbook, lead agencies are required only to complete each step in the SEQRA process within a reasonable time: "Courts have generally held that the time frames contained in SEQR are `directory,' not mandatory. . . . [T]he time frames exist to provide guidance on what is a reasonable time necessary to complete a step of the review, but [except for the maximum time period to issue a final scope] there is no provision for default if the time frames are exceeded."' Additional time is unquestionably necessary to prepare the FEIS for this project in light of the 1,780 comments received and the numerous highly significant adverse impacts to the environment that the proposal would cause. Second,with reference to the November 30, 2023 letter from P.W. Grosser Consulting, the Planning Board should be aware of the role of the Suffolk County Planning Commission ("SCPC") in the approval process. State and County law require all town bodies having jurisdiction to approve site plans,before taking final action, to refer the site plan application to the SCPC, if the site plan would affect real property lying within 500 feet of any bay or estuary in Suffolk County and/or where there are regionally significant or inter-community land use NYSDEC, The SEAR Handbook(4th Ed.2020)at 154. In contrast, agencies may not reduce SEQRA's minimum time frames because that"could limit public participation. . . [which] is a vital component of SEQR review." Id. 222 BROADWAY, 22ND FLOOR • NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10038 TEL: 212-242-2355 FAX: 855-242-7956 www.sul)crlawgroup.com Town of Southold Planning Board January 8, 2024 Page 2 issues. See General Municipal Law § 239-m; Town Law § 274-a; County Admin. Code § A14- 25(A)(6). The Planning Board made a referral to the SCPC in February 2020, and the SCPC's staff prepared a staff report, dated March 25, 2020, which the Commissioners considered at their April 1, 2020 meeting. The staff report suggested imposing the express condition that"No excavated soil shall be removed from the site." At its April 1, 2020 public meeting, the SCPC "resolved to generally agree with the staff report"but did not take action on the referral other than to deem it incomplete at that time. The minutes of that meeting state that"the referral will not be reviewed until certain information is submitted through the offices of the municipal referring agency"including, among other things, "a full environmental quality review of the proposal." The SCPC's resolution stated that"[a]t the time of Site Plan referral to the Suffolk County Planning Commission a full environmental quality review of the proposal shall be included." On April 7, 2020,the SCPC staff responded to the Planning Board's SEQRA coordination notice in a letter requesting a copy of the DEIS and the FEIS (when prepared), and stated that, "pursuant to New York State General Municipal Law section 239 and Article XIV of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, this latest action should be referred to the Suffolk County Planning Commission for review." The SCPC's March 25,2020 staff report, April 1, 2020 minutes and resolution, and April 7, 2020 letter are in your record as Attachments A—D to the July 10, 2023 comments we submitted, although at least some of them were already in your Laserfiche file). The SCPC's request is consistent with the laws cited above, as well as the Suffolk County Planning Commission Guidebook, which requires referrals to include, among other things, a completed EAF "along with all other materials associated with the environmental review process" and any additional information deemed necessary by the Commission or Department. Guidebook,pp. 9-10. Accordingly, after the FEIS has been completed, the Planning Board should refer the completed application to the Suffolk County Planning Commission for its review, along with the FEIS and all other materials listed in the Guidebook or otherwise requested by the SCPC or its staff. In particular,because of its importance to the SEQRA process,you should strongly consider completing the SEQRA Findings Statement required by 6 NYCRR § 617.11 before making the referral and including the Findings Statement in your referral package. If the Planning Board completes the Findings Statement before making the referral, you will need to allow sufficient time between issuing the Findings Statement and making a final decision on the application to allow the SCPC to consider the referral at a public meeting. The SCPC meets monthly, and it reviews and acts on all referrals within 45 days of receipt of a complete referral. Thus, it may take up to 45 days for you to receive the SCPC's recommendations. As you know, SEQRA requires at least 10 days between completion of the Town of Southold Planning Board January 8, 2024 Page 3 FEIS and issuance of the Findings Statement,but there is no required minimum or maximum time period between the Findings Statement and a final decision on the application. In addition to the FEIS and the Findings Statement,the Planning Board should also provide to the SCPC the SEQRA comment letter it received from the Town of Riverhead (attached hereto, for your convenience) and any other comments or materials relevant to the inter-municipal or regional scope of the impacts of the proposed project. Thank you for your careful consideration of all the important issues implicated by this proposal. Please add this letter to the public record. Sincerely, Reed W. Super cc (via email): Planning Department Town Attorney Paul DeChance Save Mattituck Inlet TOWN OF InVERREAD YVETTE M.AGUTAR,TOWN SUPERVISOR 200 Howell Avenue,Riverhead,NY 11901 Tel;(631)727-3200/Fax:(631)727-6712 May 23,2023 Southold Town Planning Board PO Box 1179 -� Southold,NY 11971 - RECEIVED RE: Comments on Strong's Yacht Proposed Boat Storage Buildings DEIS 5780 West Mill Road,Mattituck,NY Mil"( 2 a' 2023 SCTM Nos. 1000-106-10& 13.4 Dear Sir or Madam: Plaus rin Sora The Riverhead Town Board and the Riverhead Planning Department have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), submitted to the Southold Town Planning Board in furtherance of the site plan application known as Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings. While the majority of the impacts associated with the project are specific to the Town of Souhtold, and are well within the purview of the Southold. Town Planning Board to address, the Town of Riverhead,as an interested agency under SEQRA offers the following comments for the Board's consideration as it continues with the environmental review, and preparation of a Final Environmental Impact Statement: 1. The DEIS states that construction vehicles, laden with earthen material, weighting in excess of approximately 107,000 pounds (53.5 tons), will travel westbound along Sound Avenue from the Riverhead-Southold town line,then southbound onto Northville Turnpike (Suffolk County Route 43), then westbound onto Old Country Road (County Route 58), and on to the Long Island Expressway entrance ramp at the west end of CR58. 2. The DEIS states that excavation and exportation(Phase 1 Excavation)of these materials is expected to last between five and six months, with an expected daily trip generation of 80 total truck trips (40 entering, 40 exiting), resulting in a total of approximately 8,200 truck trips over the duration of Phase 1 Excavation. 3. On May 1, 1975, Sound Avenue was designated a "scenic and historic corridor" by the New York State Senate and Assembly(Senate Bill S.5814,Assembly Bill A.8189),which, in part,ensured that"its historic, scenic, and cultural resources,and its natural beauty shall be preserved and protected for the benefit and enjoyment of the people of the state." (Senate-Assembly Act attached herewith) 4. The DEIS does not include any type of engineering analysis of Sound Avenue in order to determine whether or not the existing roadway's construction can adequately bear the traffic from construction vehicles weighting in excess of 53 tons. 2 1 P a g e it, 5. The impacts from the proposed construction traffic have the potential to impose significant damage to the Sound Avenue right-of-way, and cause the Town of Riverhead to incur additional expense to repair any damage to said right-of-way. The Town of Riverhead would ask the Southold Town Planning Board to strongly consider the inclusion of the following information in a Final Environmental Impact Statement on the proposed action: 1. The applicant performs and include coring samples of the Sound Avenue right-of-way, at various locations along the proposed route of travel, in order to determine whether the roadway construction is of sufficient nature to safely handle the burden imposed by the construction related traffic. The location of coring samples should be coordinated with both the Town of Riverhead Highway Superintendent, and the Riverhead Town Engineer. 2. That construction traffic along Sound Avenue be coordinated in such a way as to have the smallest potential impact to seasonal traffic volumes. 3. That if an engineering analysis of the roadway construction of Sound Avenue finds the roadway unable to support the imposed loads from construction traffic, that an alternate route, possibly New York State Route 25, be considered as the proposed route of construction related traffic. Sincerely, 4faq&, wSay/ t6miar Supervisor Timothy Hubbard Frank Beyrodt Councilman Councilman Kenneth Rothwell Bola fern Councilman Counci Inian A copy of this letter was sent to: Dennis Noncarrow, Southold Town Clerk(via email) Heather Lanza, Southold Town Planning Department Director(via email) Mark Terry, Assistant Southold Town Planning Department " wE � r TATI + " . ." w YORK", " ° 1975-1976 Re 'd' S « May 1,1975 " a'Ma ` ° 1r"tt wt,"k1 �1�1„"11�.---lktlr�eoalaae„a.al Ca}' �:eka tiSl~a� 1�`l�112P4� -a°�saal ltrie�c;krrel rM s eik'alakr„a1 tra'irtted,,trael %Otuti prilitatl 6 be t:«aaakrrraatlawtl ht the Cum— wza - e^W"i .a ursattee ou t�cre al Gara,aa°reortertt . t ei a»s1.W[ItC,k- Ccsr,r� lamata+a la} t.t)IlCHI"K`TEE qN"IWF,1„ti—(at .°ver uvst of da I ktk,atkaa aa�ttrl,ettkac m13 cawe'errvd to tilt.,Ce%aitk_ttith « sukr �ksarral tMatrortrtkikatwtal:a "� "w” `, itt relation to c.-t lllishing Sou6d venue scenic ind hiatcrkr„ c rridor in Stiff k«county, in honor and aclehration of tr1P,. �rrcricof C_n :_.. _ �u°t uccnt�.nrsi�l: and the role rl�r� I^lacd in titaM cr. . r..w . Idea ScWtition w Auer 'rn t+ o ffi4`5`ttrte of"ItiFr.rab l ra1lw, rcpr«a.ac#ttra p f " /c ectra� irr,5iolkrr siombly,do"Liaatotu,frr(Iuj«aa.c 1 :" xwetloar 1, uorrat areowle fu�aro:u ila'"jaaaa 9afaat with ttatrr Tteaokte, a +� tweet town of Iti+u¢sa°trttad to it'sjtt)wttara'i with Cou wy = � car.ta aka flea, orad taveka4 �e+artk in' ' uuf or tlrolrt toa.ukt eta atellirilt: 6% , , }-. tlra toaa^rr « alait'kmd to lie a mvniu vod hi.~atorir routs: ira Saorfolic r:omita^,aexcl its 5 historic.««a uie,and cerltrus,l rv:~aaaaarr.,uw!a,smd its ra a urrat hetaok„e°ah„oil « « 1'a he, pre �uvza9 as.,r� Ittarlu;eltal 9ttr• the 1a.akerit ¢trial r.rajer}qua r:rrt of'Ott,; a s. T imotAe saf tire:Matt N"T«x�^a.+r«�,wmaxz+,...SII rarew«rm'Amre n ra w';w�matwrm Ya Pws ,rM rr „ '—4d la.+0',t .«urxior A, «� ,o e a Via.--s +as.. c-t '. tare & e t'r�'.4.= #. If la'aarataat,it i€arr.matt Palcrttifr -fli tii or 1t,tfuric=il�.,Kull moi n $i �r ttirat ttt l i_t P S�:ali tirrltt't axf alta r�ialt�lf, ,rira`r-rtf tl a3 vt€#!.^,s€ €ita,ia rfrv, tFit r€l:t ;trt€1 litn;xtt ait frim€lair`it, t;frllitd=l nts(1 S s ttt fie'. - •_ + - ! +'.. r€€5'nrk in Iri;11=r llttifs 1�`i.n.44.. Ia,fl: s ld€litre coutma ilai tip r[i€, ill!ra'ion to Or'tet rtag�ta'"tt,tfttal fr rttlr`t$rif tlt9tfr:tl rtrl stcaiii laasil t`fltftiy<nliairl ` r _ _ r3-•r€:..1 .aa`a ea€I�"k'e= .;c (€:gip• rtaf `ar r7^t`a, sau�}ft nailID `. -,'t •f�a§ta�Ti ae (;ny-evillkent,it•r:4€ir`�s a'Ft r>,:€�a*'ii 43ta rntilt7zrr,i.liv,4 d 1=[rax-€aat,€,n ist €fir; faer>; Isx€rtic•i€cam-'>L`Crai fta,tl laf [uraa;,rrrrraslrfi= '< € "• tlti:tltir- ht mein!rffrirt,incl111rfSrfra,t%irrriri,mit°nrrt rexri,^ ja i€}? i r i.rll t.s mail'. [€, rai_tlili tl=s te, ilts�g c. nr€r1 Cts;satl P:i€:t+irs and ' ;e G, tlrtf[;t ural+tel kmiicnf a-rsr€nitnt,walft`ptelt mird'Inu t'l ct fsrrm, rtt•ir'rv.t t 11,11 nrl>:6 ':a vv vlina rd~,t mul lrflslit*�r taint in itis irrtti ;arf - e t �. ttt cacti t.t€ irr. st tll .>! awl rt�lltrr rfit rlslt:ri c I i n xt.e ``tit at n t ,l�r Awl `` a lytta i't-€31 i l;rti� tata eaaratl tatf[asilr),€ria€1 tt°itlt,l,€rttenl ii rtrci ittc It III • rat<ala lfcxltcs incl t7i€aj1 rilirres_3rl6xvey traits, in rarry itul tf,c:>�; €.t€€li l€tttttt€t tai ,licit It e -riditr irk Ctnttjt ttsliUi€'tiItlt,antl i itl5,, ftttrlifrw— A4_ t. < . < :liaaFit€n,ittt€ffafll.tsattitll:rat, caf i'ur tiie:'rtcclrltartirf ,sf rite;': tS e'isirgratl in list a!€tl,itriif<iatntirtt€rl 11ei!I tic( tra, i `It xA alt . it,-i;t#fifti;tl rtt.lratrt trli€Ittrl==ltrifalc€€ .'` ti', n:lcr to Inarticular praajet is thrrr�r€f as l,cin tlr<lit tt 1,in Rerxsr°tlao :' , :l, Sdrr;f,:,{f icsisl liixt`st t,in tsc rtiaaitn„`ill€tlio of e<iiil io to °= 1 itillt 11€ia nti;,lrr lltc rn?4tr lttriti -fits txertit trityl ai.;ttarcr t a-rial,rr ia€ I'__• letaf'llwt c. 'Irral t°.tralt tt°itlai,t it, 011-11 ttrL;j xr `jsft°r.;lirl rrlt, nit t[1 . ll.the nitriltj.sit WNW lit Frt,ixnt of 6e bivont4mmini of the ltasrrara; ;:ll;t•r faairaitl:tte n lilstt F=r lite ltresti' iliun, crtlr nar14' i cr tirent, Anti"- €ttittia n rlitt- ttiaertrat1tiYlti tl:rt rmatsiititttrt1,rtnii`rtrltn€tl cli`if °< o�appr€tlerta.infi €n tl =uiitrt<lltc l: rr irtttriilfilrB l im= I I tD t tis€'ri€l,ir It°al1aill itN jury a,(irtitatt, iEicltttlitc "€Es,rl it 5fsiri-oi lilt :r_ ,<jilt€tar=n tation nut funding is tilit nt(bu irnrtirtrlar morvirlisM[=.hlif!llt �l,irir asil� , trace€itax , _ 17 x,leicit may,ill idditiult,rLcte ii pr tic ibitstrmi tma'arlIiar[na r1;K,t €santi jilavex nl lf #rtrr , [tai iii€rnt :rl ueteif iit-iwunnic ` el nl'�nr[Cttlar lirttj t!k ata ti;i ret ritaal Carried oul ia,fttsr thk `r^t;�t'i4 E, dais ttltlitTtfit°iatc fnr ltalltll;= rL•i sfriiliftsIiJ#,,'tfittit ,ntnl iter=rriat uad Ilr€•t•i=r,ti rt°s•rsrat€art-r; atirrri, l.rr thr lilalarnf€r lt`'t>tCril#.- - _ _ <Ill §•7:_sgirk abll tr,`lf Arty ltruvis till r(liii;t art rrr'tbr applir Iisn1 r .t ermar NAY re•t,tdillittF',i ltt°€[i°xir€ttailii t`6t tiCilti6itiltil,CAA rt.afr=+- e"= r Crf rt . etfirr. 11011 r€ta;tlf ort t -, t_iltc�r�t to 'a , ircr lin • anti __ i fel 1 rl<a_ i `il= nt,rr illr:tt-om.friltlfa'Prfir ati, tir•a s• - r . f€ 1'alif„t riastl ratttttil,trl'Hipp ertt 3 �nitalit tit tl!n"t Atlas[-lit' laraf i ia•a i"r-'rs[il+[isalims,itF flrit trt aal,if`l Gs-u.l , ur n1sy illtcraxd Ih ria:f,in rtsra l it rct,d[lt l re fl I x �.iitltirlt �l�tl syn <te'iilror€1 lisp itrs'ttl'att lar,:vNiridt or il+til ett, a[tlri 1=trrt ,. a,af ilsit trt;r xviamcnitnt imnxtrt llir xt tt g€t:j ttt ,sitz t. _ bl [rnn;ntrtl 1ti Osix eitrl lite ll 't of 11aiFd kttt rvrysrgri:nitir,` ` lrrrs rt`t irf tttial call care iirl°cciiic niitl €ttt[rtrt l vtr[nco IT]'(Ftc' ' fir' _-`Ph1 net`trtrnll to te'ttt€ t,sa;r ttic fir,t IEt'tit .ltiaie nr l riia3nr, tvitltirt tft lr liiitiisl irir:- ,ttfrt to illi'a$ctCrrit>tittl. in ,y -8ticrttding[Fac<t3a r on cri6ch it Aball have ltgplirrir a lrtxa, th lrrraralictintt;fter pulitie limtttlit°nti€l iijrr ricizt, € ' t 3 r inentli k a! aila[fr3itrit ltif•a11 utittx of�tic;rtti€i t.t ra sett'1tn t jirl<tlaa .t.' I f s ttt t d i aft fr€t'mtl€lrliglt airs laiarl itio^s Lfrra+itccffal•.tl,lttitslttrtrrk' r;it�r.r aat,'t•ntiratti:fat�tat.tt Cntttrti�'iJitrtil af;ttitlliillfi rtt�alrieslc'€ilitl Frilllxi€irtl '� ``.. "• _, ,`. ittr:il , tt€tai lrrctl Eiat'ca°tt€iia:iitnl rtt lana€arteu its;nrl€iiei_terttr l, r ,tic; Willr-iecanfaaxrlarliticrnr for tfii lgcsfidtifsrrttiititf rriitln ttrtlily-`= = 2 ,•. I n=tnrl Ill lit-,r rr€t lttara 4-nd Na r€icittrt Within Lt_rttrr€rlrtr tt= efltl r ; tit planwix nn€i F;t:€cl •ala n°tties.. rmrol lit aftet the lturl;v tf of d j] artclalarf jn€i of 1}tr Itt`ri Ittttfelretllit nttli[t rr�t }'oi tltt! r , of Ott tt't€=tai, latc�talrcn€let `:€ttr It. fit i1€lerilirlt�ta � t' _ • ° 3_0' t t PACC CLIENT DRIVEN SOLUTIONS S b� November 30, 2023 t a L Jv(% sc"MG Via Electronic Mail and RECEIVED FedEx Delivery James H.Rich Planning Board, of Southold Pla.airman '-96..�t t��l,a Ta rd g , ening Board Attn: Heather Lanza,AICP, Planning Director -- Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 Southold, New York 11971 Re: Application of Strong's Yacht Center - Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road,Mattituck,Town of Southold, Suffolk County, NY Dear Vice-Chairman Rich: P. W. Grosser Consulting (PWGC), as environmental consultant to the Strong's Yacht Center, wishes to address the March 25,2020 Suffolk County Planning Commission Staff Report("SCPC Staff Report")(copy enclosed)and the misnomers contained therein.We believe it important to do so given the passage of time since issuance of the SCPC Staff Report and the fact that it is cited in many of the public comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) (Rev. November 2022) for the above-referenced project. We understand that the SCPC Staff Report was based upon referral materials transmitted during coordinated review initiated by the Planning Board, as lead agency, on February 10, 2020. At that time, none of the technical analyses, reports and documentation, included in the DEIS, were prepared and, thus, unavailable to SCPC Staff. It is also our understanding that the SCPC has not issued any comments on this application since the initial referral almost four(4)years ago. By way of history, subsequent to the SCPC Staff Report, the Planning Board caused to be prepared Part 2 and Part 3/Determination of Significance, and on August 10, 2020, a Positive Declaration was issued.The Positive Declaration set forth the impact issues to be considered in a DEIS.A Draft Scope for the DEIS was filed by the applicant on September 10, 2020,which was transmitted by the Planning Board to all involved agencies,including the SCPC.Following public notice, a scoping meeting was held on November 2, 202o and a Final Scope was issued on February 8, 2021, with an amended Final Scope issued on April 5, 2021. There were no SCPC comments issued during the public comment period. The DEIS was prepared by this firm in accordance with the Amended Final Scope, and the DEIS was deemed adequate and complete for public review on March 13, 2023. The Planning Board circulated the DEIS to the involved agencies,including the SCPC.Based on the public record,the SCPC did not provide any comments on the DEIS. It is also important to note that, as part of the DEIS, extensive technical documents, plans, reports and evaluations were prepared, including but not limited to the following: 631.589.6353 - WWW•PWGROSSER.COM - PWGC.INFO a@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA - MANHATTAN - SARATOGA SPRINGS - SYRACUSE - SHELTON, CT PAG • Site Development Plans prepared by Young&Young Engineering. • Proposed Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Post-Development Renderings prepared by Jeffery T.Butler, P.E., P.C. • Marina Impact Analysis (Association of Marina Industries Marina Economic Impact Calculator). • Geotechnical Borings and Engineering Assessment Report prepared by PWGC,July 2021. • Soil Analytics,prepared by EnviroScience,September 2020. • Groundwater Modeling Report prepared by PWGC,October 2021. • Boat(Vessel) Study prepared by PWGC, rev.August 2022. • Ecological Conditions and Impact Analysis prepared by Land Use Ecological Services,rev. October 2022. • Traffic Impact Study prepared by Dunn Engineering and Stonefield Engineering, rev. October 2022. • Pavement Analysis and Equivalent Single Axle Loads(ESAL)calculations prepared by Tri State Planning,Engineering and Land Surveying, P.C. (TSPE). • Acoustic Report prepared by Sound Sense,Rev.November 2022. • Vibration Report prepared by Sound Sense, November 2022. • Air Quality Evaluation prepared by PWGC,Rev.August 2022. • Historic and Archaeology Reports and Documentation, including Phase IA Archaeology Report, Reconnaissance-level Historic Resources Survey, and Phase IB Archaeological Assessment documents,as prepared by Carol S.Weed,MA(RPA). At this time,the Final Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS)is being prepared by the Town's consultant,Hardesty&Hanover.As the FEIS will address the substantive comments received on the DEIS, and many comments are relying upon the SCPC Staff Report, we believe it to be important to address SCPC's comments before more time passes, particularly given the extensive technical analyses performed in the DEIS since March 2020, and that the SCPC Staff Report was prepared without benefit of the same. Below are excerpts from the SCPC Staff Report with a response provided for each comment. "The proposed construction of the two boat storage buildings are within the MII zoning district along Mattituck Creek. The proposed use on site is consistent with water related uses though not water dependent due to the fact that boat storage can be accomplished inland. As existing, the subject property that is to include this action is adequately buffered from existing residential uses to the south.Issues related to compatibility of land use or community character may arise from the creation of construction access to Mill Road for the excavation and removal of soil from site." &Wiasg:The proposed action is entirely water dependent and cannot be accomplished inland. As specified throughout the DEIS, the purpose of the proposed project is for vessels of an average length of 6o feet, but as large as 86 feet. These vessels cannot be transported via road (either internally at SYC or public road) due to their length and weight.These vessels must be lifted directly from the water and hauled via a boat lift or 631.589.6353PWGC.INFO@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT PAr IW 7 C I IIIE@wNT ORNM14 SOS.N4Y tat'M "travelift" on relatively flat grades to the proposed storage buildings.Regarding the use of a temporary construction road, this haul road would be used for the entirety of Phase 1 only to facilitate the removal of excavated material during the initial grading of the site. Phase i has an estimated duration of 5 to 6 months.After Phase 1 is complete, the haul road would be retained only as an emergency access road by police, fire, or ambulance vehicles, as necessary. As such, any impacts related to land use compatibility or community character are short term. 2. g. .. ,,. .cC1 Ipi? .s.v :... 1... Ccmmendations: "It is the belief of the staff that the application is consistent with local plan recommendations. However, it is apparent that the current zoning pattern on site is indicative of the extent of the marine activities existing and into the future that should be permitted." BgsV9D,%3: The proposed development, which is intended to support the current SYC operation, is entirely located on the M-II portion of the site.As excerpted from Section 280-54 of the Zoning Code, the intent of the M-II zoning district is "...to provide a waterfront location for a wide range of water-dependent and water-related uses, which are those uses which require or benefit from direct access to or location in marine or tidal waters and which, in general, are located on major waterways, open bayfronts or the Long Island Sound." The proposed action is consistent with this intent in that it seeks to provide storage facilities for yachts that are of a size that require transport via water(as opposed to smaller boats that can be trailered). 3. "As indicated above`boat storage'is not a water `dependent'use.While`related'to water,boat storage is often accommodated inland away from the waterfront. It is the belief of staff that storage of boats on site is not essential but is related and enhances the functionality of the operations on site." ;per: As indicated above, the proposed project is entirely water dependent, as the length and weight of the vessels to be stored must be lifted directly from the water and hauled via a travelift on relatively flat grades to the storage buildings. Additionally, as indicated throughout the DEIS, the objective of the proposed project is to provide SYC with the ability to provide indoor, climate-controlled winter storage for larger vessels. Climate-controlled(heated) space is essential for maintaining electrical systems in the types of vessels to be stored. Currently, the larger boats that utilize local waters in the peak season are being transported to warmer climates in the winter months due to a lack of adequate storage in the Town of Southold and across Long Island. Upon implementation of the proposed project, approximately 88 yachts can be stored within the proposed buildings during the winter months;all of which would arrive at the site via Mattituck Inlet and Mattituck Creek. Due to the height and length of the expected boats to be stored, the existing buildings at SYC cannot be used. Specifically, the height of the doors on the existing buildings are approximately 24 feet.The current yachting market is producing both longer and taller vessels with the height of a typical yacht at 35± feet. Mv631.589.6353 - WWW•PWGROSSER.COM • PWGC.INFO@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS . SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT OPACC The proposed buildings would be constructed with door and ceiling heights capable of accommodating such vessels. 4• ni ,_("p n. mi ! I .o Wc► S: "It is questioned by Suffolk County Planning Commission staff if the excavation and removal of approximately 130,000 cubic yards of soil off site is necessary. Best management practice for site design is to have balanced cut and fill for site development." es o-sg: As explained in the DEIS, in order to construct the proposed buildings at an elevation equivalent to the existing marina buildings and adjacent boat lift, material excavation is required. Upon clearing and material removal, the elevations would be reduced from an average of 50 feet above mean sea level (AMSC) to 10 feet AMSL. As indicated above, the yachts to be stored must be transported to and from the water via a travelift as the size and weight of these boat types cannot be transported via a traditional boat trailer and vehicle. The DEIS fully evaluated the impacts of material removal, including but not limited to,the impacts on topography,groundwater,flooding,ecology, traffic, air quality, vibration, noise, community character and visual resources, and archaeology.Additionally, mitigation measures to avoid or minimize potential adverse impacts have been included in the project design. It is recommended that the SCPC review the DEIS. As part of the DEIS, an alternative plan without excavation was evaluated (see Section 5.4)• This alternative plan included the placement of two boat storage buildings at the existing average elevations of 36.95± feet AMSL for Building 1 and 37.88± feet AMSL for Building 2.However,this alternative design with the buildings at the site's top elevation without excavation cannot accommodate large vessel storage.As such,the top elevation buildings would be utilized for smaller boats (30o boats in total), and three of the existing buildings would be modified for increased roof height to accommodate the storage of the large vessels(which is the purpose and intent of the proposed project).As indicated in the DEIS,this alternative plan would result in significant viewshed changes from the adjacent Town Preserve, from surrounding residential properties as well as from Mattituck Creek as the new buildings would have top elevations at 71.95 feet AMSL and 72.88 feet AMSL. Additionally, there would be a significant increase in post- development trip generation for the smaller boats stored in the upper buildings, as it is expected that approximately 150 of the 3oo boats stored would arrive and depart via trailer. 5• .olm 'No soils should be removed.This is not the case here.The intended excavation will create a bowl on site where storm flood waters from Mattituck Creek will surge into. Details shown on plans prepared by Young and Young last revised Nov. 20, 2018, and referred to the Suffolk County Planning Commission from the Town of Southold Planning Board show elevation of the finished excavation to be approximately 9 feet above mean sea level. Two feet above the base flood elevation and would be susceptible, as are other areas of similar elevations, to surges and flooding from category 2 hurricanes in the least." . � . � lo II 631.589.6353 • WWW•PWGROSSER,,CO,M, • PWGC.INFO@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT PAC7 SpQxi, : The proposed topographic modifications would not create a bowl. The elevation of the M-II zoned portion of the site ranges from 6± feet AMSL at the existing bulkhead along the majority of the eastern property line,to 50±feet AMSL.The existing marina operations and buildings are located between Elevations 6± feet and 8± feet AMSL. The proposed grading program would reduce average grade to 10 feet AMSL, in order for the two new buildings to be placed adjacent to the existing buildings and marina infrastructure, as well as to comply with NYS requirements for new construction in the Zone AE floodplain, i.e., Zone AE (Base Flood Elevation [BFE] 8 feet plus 2 feet). Regarding the impact of sea level rise and flooding from storm events, the DEIS evaluated sea level rise of 12 and 24 inches,which would not be expected to impact the Project Area. Sea level rise with storm inundation was also evaluated under the post- development conditions utilizing the NYSERDA Future Coastal Floodplain Mapper. Specifically, 10- and loo-year storm events with 18 inches of sea level rise were considered.With the proposed first floor elevation (FFE)of 10 feet for each building and the top elevation of all infrastructure at a minimum of 9 feet AMSL, neither scenario is expected to impact the proposed buildings or infrastructure. 6. p' gg "aI.(.�_ ? � w..l'� ,0 .. . B: ...�. .I «It is not demonstrated in the referral materials to the Suffolk County Planning Commission from the Town of Southold Planning Board that there has been much consideration to the Climate Change/sea level rise, SLOSH or flood zone issues.As noted above,conventional subsurface sewage disposal systems and onsite below grade storm water management structures are intended for the expansion of the proposed boat storage area. Details shown on plans prepared by Young and Young last revised Nov. 20, 2o18 and referred to the Suffolk County Planning Commission from the Town of Southold Planning Board suggests that the elevation of the water table during normal groundwater conditions would be 3 feet below the bottom of the drainage rings.Test hole data from only two test holes provided on the plans referred to the Commission noted above show depth to water to be 6.4 feet to 7.6 feet below existing grade.It is not clear that,as designed,the existing waste and storm water systems would function during elevations of the groundwater table due to extreme climatic events.An alternative development approach would be to construct the proposed boat storage buildings in the same locations at or near the existing grade and not excavate down to elevation 9.This would require an access road at an appropriate slope from between any two of the existing storage building to the top of the boat storage building footprint. One such design could, for example, be from between metal storage buildings 7 and 8 and southerly behind building 8 and curl northward to the building envelope. This route runs along the less steeply sloped parts of the site and can mitigate excavation issues.Building at the existing grade lessens the repetitive economic loss concern and also addresses the functionality of the waste and storm water systems proposed. The proposed haul road could still be the temporary construction route and left for emergency access to the site after construction. Opportunities would exist that would warrant the utilization of storm water treatment through natural vegetation and green methodologies. This alternative should be investigated fully. Significant buffering of Mill Road and properties to the south of the new boat storage buildings would be appropriate for this alternative as would " Dark Sky" lighting techniques utilized on site. This is an important mitigation to lessen 631.589.6353 WWW•PWGRO,.SSER. 0-,M • PWGC.INFO@a PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS . SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT PACC CLIENTORIVEN SOLUTIONS lighting impacts to the roadway right-of-way and single family housing to the south of the proposed boat storage buildings." ReSM.Sg: The referral materials to the SCPC preceded the issuance of a Positive Declaration,public scoping and the issuance of a Final Scope and,most importantly,the DEIS.The DEIS includes a comprehensive analysis of the impacts associated with climate change, sea level rise, and flooding. Additionally, as part of the DEIS, an extensive groundwater modeling report was developed by PWGC,which included the construction of a three-dimensional, sub-regional, numerical groundwater flow model for the subject property.As part of the analysis, the future groundwater elevation was predicted and considered in the analysis of the impacts on sanitary, drainage, and building impacts. It is recommended that the SCPC review the DEIS, as well as the groundwater modeling report included in Appendix L. Furthermore, the proposed project is under review by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS), the agency with approval authority for the proposed sanitary systems. Finally, the alternative development approach recommended by the SCPC was also included in Section 5.4 of the DEIS. 7• p@. � � �' rll .iug m � i e r n : "Application materials referred to the Suffolk County Planning Commission from the Town of Southold regarding the consideration of energy efficiency indicate little consideration. The applicants should be encouraged to review the Suffolk County Planning Commission Guidebook particularly with respect to energy efficiency and incorporate where practical elements contained therein." Rgsp As indicated above, the referral materials to the SCPC preceded the issuance of a Positive Declaration, public scoping and the issuance of a Final Scope and most importantly, the DEIS.As indicated in the DEIS, the proposed project considers energy efficiency with the proposed buildings to be heated via radiant flooring supplied by Liquid Propane Gas (LPG). 8. ge....... ) w w "Un J M:IIg.. DIt .� _.. 9I) « Vie._ II, � 1 We!It : "No trip generation or traffic study information was provided in referral materials to the Suffolk County Planning Commission. The applicant should be encouraged to begin/ continue dialogue with the Town of Southold." raw: As indicated above, the referral materials to the Suffolk County Planning Commission preceded the issuance of a Positive Declaration, public scoping and the issuance of a Final Scope and most importantly, the DEIS. The DEIS included the preparation of a comprehensive Traffic Impact Study (TIS) by Dunn Engineering Associates and Stonefield Engineering.It is recommended that the SCPC review the DEIS and the TIS in Appendix O of this DEIS. 0qFW== 631.589.6353 VK"L9F.,TW( RQ,5_,5 re .. . .. PWGC.INFO@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS - SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT PAIGC d, o CLIENT DRIVEN r L T°ONS 9. gfca)l_wmct � g .! raa �acal idllI? ( "Little discussion is made in the petition to the Town and referred to the Commission on public safety and universal design." p : The DEIS evaluated the impacts on human health and fire/public safety in consultation with the Southold Fire Marshal and Mattituck Fire Department. Additionally, pedestrian/roadway safety was also considered in the DEIS (see Section 3.3)• Regarding universal design, it is recognized that the SCPC general and specific design policies are as follows: QgII J,Pohr,.,y.. t Encourage high-quality and innovative design which incorporates universal design principles to positively shape the built environment for living, working, and playing. Sustainable design, which incorporates universal design principles,ensures that the built environment facilitates function,creates an identity of place, provides equal access to all members of society, and strengthens a sense of community. , ` _P ' v (1) Noise and Other Impacts:When a tract of land abuts the right- of-way of a railroad, a vegetated buffer should be created along the right-of-way to help preserve any amenities created on site by reducing noise levels and minimizing visual intrusion. Where the area adjacent to the right-of-way is open field, a landscaped earthen berm should be constructed. Utilizing a design that would place a large open space area between the railroad right-of-way and the new structures or amenities would be preferable in place of the wooded buffer or the landscaped earth berm. Should the subject application be in the vicinity of residentially zoned land the premises should be encumbered by appropriate operational restrictions to adequately protect nearby residences (i.e., limitations on lighting, hours of operation, truck deliveries, garbage pick-up, truck idling, outdoor speaker systems, building alarms, trash compaction, etc.). When a commercial or industrial use is proposed adjacent to residential property, a buffer strip should be created to help preserve residential amenities from the noise, dirt, and lighting created by commercial and industrial activities. The buffer strip should contain either a natural wooded area or a landscaped earth berm. (2) Promote energy efficient site plan and subdivision design which encourages compact development and clustering to minimize energy use, encourage open space preservation and the efficient use of infrastructure. As an M-II zoned site, the Town has already determined this location is suitable for the proposed use and the proposed site plan is fully compliant with the bulk and dimensional requirements.The Marine II Industry zoning boundary on the site has been in existence since the Town's adoption of an entirely new zoning map in 1989.While it is understood that this project does require the removal of soils and the removal of trees, the project does comply with the Town Zoning Code, is consistent with the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP), and is also consistent with the land use, economic, and heritage goals set forth in the 202o Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan. Notably, the LWRP recognizes the Inlet and Creek as having regional significance as the only major harbor on the Long Island Sound to the east of the Mt. Sinai/Port Jefferson harbors. This regional importance was identified in the Long Island Sound Coastal Management Program and was identified as one of 10 Maritime Centers on Long Island . � 631.589.6353 • WWW•PWGR ,5$ER.,,COM, • PWGC.INFO@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS - SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT PVVW Sound. Maritime Centers are noted as providing the most suitable and appropriate locations for new or expansion of existing water-dependent commercial and industrial uses. The 2020 Comprehensive Plan includes economic prosperity goals for the continued support of the maritime industry and the natural heritage goal to protect the unique character of Individual Hamlets,which included the revitalization of Mattituck Inlet into a recreational and commercial maritime hub. In the LWRP, Mattituck Harbor is recognized as both a recreational and commercial port and the site of one of the Town's largest concentrations of marine facilities, second only to Greenport Village. Additionally,with the infrastructure already in place to accommodate the proposed boat storage,including the travelifts,docks,and service equipment,the site is appropriate for the use proposed. Regarding landscape and buffering, the proposed landscaping plan includes site plantings and retaining wall plantings.Upon implementation of the proposed action,the area of landscape would increase by 1.67± acres. As part of the project, the existing sanitary system will be upgraded to an Innovative Alternative Onsite Wastewater Treatment System (I/A OWTS) and the new system will be an I/A system. This improvement will reduce nitrogen loading from sanitary discharge, which is a noted goal of the Subwatershed Wastewater Plan'. Also, the new stormwater infrastructure would not only capture and recharge stormwater from on- site project areas but has been designed to capture and recharge stormwater flowing from off-site properties. Furthermore, the extension of the public water main provides the opportunity for surrounding properties with private water wells to connect to the public water supply. Regarding noise mitigation,the applicant has committed to the use of only United States Environmental Protection Agency(US EPA) certified Tier 4 trucks during construction. A comprehensive noise impact assessment was performed as part of the DEIS, and no significant adverse noise impacts would result post-development. Finally, it is important to note that there has been considerable agency review as part of the DEIS.As indicated above,the site design,the LPG tanks, and the proposed fire safety plan have been reviewed by both the Mattituck Fire Department and the Southold Fire Marshal. The Mattituck Fire Chief has confirmed that the Department is capable of servicing the site and the fire safety plan was prepared in direct response to the Fire Marshal.By letter dated May 26,2023,the State Historic Preservation Office advised that the Construction Protection Plan prepared for the project would protect historic structures from vibrations and issued a No Impact determination. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation has also reviewed the proposed plan and ' The Subwatershed Wastewater Plan was published by SCDHS as part of the Long Island Nitrogen Action Plan to fulfill the recommendations of the Suffolk County Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan. 631.589.6353 - WWW•PWGROs,SER.C,O.M, - PWGC.INFO@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA - MANHATTAN - SARATOGA SPRINGS - SYRACUSE - SHELTON, CT PWGC �L$EN1 DR001? SOLUTIONS issued a Tidal Wetlands Permit (NYSDEC Tidal Wetlands Permit ID 1-4738-01843/0028 dated January 31, 2020). lo. Staff Gammen a;t%c�:It/ �c►rr jw�th Condit.an #i: "No excavated soil shall be removed off site. It is questionable if the excavation and removal of approximately 130,000 cubic yards of soil off site is necessary. The intended excavation will create a bowl on site where storm flood waters from Mattituck Creek will surge into. Building Improvements and infrastructure in the created flood plain(excavation)will only set up a `repetitive economic loss' scenario into the future for the boat storage building owners." f, The DEIS fully evaluated the impacts of material removal, including but not limited to, the impacts on topography, groundwater, flooding, ecology, traffic, air quality, vibration, noise, community character and visual resources, and archaeology. Additionally, mitigation measures to avoid or minimize potential adverse impacts have been included in the project design. The DEIS does include an alternative where excavated material will largely remain on-site,as well as an alternative with a reduction in the total excavated material.It is recommended that the SCPC review the DEIS. 11. . �+ .... ww. " a a B :(M rov j_... wtt ... oj3 w_ :: : "An alternative development approach shall be investigated in an expanded Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) that would construct the proposed boat storage buildings in the same locations at or near the existing grade and not excavate.Building at the existing grade lessens the repetitive economic loss concern and also addresses the functionality of the waste and storm water systems proposed." Rg-Vg-nse:As noted above, environmental review of the proposed action far exceeded an expanded FEAF,as recommended by the SCPC.The proposed action has been thoroughly evaluated in a DEIS that included the alternative development approach, as well as the impacts of the proposed plan (and five additional alternatives, including As-of-Right (No Action) Alternative, Alternative Material Removal Plan, Constructing Project on Another Site, Constructing Smaller Building(s) With Less Excavation, and Reconfiguration or Reconstruction of Existing Buildings On-Site for Larger Boat Storage) on the following resources: soils and topography, water (groundwater, stormwater, and surface waters), flooding, climate change, ecology, land use, zoning, relevant land use plans, human health, transportation, aesthetics, community character, open space, recreation, noise, air quality, social and economic impacts, construction-related impacts, as well as archaeological and cultural impacts. 12. PA e ,_SJ ,Lt : The SCPC Staff Report includes the following eight summary comments: 111. Review by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services is warranted for the proposed treatment of project wastewater and the applicant should be directed to begin/ continue dialogue with the Suffolk County Department of Health Services. OMMM 631.589.6353 WWW•PWGRmOSSER.C,OM,e • PWGC.INFO@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN . SARATOGA SPRINGS • SYRACUSE - SHELTON, CT @, ) PAIMS 2. It is not clear that, as designed, the existing waste and storm water systems would function during elevations of the groundwater table due to extreme climatic events.The applicant should be encouraged to investigate Innovative Onsite Alternative Waste Water Treatment Systems (IO/AWTS) including shallow drainage and wetland treatment systems. 3. The applicant should be encouraged to review the Suffolk County Planning Commission publication Managing Stormwater-Natural Vegetation and Green Methodologies and incorporate into the proposal, where practical, design elements contained therein. 4. `Dark Sky' lighting techniques should be utilized on site. 5. The applicant should be encouraged to review the Suffolk County Planning Commission Guidebook particularly with respect to energy efficiency and incorporate where practical, any elements contained therein including commercial rooftop solar etc. 6. No trip generation or traffic study information was provided in referral materials to the Suffolk County Planning Commission. 7.The applicant should review the Planning Commission guidelines particularly related both public safety and incorporate into the proposal, where practical, design elements contained therein. 8.The applicant should review the Planning Commission guidelines particularly related to universal design and incorporate into the proposal,where practical, design elements contained therein." W ,;�Qa: Response to Comment 1.An application has been filed with the SCDHS and is ongoing. Response to Comment 2. The proposed project includes the installation of two (2) I/A OWTS(one of which would serve as a replacement system for the current individual on- site sanitary system that serves the office, marina and other SYC buildings). Regarding the impacts associated with rises in groundwater elevation associated with climate change and storm events,the DEIS includes a comprehensive analysis in Sections 2.2 and 2.3. Of particular importance, Table 17 of the DEIS summarizes the proposed infrastructure and separation distances to groundwater with sea level rise.As excerpted from Section 2.3.2 of the DEIS: "Based on existing conditions, the distance between the bottom of the leaching pool and groundwater for Sanitary System No. 1 is approximately 3.2 feet and Sanitary System No. 2 is approximately 3.0 feet.When applying a projected 1.31- foot rise in groundwater elevation in the 2050s, this separation distance would decrease to 1.7± feet and 1.9±feet for System Nos.1 and 2,respectively. The recommended separation distance to groundwater for sanitary leaching fields is three feet. As such, should sea level rise occur as projected, the system would be non-compliant with current design requirements.However,in the 2050 dia = . � � • � 631•589.6353 _ � � �SS -,��--Q- • FWGC.INFO@PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN SARATOGA SPRINGS • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT PV4GC CUEH7'0WV'FJi SOLIJ�'TWNS condition,modifications to the leaching field could be implemented by elevating and installing a pump station. However, the manufacturer lifespan of the I/A OWTS is 30 years,and thus,by the 205os,new systems could be expected. Should the projections of sea level rise be realized,the new systems to be installed would be required to comply with the regulations at that time. Regarding drainage infrastructure, the recommended separation distance to groundwater is two feet. The proposed stormwater leaching fields would be installed with top elevations ranging from 9-to-9.5±feet AMSL and varying pool depths. Based on existing conditions, the groundwater separation would range from 3.0± feet to 4.0± feet. A 1.31-foot rise in groundwater elevation would decrease the separation distance to 1.7± feet to 2.7± feet. Should this scenario occur, the drainage infrastructure could be replaced and/or supplemented with shallow drainage structures to accommodate stormwater runoff." Response to Comment 3.As detailed in the DEIS,the proposed drainage controls include leaching pools of varying depths and French drains which includes the use of pervious gravel. The proposed stormwater management system is designed to accommodate a two-inch rain event in accordance with §236-7.A of the Town Code. Overall, the proposed drainage plan would improve on-site stormwater management and provide drainage for areas that are currently not served, (including off-site areas that are contributing to the on-site stormwater volumes). As such, there is a resultant benefit from the proposed action. Response to Comment 4. As detailed in the DEIS, all lighting would be shielded and directed downwards at an intensity compliant with Chapter 172 of the Town Code (Outdoor Lighting).The proposed lighting would comply with the lighting standards set forth in §172-5 and is subject to the review and approval of the Town of Southold Building Department. Response to Comment 5. As indicated above (Item 7), the proposed project considers energy efficiency with the proposed buildings to be heated via radiant flooring supplied by LPG. Response to Comment 6.As indicated above(Item 8),the DEIS included the preparation of a comprehensive TIS,which is included in Appendix 0 and summarized in Section 3.3 of the DEIS. Response to Comment 7.As indicated above(Item 9),the DEIS evaluated the impacts on human health and fire/public safety in consultation with the Southold Fire Marshal and Mattituck Fire Department.Additionally,pedestrian/roadway safety was also considered in the DEIS and deemed not to be problematic(see Section 33)• Response to Comment 8. See Item 9 above. *8*0= 631.589.6353 M ..,.. I � ..re " PWGC.INFO@a PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT 0 PVVGC CI FIS I WNVO SVLU1,1O As explained herein, the comments in the SCPC Staff Report were thoroughly addressed by experts,in extensive detail,in the DEIS.SCPC staff,if not made aware of the same since the SCPC Staff Report, should be made aware of the extensive record and empiric data in the DEIS, including the applicant's expert reports, submissions and testimony that addresses, if not dispels, the SCPC staff's long outdated comments. We respectfully request confirmation that SCPC staff was, in fact,provided with the DEIS and, if not,that SCPC staff will be provided with current information regarding this project, during the SEQRA process, so it can generate an updated Staff Report based on all available contemporary project information.The applicant is also willing to meet with SCPC staff to address any questions or comments related to the project. Thank you. Respectfully, P.W.GROSSER CONSULTING Kim Gennaro-Oancea,M.S.,AICP CEP Vice President enc. cc. David N.Altman, Esq., Brown Altman&DiLeo, LLP Charles R.Cuddy, Esq. Jeff Strong, Strong's Yacht Center . 1 631.589.6353 • WWW.PWGROSSER.COM • PWGC.INFO@a PWGROSSER.COM BOHEMIA • MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • SYRACUSE • SHELTON, CT COUNTY OF SUFFOLK G".µ r a w �• Steve Bellone SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE Natalie Wright Department or Economic Development and Planning Commissioner Division of Planning and Environment STAFF REPORT SECTIONS A14-14 THRU A14-24 OF THE SUFFOLK COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE Applicant: Strongs Yacht Center Municipality: Town of Southold Location: Terminus of Mill Road apEroximately 400 feet east of Nau les Road Received: 2/18/2020 File Number: SD-20-01 T.P.I.N.: 1000 10600 0600 010000 Jurisdiction: within 500 feet of Mattituck Creek ZONING DATA • Zoning Classification MII and R80 • Minimum Lot Area (Sq Ft): 80000 • Section 278: NA • Obtained Variance: NA SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION • Within Agricultural District: No • Shoreline Resource/Hazard Consideration: Yes • Received Health Services Approval: No • Property Considered for Affordable Housing Criteria: No Property has Historical/Archaeological Significance: Yes • Property Previously Subdivided: No Property Previously Reviewed by Planning Commission: No o Map Yield: NA • SEQRA Information: Yes • SEQRA Type Unlisted • Minority or Economic Distressed No SITE DESCRIPTION • Present Land Use: Marina • Existing Structures: Four 1 story metal buildings; 2 story frame building; 1 story frame house, 7 garages, pool and shed • General Character of Site: rolling • Range of Elevation within Site: 10-70 feet above MSL • Cover: wooded, gravel/asphalt/concrete and buildings. • Soil Types Carver, Plymouth and Riverhead associations. • Range of Slopes (Soils Map): 3-35% • Waterbodies of Wetlands: Mattituck Creek Suffolk County Planning Commission 1 3/25/2020 NATURE OF SUBDIVISION/ NATURE OF MUNICIPAL ZONING REQUEST • Type: site plan • Layout: linear • Area of Tract (Acres): 32.9559 • Yield Map: NA o No. of Lots: 1 o Lot Area Range (Sq. Ft.): 1 lot=32.9559 ac • Open Space (Acres): 22.59 ACCESS • Roads: Public • Driveways: private ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION • Stormwater Drainage o Design System: catch basins- leaching pools o Recharge Basins: no • Groundwater Management Zone: IV • Water Supply: public • Sanitary Sewers: septic tank and leaching pools PROPOSAL DETAILS OVERVIEW Applicants seek'Town of Southold Planning Board Site Plan approval for the construction of 101,500 SF of boat storage in two one-story buildings (52,500 SF [Bldg. 1.1 and 49,000 SF [Bldg. 2.])plus associated site"improvements" including grading, storm water drainage, water supply, and sewage disposal. In addition, traditional concrete and evergreen retaining walls, French drains, two locations for duel 2,000 gallon Liquid Propane above ground storage tanks and a six foot high black vinyl clad chain link fence along the top of the proposed evergreen retaining wall is proposed. The new storage buildings are to be added to an existing boat yard and building complex with an existing gross floor area of 82,245 SF (now or formerly known as Strong's Yacht Center). It is presented by the applicant to the Town Planning Board that approximately 3.9 acres of the site will be physically disturbed. The proposed boat yard expansion is located on a parcel 32.8 acres in area in the Mll (Marine District)and R-80 (Residential-low density)zoning districts. An out parcel and several out buildings take access from a 20' right-of-way at the north end of the site. As noted the parcel is "split zoned". The westerly portion of the site is in the R-80 zone.The proposed development site is located on the south side of Mill Road approximately 100 feet east of Naugles Road at Mattituck and is to be only on the south-east side of the lot in the Marine District The limit of clearing is roughly along the zoning boundary and approximately 120 feet south of the out parcel. The residentially zoned western-portion of the site is not to be developed with the exception of a construction access road noted below. According to referral materials to the Suffolk County Planning Commission from the'Town of Southold Planning Board, the proposal includes the construction of a "haul road"from Mill Road eastward across the residentially zoned and wooded area of the property for the excavation and removal of approximately 130,000 cubic yards of soil off site. 3/25/2020 Suffolk County Planning Commission 2 The proposed haul road, according to referral materials, will be constructed prior to the commencement of excavation and construction activities. No planned route across the parcel is provide in referral materials to the Suffolk County Planning Commission (plans prepared by Young and Young last revised Nov. 20 2018). The subject development property is bound on the west by Mill Road (Town road). To the north the site is adjacent to a detached dwelling on a low density lot and the terminus of Mill Road. The subject lot is adjacent to Mattituck Creek to the east and Town of Southold owned undeveloped land and detached residential dwellings to the south. The zoning pattern in the area is predominantly residential (R-40 and R-80)with several Marine District properties along Mattituck Creek. Potable water is to be supplied by the Suffolk County Water Authority via a water main extension of 765 feet along Mill Road. In addition, according to referral materials to the Suffolk County Planning Commission from the Town of Southold Planning Board, approximately 1,6165 gpd of sanitary liquid waste is proposed to be directed to a conventional subsurface sewage disposal system. Onsite below grade storm water management structures are intended for the expansion of the proposed boat storage area Total parking required by Town of Southold zoning law is not shown on the site plan or referenced in any materials referred to the Commission and is anticipated to require a variance from the Town. The area around the proposed boat storage buildings is to be stone blend and/or gravel as is typical throughout the existing development. The total area of buffers (approximately 23 acres) is contained mostly on the R-80 residentially zone portion of the site and a small area north of proposed Building 1 between it and the out parcel. The proposed project site is situated over Hydro-geologic Management Zone IV. The subject parcel is not located in the Southold Special groundwater Protection Area (SGPA). The site is not located in a Suffolk County Pine Barrens Zone. The development site is not located in a State designated Critical Environmental Area.The property is however, listed in the NYS Heritage Area—Long Island Heritage Area. The site has tidal wetlands on site along Mattituck Creek at the southern end of the property and is likely to be regulated by the Town of Southold and the NYS DEC. The subject property is within the 100 year and 500 year flood plain. The subject property is situated in a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Federal Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)flood zone A with a base flood elevation set at 7 feet above mean sea level. Based on the extreme topographic change behind the existing buildings the flood zone stops at the existing retaining walls. The Sea, Lake and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH) model applicable for the subject site demonstrates the subject property to be effected by surges from category 1 and 2 hurricanes at the existing marina and penetrating into the subject development site at the southern end. STAFF ANALYSIS GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW CONSIDERATIONS: New York State General Municipal Law, Section 239-1 provides for the Suffolk County Planning Commission to consider inter- community issues. Included are such issues as compatibility of land uses, community character, public convenience and maintaining a satisfactory community environment. Suffolk County Planning Commission 3 3/25/2020 The proposed construction of the two boat storage buildings are within the MII zoning district along Mattituck Creek. The proposed use on site is consistent with water related uses though not water dependent due to the fact that boat storage can be accomplished inland. As existing, the subject property that is to include this action is adequately buffered from existing residential uses to the south. Issues related to compatibility of land use or community character may arise from the creation of construction access to Mill Road for the excavation and removal of soil from site. LOCAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS: The Town of Southold 2019 Master Plan update recommended commercial use of the subject site. For the Maritime District the 2019 Draft Comprehensive Plan references the 2005 LWRP for specific recommendations. The LWRP appears to recommend residential for this site but is extremely supportive of Water dependent, related and enhanced uses. It is the belief of the staff that the application is consistent with local plan recommendations. However, it is apparent that the current zoning pattern on site is indicative of the extent of the marine activities existing and into the future that should be permitted. SUFFOLK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION GUIDELINE CONSIDERATIONS: The Suffolk County Planning Commissions has identified six general Critical County Wide Priorities that include: 1. Environmental Protection 2. Energy efficiency 3. Economic Development, Equity and Sustainability 4. Housing Diversity 5. Transportation and 6. Public Safety These policies are reflected in the Suffolk County Planning Commission Guidebook (unanimously adopted July 11, 2012). Below are items for consideration regarding the above policies: Suffolk County Planning Commission Jurisdiction over this application is triggered by the project sites proximity to Mattituck Creek. It rises to a regionally significant project by Commission definition as it is located in one of the five East End towns and proposes the construction of more than 50,000 square feet of gross floor area. Because of the subject action's location proximate to Mattituck Creek, matters related to coastal process become important. Issues such as storm water runoff from site, waste water discharge and the treatment of nitrogen containing effluent, periodic tidal flooding and ground water swelling are particular for this site and application. Moreover, the principles of"Climate Change" puts forth the notion of rising seas level, more frequent and severe and frequent storm events including more violent storm surges. As indicated above"boat storage"is not a water"dependent" use. While"related" to water, boat storage is often accommodated inland away from the waterfront. It is the belief of staff that storage of boats on site is not essential but is related and enhances the functionality of the operations on site. It is questioned by Suffolk County Planning Commission staff if the excavation and removal of approximately 130,000 cubic yards of soil off site is necessary. Best management practice for site design is to have balanced cut and fill for site development. Suffolk County Planning Commission 4 3/25/2020 No soils should be removed. This is not the case here. The intended excavation will create a bowl on site where storm flood waters from Mattituck Creek will surge into. Details shown on plans prepared by Young and Young last revised Nov. 20 2018 and referred to the Suffolk county Planning Commission from the Town of Southold Planning Board show elevation of the finished excavation to be approximately 9 feet above mean sea level. Two feet above the base flood elevation and would be susceptible, as are other areas of similar elevations, to surges and flooding from category 2 hurricanes in the least. While this could be considered beneficial to the area for additional flood water storage during storm events, the fact that there is proposed to be building Improvements and infrastructure in the created flood plain (excavation)will only set up a "repetitive economic loss" scenario for the boat storage building owners going into the future. It is not demonstrated in the referral materials to the Suffolk County Planning Commission from the Town of Southold Planning Board that there has been much consideration to the Climate Change/sea level rise, SLOSH or flood zone issues. As noted above, conventional subsurface sewage disposal systems and onsite below grade storm water management structures are intended for the expansion of the proposed boat storage area. Details shown on plans prepared by Young and Young last revised Nov. 20, 2018 and referred to the Suffolk county Planning Commission from the Town of Southold Planning Board suggests that the elevation of the water table during normal groundwater conditions would be 3 feet below the bottom of the drainage rings. Test hole data from only two test holes provided on the plans referred to the Commission noted above show depth to water to be 6.4 feet to 7.6 feet below existing grade. It is not clear that, as designed, the existing waste and storm water systems would function during elevations of the groundwater table due to extreme climatic events. An alternative development approach would be to construct the proposed boat storage buildings in the same locations at or near the existing grade and not excavate down to elevation 9. This would require an access road at an appropriate slope from between any two of the existing storage building to the top of the boat storage building footprint. One such design could, for example, be from between metal storage buildings 7 and 8 and southerly behind building 8 and curl northward to the building envelope. This route runs along the less steeply sloped parts of the site and can mitigate excavation issues. Building at the existing grade lessens the repetitive economic loss concern and also addresses the functionality of the waste and storm water systems proposed. The proposed haul road could still be the temporary construction route and left for emergency access to the site after construction. Opportunities would exist that would warrant the utilization of storm water treatment through natural vegetation and green methodologies. This alternative should be investigated fully. Significant buffering of Mill Road and properties to the south of the new boat storage buildings would be appropriate for this alternative as would "Dark Sky" lighting techniques utilized on site. This is an important mitigation to lessen lighting impacts to the roadway right-of-way and single family housing to the south of the proposed boat storage buildings. Application materials referred to the Suffolk County Planning Commission from the Town of Southold regarding the consideration of energy efficiency indicate little consideration. The applicants should be encouraged to review the Suffolk County Planning Commission Guidebook particularly with respect to energy efficiency and incorporate where practical elements contained therein. No trip generation or traffic study information was provided in referral materials to the Suffolk County Planning Commission. The applicant should be encouraged to begin/continue dialogue with the Town of Southold. Little discussion is made in the petition to the Town and referred to the Commission on public Suffolk County Planning Commission 5 3/25/2020 safety and universal design. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approval of the Site Plan referral from the Town of Southold Planning Board to the Suffolk County Planning Commission for"Strong's Storage Buildings" proposing the construction of 101,500 SF of boat storage in two one-story buildings (52,500 SF [Bldg. 1.] and 49,000 SF [Bldg. 2.]) plus associated site"improvements" including grading, storm water drainage, water supply, and sewage disposal; with the following condition and comments: Condition: 1. No excavated soil shall be removed off site. It is questionable if the excavation and removal of approximately 130,000 cubic yards of soil off site is necessary. The intended excavation will create a bowl on site where storm flood waters from Mattituck Creek will surge into. Building Improvements and infrastructure in the created flood plain (excavation)will only set up a "repetitive economic loss" scenario into the future for the boat storage building owners. 2. An alternative development approach shall be investigated in an expanded Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF)that would construct the proposed boat storage buildings in the same locations at or near the existing grade and not excavate.. Building at the existing grade lessens the repetitive economic loss concern and also addresses the functionality of the waste and storm water systems proposed. See the adopted report of the Suffolk County Planning Commission for further details on this alternative. Comments: 1. Review by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services is warranted for the proposed treatment of project wastewater and the applicant should be directed to begin/continue dialogue with the Suffolk County Department of Health Services. 2. It is not clear that, as designed, the existing waste and storm water systems would function during elevations of the groundwater table due to extreme climatic events. The applicant should be encouraged to investigate Innovative Onsite Alternative Waste Water Treatment Systems (IO/AWTS)including shallow drainage and wetland treatment systems. 3. The applicant should be encouraged to review the Suffolk County Planning Commission publication Managing Stormwater-Natural Vegetation and Green Methodologies and incorporate into the proposal, where practical, design elements contained therein. 4. "Dark Sky" lighting techniques should be utilized on site. 5. The applicant should be encouraged to review the Suffolk County Planning Commission Guidebook particularly with respect to energy efficiency and incorporate where practical, any elements contained therein including commercial rooftop solar etc.. 6. No trip generation or traffic study information was provided in referral materials to the Suffolk County Planning Commission. Suffolk County Planning Commission 6 3/25/2020 7. The applicant should review the Planning Commission guidelines particularly related to public safety and incorporate into the proposal, where practical, design elements contained therein. 8. The applicant should review the Planning Commission guidelines particularly related to universal design and incorporate into the proposal, where practical, design elements contained therein. Suffolk County Planning Commission 7 3/25/2020 tl 3 7, { nT Q rt;l W A x. r * Proposed 1 Story _pn Boat Storage Bldg ,,,,n7 S2,S00 SF Proposed 1 Story 10 Boat Storage Bldg . 49,000 SF ` a a Rrd " .- - . Scale (In Feet) 0 200 Suffolk County Planning Commission $ 3/25/2020 C O rY. n Q STRONGS YACHT CENTER Town of Southold•Suffolk County, New York 00 �, c 10 - 0Ge Q. v7 Q 134 32-Op % Subiect Propeily W _- - -. N - SCRP TAXMAP BASE,2020 Application;Strongs Yet ht Center N 1 Incha SQt�feel fmx C SCTM No.:1000 10600 0600 010000&013004 Feet SCPD No.:SD-20-01 `� 0 600 1200 Date:03/30!2020 OFFICE LOCATION. MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 �'w� Southold, NY 11971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE November 15, 2023 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD David N.Altman, Esq. Brown,Altman&DiLeo LLP 538 Broadhollow Road, Suite 301 Melville,NY 11747 Re: Strong's Boatyard Buildings Site Plan Application 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr.Altman: In response to your letter dated October 26, 2023, we offer the following: 1. Timeline for preparing the Final Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS). The Planning Board is diligently moving forward with their consultant to prepare the FEIS. As we have indicated, and as is readily seen in the public record, the large volume of comments is what is causing the Board to require more time to complete the FEIS than is suggested in the SEQRA guidelines. The consultant has let us know they have just completed(as of Monday,November 6, 2023) sorting and cataloging the 1,780 comments received. The next step is for our consultant to analyze the comments to identify those that are substantive and to determine what if any, additional information is needed to complete the FEIS. We hope to have this step completed by mid-December. Due to the volume of comments, we expect it to be some months before the FEIS is completed. The Planning Board will require at least an additional four months to complete the FEIS. This timeline is subject to change depending on the nature and extent of any further information or analysis that might be required to answer the comments. Southold Town Planning Board Page 2 November 15,2023 2. Comments that require Strong's input. A priority for our consultant from the start has been for them to identify the comments that will require Strong's input. We realize it is very important for Strong's to have this information as soon as possible. This will be part of the initial step referenced above that we expect to be completed by mid-December.At that time the Planning Board will provide Strong's with the list of questions and further input required to respond to the DEIS comments. Please consider this a formal request to extend the time required to complete the FEIS so that all necessary responses and input may be included. Please be assured that the Planning Board is committed to moving this site plan application along as quickly as possible. Feel free to call Planning Director Heather Lanza for updates or to answer any questions on the progress discussed above. Sincerely, Jame 1.1. Rich �III Vice Chairman CC. Charles Cuddy, Esq. „1 538 BROADHOLLOw ROAD SUITE 3131 Dix BROWN MELVILLE, NEW YORK 1 1 747 ALTMAN Sc TEL 51 6-222-13222 FAx 51 6-222-13322 DiLEO , LLP KBDA@BROWNALTMAN.COM www.E3ROWNALTMAN.COM October 26, 2023 Via Electronic Mail and Fe .r Qvern�,Yht DeliverE F---'C"AVED d,E James H. Rich III,Vice-Chairman OC r 2 7 ?02 Planning Board, Town of Southold S.66thold I()wh Town Hall Annex Planning Board 54375 State Route 25 Southold,New York 11971 Re: In the Matter of the Application of Strong Yacht Center ("Strong's”)for Site Plan Approval(the"Site Plan Application")from the Southold Planning Board(the"PB" or the "Town")) to construct new boat storage facilities @ 5 780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, New York(the "Property"); S.C.TM No.: Dist. 1000, Sec. 016, Blk. 06, Lots 010 and 013.004 Our File No.: 100-661-001 Dear Vice-Chairman Rich and Fellow Members of the Planning Board: Our firm is co-counsel with Charles Cuddy, Esq., concerning Strong's pending Site Plan Application to develop two (2) new boat storage buildings at the Property. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement ("DEIS") public comment period, as you know, ended on July 10, 2023. New York State Environmental Quality Review Act("SEQRA") provides that the PB, as lead agency, must prepare or cause to be prepared and must file a final EIS ("FEIS") within forty-five (45) days after the close of any hearing or within sixty (60) days after the filing of the DEIS, whichever occurs later. 6 NYRCC 617.9(a)(5). The PB is beyond its statutory time-period to prepare and/or file a FEIS regarding the Site Plan Application.1 The last communication Strong's received from the Town,dated September 20,2023 (copy enclosed) (the "Sept. 20, 2023 Memo), indicates that the PB's consultant, Hardesty & Hanover ("H&H"),is cataloging substantive comments to the DEIS made during the public comment period (hereinafter, "DEIS Comments"). The Sept. 20, 2023 Memo also stated that H&H "will prepare responses [to the public comment] on behalf of the PB". We have not received any further communication from the Town. The absence of communication and objective progress regarding the Site Plan application is concerning. Further, H&H's Sept. 20, 2023 Memo correctly notes that additional input from Stong's and its project team may be required. Respectfully, input from Strong's is essential. While we recognize that the PB, as lead agency, is responsible for the adequacy and accuracy of the FEIS, practically,the applicant(Strong's)prepares the FEIS as the party that conducted the due diligence 1 PB did not request,nor has it issued written notice extending its time to prepare a FEIS. 6 NYCRR 617.9(a)(5)(ii). bR❑WN .., .. ALTMAN & WIN, ''D1 11 1LEO ' LLP and expert analysis resulting in the DEIS. As you know, responding to DEIS Comment is more than a simple written answer to a comment. Often, the applicant's experts are required to conduct additional study/analysis and provide further data/findings. In the instant Site Plan Application, Strong's and its project team prepared the studies and findings comprising the DEIS and their input is required to respond to DEIS Comments. It is imperative that we establish,as soon as practicable,those DEIS Comments that require Strong's input and the extent of such input. Further, expert reports and studies submitted by Strong's were prepared on behalf of and paid for by Strong's and, as such, there are proprietary and possible privilege considerations to be addressed. We ask that you promptly contact us so we can schedule a meeting to discuss the status of H&H's cataloging of DEIS Comments, commencement of the FEIS process and proper responses to DEIS Comments. We look forward to hearing from you and working with you to advance this Site Plan Application. Very truly yours, Brown Altman& DiLeo, LLP By: bavN.Altman cc.: Southold Planning Dept. (attn: Heather Lanza, Planning Director; via electronic mail and regular mail) Paul DeChance, Esq., Southold Town Attorney (via electronic mail and regular mail) Strong's Yacht Center(attn: Jeff Strong, via electronic mail) Charles Cuddy, Esq. (via electronic mail) PWGC (attn: Kim Gennaro and Katelyn Kaim, via electronic mail, respectively) 2 555 Theodore Fremd Ave,Suite C-301 Rye,NY 10580 T:914.967.6540 H&H www.liardestyhanover.com 9/20/2023 Received MEMORANDUM Southold Town Planning Department To: Heather Lanza,AICP,Town Planning Director Date; September 20, 2023 Subject: Strong's Yacht Center Final Environmental Impact Statement Preparation — Pro cess Update As requested, we are currently reviewing and cataloging the 1,488 pages of public comments received on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS)and the Revised DEIS to be included in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). The comments received are included in the following documents: • A 623-page collection of comments on the DEIS;and • The 328-page Joel Klein 5115123 comment letter; and • A 186-page 615/23 public hearing transcript; and • A 145-page 5115123 public hearing transcript;and • The 94-page North Fork Audubon Society 5/26/23 comment letter;and • The 6-page NPV review memo; and • The 106-page Reed Super 7/10123 comment letter. Our process has been to read through these documents to identify the individual substantive comments they contain. Once a comment is identified, it is highlighted in the original text and given a unique ID number.That question is then catalogued in a spreadsheet.The ID number also assigns the comment to the corresponding chapter of the DEIS.As an example: ID# Source Document Page Comment(Original) Number 2.4-1 Joel Klein 5-15-23 1 DEIS Appendix N conflates the Project"site"with the Ecology Project"Area"resulting in significant distortionsin the ecological analyses included in the DEIS. Section 2.4 of the DEIS is titled `Ecological Resources' and identifies the existing ecological conditions, the potential ecological impacts of the proposed project, and the mitigation measures to those ecological impacts.The comment is given a comment ID#of 2.4-1 to identify which section of the DEIS it refers to and to order it within the collection of ecology related comments. Our next steps will be to complete the review and catalogue of public comments and to identify which comments repeat and can be organized together. It is possible that many comments received are some reiterations of comment 2.4-1 and they will be grouped and share one comprehensive answer. The FEIS will take form as a collection of these comments and their answers. As you know, an FEIS is the Lead Agency's document. Because it is intended to present the Lead Agency's—and not the Applicant's--4esponses to comments on the DEIS, the substantive comments identified will be included in the FEIS and we will prepare responses on behalf of the Planning Board. As we continue to catalog the substantive comments, we will keep you and the Board informed on topic areas included in the DEIS that may need additional input from the Applicant or may require additional analysis. As these areas are identified, it may be necessary for the Board to first engage in additional substantive discussions on the Proposed Action itself. The outcome of those discussions could very well affect the way in which some responses to comments are written in the draft of the proposed FEIS. The Planning Board may also find that it needs additional input from other Involved Agencies. As we continue to work, we would recommend that we set-up another meeting to discuss our progress and estimated timeline. We look forward to discussing the project with you. Sarah L. Brown,AICP Associate, Principal Planner Malcolm M. Simpson Planner 555 Theockire Fsenid 4 v(--�,Su [te C-301. Rye,NYH&H V.0 CroP.wy) I.,91.4.967.6540 oavnrvrns.h ardes;t,y rarncave:^ir.corn MEMORANDUM To: Heather Lanza, AICP, Town Planning Director Date: September 20, 2023 Subject: Strong's Yacht Center Final Environmental Impact Statement Preparation – Progress Update As requested, we are currently reviewing and cataloging the 1,488 pages of public comments received on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and the Revised DEIS to be included in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). The comments received are included in the following documents: • A 623-page collection of comments on the DEIS; and • The 328-page Joel Klein 5/15/23 comment letter; and • A 186-page 6/5/23 public hearing transcript; and • A 145-page 5/15/23 public hearing transcript; and • The 94-page North Fork Audubon Society 5/26/23 comment letter; and • The 6-page NPV review memo; and • The 106-page Reed Super 7/10/23 comment letter. Our process has been to read through these documents to identify the individual substantive comments they contain. Once a comment is identified, it is highlighted in the original text and given a unique ID number. That question is then catalogued in a spreadsheet.The ID number also assigns the comment to the corresponding chapter of the DEIS. As an example: .wwww_w .............---- .................... ..._.............ww... -.........._ �wwww..�._. ..www ... _mm...Hw w w_. .. .... ID# Source Document Page Comment (Original) Number 2.4-1 JoelEcology Klein 5-15-23.... 1 WWWYYYYYYYYYYMI�� Project ect Area'Ix N resulting in sithe nificant distortio sroject"site" lth the in the.._.._ 9Y 1 9 ecological analyses included in the DEIS. n 2.4of the DEIS is titled Ecological Res.. ..www.....' and_�--._._..�w_.www_____..........—www-www_._____......_. Sectio ......................_._ t Resources' identifies the existing ecological conditions, the potential ecological impacts of the proposed project, and the mitigation measures to those ecological impacts. The comment is given a comment ID #of 2.4-1 to identify which section of the DEIS it refers to and to order it within the collection of ecology related comments. Our next steps will be to complete the review and catalogue of public comments and to identify which comments repeat and can be organized together. It is possible that many comments received are some reiterations of comment 2.4-1 and they will be grouped and share one comprehensive answer, The FEIS will take form as a collection of these comments and their answers. As you know, an FEIS is the Lead Agency's document. Because it is intended to present the Lead Agency's—and not the Applicant's—responses to comments on the DEIS, the substantive comments identified will be included in the FEIS and we will prepare responses on behalf of the Planning Board. As we continue to catalog the substantive comments, we will keep you and the Board informed on topic areas included in the DEIS that may need additional input from the Applicant or may require additional analysis. As these areas are identified, it may be necessary for the Board to first engage in additional substantive discussions on the Proposed Action itself. The outcome of those discussions could very well affect the way in which some responses to comments are written in the draft of the proposed FEIS. The Planning Board may also find that it needs additional input from other Involved Agencies. As we continue to work, we would recommend that we set-up another meeting to discuss our progress and estimated timeline. We look forward to discussing the project with you. Sarah L. Brown, AICP Associate, Principal Planner Malcolm M. Simpson Planner From: Charles Cuddy <CharlesCuddy@Optonline.Net> Sent: Wednesday, August 2, 2023 1:21 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: Strong's-Storage Building- FEIS Attachments: D00080223-08022023131312.pdf In response to your letter of July 14, 2023,this is to advise that I have received a check in the sum of$85,465.00(copy attached) and placed in my escrow account as payment for FEIS fee. S U lb-R Charles R. Cuddy L. .---dn-14aC4C Attorney at Law RECEIVED 445 Grilling Avenue Riverhead, New York 11901 631-369-8200 1-369-9080 fax �-.�W ��.� _-.w., 63 oui. oir own charlescuddy@optonline.net Planning Board ATTENTION:This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. OFFICE CHall Annex MAILING ADDRESS: Town P.O.Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 � � " � Southold, NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY r Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD July 14, 2023 Charles Cuddy Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Strong's Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: In accordance with SEQRA regulations, we are writing to request to be reimbursed for the expense to prepare the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the project referenced above. The Town has hired the consulting firm Hardesty & Hanover to prepare the FEIS. The total cost estimate from the consultant for this work is $99,930. Your client has agreed to pay a portion of this amount up to a total of$85,465. This amount includes the $71,000 left of the amount of reimbursement required by SEQRA, plus 50% of the remaining cost. Typically, we require the entire amount be submitted to the Town before work can begin, however given the amount involved, and the applicant's willingness to pay more than the amount required by SEQRA, we suggest the following alternative. We are requesting that the entire amount be placed in escrow through your office. Please, if you have any questions, do not hesitate to call this office at (631) 765-1938. Respectfully, Heather Lanza, AICP Town Planning Director Town Hall Annex Glenn Goldsmith,President ' 54375 Route 25 A.Nicholas Krupski,Vice President � P.O. Box 1179 Eric Sepenoski Southold,New York 11971 Liz Gillooly Telephone(631) 765-1892 Elizabeth Peeples Fax(631) 765-6641 5 V bt BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEESL M RC� G TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ECEIVE MEMORANDUM 5 _. �, mal�a�a6� ..�ow. n Planning Board TO: HEATHER LANZA, TOWN PLANNING DIRECTOR MARK TERRY, ASSISTANT TOWN PLANNING DIRECTOR FROM: GLENN GOLDSMITH, PRESIDENT BOARD OF TRUSTEES DATE: JULY 13, 2023 RE: SEQRA CONSULTANT FOR STRONG'S STORAGE BUILDINGS SCTM# 1000-106-6-10 & 13.4 The Board of Trustees understand that the Planning Board is hiring a consultant in regards to the above referenced property for a Final Environmental Impact Statement. The Board of Trustees are requesting if this consultant could determine if the property contains a bluff or a bank as defined under Town Code Chapter 275-2 Definitions; Word Usage, and add that determination to the formal written report. If there are any concerns regarding this request please do not hesitate to contact the office. Thank you. t MAILING ADDRESS: OF .Town Hall nnexGN� � �� " �„ � � P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 " .,,y Southold,NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY � Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 6, 2023 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: SEAR DEIS Public Hearing Draft Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Storage Buildings Located at 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, NY SCTM#1000-106-6-10 & 13.4 Zoning District: M-II and R-80 Dear Mr. Cuddy: The continuation of the May 15, 2023 Public Hearing was held by the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, June 5, 2023 regarding the above-referenced application. The Public Hearing was held open for written comment only, until July 10, 2023. If you have any questions regarding the above, please contact this office. Respectfully, James H. Rich III Vice-Chairman Southold Town Plannin Board Work Session —June 26 202.3= Page 2 Location: _ 13200 Route 25, +225 west of Wickham Avenue,Mattituck rn _ Protect Name 113200 Main Road Corp aka Goggins, William SCTM# 1000-114-11-9.1 Description: This Site Plan is to convert a �� i . �.....p..w.........,_,µ. n existing 2 187 sq. ft. single family dwelling to f include two one-bedroom apartment units at 600 sq. ft. each and a 785 sq. ft. office pursuant to ZBA File#6677. Eight parking stalls are proposed at 13200 ...w,� NYS Rt 25, Mattituck, in the HB Zoning District. Status Approved Action Review Final Site Inspection -ww Re port _.e rc ... Attachments Staff.Re .__..,......_._.. ..._... ry._ Pro ect Name w. I Dish Wireless Collocation at Orient Fire District SCTM# 1000-18-5-13.8 w Description: This amended wireless c Location: 23300 Main Road, �.....,._ ....... ...-_w.... _.. .. less communication facility application is for a proposed This Wireless colocaton at 66' a.g.l. on an approved 100' tall stealth canister tower, and the addition of associated ground equipment within a 35 sq. ft, leased area. There are two other existing carriers at various heights on the cell tower with associated ground equipment, as well as existing fire department buildings,yell located on 4.36 acres in the R-80 Zoning District _,..a.a ...T Status pprovd .._ R Final Site Inspection Attachments e „ Staff trt ....... 1-4 ...,. —...�.M_....�..........w� Area Lot Family wnDevelo ment��' CTM# W 1000-100-4-4.1.... .. ,.&4.2 .._. � p p Protect Name: Sidor Descri tion.........._... _ -Th s0proposal Road,for the creat on of three lots from a 61-acre o en devel e _......... pLocatio . I ..P p Mattituck p development area that was approved by the Planning Board and Town Board in 2014. Proposed Lot 1 equals 2.6 acres, Lot 2 equals 2.7 acres, and Lot 3 equals 1.8 acres. This property includes a LIPA Easement and 53.9 acres of preserved open space in three Agriculture Reserve areas where A equals 18 acres, B .w... n 1_8.7 acres and C equals 16.5 acres all in the Ate caning district e uals Status Pending _ Action. Final Plat Completeness - . .. Attachments; Staff Report Loc a Project � 3430 Mill Road, Matt�tuc'ngs ...� SCTM# ( 106.-6-10µ & 13.4 i � act Name Stron s Stora a Buildings k p.. .. ...._. .... M.._... _. w. _.. . ... .,..a._.. _._.._....,, _. ._ .... Descri tion: This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there is 69,245 sq. ft. of axis F � ting„boatyardnbuildincg_s-..... w...___.,—_....m__, ... ... .. on Review merits a Status: Acti w Draft Plann�n Staff Com n the DEIS e _ .w Attachments: ! Staff Report Discussion: ZBA Request for Comments: o RQA Properties, 29950 Main Road, Cutchogue, SCTM#1000-102-3-1 HEARING: July 6, 2023 Submission Without a Cover Letter RECEI,V ED Name: , A- Plar�rtrn��Ba�ard._.... Project Title: � _.._ _, ......_ .. SCTM#: 1000 - \0 . — \O t '�- Date: 0►V1 a3 Details of Submission: pAddt a Q co�3 o- tS IN, � MAILING ADDRESS: PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS " P.O. Box 1179 DONALD J.WILCENSKI �� rN Southold,NY 11971 Chair OFFICE LOCATION: JAMES H. RICH III Town Hall Annex MARTIN SIDOR r 54375 State Route 25 PIERCE RAFFERTY 'I (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) AMELIA JEALOUS-DANK Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD May 16, 2023 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq, P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: SEAR DEIS Public Hearing Draft Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Storage Buildings Located at 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, NY SCTM#1000-106-6-10 & 13.4 Zoning District: M-II and R-80 Dear Mr. Cuddy: A Public Hearing was held by the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, May 15, 2023 regarding the above-referenced application. The Public Hearing was held open. If you have any questions regarding the above, please contact this office. Respectfully, H. A-1.4 ?., James H. Rich III Vice-Chairman Southold Town PlannWing_Board Publwiclleetin - Marw_15,_ — Page 2 SETTING OF THE NEXT PLANNING BOARD MEETING ............._... _.._^wwwAA..µ...µ........... _- ._._...._....__......._w.- ....._ _......._._.....w. __.._w __.. .............._.. __.... www . Board to set Monday, June 5, 2023 at 6:00 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, as the time and place for the next regular Planning Board Meeting. w......._.......w. PUBLIC HEARING RI N..G w .._._._. .µ,. _. �M._......�w�w_.vw._� www�....w.y...y....W.�.Y............................. ..M ww.__.�w__v_...................�.. .. �..�w.Y.....�_..........�. .._.......��w� 6:01 p.m. —Strong's Storage Buildings Draft Environmental Impact Statement—This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. The property is located at 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck. SCTM#1000-106-6-13.4 E �. I CHARLES R. CUDDY MAY 16 ZU23 Attorney at Law 445 Griffing Avenue _. Riverhead, NY 11901 �>Iarir6ng Board Mailing Address: Tel:(631)369-8200 PO Box 1547 Fax: (631)369-9080 Riverhead,NY 11901 e-mail:charlescuddy@optonline.net May 13, 2023 Jessica Michaelis, Senior Office Assistant Planning Department Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Rei Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Boatyard Buildings-5780 West Mill Road,Mattittuck SCT M#1000-106-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Ms. Michaelis; In connection with a hearing scheduled for May 15,2023,for the above applicant, enclosed please find the green/white receipts and green signature cards. Very truly yours, Charles R. Cuddy CRC:ik Enclosures _...... �a-t L R"fCEIVED. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING 1 PVanning Boarcl This is to serve notice that I personally posted the property known as Lde§t Mill R u_ck NY 11252 by placing the Town's official poster notice(s) within 10 feet of the front property line facing the street(s) where it can be easily seen, and that I have checked to be sure the poster has remained in place for at least seven days prior to the date of the public hearing on _ . ` ' - I have sent notices by certified mail — return receipt, the receipts and green return receipt cards of which are attached, to the owners of record of every property which abuts and every property which is across on May 4, 2023 Your Name (print) Signature �- Address aG'g3 Date ot\_� Notary Public KAREN OLIVER NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF NEW YORK No.01 OL6391332 Qualified in Suffolk County My Commission Expires 05-06-2027 PLEASE RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT, CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS & GREEN RETURN RECEIPT CARDS BY: 12:00 noon Fri. 5I12I23 Re: Stron 's Storage Buildings Site Plan SCTM#: 1000-106-6-13.4 & 10 Date of Public Hearing: Monday, May 15, 20g3, 6:01 p.m. n ® o g 0 Pulw IIIII�,W iwm nw C � �1 � m r6 � (1) -0 0 M rn ti z u. ro.ro 'IE . t Q d o 7 , Q v C11t El ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ gra a� Vim, m a CO ?-`(D • (� .. O lD OIv CJi CSr� N u'Io a`CrIroincnrt ❑ v _ +a 1._r ... _.. El ❑Elo li ft EQ ❑ eo tm;`tb0: i'vA„4k"°f..'"m.*.,;p frhrrhox, :Wu,9m6awr22aJ f a Z, > ru J Return Receipt(hardcopy) $„_,,,,, ,„ N ❑pReturn Recel t electronic} e °$ Postmark m 'L ❑m 3 [_f Certified Mail Restricted Delivery $ f-IP,rO m ❑ C:3 El Adult Signature Required �. o m ti 1:3Po LR A:guSlynaturo..___) .��Restdcted Delivery$...........".....:::..................................... �Q O� �cc , CL o.s....4,.a....�e...�a...n..d..-..F..1�.bbI........'J�..r.�...................�........,.........,...._....._... '- _ry_�� >�mUwmy ~�,gcrnwCrn—�.:�m="❑co'm❑co —5— _ 1tl F• . "O} ru ru ri r k D. A'x. T"de � X m ❑ U v v m m o O ru " ddUUUU 0 daxd �ad:R d. ord rad ..,.,._ ._.,,_m,.... ..,„._.,,w. „ ..,........... .... .... ci❑C}❑❑O❑ frI CIO t" .�. .._ . .."................ .,...w_. .... o tuoik1952 `O � tCo cv un v Q r`.. •n o .00 ,n �, ru m f0 `.-° o £s Q € €m vOi-0 ° tNn O � � Z Q < o z W a w .o'o E CO m o 0 rn CO E 0 a U r U000❑ 1 ❑❑ to oCO cc D\1 �•N 'O NEa o arc ❑ n n rr c CV N g -0 O rqi03 " m c C) y ® U y0 rl U ru y..,, e m n) m v- " E r- _ 0) z ru 0 C C3 C" 9 O° d W _s N x lO L cJ r1- aNim �i m v U tOn ¢ O Q (CO cd ¢ LL C-4 CO • v m � N is _ - rom❑❑ m e� N W m.22 0 p . .. qb � ,..w.w� m m n 5 X o0 0o¢<CO)00 m a ciOOOOO❑ TL btu t9 Ln Ln m &� Cbl” • i , a N � ° a'.ad tfB ae d awsl&=pie ----..--. ...._ N :i .______ .m o �'......... ._, �.. _ �., N�.F • E t~f} No� rrhCd�l1�, r�kuwa•.^ 'eTn'tOa Qo,"•bvds^kncrcxww^D a`wraa r }`'rGcr} a. CV •� = Or ❑Return Receipt(hardcopy) u O .F Lr) `� U_ ❑Return Receipt(electronic) W ,, r �) postmark N ;� r-q r` 0 Certified Mail Restricted Delivery $ Cr.) ao E G O O o ce) O a � ❑AdWt Ignature Required.,_,... ro$. .. L CO Q ca '4'- N � U Adult Sic nahire Restricted Relive $ "�r td` a) N O 0) i O k ta$ds3�Ba N C Z v --4 Q. — N m r� raIXBrow@awdt}rr1e _.. .. .,,,.._,. ,- COED CIA N o c Ufi ® C11� a> a o � Z G s~ x m E E � E ru ,aro N tU _ N o) , ru 7 mes Neumann ath1eerk N 0 :3 rueu a�� 3 L o -- o dddi� ■ a u1 O LO z ¢a tm " rta O T O 8 O +� I � 07 a r�.a .h1 ve�1uL.,J- 45A----------- 0N . ., . ..re .,. . ....,,_. .. r O N fir. U N ¢ o a N v d �ew York, NY 10029 i r y elf irryIXxMIN uSEA gnu I� . ROTI (D r �y 0 1111111 N � ?� C C N y > O O N a) a Q P me lT, w,— O O �.. ..... > fY EI t'amd. A. ID - c)❑ fl1IIm ❑ ❑ Q ❑ ❑ m0 a d In = =m m C3CO � d Southold, I � E 9 a-cc�o65Fa u1 _... _._.. . ❑o❑ ❑❑ o .. N ..._,w__.. . ,_. E .o �ff da l 'd 4°i� 11 d U ❑ r� (et k t x amd 9 Pary r� �� .,. • m '0 m [,.�pfft a%Receipt(hardcopy) `E s.., ani MIRtN El pctronic) CeR'tfcd Mail Restricted cted IJehvery $ ... ( E3 ReceiptHere COd > 0 o c o E3 re al � a C3 [�Adult Signature Required $,µ... `' -•— m -0 N J V Adult Signature Re trickedcc p �rtCg n m o�nr T>= &t. ._.....,,.,� , ^ m � are ro o 0 1 J40 rcefisty attar F7aati COdo am • � p �� tAY : m o o fU or apt a .t t , :Lk�pw. .,.,,..M.... Q X m of❑"° C El D 0 ) r � � or � Rd r Point °rs's"��taaaat, 7)'�a•"3" rat�io��, NY ..�.�.��,�...,.,_,. � � Ln m Q? � 1u 07 N'�• c c Q.. • D O •E 4J v E m nj b w w ;j w to �, o mao CO d n6 z Ll m� c`c= E m� O` H aJ p COti ❑ ❑ ro ❑❑ m m�ro aa � sa fir\ o Ep d O o � r N lei � CO 0— mat �J Pi -4 LO ° c, `o " d^ c c y E y 8 u+ ,� r i ,..� N (� E 3 aw¢oowi ql MJ fNr • m a) In fYl a m L= Lip Q Q o } Z uJ 2 2 o O) N UU ...n m. ❑ ❑ ❑❑ m N Q1 Q" C` � L'1 ar m�•>>� U T �m0 rnm� vi Ln _w_.. _w _ r„.. - E 3 a`cr or❑m n a CD �1 C tsad b maa 4 MOH Fee C $ �..l g:) 1 °?m ❑LI❑ ❑❑ wd ru °.1..t • E ..; ° _ m „Lra�9'a'w.�,elr'J64nM'e Receiptf�c ltd faMae' Return „ zR '0m pm fJ Return Receipt eCtrun cfuAaBP&k t N 0 vOm ?0m � cted m2 0 Adult Signature Required ,r ult Signature Reetdcted I'.aalivery .. ., ww;;; � post , ..._ a � ro m ami ., s.37 a mw fU Cr, = Fcaw'��"M) • U)"o"a armoo usdMl P � "how o4�t1t�1Cllt� ...,.a,..w..,, .,._....... _ � Q 9< t6 'ri � ��6dcr M000011 M 0000 P M 7 ...o C1 ��* P�Mn uMr rCS, _.,.,.. Cr of t4 old ry 1 1 971 �j ti M � � �I iJ". n� :r w rn� a w 7i x�urAti a) IIICD d � Ln 00, LO .D 00 ru o f m D E � Cot� N Ca O O � O l ® �y N L UA �� •E� � O� Y tS 5 a � CO CL—r _ ._ m O O 4 1-1 ®® CO ¢¢ � z 6 o00 rn � YE n C�7 auo z m >! a v a rI r1 c U O mrr,dj Oi N N C L lU4 I+ .� E O 6 CL[]rA U D= N N •D aD+ ++ O_ � v r" N • -m ❑0❑ ❑❑ p — Ca a) o :JCS N 7 �E d E E � � aD) cn memo C) • r fe 7 b E C r y6 Q U L C, m.) 'w °' aNi O O O O -� Q ll � o a UaUO) Qo ¢ H P-4 En m CO m N p=s? O w� �� n-�3Yg—gym qry Cn a) c cL�c c" N W rn m O O^ — ung "" M 6,M • iwu 0:2<0oroo 000 .gam"IIS to OOl7000V CO ci IJ- EO amr COE' a) EC) rl-- a) T cc n. u a _ 'CO o vaeM)Mao pec s N D E "` C&q"��' Cv,, r u r D-D O«..; m �. �' r�h �mime eaaMa^ .. rp O rY9 tN " Co ftgu P'ta�t66 ae aru Manu knSri a) t x aurs MxuiCw*xnVANC4 a ri v a)! p �. cenowAt Mao Ramrrtnnaa DeNvery E 0 m u —4 �" in � O �Ja�aa1M,u� rreaP wea ®. Ory C[StV a) O ®m N uaMEC Signstum Rau#k Wd u)mrtn rare" ..,... N a J N r Ca � cn ri p r I wo w a) PA r- aN .0 E E m c oo x two= ": Fctttta�M ¢aa cu a)ra§ M)s Br. Cl) a >C wC3 - C T ,= to u (D CO soon= LO ami o f U ¢ w o -r-i ¢ C3 cO © ru c _ ® 525 Pq � ( EQ MroB. a. or C"' ion�r _ a�M M)rmo Uau°) Q0 < App < ILL aA,16,i :, y a) m jj ry i N � O O 'N 22 a: E E �' a)• 4 4 0 r Z w.m`� .�c' LE '� tF ❑ ❑ ro ❑ ❑ -gam UUp o roroli . t .roa a ❑ wmmZ`m>m ME= =ornmm>mfU Mott tucP i NY 11952 v y to _. _.. _. �_ �� a rr ❑rn rn¢ ufiu WAsalll ea c 9,a ... ' E 000 ❑❑ Q rt.�ru 2 . �� ill 19 $� r�°�a�rGt Ursa aroR��Da�dray^cror�taw mix �w°b�"�w�A .. � � �� Bf n fl_I E]Return Rorelpt(hwdaepy' _ • z 2 C3 .}Return Receipt(a;lectrcrrric) $....... �- - ❑ . r ., 'Here E:3 Certified men Restricted Delivery $ 34T__ VA N� N ? nvm O o C:3 Adult Signature Required a Adult Signature Recrtrlcted Delivery$ - p � mm Ceardat $0.67152 moo- m ° .... _ m m o `0 adC Ecxa@aa sracl ,, eu U m m 0 s "~nato'bM TO c/}n n co 0000. m m o o 5 O Aames Kin r .0 Lt a�CL1 ni O O O C ul •,:." a 1 !t P sRy+ Md'SQdd m 'Ma, ��d pp airu rn V4M S y /dn'Npud' • It l ill . ,u ca co p o .. ❑ "mom LO D O co N a) (� o o "w'. %"" 4y T ) ❑ w O �� . EES CX U OCJt N -- C7 p mn Q Q O >- Z w ra co c � a:. �, Q U) Iti Z ca �'m CO ai) w°ate ", .. 6t O r q Q. r• ._ m m m m'c e,a C ""I .ay T : N • > c c-„ Cd 4;g O am'i m m rn 0 ami mo N "O' �''ca3 ®"� .d. wU? RJ N _ m o mmm❑to'mm N c C� OL bj CO m ru p > -m ❑❑❑ ❑o � - ttG o N E m m a a g o •r-I U E T 4J CO sum= E N> moo-. ..m. aNi v O ` .... 00 r RS C7 -W Cf)1LLa -D-2 N y s U CL O Q cd -H N 0Ir maim m A N ni JO E(Dw a)W rnrn�� oc w -°� �minmm� o vim Z__v- rq? m :QQ¢UUUU L+•! �W ro Cr Ln N co LO rn f1tW{tip.µ »y 1-1952wn ii r ,t� u. ux cm nj U 1 T o • • tea., �O'• F� •WrI . ronc. a ai o E nl 4.; ru o N p wmtd� SIJ•._ L ekna rnac � 0-0 p a N cr) C7 n rU ❑Return Receipt(Frardcapyl l v) � Y Lr) ________ Z p �..�Return Receipt(electrrxnia) $ �� Pia v U G rn C7 p p �DerttFud Mail Restricted Relive y .. H arae a � CU C•". +--1 Lo 6 r``- O C L1 Adult Signature Required ♦, ' e6 � rU& •M co 'b r-1 �- ` O (�F4dul2 ignature Re.tricted Delivery$ l 7 P-4 P4 E E x p O 111 jC : Cpa yrcIf C�_v • m COnjo o x d r a ® o= v c Ain rl to m C` t1J ra�ort ork CA : .. a d.,... ... . ....,. ,..,._,,.......,...' m ._ O rl cd U rg�aa. raa." • c+ m o c+1 a i O'�� f"1I1�C o U a rn ¢ o r ZSa O N +1 ¢ O � ¢U cd gykp Cti2 �Iai,,.Ll, �� 952 m' 'w U ua m "C3 C7 t a E [c E E _ _ w mm m:T w. att U - r.- > fU uS m 4 ^wt o Z ro m c`c= C E3 y,ar ❑ ❑ _ .� (mJ�❑ ru ry g y m m m m N a a a a w » a a m m ¢ Erel. tuck siI ✓ O E u¢¢onnac I-f'I - 0s ❑O❑ ❑❑ o �°:Y;Rw"tR1asgiuwuYsVVl7iasMc'"aEp xt rrRaa2runmtra.& " .,... ' al�'R"�.,.�.. .^ o• � Z �E o $ . r � too &WwF0e*Q &� a9 Marrn ryof(har Coh $ � �r�Prark mwrNn �" m ❑c>m• ni p q'Wa p MaN t ssfta t Doovery U) s a o O ]AAdult t Signature Required [] Signature Restricted Delivery$_- ".� - �- b a � y ¢ 0 D Porta .._..,...�.,. �,..w...m.__�._,.....ww_._.... .__,,.... e - q 7 `p w,..wis _. ge, _ ...,,. roma❑ ys>gva8 I Bata aswd F e, r' 4)w m m rn� 0 0 r 9 �� _ w _. . .�,,.. g m r7 to in L o fL .... _ sa.A itrcdl ddoCooperr"x p o .,r..w,... c6ccm m pru ewC ' 5 ru id W d tao R� _ riOOODO❑ p' oeP 1 ..... ul sta vg 'i ttituck, NY 11952 ru M r o s CO o N }N Q"Q � •�tl T D7ru CI °t c c a V ®' O Cil .0 p No c 'E o ;:a o r" Ln o rn ._ m T'' m ro O uLO "" N p CO ¢Q o � Z �m'Fa ccro C y u1 O n ❑ ❑ a) ❑ ❑ _2:E moo qj'o qj rn CO p Z IM m m m m m C7 "� r' C) n U o'aci .�m m in N °+J a3 a d' .a o m Ir ❑OOa63 in OOc E "" 0 p CD c f1J • o a a3t - C� N :3:3__ o C3 o , o m � aGSJ '''w°� .� U a r r c 07 t f� c b m T co ft� to eL m .•1"I PQ ld 67 wimmm E n y �a� a ❑ E C Y a9 O o n v a O O hh 1,W O cd I0 CE w CO ,d j roN,gym, aroi Tt Si m Q'� N d ^qj w C p_m Sad B a3 �== C6 C CSt � !c ® ar��cti- v v m m o 0 r Q X d COd d U U U U 6000000 rl rq I Uru ,u y pp ti Amy ro oy� a to W " arNY 11052 C:, 7-- ®_ ru 0 ru ijgf li • m o a� .- tl Q re '" v cur. re drr Oc;^M bOK'�,ddlee as�y� �tg ar 1 L .. C LO U ru fl_I { 8&"tlwRum Frarcefgt Owaurffisopy$ . 0-0 o N CO � p � p �G �� Postmark 6_O'Eawfiewt�ro Po ,paipt Q apuyr hu'� S' ar ... .... M � y O O C1 certlslrvd M6ail Restnated r7ellvey $ 9, J - Here N r I dr' O p P stage iyn-- Restr-tl�m--.�r.'..--�.. ...............................................................# alum Re ufrecl C L _.__. r a j I'l r. . , l_: _ m trfetal Postage a� c CO U sammru $0r i u 3 O tra D P C + CD� =1 WirrdjifNo,Io� y . ..... ........ .....�.t. LnN 6coo Cc: vPe +t Ua ._. .,,., ., ¢ odw�' PP ¢ M r w CO *nx sn^ a w LO 09 r Save WAY 11771 ..off. � .... LO +. .r � � N� �' °� _ �,....W........ ._...,.m,_.._M._..M....__.._"""._w...... .._.. ... .w_w_._._w_.._.��,.m.µ.._..._.. � ..Q &1 f11 grordgt d �$r 4—1rdbtror nj _ iatuni , Return 3cep(na'dro x.md$Returnrevorc)I Repv) aCertified Jail Ree4ltadddN✓o �JbVrk & turn Reeipt(aleotrunlu) $ Pwo ¢ e� Postmark ElAdult ir�nature RequireHere El Ccrtiffed Mail Restricted Je6vary Here ]Adult inatureReria �Ad�t^gnaturo fegalrrd � _cl ^ Signature Restricted Ur.livary$ ... ..D xu& * a�sxi"a �rwesJr'Cl'w w U,f Postage du trot Cod hr rZI Nre -U ,° 3 'tea flJ r� ._w..._ m..._.w.. ..__. ..._ _A..._ eumf BcrzrCaaa arra $8.37 J N ru 0 M �a k" 't M t`,(�O 1 �r �r �roN P _ 1511 �. .".. .. .�......_„ ._....ww.W..... _,. .i lortc9 �1t c wx 1. a v.,..t. m o a,. •u p 'k' N �tl# A.� "u'. l �M " 4n1�� uuuuu IIIIW^ VIII �6 � re»fl '�I IwU �� eIW� �j°0°� � � � Illllml IIIIIIIII III®i Er iv a CO Porn " n q b 11.569 aEk ® W l r W ........ ..,..... .. .,.,.. ...�"..., ...,.W..w ..,........ai... .......... ........... .......v....M.w. �.. ^- ......W�. m"¢Wl w7 tl4% k � ,_i &901 —0 � r rtllYed Nall Fee $4.1b ru .. W „,,. l!rtm�YBaattla9x'e�Yp'u�&wNuaurvr; vuutrux act tnarm�wr�, "� . 12 9 �ra¢r�c ro na6�ae��"s��Ce rrcrh dwux,aYdd Yea n�rgrn m rU C f P'W¢rPiurro Yt¢¢Wntrt(Yronulr r,pyp `�,,. .,„ „ F(� ? 0 Return RE;i(at � 9ntta1E 'd S:=9. .... M 11 + O ( wYrihtd MaH Fieto"ted NYnV4 $ q0., ED .(PWtt*d�g Acat�4NedDapNLf % i fiem eiAdult ¢MtFrFftHnau ¢uC $ , " .�.��..�.�.�.._. I,.,.,�N''J'tt�l¢'yrl'r.')40.Ir!l O�a'YO tCd r.Y45�ItPFJP}0`� .. .,q,. f4deVh Nsl4'Mr"Atl.lp'F7 f{4A:iY,4Gl:kE3fk 27elVfeY � ,n, Ge •e,.... E3 xtr.. y �.....ww. .. .. rI-C3war rare: $Lr.$ »ama4.dw Y y R7 B?vrva,tfkua troavC6 d= .37 ru Brrf¢aVl'r aasa,ge anee ' .wp lrrev C� Mi"q�1,a "ta�d� �E ,w& �u" t� _- . b :. "r . rtiCynthia �n t,r1 :1 e#' K.1.Ta � . ....... ..._. "._.m.w._......w.,..,....„.. w...........r...,,.,......... a« wLokoutY 115 tattituck NY 11952 2 . � , . . .. r vomx d. f M rr Er, rl S1`v.r�x1CIO (Nagarro" wurypd'urd,au..t.aarmu rrrkr trl¢C�r.r�l,tk b.ox ro�.,_°.-._o.�p `�n„:,��"mt•.",.e,f�:•.. � `r�3n F r e. .�„.. w�-w.�., N �.....-."�. .�.,., , .. • I -._ : 9 0 'tfiemJ4.15 ew _ yN nGaro BqrvrxurvaaharoOuaurar p Ga4oivn Grr,W1pk(hardcoipy) b postmark natvm Nc6tp¢t aatmiac) a .Nj]" CVr Postmark ru I Return FiOra+uut(electron”) inctadl Dedly-ly $ . Here ] Leldveff � F 0 Certified Mall R Adult Signature Required $ E-3 ]Adult gn¢atun,Required AdultSignatur5 R©etrroted Delivery$ µyu $-l-.87 r--,.,o4/2Q23 � � s —0231, v 37 � ru �................ ...... _._ Sent lb to N 1 ae B n n1 X44" 1 O a l�, P4 LIQ P-9 6 Y"tt 4 eaas l m�"' &M3k Prot ro � Mei.`' uck � 11. 5 E Awa ro t1.t . �" WIN', N.r+mf a � �d Tl '' � oC n a r-rl C� w w ,."' ~n .".e• � k Ill�so tiltuckir u .H Itl p e w Ln NY 119F�2 ru a`k64kCtt9Pv4GtYWk" uq ^a( rwsd'<aywnaecuadidPurwar "a ,..." ` a ......_. tsW,tt�kst:a^mdcttltGrharkPxrae.,vu •tnc1.2 ,...'. .«..«�^rn,;,r-'=. !1J y nryw 0) (hadc � " E) [.Return ecel t(electronic) Delivery .. `r"Y'" 0 Return Receipt electurpy) t tra deo 0a 1-3 rU �.�Cekurn Receipt t Restricted tride r ry ... �. kk ..Here d °,�1 ED E]Certfled Mail Restricted S�� :��, ]I'fetuni Ftcceipt feta+etrranrr,) $ NAF & Pcairttrparroe 1:3 [f Adult Signature Required `C.. [f Adult Signature Required ¢ ,�,� ,,, „�,... OAdult Signature Rea8rloGvd Delrve `C � {tl6re,gra¢`Stl9 Iv R'd5aA1'ak d�gu akt Igraku_ra.. Restrictedtnc,Cd,e:doDl,l.v.m..y„..t � "�-9 a hf � a1& etitPw „ �4 .6 .. . .�::........ aw.�:. � Pi�x 5p�.�r �i„• 3 r 70, ru earn n' C ern mer l ,x j ..,.�_. ...,.m�...,,. rut cba �l taNeumann Beth Neumann u r at 21AFw, ................................... .a.....,... b, �CrM�F Nattituck N” 9:.1,.9,5;2. A.tt..i.tuck NY 11 .5 r a+ a i sum �i Ir rq flI a u� Ir Hatti u Hattitucky NY 119,2 —U a*Tt fued Mail Fee $ T b ...w, �l ... t� a�c ��",� ru gyp_ ru4 12 u E]Return Receipt eceirt 6hrdcope.r ..rr kYCuw a duReceipt Return ._cCJReturn Receipt Ppt(electronic) Postmarkm0 OeRecelp � lr _y ch$ Pn�=(gkr irk []Certified Mail Restricted Delivery , Mere fGer tiPed Mull Restricted Delivery $ Adult aitn bsru Required rad (, Adult Signature Required r� Adult Signaturefir to 4Pd Delivery ,.. ❑Adult Signature Restricted Delivery$ 5/04/21027 VnMPxYCdR,ymt�.z at & TIP, s ., _.._ 'a8 ukS4a ci anti9 urarS $,........... r=I P�,3 8 7 ru Jose h.. ,. � ��u�� " Joseph Noreen t Mpg, PCrTyurert Ajffp ?Car � gym..,., rL � dC33 ........................,, , ,. . ......, � „ ddfk k C.,oa1( rolk „e,ff"b'd9k ,. .„ .». Mzittituckk NY 1152 Mattituc A, ru C (;Y imu sr O ^iia i StaterI ��;^ N .. a, 19a 1 �9� Y 1195 u `n _ _. c Ln C+qtr a7 flv6,adfl d awr' ''yF.1'5 -ro � � ~? � mYCubwvd Cdawc„muwk t�umrr9r�4 P d_R�'�•: d rurrd rq fra Return ReceiptE nlrrrp C)ckJfe.. i�ar O !t•qRa ue�Ntct rlg d�drr'�+n5rua”-k'Cotkm'aaPduJ new $2 H --- '.. ru ❑RetunReeipt(..lalc.p.) $........... . . . .. frbstrraPk C R% Postmark D mhw% aA6 Peat retard f0. wr 44— E3 Here Mail ]AdPau:guature Required Delivery�, t Here 7 rfudnNt twq�rtn�akutmaq rRNw.q„mkud➢ ru ❑Adult�uid aCur'u Required Delivery $. ulred y a _, O ` Ad ll SignWuue ROI u2fnd RWnBm!au7,fy va 0 u sto e �,_----- _ �` �,.,�. .. � t✓o Ya a #I.I�._..._....m.m......_v__......._.... k PCD; 9 t r� srl ...D .. .�. ....� ..........,._ td,5a. d.9 /2d'23 , r-q Total �@� �,9,.`Nmd��k� 7� t as S�exat rop an aawc&Meets b�8.� i ru rIJ �. ..,, _.,, ,,..M,. _.. � r ^GGII nnab ... "... ,,.,. , lr tr ,3 , .L ....... ..... .. .. ..... ...._..,. $8.37 aN Dokticl . ......... 5 !-P, �uaGo R < u a ova e ��,.,.,�,.,.. ...•.........,_.._...,.....,...,. .,...............,...., � q-iP..*fnYd,.�"n""t?w��.. ,�._.. ,.._..,..._... . ....».,...,... ,,...........„.,..,..,...,.... .....»_..... d & ” e Mat C1 IaP.�'„ � d rn rq 7�.. Py) BSaw1Y 11952 Ln njry �yPra 'a�r.u,MbpGty�gf4. .. aJ,g rw t, _. [�Return Receipt(electronic) $ ._. Postmark �� N $ ^ .^vn�........ Har® ,. Certified Mail Restricted[Jel'rva �b {{ � �)Adult Signature Required $.,., ),'„�3.f []Adult Signature Restricted Delivery,IS 'L.,. �,,.�...,,.._..... .. $0.37 Q5/04/2-0221 to 7? tie,�r 1 ..�....... ..— ., rLI ti ppnmel,exnic arn1 _..,I,.L mr..... ,.KK. .... .w..w.......,. r— ',�trr�tntt aat"t�9"A�vt ritt»„”or t�P"tas .a. u, Ktt.Ltuk NY 11952 tr air d� t;ll ✓tib 'l i, OF •DN� ��' �� MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall AnnexM. �'"�� P.O.Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 � 'm , Southold, NY 11971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) 'k Southold, NY � Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov 00 U PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD May 4, 2023 Charles Cuddy Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Boatyard Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, ±600' s/e/o Naugles Drive & West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: Based upon the large amount of technical data included within the DEIS, the Planning Board is requesting that sections be presented by the consultant or author who prepared them over two public meetings. Each presentation will be limited to ten minutes and can be in person or by Zoom. The below schedule is proposed. May 15 2023 public Meeting 3.3 Transportation Dunn Engineering and Stonefield Engineering a. Traffic Impact Study, Revised October 2022 NP&V b. Town Planning Board Consultant on Transportation Impacts 3.7 Noise Sound Sense a. Acoustic Report, Revised Nov. 2022 and Vibration Report 3.10 Construction-Related Impacts 3.10.1 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Excavation Program 3.10.2 Description of Proposed Construction Schedule and Activities Red Rock Industries, Inc. a. Construction Schedule and Details 4.2 Unavoidable Impacts Short-Term and Long Term Southold Town Planning Board Page 2 May 4, 2023 June 5 2023 Public Meetin 2.2 Water Resources PWGC Groundwater Modeling Report, as prepared by PWGC and Environmental Data Resources (EDR) Database Report (existing groundwater quality 3.2 Human Health a. Correspondence with Mattituck Fire Department, Town of Southold Fire Marshal, and Proposed Fire Safety Plan; and Projected Electrical Load. 2.4 Ecological Resources Land Use Ecological Services a. Ecological Conditions and Impact Analysis, revised October 2022. b. NYSDEC Tidal Wetlands Permit and Non-Jurisdictional Determination, issued January 31, 2020 and correspondence to NYSDEC (Mr. Robert W. Yager, Mined Land Reclamation Specialist, II) dated April 19, 2021. 3.3 Air QgpjLty PWGC a. Air Quality Evaluation 5.0 Alternatives and Their Impacts Alternative 1: As-of-Right (No-Action) Alternative Alternative 2: Alternate Material Removal Plan, Including Barge Transport and On-Site Processing LI Precast a. Documentation for Alternate Material Handling, including Barging Material Off-Site (H&L Contracting correspondence dated June 24, 2021) and Sand Calculations from LI Precast. Alternative 3: Construct Project on Another Parcel Alternative 4: Construct Proposed Storage Building(s) Without Excavation Alternative 5: Construct Smaller Building(s) With Less Excavation Alternative 6: Reconfiguration or Reconstruction of Existing Buildings for Larger Boat Storage If you have any questions regarding this site plan or its process, please do not hesitate to call this office. J4espectfully, H James H. Rich III Vice Chair OFFICE LOCATION: MAILING MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 �,� Southold, NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY � Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SEAR NOTICE TO ALL INVOLVED AGENCIES AND INTERESTED PARTIES Draft Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Storage Buildings Adequacy Determination & Set Public Hearing March 2023 Strong's Storage Buildings Located at 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, NY SCTM#1000-106-6-10 & 13.4 Zoning District: M-II and R-80 Proposed Action: This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings; The Southold Town Planning Board adopted the following resolution at a meeting held on Monday, March 13, 2022: RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to 6NYCRR Part 617, of the Environmental Conservation Law acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, hereby determines the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings dated December 1, 2022 to be adequate with respect to the adopted Final Scope and content for the purpose of commencing public review; and be it further RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board hereby authorizes the Planning Board Vice- Chairman to submit the Notice of Completion pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and, upon filing, the public comment period will begin; and be if further The Southold Town Planning Board sets May 15, 2023 at 6:01 pm, for a Public Hearing on the DEIS. The Draft EIS can be accessed at the following: 1. Southold Town Planning Board Office 54375 Main Rd. PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 P: 631-765-1938 Mon - Fri 8:00am —4:00pm 2SC:1age 2. Town of Southold Website http://24.38.28.228:2040/weblink/0/fol/1067645/Rowl.aspx If you have any questions regarding this information, please contact the Planning Board Office. Respectfully, /b."A "L , James H. Rich III Vice Chairman cc: Scott Russell, Southold Town Supervisor Yvette Aguilar, Riverhead Town Supervisor Southold Town Clerk for Southold Town Board Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Engineer Southold Town Police Department Southold Town Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator Southold Town Highway Department Southold Tree Committee Southold Economic Advisory Council Mattituck Fire District Suffolk County Department of Public Works Suffolk County Department of Health Services Suffolk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Commission Suffolk County Legislator Albert Krupski Sheri Aicher, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Michelle Gibbons, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation NYS Natural Heritage Program New York State Department of Transportation PSEG Long Island/ National Grid Environmental Notice Bulletin Town Website Any Interested Party File OFFICE LOCATION: . MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annexe P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 , Southold, NY 11971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov Cou, PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 14, 2023 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: SEAR DEIS Adequacy Determination & Set Public Hearing Draft Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Storage Buildings Located at 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, NY SCTM#1000-106-6-10 & 13.4 Zoning District: M-II and R-80 Dear Mr. Cuddy: The Southold Town Planning Board adopted the following resolutions at a meeting held on Monday, March 13, 2023: WHEREAS, this site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) 6 NYCRR, Part 617, has determined that the proposed action is a Type I action pursuant to 617.4(b)(10): Any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space, including any site on the Register of National Natural Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994 [see 617.17]. The physical alteration of 3.74 acres exceeds 25% of the 10-acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6); and WHEREAS, on August 10. 2020 the Southold Town Planning Board declared itself as Lead Agency and issued a Positive Declaration for the action; and WHEREAS, on September 11, 2020 the applicant submitted a Draft Scope prepared by P.W. Grosser Consulting Inc.; and Southold Town Planning Board Page 12 March 14, 2023 WHEREAS, pursuant to the Regulations of the State of New York Title 6 Department of Environmental Conservation Chapter VI General Regulations Part 617 State Environmental Quality Review the Planning Board held a public hearing on the Draft Scope on November 2, 2020; and WHEREAS, on November 16, 2020 the public comments received to date were discussed at a Planning Board work session; the public comment period was held open until December 7, 2020 and additional written comments were received; and WHEREAS, on April 5, 2021, the Planning Board, as Lead Agency, adopted an Amended Final Scope; and WHEREAS, certain clarifications and corrections were agreed to by the Planning Board at the applicant's request; and WHEREAS, on December 9, 2021, the applicant submitted a Draft Environmental Impact Statement December 2021 Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings (DEIS); and WHEREAS, the review period of the DEIS was mutually agreed to be extended between the applicant and Planning Board to April 11, 2022 and due to circumstances beyond their control again to May 9, 2022; and WHEREAS on May 9, 2022, the Southold Planning Board determined the DEIS to be inadequate; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board received a revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage (DEIS) on December 1, 2022; and WHEREAS, due to the holidays and scheduling, the Southold Town Planning Board requested and received approval for a 30-day extension to review the submission; and WHEREAS, after careful review and upon recommendation from the Planning Board's consultant Nelson, Pope and Voorhis in their February 17, 2023 letter, the Board is prepared to determine that the DEIS is adequate for public review; therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to 6NYCRR Part 617, of the Environmental Conservation Law acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, hereby determines the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings dated December 1, 2022 to be adequate with respect to the adopted Final Scope and content for the purpose of commencing public review; and be it further RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board hereby authorizes the Planning Board Vice-Chairman to submit the Notice of Completion pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and, upon filing, the public comment period will begin; and be if further Southold Town Planning Board Page 13 March 14, 2023 RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board sets May 15, 2023 at 6:01 pm, for a Public Hearing on the DEIS. If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this resolution, please contact the Planning Board Office. Respectfully, James H. Rich III Vice Chairman Encl. The DEIS can be found here: hftp://24.38.28.228:2040/weblin k/0/fol/1067645/Rowl.aspx cc: Scott Russell, Southold Town Supervisor Yvette Aguilar, Riverhead Town Supervisor Southold Town Clerk for Southold Town Board Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Engineer Southold Town Police Department Southold Town Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator Southold Town Highway Department Southold Tree Committee Southold Economic Advisory Council Mattituck Fire District Suffolk County Department of Public Works Suffolk County Department of Health Services Suffolk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Commission Suffolk County Legislator Albert Krupski Sheri Aicher, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Michelle Gibbons, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation NYS Natural Heritage Program New York State Department of Transportation PSEG Long Island/ National Grid Environmental Notice Bulletin Town Website Any Interested Party File The ENB SEQRA Notice Publication Form-Please check all that apply Deadline:Notices must be received by 6 p.m.Wednesday to appear in the following Wednesday's ENB ENegative Declaration-Type I Draft EIS ✓ with Public Hearing E,Conditioned Negative Declaration Generic Ea Supplemental Positive Declaration Draft Scope E] Final EIS = with Public Scoping Session(optional) Q Generic QFinal Scope F� Supplemental 1 DEC Region# County: Suffolk Lead Agency: Town of Southold Planning Board Project Title: Strongs Yacht Center — Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Brief Project Description: The action involves . . . This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2)buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq.ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the Mil and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings.Located at 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, NY SCTM#1000-106-6-13.4 Zoning District: M-II and R-80 Project Location(include street address/municipality): Contact Person: Mark Terry,Assistant Town Planning Director Address:; 54375 State Route 25 ,City: State: Zip:Southold NY 11971 6317651938 Mark.Terry@town.southold.ny.us Phone: Fax: E-mail: For Conditioned Negative Declaration/Draft Scope/Draft EIS: Public Comment Period ends: 7 /_10 / 23 g Scoping 5 15 23 Time: 6 : 01 am/pm For Public Hearing or Sco m Session: Date: / / Town of Southold Town Hall Meeting Room Location: A hard copy of the Draft Scope/Final Scope/DEIS/FEIS is available at the following locations: Southold Town Planning Board Office, Town Laserfiche System, Mattituck, Cutchogue and Southold Libraries The online version of the Draft Scope/Final Scope/DEIS/FEIS is available at the following publically accessible web site: https://www.southoldtownny.gov/270/Environmental-Impact-Statements For Conditioned Negative Declaration: In summary, conditions include: ENB Form January 2019 Southold Town—Planning Board Work Session–February 27, 2023- Page 2 3:45 p.m. Executive Session -Discuss the hiring of particular consultant for SEQRA 4:00 p.m.Applications Project Name: Brown Lnet Stan TM# 000-48-3 Subdivision 20.1 Standard SC Location -... : 465 B -mmmmmwet&711 Linnet Street, Greenport Descrition: This proposal m_mmmmrv_ ,,, w� p p posal isfor the standard subdivision of a 0.52-acre parcel into two 0.26-acre lots in the R-40 Zoning District. Lot 1 will contain the existing two- family dwelling, and Lot 2 will contain the existing single-family dwelling. The Zoning Board of Appeals granted approval of the non-conforming lot areas. This parcel is located on the south side of Linnet Street, +/-100west of Seventh Street in Greenport. Status: New A lica�tlon -_.�_ro_ Action: mm...... Review for CoMpletqness Attachments: Staff Report 4 Pra j t Name:, tronsS �r�a e Buildings �µ SCTM# 106.-6-10 &13 4��...�. Location, 3430 Mill Description": This Site Planfor artthe proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat M storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the M I I and R-80 Zoning Districts where there is 69,245 sq. ft. of existing._.m yand is �__._m .�......—. beat buald .�_.. ._..�a....�. �, ..... Status. �..mm..... . Pendia —Action-, Draft Environmental Im act Statement Ade% acy Review Attachments_..._n ..m Staff Report..�..._....... �..._�._. ,�.. Discussion: ❖ Site Plan Use Determinations(SPUD): o LIV 2 Max LLC(8 Hands) Storage Barn, 4735 Cox Lane, Cutchogue, SCTM#1000-96-2-10.2 o Laurel Links Tennis Court, 6400 Main Road, Laurel, SCTM#1000-125-4-24.23 o E&C Property Holding Storage Building (Joint Industry Board), 3800 Duck Pond Road, Cutchogue, SCTM#1000-83-2-17.3 ❖ ZBA Requests for Comments: o Charles& Kavita Vansant, 1355 & 1285 Smith Road, Peconic SCTM#1000-98-4-12, 13& 14 DUE: March 2,2023 o 170 Moores Lane Realty, 170 Moores Lane, Greenport, SCTM#1 00 0-45-7-3 DUE: March 30, 2023 Southold Planning Department Staff Report Site Plan Application Work Session –Supplemental Summary Date February 27, 2023 Prepared By: Mark Terry I. Application Information Project Title: Strong’s Boatyard Buildings Applicant: Strong’s Yacht Center Date of Submission: July 20, 2018 Tax Map Number: 106.-6-10 & 13.4 Project Location: 5780 West Mill Road Hamlet: Mattituck Zoning District: Split R – 80 / Marine II (M-II) II. Description of Project Type of Site Plan: Commercial Acreage of Project Site: ±33 acres (R80 @ 16.5ac + MII @ 16.5 ac) Building Size 101,500 sq. ft. This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R- 80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. III. DEIS Adequacy Determination It is recommended that the Planning Board find the Draft Environmental Impact Statement December 1, 2022 Strong’s Yacht Center – Proposed Boat Storage Buildings ADEQUATE for public review. This recommendation was based upon the following: 1. Staff comments on the DEIS regarding adequacy dated February 23, 2023, titled; SUMMARY OF INADEQUATE SECTIONS REVIEWED FOR ADEQUACY IN DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT DATED DECEMBER 1, 2022; and 2. The Planning Boards’ consultant Nelson, Pope and Voorhis in their February 17, 2023 letter recommending that the DEIS be found adequate for public review. NOTE THAT THE ACCEPTED DEIS REQUIRES NOTICING IN THE NYSDEC ENVIRONMENTAL NOTICE BULLETIN 1 FEBRUARY 23, 2023 D SUMMARY OF INADEQUATE SECTIONS REVIEWED FOR ADEQUACY IN RAFT EIS NVIRONMENTAL MPACT TATEMENT DATED DECEMBER 1, 2022 S’YC–PBS TRONGS ACHT ENTER ROPOSED OAT TORAGE B UILDINGS 3430MR ILL OAD M,TS,NY ATTITUCK OWN OF OUTHOLD SCTMN.:D1000,S106,B6,L10&13.4 O ISTRICT ECTION LOCK OTS 1.Review the estimates of traffic anticipated to be generated during the construction of the proposed development. Determine the make-up of the added traffic and hourly new traffic volumes to be placed on the existing road system. STAFF : Traffic volumes (including trucks) have been included in the DEIS and Appendix Nelson, Pope and Voorhis in their February 17, 2023 letter to O Traffic Study. recommended the DEIS is adequate. 2.Provide and discuss a vehicle routing plan for all phases of the project (site preparation, construction and operations after construction). Identify the roads used, speed limits, existing road condition with photographic representation, all intersections, all school zones, anticipated traffic levels and traffic chokepoints along a proposed route. Determine the dimensional characteristics of the road and the existing traffic control provided. Examine whether the additional construction related traffic can safely be accommodated on the existing roadways Discuss the suitability of the road capacity. The traffic flow along Cox Neck Lane and West Mill Road and how vehicles will navigate the curves on the roadways. STAFF: A routing plan has been included and is discussed in the DEIS on pages 223 and 338 (Alternative Routing Plan) and Appendix O Traffic Study. Nelson, Pope and Voorhis in their February 17, 2023 letter to recommend the DEIS is adequate. 3.Include a roadway user group safety study and analysis in the DEIS during all four seasons on the use of the roadways (route) by user groups, including potential adverse impacts on pedestrians walking (with Strollers), jogging, biking and children waiting for the school bus that will could be adversely impacted by vehicles including loaded trucks. Include an analysis of the proposed truck route’s road width and the capacity to accommodate two vehicles passing at the same time and location as a pedestrian or cyclist, and whether the roads are currently safe for such an interaction, including the perceived safety from the perspective of the pedestrian or cyclist. STAFF: Information on revised estimates has been included. Nelson, Pope and Voorhis in their February 17, 2023 letter to recommend the DEIS is adequate 4.Discuss the potential damage and destruction of local and regional roads by trucks and all other vehicle types involved in the staging, clearing, excavation, site preparation, construction and post construction and operations of the facility. Include the aprons at the access points. Provide all specifications of the loaded and unloaded trucks involved in the excavation and construction. STAFF: A discussion on road conditions has been included. Nelson, Pope and Voorhis in their February 17, 2023 letter to recommend the DEIS is adequate 5.Discuss specific provisions for a performance guarantee to assure appropriate reclamation/restoration of any areas (including local roadways) that may be required, or in the event that the project does not come to completion after a specifically defined period of time. STAFF: Included.Nelson, Pope and Voorhis in their February 17, 2023 letter to recommend the DEIS is adequate 6.Evaluate and discuss the duration of potential adverse impacts from all vehicle trip types included in each phase and post-construction, the wear and tear on roadways caused by vehicle types, quality of life impacts to the community and receptors along the routes including adjacent Towns where vehicles will be traveling. STAFF: Included; traffic routes including the use of Sound Avenue and other roadways in adjacent Towns have been discussed. Nelson, Pope and Voorhis in their February 17, 2023 letter to recommend the DEIS is adequate. Appendices M Boat Vessel Study 7.Discuss the impacts of vibration from loaded trucks on structures along the vehicle route(s). STAFF: INCLUDED as Appendix R with discussion on page 223 in the DEIS. 8.Provide detailed analysis on the potential, long-term adverse impacts to adjacent roadways (surfaces, condition), surrounding properties, neighborhood(s), and region through the clearing, excavation, storing and transporting of cleared vegetation, excavated materials and construction of the site over a multi-month period in multiple phases. STAFF: A discussion on road conditions is included on page 222 and long-term adverse impact analysis is in appendices R Acoustics Report and Vibration Report and also discussed in the DEIS. 9.The potential adverse impacts of Transportation on community character (see above). STAFF: Included in appendices R Acoustics Report and Vibration Report and S Air Quality and discussed throughout the DEIS. 10.Impact from Noise STAFF: Included in Appendix R Acoustics Report and Vibration Report and discussed throughout and on page 329 of the DEIS. 11.Discuss how the unexpected site conditions, weather, pandemic, and workflow and schedule changes will be addressed to not impact the community? STAFF: Included on page 35 in the DEIS. 12.Describe the public benefit to the community. STAFF: Included as section 1.3.2 on page 14 of the DEIS. ;W NELSON POPE VOORHIS environmental® /and use®planning MEMORANDUM To: Town of Southold Planning Board From: Carrie O'Farrell, AICP, Senior Partner, Nelson Pope Voorhis and Osman Barrie, P.E. Nelson + Pope Engineering Cc: Heather M. Lanza,AICP, Planning Director and Mark Terry,AICP, Assistant Planning Director Date: February 17, 2023 NPV No: 08265 Re: Strong's Yacht Center Proposed Boat Storage Buildings - DEIS Substantive Review Nelson Pope Voorhis, LLC ("NPV") in association with Nelson + Pope Engineers,Architects, Surveyors ("N+P") has reviewed the revised November 2022 Draft Environmental Impact Statement ("DEIS") for the proposed Site Plan for Strong's Yacht Center's Boat Storage Buildings at 5780 West Mill Road in Mattituck. The revised DEIS has been reviewed against the scope and content requirements of the adopted February 8, 2021, Final Scope,' and the implementing regulations for the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) at 6 NYCRR Part 617, Subsection 617.9(b) "Environmental impact statement content" to determine whether to accept the DEIS as adequate with respect to its scope and content for the purpose of commencing public review. Based on our review of the resubmission, NPV finds that the revised DEIS addresses NPV/N+P's May 6, 2022 comment letter submitted to and accepted by the Southold Planning Board and recommends that the DEIS may be deemed complete for the purpose of commencing public review. Should the Board agree with the recommended acceptance of the document,the DEIS will need to be circulated to involved and interested agencies and made available on the Town's website. At the time of acceptance, the Board will need to set a public comment period on the DEIS and has the option to hold a public hearing to receive comments. The following requirements apply to scheduling of the public comment period and public hearing: • The notice of hearing must be published, at least 14 calendar days in advance of the public hearing, in a newspaper of general circulation in the area of the potential impacts of the action. • The hearing must commence no less than 15 calendar days or no more than 60 calendar days after the filing of the notice of completion of the DEIS by the lead agency. • The public comment period must be a minimum 30 calendar days from the first filing and circulation of the notice of completion and must extend for a minimum of 10 calendar days following the public hearing. As previously discussed, once the DEIS is accepted as adequate for public review, additional substantive technical comments will be made regarding potential impacts and mitigation measures set forth in the document. 1 as amended by the Planning Board's April 5, 2021, "Response to Final Scope Amendment Request from the Applicant" Long Island: 70 Maxess Road, Melville, NY 11747 ® 631.427.5665 nelsonpopevooris.com Hudson Valley: 156 Route 59, Suite C6,Suffern, NY 10901 845.368.1472 M NELSON POPE VOORHIS environmental® land use-planning 9' February 17, 2023 Heather M. Lanza,AICP, Planning Director Town Hall Annex Building S437S Route 2S, P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 RE: Budget Request for Environmental Review Services Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road Mattituck, NY Dear Ms. Lanza: Per your request,we have reviewed the hours spent to date and the remaining hours anticipated in review of the initial and subsequent submissions of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) prepared for the proposed Strong's Yacht Center expansion. Our contract included budget estimates based on the anticipated hours necessary for review of the initial DEIS completeness review (Task 1 - $8,500) and one resubmission (Task 2-$4,000). To date, Nelson Pope Voorhis, LLC(NPV) invoiced $9,168.75 for review of the initial submission of the DEIS and meetings with Town staff, and $1,548.75 on the review of a subsequent June 2022 submission by the applicant's representatives requesting clarifications and/or confirmation of the adequacy of approaches to address the May 2022 DEIS comment memo. The time necessary for review of materials depends on several factors, including the quality of the submission(s), the number of meetings requested with representatives from the Town Planning staff or applicant's representatives and the number of resubmissions required for the DEIS to be deemed complete. Our contract noted that the reviews would be billed based upon the hours expended following the scope of services, and that if additional submissions/review were necessary, an additional budget would be requested. Additional time was required to review and respond to the applicant's interim submission in June 2022. Additionally, based on the extent of additional information/analysis contained in the November 2022 DEIS submission, there was considerable time necessary to review and verify whether the comments have been addressed throughout the DEIS and various appendices and supplemental studies. Therefore, NPV is requesting that the Town shift the $2,500 budget from Task 3 (Assistance with Impact Identification) to Task 2A (Second DEIS Completeness Review). The budget for the overall DEIS Completeness review contract would remain unchanged at$15,000. We look forward to continuing work with the Board on the review of this application. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this proposal, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very Truly Yours, Nelson, Pope&Voorhis, LLC I/A Carrie L. O'Farrell Senior Partner/Division Manager Long Island: 70 Maxess Road, Melville, NY 11747 631.427.5665 nelsonpopevooris.com Hudson Valley: 156 Route 59, Suite C6,Suffern, NY 10901 845.368.1472 v RECEIVED CHARLES R. CUDDY DEC 2 2 22022 Attorney at Lawm _. 445 Griffing Avenue Soutnam s own u Riverhead,NY 11901Plan ning Board Mailing Address: Tel:(631)369-8200 PO Box 1547 Fax:(631)369-9080 Riverhead,NY 11901 e-mail:charlescuddy@optonline.net December 20, 2022 James H. Rich III, Vice-Chairman Planning Board Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Re: Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Boatyard Buildings SCTM#1000106-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Vice-Chairman Rich: In response to your request for a 30-day extension to review the additional submission,the applicant is willing to grant an extension on the basis that the review will be completed not later than a date permitting it to be reviewed at the Planning Board work session scheduled for February 6, 2023. Very truly yours, Charles R: Cuddy CRC:ik Enclosures OFFICE LOCATION: MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 �� Southold,NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY � Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtowirmy.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD December 13, 2022 Charles Cuddy Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Boatyard Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, ±600' s/e/o Naugles Drive & West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: The Planning Board received the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage (DEIS) on December 1, 2022. Due to the holidays and scheduling, the Planning Board is requesting a 30-day extension to review the submission. The total review period would then equal 60 days. Please confirm your acceptance of this request. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call this office at 631-765-1938. Respectfully, )A""- H. James H. Rich III Vice-Chairman Cc: John Burke, Assistant Town Attorney RECEIVED IVE PAW ll- iQlIIWAT III'l'RIllelll'4 S01I III 11101114S December 1, 2022 �" duiC of Town Planning Board VIA HAND DELIVERY Town of Southold Planning Board Attn: Heather M. Lanza,AICP, Planning Director Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 Southold, New York 11971 RE: Draft Environmental Impact Statement,Revised November 2022 Strong's Yacht Center,LLC.-Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road,Hamlet of Mattituck,Town of Southold Dear Ms. Lanza: Transmitted herewith is the Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS), Revised November 2022 for the Strong's Yacht Center, LLC. - Proposed Boat Storage Buildings.This DEIS has been revised pursuant to the comments of the Town of Southold and its consultants. In December 2021,this firm filed two(2) printed copies of the three-volume DEIS and six(6)flash drives with paper copies of the site plans. As discussed,we are filing the following: 1. Two(2) printed copies of only those documents/reports/plans that were modified, including; • Revised DEIS Text • Volume 1:Appendix C-Site Development Plans • Volume 2: Appendix J — Additional SCDHS-related documentation; Appendix L - Added Environmental Data Resources Database Report; Appendix M — Boat Vessel Study, Revised; Appendix N—Ecological Impact Assessment, Revised • Volume 3: Appendix 0 - Traffic Impact Study with select appendices, Revised; Appendix R — Acoustic Report, Revised and Vibration Report (Added/New); Appendix S — Air Quality Report, Revised and Appendix T—Additional Archaeological Report and OPRHP correspondence. Note that there are no changes to: • Volume 1: Appendices A, B and D • Volume 2: Appendices E, F,G, H, I,and K • Volume 3: Appendices P,Q, U and V All documents are being submitted three-hole punched so they can replace what was included in the December 2021 submission or added to the appendix. The annexed instructions provide what is to be replaced in its entirety or added to the appendix. 2. Two (2) printed copies of Binder Spines and the Volumes 1, 2 and 3 Cover and Insert Pages (modified to include revision date and modified Appendix L and R titles,where necessary). 0 13$1() . 6311,589.6353 63:) d 9�WIP,I41 O1NVE:INIW,WE �rf'W' 7 `v' - J ,w { W ROS 0. C0IN l " A 14Y 1171'6 LONG ISLAND MANHATTAN SARATOGA SPRINGS • SYRACUSE • SEATTLE • SHELTON r 3. Instructions on what has been modified, and also provides instructions on what is to be replaced (i.e., revised in its entirety) or what is to be added to the appendix (i.e., additional work completed as part of this revision). 4. Mark-up of Planning and Consultant comments acknowledging that every requested revision or modification has been addressed. 5. Six(6)flash drives with paper copies of the proposed site plans. Each flash drive has the following folders: • "Revised DEIS Submission November 2022 and Red-Lined Reports"—Note that this folder contains all of the reports/plans/documents that changed (and submitted in paper format), as well as red- lined copies of the DEIS text, Ecological Report,Acoustic Report,Traffic Impact Study and the Boat Vessel Study. • "Revised DEIS November 2022_Full Document and Appendices" — As requested, this is the complete DEIS Revised November 2022. If you require additional copies, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at k ennaro w rosser.cam or (631)589-6353. Thank you. Sincerely, P.W.GROSSER CONSULTING Kim Gennaro-Cancea, M.S.,AICP CEP Vice President cc: J.Strong,Strong's Yacht Center, LLC(enc.) C.Cuddy, Esq. (via electronic mail) �.� II� �C�Pt"��w114,IIID f�tmJl � O� IIIIII.IIkIIIIA.� �'� �AVENUE�17IIII LONG ISLAND = MANHATTAN • SARATOGA SPRINGS • SYRACUSE - SEATTLE • SHELTON COUNTY OF SUFFOLK T STEVEN BELLONE SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES GREGSON H.PIGOTT,MD,MPH Commissioner May 17,2022 ` Town of Southold Planning Board Heather Lanza; Town Planning Director 54375 Route 25 P.O.Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Via E-mail: Heather.Lanzala'_,town.southold.ny.us Re: Strong's Yacht Center 5780 West Mill Road,Mattituck SCTM# 1000-10600-0600-013004 Dear Ms. Lanza, The Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS; "Department") has received your letter dated May 10, 2022 concerning the above referenced application. The Department has no objection to the Southold Town Planning Board assuming Lead Agency status. Based on a review of the subject coordination, the Department offers the following comments. However, the Department wishes to reserve its right to provide more detailed information within the comment period(s) established for this action. These comments should not be construed as an implicit SCDHS approval or rejection of the project. All applications are reviewed thoroughly with respect to Suffolk County Sanitary Code concerns by appropriate departmental personnel when SCDHS applications are submitted. 1. SANITARY CODE A. Article VI Application Status: The Department has not received a commercial wastewater application for the above referenced project, as required by Article VI of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code. The project sponsor should submit an application to our agency's Office of Wastewater Management at the earliest possible date DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY—Office of Ecology IV 360 Yaphank Avenue,Suite 213,Yaphank NY 11980(631)852-5750 Fax(631)852-5812 PublicHealth P t.Promote.Protect. so that a complete technical assessment of this proposal can be undertaken. B. SCDHS Jurisdiction The SCDHS maintains jurisdiction over the final lot area, density and use. The applicant, therefore, should not undertake the project without Health Department approval. Density, design and flow specifications, location, subsurface soil conditions, and complete site plan details are essential to the review of this project. These considerations are reviewed completely at the time of SCDHS application. Thank you for the opportunity to review this application. If you have any questions,please feel free to contact the Office of Ecology at 631-852-5750. Sincerely, Joy Sauer Environmental Analyst Office of Ecology SEQRM( suffolkcountyny.gov OFFICE LOCATION: MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall AnnexN � �, P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 �� Southold, NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY r, Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD May 10, 2022 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: SEAR DEIS Adequacy Determination Draft Environmental Impact Statement December 2021 Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Located at 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, NY SCTM#1000-106-6-13.4 Zoning District: M-II and R-80 Dear Mr. Cuddy: The Southold Town Planning Board adopted the following resolution at a meeting held on Monday, May 9, 2022: WHEREAS, this site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) 6 NYCRR, Part 617, has determined that the proposed action is a Type I action pursuant to 617.4(b)(10): Any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space, including any site on the Register of National Natural Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994 [see 617.17]. The physical alteration of 3.74 acres exceeds 25% of the 10-acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6); and WHEREAS, on August 10. 2020 the Southold Town Planning Board declared itself as Lead Agency and issued a Positive Declaration for the action; and WHEREAS, on September 11, 2020 the applicant submitted a Draft Scope prepared by P.W. Grosser Consulting Inc.; and Southold Town Planning Board Page 12 May 10, 2022 WHEREAS, pursuant to the Regulations of the State of New York Title 6 Department of Environmental Conservation Chapter VI General Regulations Part 617 State Environmental Quality Review the Planning Board held a public hearing on the Draft Scope on November 2, 2020; and WHEREAS, on November 16, 2020 the public comments received to date were discussed at a Planning Board work session; the public comment period was held open until December 7, 2020 and additional written comments were received; and WHEREAS, on April 5, 2021, the Planning Board, as Lead Agency, adopted an Amended Final Scope; and WHEREAS, certain clarifications and corrections were agreed to by the Planning Board at the applicant's request; and WHEREAS, on December 9, 2021, the applicant submitted a Draft Environmental Impact Statement December 2021 Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings (DEIS); and WHEREAS, the review period of the DEIS was mutually agreed to be extended between the applicant and Planning Board to April 11, 2022 and due to circumstances beyond their control again to May 9, 2022; therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to 6NYCRR Part 617, of the Environmental Conservation Law acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, hereby determines that the Draft Environmental Impact Statement December 2021 Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings to be inadeguate with respect to the adopted Final Scope and content for the purpose of commencing public review. A complete list of inadequacies is included. If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this resolution, please contact the Planning Board Office. Re A ppectfully. arises H. Rich III Vice Chairman Encl. The DEIS can be found here: hftp://24.38.28.228:2040/webl in k/0/fol/1067645/Rowl.aspx Southold Town Planning Board Page 13 May 10, 2022 cc: Scott Russell, Southold Town Supervisor Yvette Aguilar, Riverhead Town Supervisor Southold Town Clerk for Southold Town Board Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Engineer Southold Town Police Department Southold Town Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator Southold Town Highway Department Southold Tree Committee Southold Economic Advisory Council Mattituck Fire District Suffolk County Department of Public Works Suffolk County Department of Health Services Suffolk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Commission Suffolk County Legislator Albert Krupski Sheri Aicher, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Michelle Gibbons, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation NYS Natural Heritage Program New York State Department of Transportation PSEG Long Island/ National Grid Environmental Notice Bulletin Town Website Any Interested Party File Southold Town Plannina Board Work Session — 1a 9 2022 — Pa e Location: 3430 Mill Road M.mm.... & 134 ron� s Storage B��dk s SCTM# 106.-6-10 _.. Project Name: St �...m. _....._.._..._ rn..�� . Description: This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there is 69,24g5 sq ft of existin 5oatrd buildings. Status. Pendm _ .. �.e Review continued) Action: Draft Environmental Impact Statement Adeu Attachments Staff Ror ! "k"1� � b N .. ...._.... ... 0 �......_m._.. ��. n.�m .� . . _a..__.�....—.,._. . .. Southold Planning Department Staff Report Site Plan Application Work Session —Supplemental Summary Date May 9, 2022 Prepared By; Mark Terry I. Application Information Project Title: Strong's Boatyard Buildings Applicant: Strong's Yacht Center Date of Submission: July 20, 2018 Tax Map Number: 106.-6-10 & 13.4 Project Location: 5780 West Mill Road Hamlet: Mattituck Zoning District: Split R — 80 / Marine II (M-II) II. Description of Project Type of Site Plan: Commercial Acreage of Project Site: ±33 acres (R80 @ 16.5ac + MII @ 16.5 ac) Building Size 101,500 sq. ft. This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R- 80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. III. DEIS Adequacy Determination It is recommended that the Planning Board find the DEIS INADEQUATE for public review. This recommendation was based upon the following: 1. Staff comments on the DEIS regarding adequacy dated May 9, 2022 Summary of Inadequate Sections Draft Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center — Proposed Boat Storage Buildings; and 2. The memorandum addressed to the Planning Board dated May 6, 2022, and prepared by Carrie O'Farrell, AICP, Senior Partner, Nelson Pope Voorhis, and Osman Barrie, P.E. Nelson +Pope Engineering for the Strong's Yacht Center Proposed Boat Storage Buildings under contract with the Town; and 3. The Office of Parks Recreation and Historic Preservation memorandum dated April 8, 2022, requesting a Construction Protection Plan for Mattituck Creek Tide Mill/Old Mill Restaurant and The Water Tower and Building. 1 FINAL May 9, 2022 SUMMARY OF INADEQUATE SECTIONS DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT STRONG'S YACHT CENTER-PROPOSED BOAT STORAGE BUILDINGS 3430 MILL ROAD MATTITUCK,TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NY SCTM NO.: DISTRICT 1000, SECTION 106,BLOCK 6,LOTS 10& 13.4 Page Numbers Correlate to the Amended Final Scope or Noted Otherwise Page 15 Review the estimates of traffic anticipated to be generated during the construction of the proposed development. Determine the make-up of the added traffic and hourly new traffic volumes to be placed on the existing road system. STAFF: INADEQUATE. The magnitude and duration of expected large adverse impacts (significant) to the quality of life of residents and visitors, community character, and infrastructure that is being proposed regarding the number of vehicle trips for this action have not been adequately discussed. Notably, a total of 40 truck trips per day from 7:00 am to 5:00 pm five days per week (Monday to Friday) are proposed on local and regional roadways (Sound Avenue)for approximately 5 to 6 months has been presented in the DEIS. The DEIS combines both directions when assessing the adverse impacts of a truck trip when in fact the total number of trips is expected to be much greater and is not discussed in the document. Therefore, the Planning Board finds that the discussion provided in the document on impacts to transportation, community character and infrastructure is not a true assessment of what will occur on local and regional roads and the direct and indirect adverse impacts on the quality of life of residents and the character of the impacted areas. During Phase 1; it is expected that a total of 80 trucks loaded and unloaded with sand would travel the route each weekday passing a single point on the route 9,600 ti>xnes over a six-month period. For example, a single-family residence(single point) located on Cox Neck Road or Sound Avenue would be subject to these potential large adverse impacts along the specified truck route. During Phase 2, approximately 12,000 CY of material would be excavated and removed and would generate 400 total trips or 800 trucks passing a sin le oinut loaded and unloaded up to 1 month (2 to 4 weeks)with a commencement date of May 2023. Phase 3 would generate a total of 60 truck trips for the construction of the retaining wall and another 101 truck trips (12 trucks for material delivery and 89 trucks for concrete foundation) for the two boat storage buildings. over approximately 6 months. This would result in 322 trucks passing a single point along the route over 6 months. Please provide a more accurate and detailed discussion on the: 1. The total number of trucks per day that will travel over local and regional roads over the duration of the project. 2. The mitigation proposed to address potential large adverse impacts from the total number of trucks on the quality of life, community character and infrastructure along the route. 3. Verify that no truck trips will be operating from any phase of this project over local and regional roadways from the site or staging areas along the route. 4. Verify that a staging area to store and transport material during the weekend and holidays over local and regional roadways will not be used. Page 16 Provide and discuss a vehicle routing plan for all phases of the project (site preparation, construction and operations after construction). Identify the roads used, speed limits, existing road condition with photographic representation, all intersections, all school zones, anticipated traffic levels and traffic chokepoints along a proposed route. Determine the dimensional characteristics of the road and the existing traffic control provided. Examine whether the additional construction related traffic can safely be accommodated on the existing roadways Discuss the suitability of the road capacity. The traffic flow along Cox Neck Lane and West Mill Road and how vehicles will navigate the curves on the roadways. STAFF: This discussion on this section of potential large adverse impacts is INADEQUATE. There is a direct connection to the magnitude and duration of potential large adverse impacts on the quality of the life of residents and visitors, residences(vibration),community character,and infrastructure(road damage)along an entire route due to the total number of vehicles trips proposed. Page 17 4. Include a roadway user group safety study and analysis in the DEIS during all four seasons on the use of the roadways (route) by user groups, including potential adverse impacts on pedestrians walking (with Strollers),jogging,biking and children waiting for the school bus that will could be adversely impacted by vehicles including loaded trucks. Include an analysis of the proposed truck route's road width and the capacity to accommodate two vehicles passing at the same time and location as a pedestrian or cyclist, and whether the roads are currently safe for such an interaction, including the perceived safety from the perspective of the pedestrian or cyclist. STAFF: INADEQUATE. We are of the opinion that sampling methodologies were not representative of timeframes when user groups were expected to use the roadway (morning and evening hours). The sampling methodology was too narrow in scope and does not provide a comprehensive assessment of user groups along the entire route. Discuss the potential damage and destruction of local and regional roads by trucks and all other vehicle types involved in the staging, clearing, excavation, site preparation, construction and post construction and operations of the facility. Include the aprons at the access points. Provide all specifications of the loaded and unloaded trucks involved in the excavation and construction. STAFF: INADEQUATE. The route has not been identified. No discussion on the road condition and impacts to Sound Avenue or other roadways in adjacent Towns have been discussed. Discuss specific provisions for a performance guarantee to assure appropriate reclamation/restoration of any areas (including local roadways)that may be required, or in the event that the project does not come to completion after a specifically defined period of time. STAFF: INADEQUATE. A performance guarantee discussion has not been provided for all impacted roadways or Townships. Evaluate and discuss the duration of potential adverse impacts from all vehicle trip types included in each phase and post-construction, the wear and tear on roadways caused by vehicle types, quality of life impacts to the community and receptors along the routes including adjacent Towns where vehicles will be traveling. STAFF: INADEQUATE. The route has not been identified in detail. No discussion on the road condition and impacts to Sound Avenue and other roadways in adjacent Towns have been discussed. Regional large, adverse impacts are expected. Page 17 5. Discuss the impacts of vibration from loaded trucks on structures along the vehicle route(s). STAFF: INADEQUATE. The vehicle route is not identified regionally. Page 19 7. Provide a detailed analysis on the potential, long-term adverse impacts to adjacent roadways (surfaces, condition), surrounding properties, neighborhood(s), and region through the clearing, excavation, storing and transporting of cleared vegetation, excavated materials and construction of the site over a multi-month period in multiple phases. STAFF: INADEQUATE. The total number of vehicle trips is not accurately stated in the DEIS. Page 21 1. The potential adverse impacts from Transportation on community character(see above). STAFF: INADEQUATE. There is no discussion on the regional, adverse impacts to community character and receptors along the routes. Page 22 Impact from Noise STAFF INADEQUATE Do the noise levels assigned to the tub grinder and wood chipper include the sound generated while grinding and chipping is in progress? The levels shown in the table in the acoustic report are similar to other machinery, which leads us to believe the additional noise from the actual grinding and chipping is not included. Page 26 1. Discuss how the unexpected site conditions, weather, pandemic, and work flow and schedule changes will be addressed to not impact the community? STAFF: INADEQUATE. The DEIS states that clearing, grubbing and stripping will be conducted in dry weather. Will work be conducted in wet weather conditions? The DEIS also states that "It is noted that the proposed construction schedule is a maximum time period and considers delays that could occur from unexpected weather and task delays." (DEIS Page 272). What is unexpected weather? What would be considered task delays? Page 28 1. Describe the public benefit to the community. STAFF: INADEQUATE. The DEIS states that"Constructing and operating winter boat storage buildings would bring additional jobs and a new tax revenue stream to the Town of Southold. In addition to direct benefits to the Town, the Applicant is responding to market demand for larger boat owners looking for local indoor winter storage" (DEIS Page 231) Please elaborate as to why meeting market demand in this location is a public benefit. RECEIVED NELSON POPE VOORHIS MAY 0 9 2022 I environmental•land use•planning Planning Board MEMORANDUM To: Town of Southold Planning Board From: Carrie O'Farrell,AICP, Senior Partner, Nelson Pope Voorhis and Osman Barrie, P.E. Nelson+Pope Engineering Cc: Heather M. Lanza,AICP, Planning Director and Mark Terry,AICP,Assistant Planning Director Date: May 6,2022 NPV Not 08265 Re: Strong's Yacht Center Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Nelson Pope Voorhis, LLC("NPV") in association with Nelson+ Pope Engineers,Architects,Surveyors("N+P") has conducted a preliminary review of the December 2021 Draft Environmental Impact Statement ("DEIS") for the proposed Site Plan for Strong's Yacht Center's Boat Storage Buildings at 5780 West Mill Road in Mattituck. The purpose of this review is to: • assist the Town Planning Board as lead agency in determining the DEIS's consistency with the scope and content requirements of the adopted February 8, 2021, Final Scope, as amended by the Planning Board's April 5,2021 "Response to Final Scope Amendment Request from the Applicant";and • review the DEIS for compliance with the State Environmental Quality Review Act ("SEQRA") and its implementing regulations established pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617,Subsection 617.9(b)"Environmental impact statement content." This review, along with the Town Planning Department's assessment of other pertinent topics outlined by the Final Scope and amended scope, is specifically intended to assist the Planning Board in determining whether to accept the DEIS as adequate with respect to its scope and content for the purpose of commencing public review or if additional revisions or amendments are necessary to satisfy these requirements. Per our agreement with the Town,NPV's primary review responsibilities for this DEIS completeness review include consideration of hydrology, hydrogeology and associated factors (e.g., groundwater, surface water, wetlands, soils, and topography). N+P's focus was on the DEIS's completeness in terms of traffic and transportation related analyses. Based on our review of the DEIS submission, NPV and N+P recommend the Planning Board deem the DEIS "Incomplete" and that the following comments be addressed prior to DEIS acceptance, distribution, and review by the public and involved and interested agencies. HYDROLOGY/HYDROGEOLOGY Comments: 1. There appears to be limited information on existing groundwater quality in the area. The Existing Conditions section under the Water Resources section should include a general discussion of existing groundwater quality in the area based on recent available drinking water quality data such as is available Long Island: 70 Maxess Road, Melville,NY 11747 • 631.427.5665 nelsonpopevoorhis.com Hudson Valley: 156 Route 59, Suite C6,Suffern, NY 10901 845.368.1472 Strong's Yacht Center Proposed Boat Storage Buildings DEIS Completeness Review from the SCWA for its nearby Inlet Drive wellfield,SCWA Annual Drinking Water Quality reports,or other available sources. This information will provide a necessary baseline for the groundwater (and surface water) quality assessment including current conditions and any existing groundwater quality issues that may be exacerbated by the project. 2. The Applicant was required by the Final Scope and April 5, 2021 "Planning Board Clarifications and Comments in Response to Final Scope" memo to assess groundwater quantity available to neighboring wells over the course of four seasons. Instead, as noted in the DEIS,the Applicant utilized a numerical 3- D groundwater modeling assessment and provided a report to address the potential impacts from the soil excavation on-site that the Amended Final Scope identified as "potentially capable of affecting the hydrology and zones of influence for nearby private wells, and the quantity of water available after excavation is completed.The groundwater model was employed rather than taking monthly water level observations over the course of a year because the model can reliably predict groundwater levels and aquifer responses under numerous different conditions and scenarios.Also, rather than one year of data, multiple years of groundwater level data were used to construct and calibrate the model(in this particular case some of the local monitoring wells used to construct the model had monthly data going back as far as 1975), which allowed for more long-term averages to be used.This also allowed for the identification of anomaly years, such as when drier or wetter conditions may prevail. Longer term groundwater trends (rising or falling water levels and potential causes)can be observed as well when looking back over many years as opposed to a single year. NPV reviewed PWGC's October 2021 Groundwater Modeling Report and concurs with the Applicant's contention thatthe model provides a suitable methodology using appropriate data to analyze and address the issues and parameters the Town has requested. 3. The assessment of tidal flow restrictions did not include the use of a model. Instead, as permitted by the April 5, 2021 "Clarifications and Comments in Response to Final Scope memo," a quantitative and qualitative discussion was provided that included NOAA and Mattituck Inlet Survey data. The vessel trip generation estimates for the two eight-week periods when boats are expected to arrive and depart is 11 boats per week over eight weeks or 1.57 trips per day during this period, but this does not take into consideration peak periods of vessel activity within those eight weeks that may be preferred by boaters (e.g., certain weeks during the eight-week arrival and departure periods), certain days of the week(e.g., Saturdays or Sundays rather than Tuesdays or Wednesdays),and preferred hours of the day(e.g., midday rather than midnight). With this information, a determination of peak vessel traffic times and an assessment of queueing boats within the creek can be more accurately assessed. It is recommended that the yacht center's records be researched to identify peak periods of vessel activity, boat trips in the Creek should be tallied, and any vessel trip generation numbers be sought or generated to provide a more reasonable peak trip count. NPV also recommends that a simple sketch be provided depicting a vessel of the size anticipated to be stored onsite along the property's shoreline being docked (parallel and perpendicular to the shoreline as may be expected), any conceivable queueing, creek depths at that location, and the space available for boats to pass without surface and bottom obstructions. 4. Page iv, next to last paragraph, indicate that surface elevations are"AMSL 5. Page vi,first paragraph states that potable water usage for post-development conditions would increase by 18 gpd from 1,058±gpd to 1,076±gpd. Please indicate how this was estimated including sources and applicable multiplier(s). Other information provided in the DEIS indicates that upon implementation of N P V Page 2 of 7 Strong's Yacht Center Proposed Boat Storage Buildings DEIS Completeness Review the proposed action, an additional 11 full-time positions are expected to be created to service the boats in storage (pp. 14 and 292). However, this additional demand alone, would suggest a larger increase in water use than 18 gpd. Also, please indicate whether additional groundwater water will be used for other activities associated with 88-boat storage area, such as washing, detailing, painting, antifouling and how much water,if any,would be needed for these operations? 6. Page viii,fourth paragraph,states that higher levels of dissolved oxygen and HAB events indicate the water quality of Mattituck Creek trends towards poor. Aren't higher concentrations of dissolved oxygen considered indicator of good water quality rather than poor quality? 7. Page viii,fifth paragraph provides the acronym "HAB" for "Harmful Algal Blooms". The full term should be indicated in this paragraph,where it first appears in the fourth paragraph (see No.7 above). 8. Page 27, first paragraph, uses the phrase "poorly rated sand". Shouldn't this say, "poorly graded" or perhaps"poorly aerated"? If"poorly rated" is the intended description, please define this term. 9. Page 27,last paragraph provides the soil classifications"SP","SP-SM",and"SM". The Geotechnical Memo defines these classifications; however,the DEIS should also define them either by text,chart,or footnote. 10. Page 35,first paragraph mentions the need for soil mixing to loosen over consolidated soils.Will there be any need to ship poorly drained soils such as clays offsite and import clean sand as fill? 11. Pages 37-38 discuss erosion and sedimentation controls, but do not mention the requirement to submit a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan("SWPPP"). 12. Page 41/42, regarding the 2018 McDonald Geoscience borings: Please provide a generalized written description of where these borings were dug,similar to the PWGC 2021 borings discussion that follows it. 13. Page 48 contains a list of the existing storage tanks currently onsite and indicates that an Article 12 permit is in place for any hazardous materials stored on the property. Even though these are existing tanks, it would be beneficial to know for the existing onsite conditions inventory, if any existing safeguards are in place such as secondary containment,double walled tanks, overfill protection,spill detection,etc. 14. Page 93,last paragraph states that:"...land disturbance within 100 feet of the regulated tidal wetland area would not alter the existing grade and would not increase the likelihood of flooding." Will there be an increase in impervious surfaces within 100 feet of a wetland that may impact wetlands? 15. Page 104, first paragraph under "Precipitation" states: "the average annual precipitation was 3.97± inches." This appears to be monthly precipitation rather than annual precipitation. 16. Page 108,first sentence says: "Elevating structures two feet above the BFE for non-critical infrastructure and three feet above BFE for critical infrastructure is also recommended." Does critical infrastructure include sanitary systems? 17. Page 109, footnote to Table 17 states: "**2050 Separation is less than the current recommended separation distance to groundwater for sanitary effluent(3 feet)or stormwater(2 feet)." Is providing final grade at 11 or 12 feet AMSL rather than 10 feet AMSL been considered? Is this practical and feasible? N P V Page 3 of 7 Strong's Yacht Center Proposed Boat Storage Buildings DEIS Completeness Review 18. Page 138, third paragraph states that: "It is estimated that approximately 547 boats are active in Mattituck Creek on a peak season day.Therefore,the increase in vessel traffic of 0.48 boat trips per day is nominal and the potential for increased erosion of tidal marshes due to vessel traffic is not significant." The impact of increased vessel traffic in Mattituck Creek should be based on the eight weeks when boats are expected to arrive and the eight weeks when the boats are expected to leave storage, rather than average traffic over the course of a full season.This, as previously noted on page 8 of the DEIS is 11 trips per week on average,or the equivalent of 1.57 trips per day. See also comment above. 19. Sections 3.7 and 3.8,air and noise analysis: Please see comment#20 and comments under the Traffic and Transportation heading below which will impact the assumptions and findings of the air and noise analyses. a. Page 254, Fugitive Dust—the total suspended particulate(TSP)concentration utilized is based on "apartment and shopping center construction projects." The applicability of this TSP rates should be verified and explained, particularly given the nature of the proposed project, which includes significant slope excavations. b. Page 246,Construction Noise and Global comment—the DEIS text states that"there is a significant increase in noise at Receivers R1-R9. These increases would be considered a significant and adverse impact, as defined by the NYSDEC criteria, during the periods of excavation and construction." The DEIS does not adequately address the quality of life impacts associated with significant noise (as well as dust and potential vibration) associated with the necessary heavy construction trucks on local roadways. The applicant has provided no meaningful and enforceable mitigation to address these impacts. 20. Page 269,Section 3.10.2: Construction Schedule and Activities(also Section 1.4).. a. The scope requires a construction vehicle routing plan for all phases of the construction. As the construction period will overlap with peak periods (summer and fall), the DEIS should evaluate potential routing using both the Sound Ave.and Main Road due to backups that commonly occur on Sound Ave. in the peak seasons. Additionally, the entire construction route should be identified and evaluated from the subject site to the Long Island Expressway(i.e.,West Mill Road, Cox Neck Road,Sound Ave./Main Road, Northville Turnpike, Route 25,etc.). b. The basis of truck trip analysis for the construction period assumes use of 22-wheel,30 yard dump trailers for the removal of excavated material over the course of construction. The size,mobility, and wear and tear on local roadways from repeated use of these large heavy construction vehicles has not been adequately addressed in the DEIS to ensure that trucks of this size and weight can be reasonably utilized for the extensive construction period proposed. Such analysis should include i. A truck turn radius evaluation along the entire construction route to ensure such large construction vehicles can properly maneuver within the existing paved roadway while allowing for passage of on coming traffic and pedestrians. The basis for the construction truck traffic analysis and potential construction duration is largely reliant on the use of large 30 yard trailers, therefore the feasibility of use of this equipment must be fully evaluated to determine if the projected construction duration is reasonably analyzed, or V P V Page 4 of 7 Strong's Yacht Center Proposed Boat Storage Buildings DEIS Completeness Review if smaller (i.e., 20 yard trucks) will be necessary (which would increase the number of truck trips and may impact the expected construction duration accordingly). c. This section describes a 1,454 linear foot haul road that would be utilized by heavy equipment to transport construction materials and excavated soils to and from the site. The road is shown in areas of steep topography. The estimated timeframe and feasibility of construction of the haul road should be further evaluated, including evaluation of the necessary grading that may be required to establish the haul road with grades viable for use by the various heavy equipment necessary to construct the project as well as for future fire trucks/emergency vehicles as the applicant indicates that this road is proposed for long term use as an emergency access road — this equipment has limited mobility on steep grades. Additionally,the estimated quantity of RCA needed to stabilize the access road for use by heavy equipment should be provided and the analysis of truck trips updated to address the number of truck trips required to bring this material to the site. 21. Page 295, Barge Alternative — The applicant indicates that the purpose of the proposed project is to provide for storage of yachts, but states that the limitation in utilizing barges for material transport off site is limitations in bottom depth. Additional information should be provided to explain the typical draw and bottom depth limitations for the larger boats targeted for storage at this location. TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION 1. According to the Final Scope, accident analyses should be conducted for the most recent three-year of accident data published by the NYSDOT and accident data from the Southold Police department if more recent or more detailed than that available from the NYSDOT. From a review of the accident data analyses in the Traffic Study,it appears accident records for the most recent 3-year period were only obtained from the NYSDOT and there was no mention of any data request from the Southold Police Department. Written confirmation for a request for accident data to the Southold Police Department should be provided. 2. Existing Traffic Flow Conditions — Figures 5-7 of the Traffic study provide useful comparisons of the weekday traffic volumes. A figure should also be provided for weekend traffic volumes to better describe variations in seasonal traffic volumes during various times of day. 3. The Traffic Study assumed increased trip generation rates based on an increased number of employees. However,this does not address the increased truck trips expected to support future operations(increased deliveries . The truck volumes associated with the current use should also be increased proportionally with the increased storage capacity and the traffic analysis updated accordingly. This will also impact the modeling assumptions of the air and noise analyses included in the DEIS. 4. The Traffic Study discussed the vehicle routing plans for all phases of the project and identified the roads used, speed limits,existing road conditions, but did not provide any photographic representations. 5. The Traffic Study did not address how vehicles,especially construction trucks and equipment will navigate the curves along Cox Neck Lane Road and West Mill Road (see comment#19 above). Given the size and extent of heavy construction equipment anticipated for the proposed project and nature of local roadways, the DEIS must evaluation the feasibility of use of 30 yard trucks along the proposed construction route,including truck turn radius evaluation along the proposed construction route to ensure such large construction vehicles can properly maneuver within the existing paved roadway while allowing N P V Page 5 of 7 Strong's Yacht Center Proposed Boat Storage Buildings DEIS Completeness Review for passage of on-coming traffic and pedestrians. The traffic study should also be updated to address the construction of the proposed haul road, including necessary equipment,delivery of RCA, and duration of construction. 6. The Traffic Study discussed the potential impact of construction traffic(trucks and vehicles)on pedestrians walking(with strollers),jogging,biking and children waiting for school buses.The pedestrian analysis must provide additional analysis to fully evaluate the potential for impacts to pedestrians along the entire construction route, including: a. A pedestrian and bicycle count along Cox Neck Road/W Mill Road between 6 am and 6 pm to quantify the number of pedestrians and bicyclists on this roadway segment during the period of the day when construction trucks are arriving and departing the site. b. The width of all the roadways along the entire proposed truck route and the capacity to accommodate two vehicles passing at the same time and location as a pedestrian or cyclist, and whether the roads are currently safe for such an interaction. This should account for the perceived safety from the perspective of the pedestrian or cyclist, as well as areas with known high pedestrian activity for road crossings, particularly during peak tourist activity in the fall months (crosswalks at Harbes Family Farm on Sound Ave., and similar crossings frequented by pedestrians in peak season). c. As stated in the Traffic Report, the Saturday roadway volumes are higher than the weekday volumes. The anticipated timeframes for the various phases of construction described in Section 3.10.2(and Section 1.4)of the DEIS are not consistent with the timeframes evaluated in the Traffic Study.This should be corrected. Additionally,it is not clear how work on Saturdays during Phase 1 of construction would be prohibited without a formal and enforceable commitment. Unless the applicant is formally committing to no work on Saturday during Phase I,the Traffic study should be updated to account for the worst case condition,which according to the construction schedule provided in the DEIS,will overlap with peak seasons of roadway traffic. d. The Traffic Study provides information on existing truck volumes on the major and minor roadways that were counted. The scope requires an assessment of potential damage of both local and regional roads. The applicant should obtain NYSDOT historical data on major roadways (including Route 48, Route 25 and Sound Ave.) and minor roads that may be utilized for construction routing to determine truck volumes/trends for last 5 years to quantify the increased truck volumes on local and regional roadways. e. Measures to mitigate any impacts on pedestrians and bicyclist during the construction phase of the project. 7. The Traffic study discusses the potential impact of vibrations from loaded trucks on structures along the vehicle route(s) and concludes that the "only existing structure that may be susceptible to increased vibrations from trucks would be the existing water tower located close to West Mill Road on adjoining property to the subject property at the southwest corner." The basis for this conclusion is not clear. The setback distances of historic homes along the construction route should be considered based on the extent and duration of proposed heavy truck trips associated with the proposed action. The discussion of truck trips during construction should also be clearly and consistently described to account for round trips (empty and loaded)trucks passing the residential homes along the route. 8. The Traffic Study did not adequately address the potential long-term adverse impacts to the adjacent roadways(surface conditions),surrounding properties,neighborhood(s),and region through the clearing, N P V Page 6 of 7 Strong's Yacht Center Proposed Boat Storage Buildings DEIS Completeness Review excavation, storing and transporting of cleared vegetation, excavated material and construction of the site over a multi-month period in multiple phases.This should include an analysis of existing heavy truck traffic on these roadways and provide a comparative increased volume of heavy trucks (based on the weights/sizes of required construction vehicles) based on the projected total number of passes of equivalent standard axle loading(ESAL) in accordance with NYSDOT/FHWA standards. 9. While discussed in other portions of the DEIS, the Final Scope requires that the Traffic Study include an evaluation of use of barges as an alternative means to transport materials for mitigating impacts from transporting material associated with the site preparation and construction of the project. N P V Page 7 of 7 Southold Town Planning Board Work Session --A ril 25 2022 —Pa e 2 Pro e t Name: Stron s Stora a Buildin a SCTM# d 106.-6-10 & 13'.4111 ... . . . Location: 3430 3 Mill RoadMatti tuck Description, proposed tion: This Site Plan is for the , construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32..6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there istinc boatyard buildings Status Pendur _.. .. ., .. . . _� ..� �.. Environmental m aStatement ..�. a e._m. �en, Adequacy R_. e.. vie [.Att_achme. nts taff Rep ttm y . .....e..... m.� h , Pro ect Name 2200 Bre . ........ ........ .... .. 1000-106-9-2.3 .. . . ._.sect �.....,Cooper_.. Location: Breakwater Road, Mattituck Standard Subdivision � SCTM# � a _. __. .. Description: three tlots, w 8 28 acres, and Lot 3 is proposal is for a Standard Subdivision of a 25.86 acre parcel into here Lot 1 is 9 47 acres, Lot 2 is e.. . .._..._- 1 acres Status Pending . ....� Review for Sk etch Plat Apphctin Completaess . Attach ments Staff Repp Project Name: Little itsHse &Vines on 1000-115-2-2.3 Resubdivision 1000-115-2-2.4 1 1000-115-2-3.2 Location. Th sore ub11 d5v s on55 oRoses to transfer 44,60 11 5 sq. ft. of 'rights-intact" oute 25, Mattituck Descnption. P P land from SCTM#1000-115-2-2.3 to SCTM#1000-115-2-2.4. Lot 2.3, the house lot, will decrease in size from 84,942 sq. ft. to 40,000 sq. ft. and will become non-conforming, and Lot 2.4, together with lot 3.2, will increase in size to 50.88 acres. A variance from the Zoning Board of for Lot 2.3 is rguired. .... . . .Action. Review for A n _ Status I New Applicatio _ Pp � m letgness . m . hments Staff Re cert _. _ _.. .. ica i FAiia' c .p . . �..a.. _. w .... _m. ....._Universalist First . . _..... .. � SCTM# � 1000 63 6 6 1._ .. - � church Location:ame 5170 Route 25So Southold n.......... .. . Descriptions: This proposed Site Plan is for the construction of a one story 6,816 sq. ft. place of worship and 32 parking stalls. There is an existing parish house and single family dwelling to remain, all on 1.2 acres in the 1 e Status: Posidential Office (RO) Zonmg District. mm ndrng.. Action: Review Revised Site Plan s StaffReport ,,Attachment ,, ...�� NEWYORK parks, Recreation, " ' STATE OF �J p OPPORTT UNITY. and Historic Preservation RECEIVED KATHY HOCHUL ERIK KULLESEID AN2 2022 Governor Commissioner .....__ cu tru+ 6b'�un'- Planning Board April 8, 2022 Mr. Charles Vandrei Agency Historic Preservation Officer NYS Environmental Conservation Division of Lands and Forests 625 Broadway Albany, NY 12233-4255 Re: DEC Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 W Mill Rd, Town of Mattituck, Suffolk County 21 PR04396 Dear Mr. Vandrei: Thank you for requesting the comments of the Division for Historic Preservation of the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP). We continue to review the project in accordance with the New York State Historic Preservation Act of 1980 (Section 14.09 of the New York Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law). These comments are those of the Division for Historic Preservation and relate only to Historic/Cultural resources. OPRHP has concerns regarding potential impacts to historic architectural resources as a result of vibrations from construction vehicles. OPRHP recommends the preparation and implementation of a Construction Protection Plan for the following two structures, which have been determined by OPRHP to be eligible for listing in the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places. Structure Name Address OPRHP No. Mattituck Creek Tide Mill /Old Mill Restaurant 5775 West Mill Road 10310.000348 The Water Tower and Building 3380 West Mill Road 10310.001551 If you have any questions, I can be reached at nancy.herter@parks.ny.gov, Sincerely, Nancy Herter Director, Technical Preservation Services Bureau New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Division for Historic Preservation,Peebles Island,PO Box 189,Waterford,New York 12188-0189 (518)237-8643•https://parks.ny.gov/shpo Southold Town Planning Board Work Session –April 11 2022 – Page 2. ..P __... _.. . _Store r ro�ect Name Southold Gas Station & Convenience Store SCTM#. 1000-5,5-5-2.21 .... CR ._. .ungs Avenue, Southold.' Location 45450 CR 48. on the s/w corner of CR 48 and Yo„ Description: This Amended Site Plan is for the proposed conversion of an existing 3,476 sq. ft. building (formerly for vehicle detailing, RV sales and servicing) to a convenience store and vehicle fuel sales, with: 6 fuel pumps (12 fueling stations), two canopies, one at 50' x 24' (1,200 sq. ft.) and the other at 50' x 50' (2,500 sq. ft.) and 29 parking spaces on 1.46 the General Business (B) Zoning District —.......... .. ._.... ,acres in... � W .............. _.... ....�. ....... Status Approval .. C Action Construction Update ( Attachments: Staff Report .... w..... - _ ........ .. ......... ..... ........ � Project Name: Strong's Storage Buildings SCTM# 1 1000-106-6-13.4 ,_Location: , attituk3 _ Description: This site plan is for the proposed �. construction of two (2) buildings for boa storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ftof existing boatyard buildings Status.;.. ....... ........ Pending ...... . .. .. .. ... .. _._. _._......... ....A _. ....- cy Review A Attachments: None -EIS Adequa coon Begin At... .. - - w � Discussion: ❖ Planning Board Monthly Report for March, 2022 ❖ Pheasant Run Condominiums: Request for clearing of dead wood from buffer, ❖ Town Board Requests for Planning Board Comments o A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280, to address maximum size of single family homes. ❖ Site Plan Use Determinations (SPUD): o Ulster Farms LLC, 705 CR 48, Mattituck, SCTM#1000-113-12-13 o Arrow Farm, 13945 Oregon Road, Cutchogue SCTM#1000-83-2-9.3 OFFICE LOCATION: ; MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 29, 2022 Charles Cuddy Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Strong's Boatyard Buildings Site Plan Application 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: am writing as a follow-up to the Work Session held on March 28,.2022 where the Planning Board discussed the above-referenced Site Plan Application and determined the following: Due to the highly technical nature of the content of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the project, the Planning Board has requested Nelson, Pope & Voorhis (NPV) to provide assistance with the review of the adequacy of the document. This specific review is limited to the adequacy of the sections on hydrogeology and traffic, for which the Town does not have in-house expertise. The proposal in the amount of$12,500 was accepted by the Planning Board. Please submit a check in the amount of$12,500 to fund the environmental services provided by NPV as described above, and pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). Please, if you have any questions regarding this site plan or its process, do not hesitate to call this office at 631-765-1938. Respectfully, bV KVI t v 0, J Brian A. Cummings Planner Terry, Mark From: New York State Parks CRIS Application <cris.web@parks.ny.gov> Sent: Friday,January 7, 2022 2:51 PM To: Charles.Vandrei@dec.ny.gov Cc: csw13108@gmail.com; kgennaro@pwgrosser.com; kkaim@pwgrosser.com; charlescuddy@optonline.net; Terry, Mark Subject: NY SHPO: Requested Submission XXFBXK9BL1CC Received for Consultation Project 21PRO4396 Requested Submission Received The New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has received the following requested submission. Requested Submission Token: XXFBXK9BL1 CC Project Number: 21 PRO4396 Project Type: Consultation I Project Name: Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Consolidated Response Token: XCICWNESV111 Previous Submission Number: 21 PR04396.006 Open Request: Please submit the results of the addendum Phase IB archeological testing The request description above is for reference only. It is not a new request. New York State Historic Preservation Office Peebles Island State Park, P.O. Box 189, Waterford, NY 12188-0189 518-237-8643 1 htts://parks.ny.gov/ Ip CRIS: https://cris.parks,[IMov Are you registered to vote? R ister to vote online today. Moved recently? Update your information with the NYS Board of Elections. Not sure if you're registered to vote? Search our voter registration status. Who sent this email? This email is a notification from the New York State Cultural Resource Information System: C(� . CRIS is an online service administered by the NewYorkState Division for Historic Preservation, also known as the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), which is a division of New York StateParkmRecreation & Historic Preservation. This message pertains to a submission for a consultation project. Please see SHPO's Environmental Review web page for more information about the consultation process. 1 OFFICE LOCATION: LING ESS: Town Hall Annex ;f OF soil, P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 � '�" " ��'. Southold, NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) '® > Telephone: 631 765-1938 Southold, www.southoldtownny.gov CIOt OOUNT`I PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD December 21, 2021 Charles Cuddy Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Boatyard Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, ±600' s/e/o Naugles Drive & West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: The Planning Board received the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage (DEIS) on December 9, 2021. This memorandum memorializes an agreement made between the Planning Board, you and the applicant, Jeff Strong, during the December 20, 2021 work session meeting to extend the 45-day review time frame to determine the adequacy of the DEIS to April 11, 2022. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call this office at 631-765-1938. Respectfully, James H. Rich III Vice-Chairman Cc: John Burke, Assistant Town Attorney Southold Town Plannin Board Work Session — December 20 2021 — Pa e 2 Project Name: Mattituck Hotel SCTM#: 1000-122-6-22.1 j Location: 9025 NYS Route 25, Mattituck Description; This proposed site plan is for the re-development of an existing commercial site including the demolition of the existing building, and the construction of a hotel with 125 rooms, restaurant and catering facility totaling 132,821 sq. ft. and associated parking; and, three 1,200 sq. ft. workforce housing and maintenance buildings with additional parking on two parcels to be merged totaling 11.8 acres in the General Business (B) Zoning District. Status: New Application _ ..... Action: Review for Completeness Attachments: Staff Report Project Name: The Heritage at Cutchogue (Harvest Pt.) SCTM#: 1000-102-1-33.3 Location: 75 Schoolhouse Road, on the n/w corner of Griffing Street and School House Laapproximately 1,079 feet n/o the Main Road, in Cutchogue. Description: This Residential Site,. is for the development of 124 detached and dwellings.y . .... attached Status_ Approved with Conditions Action: Review for CO's of several units ........ Attachments: Staff Report N Pro ect Name: Stron ' a.....w . . g _ g SCT ... _ s Storage Buildings_ M#: 1000-106-6-13 4 � 4 Location; 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck Description: This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sc ft. of existing boatyard buildings. Status: Pendin Action' Update on DEIS Attachments: Staff Report Project Name: Orient Point Conservation SCTM#: 1000-14-2-29.2, 29.3, 29.4, Subdivision (Pappas) 1000-19-2-2, 3, 12.2 Location: 32357 Old Main Street, Orient Description: This proposal is for a 75/75 clustered Conservation Subdivision of 36.14 acres, currently comprised of six parcels, into 5 residential lots ranging in size from 1.6 to 1.9 acres, and one agricultural parcel with a 0.9 acre development area and with 25.68 acres of farmland from which development rights are proposed to be sold to the Town of Southold, in the R-80 and R-40 zoning districts. Status; Conditional Sketch Approval { Action: Update Attachments: Draft Letter STRONGS MARINE DEIS REVIEW FOR ADEQUACY TIMEFRAME DEIS Received December 9, 2021 Determine Adequacy of Submitted Draft 45 days Adequacy Determination Due Date Sunday, January 23, 2022 Recommendation: Due to the size of the document, holidays and vacations over the next few weeks, it is recommended that the Planning Board seek an extension of time to review the DEIS to March 14, 2022 or April 11, 2022. LOCATION:OFFICE MAILING ESS: Town Hall Annex" P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 ,��' " Southold, NY 11971 ;9 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY �, Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD December 21, 2021 Charles Cuddy Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Boatyard Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, ±600' s/e/o Naugles Drive & West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: The Planning Board received the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage (DEIS) on December 9, 2021. This memorandum memorializes an agreement made between the Planning Board, you and the applicant, Jeff Strong, during the December 20, 2021 work session meeting to extend the 45-day review time frame to determine the adequacy of the DEIS to April 11, 2022. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call this office at 631-765-1938. Respectfully, James H. Rich III Vice-Chairman Cc: John Burke, Assistant Town Attorney @) PIWIG 11 C DE 2 `1 p ' 4 ,e,d.if4i6� 4d'w�/I December 20, 2021 I'Iani.rd nq 1�oarr1 VIA ELECTRONIC AND U.S. MAIL Mr. Mark Terry Assistant Town Planning Director Town of Southold Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 Southold, New York 11971 RE: Page Correction Draft Environmental Impact Statement, December 2021 ("DEIS") Strong's Yacht Center, LLC. - Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Hamlet of Mattituck, Town of Southold Dear Mr. Terry: We have caught an inconsistency between the ecological assessment report and summary text in the DEIS. The inconsistency relates to the proposed species type to be replanted in the south as mitigation, which is identified in one sentence on page xii of the Executive Summary and the same sentence on page 133 of the DEIS text. Specifically, the proposed species types are native trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants including pitch pine (Pinus rigida), lowbush blueberry ( Vaccinium angustifolia), and switch grass (Panicum virgatum). The proposed plan does not include replanting in the southeast of the following: white and chestnut oak (Quercus alba and Quercus prinus), sassafras (Sassafras albidum), black cherry (Prunus serotina), black huckleberry (Gaylussacia baccata), bayberry (Morella pensylvanica), and arrowwood ( Viburnum dentatum). We would like to acknowledge this inconsistency and have enclosed corrected pages xii and 133. Thank you. Sincerely, P.W. GROSSER CONSULTING Kim Gennaro-Oancea, M.S., AICP CEP Vice President cc: James H. Rich III, Vice Chairman and Members of Town of Southold Planning Board J. Strong, Strong's Yacht Center, LLC C. Cuddy, Esq. 9 �" �... II �� II..:..II" I'... I� �.... �v... I° p° Nu, u" I �C 01°i w Iiiiu iiiiii'iiiliii µS01114 °iiiii";;u, iiia LONG ISLAND - MANHATTAN SARATOGA SPRINGS • SYRACUSE • SEATTLE • SHELTON Draft Environmental Impact Statement December 2021 Strong's Yacht Center-Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road,Mattituck,Town of Southold,Suffolk County,NY maturity will occupy ground-, understory-, and canopy-levels) with conifer trees (i.e., 86 pitch pine trees) to minimize light penetration into the new forest. This planting area would also include 57 lowbush blueberry shrubs and 4,295 switch grass plants. After establishment of these natural vegetation areas located landward of the proposed retaining wall, the total forest area on the property would increase from 11.76-acres to 12.38-acres. The subject property is adjacent to the 27±-acre Town of Southold Mill Road Preserve located between Mill Road and the residential properties on North Drive. The Mill Road Preserve has an ecological community composition similar to the subject property with successional shrublands and forest proximal to Mill Road and Coastal Oak-Beech forests located to the east. The project would result in the creation of a new forest edge approximately 105 feet from the Mill Road Preserve boundary along a short reach (approximately 99 feet) of the shared property boundary located in the northeastern corner of the Preserve. This area is proximal to historical disturbance associated with the clearing, filling, and hardening of the west shoreline of Mattituck Creek on the subject property in the 1950s-1960s.The existing oak-dominated and successional forests in this portion of the property have regenerated on the bare,exposed substrate. The potential impacts associated with the new forest edge could include potential changes to the forest microclimate and increased abundance of invasive plants and wildlife species,as previously described. These edge effects are expected to extend approximately 195 feet into Mill Road Preserve from the northeastern corner of Mill Road Preserve. The total area of the Mill Road Preserve that may be potentially impacted by edge effects associated with the new clearing limit on the SYC property is approximately 0.38 acre(16,419±SF). Existing residential properties are located along the eastern border of Mill Road Preserve. Therefore, the eastern border of Mill Road Preserve is expected to have existing edge-related impacts due to past tree clearing on these residential properties and the utility right-of-way and an increased abundance of invasive plants and nest predators and parasites. Accordingly, some of this 0.38-acre area represents an intensification of an existing forest edge rather than creation of an entirely new edge. The area subject to new or enhanced edge effects accounts for approximately two percent of the 18±-acres of mature oak-beech forests in Mill Road Preserve. Thus,the proposed action would not be expected to have significant adverse impacts on the forest habitat quality or composition through the large majority of the Mill Road Preserve. Furthermore,the magnitude of potential edge effects are expected to decrease over time due to the proposed landscaping comprised of native trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants including pitch pine (Pinus rigida), lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolia), and switch grass (Panicum virgatum). Proposed edge plants would facilitate the development over time of a dense "wall" of vegetation comprised of maintained canopy trees, regenerating trees, and shrubs to fill in open space at the edge. This "sealing" of the edge through development of multiple layers of vegetation may reduce the penetration of light into the forest and decrease the depth of edge impacts towards the interior of Mill Road Preserve. The decreased habitat availability associated with the loss of 32 percent of the site's forest habitat would likely decrease the abundance and diversity of the plant and wildlife species that utilize the site. Wildlife that utilize the site's successional shrubland and successional forest habitats would not be adversely impacted by the proposed action due to the maintenance of 13.77± acres (approximately 89 percent) of these successional habitats. Similarly, wildlife species that are habitat generalists and utilize all of the site's habitats (i.e., successional habitats,forests,and developed areas)are also unlikely to be adversely impacted by the proposed action,due to their general tolerance for human activity. Wildlife species that are most likely to be adversely impacted by the proposed action,specifically the reduction in Coastal Oak-Beech forest habitats from 12.60 acres to 8.28 acres,include birds or other wildlife that inhabit mature forests,forest interiors,or have large patch size requirements. Songbirds that are expected to utilize the site's Coastal Oak-Beech forests include species that forage for insects on and under bark (such as xii Draft Environmental Impact Statement December 2021 Strong's Yacht Center-Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road,Mattituck,Town of Southold,Suffolk County,NY approximately 0.38 acre(16,419±SF). Existing residential properties are located along the eastern border of Mill Road Preserve,as shown in Figure 4 in the Ecological Report. Therefore,the eastern border of Mill Road Preserve is expected to have existing edge-related impacts due to past tree clearing on these residential properties and the utility right-of-way and an increased abundance of invasive plants and nest predators and parasites. Accordingly,some of this 0.38-acre area represents an intensification of an existing forest edge rather than creation of an entirely new edge. The area subject to new or enhanced edge effects accounts for approximately two percent of the 18±-acres of mature oak-beech forests in Mill Road Preserve. Thus, the proposed action would not be expected to have significant adverse impacts on the forest habitat quality or composition through the large majority of the Mill Road Preserve. Furthermore,the magnitude of potential edge effects are expected to decrease over time due to the proposed landscaping comprised of native trees, shrubs,and herbaceous plants including pitch pine (Pinus rigida), lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolia), and switch grass (Panicum virgatum). Proposed edge plants would facilitate the development over time of a dense "wall" of vegetation comprised of maintained canopy trees,regenerating trees,and shrubs to fill in open space at the edge. This "sealing" of the edge through development of multiple layers of vegetation may reduce the penetration of light into the forest and decrease the depth of edge impacts towards the interior of Mill Road Preserve. Potential Impacts to Wildlife The decreased habitat availability associated with the loss of 32 percent of the site's forest habitat would likely decrease the abundance and diversity of the plant and wildlife species that utilize the site. Wildlife that utilize the site's successional s rubland and successional forest habitats would not be adversely impacted by the proposed action due to the maintenance of 13,77±acres(approximately 89 percent) of these successional habitats. Similarly, wildlife species that are habitat generalists and utilize all of the site's habitats(i.e.successional habitats,forests,and developed areas)are also unlikely to be adversely impacted by the proposed action, due to their general tolerance for human activity. Examples of these habitat generalists include raccoon,opossum,and white-tailed deer as well as birds such as American robin,common grackle,black-capped chickadee,blue jay,and wild turkey. Wildlife species that are most likely to be adversely impacted by the proposed action, specifically the reduction in Coastal Oak-Beech forest habitats from 12.60 acres to 8.28 acres, include birds or other wildlife that inhabit mature forests,forest interiors,or have large patch size requirements. Songbirds that are expected to utilize the site's Coastal Oak-Beech forests include species that forage for insects on and under bark(such as woodpeckers and nuthatches),glean insects from canopy foliage (such as vireos), and/or catch airborne insects (such as flycatchers and wood pee-wees). Some bird species may be found in both small and large habitat patches,whereas other bird species are more frequently found in larger habitat patches than smaller patches. Bird species that are not dependent on habitat patch size and/or species that have tolerance for small habitat patches or edge habitats are likely to continue to utilize the smaller wooded habitat patches remaining after completion of the project. 133 From: Terry, Mark Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2021 8:54 AM To: Michaelis, Jessica Subject: FW: NY SHPO: Unrequested Submission 1 RRCW97CTTYK Accepted for Consultation Project 21 PR04396 ° I E From: New York State Parks CRIS Application <cris.web@parks.ny.gov> � Monday, r3, 20214:52 PM �i � �"' ToCharles.Vande @dec.nY•g0 \© � Cc: csw13108@gmail.com; kgennaro@pwgrosser.com; kkaim@pwgrosser.com; charlescuddy@optonline.net;Terry, Mark<mark.terry@town.southold.ny.us> Subject: NY SHPO: Unrequested Submission 1RRCW97CTTYK Accepted for Consultation Project 21PRO4396 Unrequested Submission Accepted The New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has accepted the following unrequested submission. Unrequested Submission Token: 1 RRCW97CTTYK New Submission Number: 21 PR04396.007 Project Number: 21 PR04396 Project Type: Consultation Project Name: Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Submission Description: Response to December 9, 2021 letter from Robyn Sedgwick to Charles Vandrei concerning request for additional information about vibration studies. Letter was copied to the CRIS list for the project. New York State Historic Preservation Office Peebles Island State Park, P.O. Box 189, Waterford, NY 12188-0189 518-237-8643 1 htt s:// arks.ny.goy shpo CRIS: httos://cris.i:)arks.nv.gov Are you registered to vote?oto taxa vote online today Moved recently? Update your information with the NYS Board of Elections. Not sure if you're registered to vote? Search„your voter regi stration statUs,,. Who sent this email? I. This email isonline service administered bythe Historic Preservation Dffioa (SHPO), which is a division of New York State Parks, Recreation..&-Historic Preservation. This message pertains to e submission for a consultation project. Please see SHPO'o Environmental Review web page for more information about the consultation process. Why did I receive this email? The contact list for the project includes your email address, or you were the submitter of the unrequested submission. What do I need to do? You do not need to take any action at this time. The unnaquested submission is now undorSHPO review as project submission 21PR04396.007. What will happen next? SHP(}will review the submission. |fSHPC} sends comments or questions in response to this submiooion, the project contacts will receive an email notification with a link to SHPO's correspondence. What else can | do? Please see the following help topics for more information about unrequeotad submissions and projects in CR|S: * How do I check the review status of n,iy pjglq�L?° How long does SHPO take to review proiects. ° Submit New Information for an Exi�i�n _aLoject Where can I get help? Please visit the CR|S Online Help System: If you aUU have questions about CR|S, please contact CR|S Help at . For any other questions, please call SHPO at 518-237'8643. ATTENTION- This email C8Dle from an external source. OO not open att2Chn0SDtS or click OD links PAG �� 1, 111)RIVEN SOLUTIONS December 9, 2021 -� VIA HAND DELIVERY u, E- James H. Rich III, Vice Chairman and Members DEC 0 9 021 Town of Southold Planning Board I S of r & "I�"] Town Hall Annex NainF-iing.Board 54375 State Route 25 Southold, New York 11971 RE: Draft Environmental Impact Statement, December 2021 Strong's Yacht Center, LLC. - Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Hamlet of Mattituck, Town of Southold Dear Vice Chairman Rich and Honorable Members: Transmitted herewith for filing is the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Strong's Yacht Center, LLC. - Proposed Boat Storage Buildings dated December 2021. This DEIS has been prepared in accordance with the implementing regulations of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) at 6 NYCRR Part 617 and the Amended Final Scope issued by the Town of Southold Planning Board, as lead agency, on April 5, 2021. As directed by Mr. Mark Terry, Assistant Town Planning Director, we are filing two (2) hard copies of the three-volume document, and six (6) electronic copies (via flash drive) with paper copies of the proposed site plans. If you require additional copies, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at , ,+gcn rc pwgrosser,,corn or (631) 589-6353. Thank you. Sincerely, P.W. GROSSER CONSULTING Kim Gennaro-Oancea, M.S., AICP CEP Vice President cc: J. Strong, Strong's Yacht Center, LLC (enc.) C. Cuddy, Esq. (via electronic mail) _.. ,, p„'>Ip ONE: gyp."31.S 9 N 3 630,111 111CIIINS01114 'W"II'iii!,II11CHkmm !�N1:: NTM DIIS II II:.:.. 11 . IL....... . �T� 01 M1 .. 1 0 iE111u , I4 h7°i LONGS IS[...AND - MANHATTAN - SARATOGA SPRINGS « SYRACUSE.SF: . SFA.'r'f.LF. - SHEm130N From: New York State Parks CRIS Application <cris.web@parks.ny.gov> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2021 3:42 PM To: Charles.Vandrei@dec.ny.gov Cc: csw13108@gmail.com; charlescuddy@optonline.net; kkaim@pwgrosser.com; kgennaro@pwgrosser.com;Terry, Mark Subject: NY SHPO: Submission Consolidated Response 2SKOXB785T6R Issued for Consultation Project 21 PR04396 Submission Consolidated Response issued The New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has issued a submission consolidated response for the following project. The consolidated response may include letters with comments from the reviewers or requests for more information, �� Consolidated Response Link: https:Hcris.oarks.nv.gov/?type=CR&id=2SKOXB785T6R 1 �� NOV2 Project Number: 21 PR04396 . saut.hcsuaji cwn Project Type: Consultation I�iaro� un �Boa� Project Name: Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Consolidated Response Token: 2SKOXB785T6R Submission Number: 21 PR04396.004 Submission Description: Please submit the results of the Phase IB archaeological survey The submission description above is for reference only. Please go to the consolidated response page to view new correspondence or information requests from SHPO. New York State Historic Preservation Office Peebles Island State Park, P.O. Box 189, Waterford, NY 12188-0189 518-237-8643 1 hftps://parks.ny.gov/shpo CRIS: htt s;;//tris.parks.n . ov Are you registered to vote? Register to vote online today. Moved recently? Update your information with the NYS Board of Elections. Not sure if you're registered to vote? Search your voter registration status. Who sent thisemail? I From: New York State Parks CRIS Application <cris.web@parks.ny.gov> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2021 4:11 PM To: Charles.Vandrei@dec.ny.gov Cc: csw13108@gmail.com; kgennaro@pwgrosser.com; kkaim@pwgrosser.com; charlescuddy@optonline.net;Terry, Mark Subject: NY SHPO: Requested Submission UKLROW3RVB97 Accepted for Consultation Project 21PRO4396 Requested Submission Accepted The New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has accepted the following requested submission. .... . Requested Submission Token: UKLR0W3RVB97 �; w New Submission Number: 21 PR04396.006 NOV 2 3 x',021 i Project Number: 21 PR04396 Sx u� ,gidORl ` wri Raro ming Board Project Type: Consultation Project Name: Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Consolidated Response Token: 2SKOXB785T6R Previous Submission Number: 21 PR04396.004 Closed Request: Please submit the results of the geotechnical borings The request description above is for reference ly. It is not a new request. New York State Historic Preservation Office Peebles Island State Park, P.O. Box 189, Waterford, NY 12188-0189 518-237-8643 1 https:Hparks.ny.gov/shpo CRIS: htt s;l/cris. arks.I ov Are you registered to vote? Register to vote online toda Moved recently? Update your information with the NYS Board of Elections. Not sure if you're registered to vote? Search your voter registration status. Who sent this email? This email is a notification from the ie%y York State Culturat Resource Information S stern ,I�. CRIS is an online service administered by the New York State Division for Historic Preservation, also known as the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), which is a division of New York; State Parks, Recreation & Historic Preservation. BOARD MEMBERS " Southold Town Hall Leslie Kanes Weisman,Chairperson� �' 53095 Main Road • P.O. Box 1179 ' � ' Southold,NY 11971-0959 Patricia Acampora Office Location: Eric Dantes Town Annex/First Floor, Robert Lehnert,Jr. 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Nicholas Planamento RE IVED E „„ http://southoldtownny.govCV S E P 0 0 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS p /%.8 7tA. TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 'Fel.(631)76S-1809 • Fax (631)765-9064 Southold Town Clerk F NDINGS,,DEIABER .TIONS AND DEThB.1 I m MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 2, 2021 ZBA FIL °, # 7546SE NAME OF:APPLICANT: Strong's Marine, Inc. (AKA Strong's 9605 Main load LLC) PROPERTY LOCATION: 9605 Route 25, Mattituck,NY 11952 SCTM# 1000-122-6-12 RA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type 11 category of the State's List of Actions, without further steps under S.F RA. PI .OPER`1" FAQT'S/D S 'T PLEION;, The property is a conforming 76,230 square foot parcel located partially in a Business Zoning District (frontage on Main Road) with the rear portion located in the R-40 Zoning District. The parcel measures 100.00 feet along NYS Route 25 (Main Road) on the southerly boundary; 815.77 feet on the easterly property line; 100.00 feet along the northerly property line contiguous to the MTA Long Island Railroad; and 799.57 feet on the westerly property line. The parcel is currently improved with a one-story frame building, a metal storage building, and solid wood fencing along the rear and side property lines , as shown on a survey prepared by John C. Ehlers, L.S., last revised June 13, 2019 BASIS Ol APPI ICSTION: Request for a special exception,identical to the existing special exception permit ZBA# 4681 (May 5, 1999), to establish a business use consisting of the display, storage, sale and service of boats on the portion of the property zoned B-business necessitated by conditions of approval in ZBA File# 7014 (April 6, 2017) which required that if the applicant changes the business use or sells the business, the applicant or new properly owner must apply to the Board of Appeals for a new Special Exception Permit and to the Building Depa:rtnient for any variance variance relief or approvals that may be needed. The subject property is in contract to be'scald to the applicant; which pending sale necessitates this application. l l 'I 1LI'Rf TED: The applicant requests granted a special exception to establish a business use consisting of the display, storage, sale and service of boats on the portion of the property zoned B-business consistcnt with the prior grant. Page 12, September 2, 2021 #7546SE Strong's Marine SUM No. 1000-122-6-12 DITIONAL INFORMATION: The applicant has the benefit of the following three prior variances: ZBA #397 which extended the Business Zoning District on the parcel; ZBA file # 3375 granted the applicant permission to erect a 6 foot by 2-foot advertising sign, and ZBA# 4681 granted a Special Exception Permit for the applicant to display, store, sell, and service boats on the Business zoned section of the property. ZBA#7014 granted relief from both the minimum front yard and side yard setbacks, as well as off street parking for boat storage in the R40 zoned portion of the subject property as an accessory use to the B zoned portion of the property. In addition to other conditions, the grant of prior variance relief 1 in ZBA File# 7014 on April 15, 2017 was subject to the condition that if the applicant changes the business use or sells the business, the applicant or new property owner must apply to the Board of Appeals for a new Special Exception Permit and to the Building Department for any variance relief or approvals that may be needed. The required actions associated with the variance relief granted in ZBA# 7014 was delayed due to the COVID 19 pandemic and as such an extension of the variance relief was granted by the ZBA on April 15, 202 L . ..DINGS OF FACT:/REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on September 2, 2021, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property and surrounding neighborhood, and other evidence,the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be.true and relevant and makes the following findings: After hearing testimony and making personal inspection of the property, the Board has considered the General Standards set forth in Code Section 280-141, and finds and determines the following: A. The continued use of the property as a boatyard pursuant to a special exception as requested will not constitute a change of use and therefore, will have no negative effect on the character of the existing and probable development of uses in the district and the peculiar suitability of such district for the location of any of such permitted uses. B. The special exception requested will have no negative effect on property values and encourages of the most appropriate uses of land. C. There is no proposed change of use or to the location of entrances and exits to the existing boatyard. Therefore, the grant of a special exception identical to that already in existence, will not increase of vehicular traffic congestion on public streets, highways or sidewalks to assure the public safety. D. There exists a proper public or private water supply and facilities for the treatment, removal or discharge of sewage, refuse or other effluent (whether liquid, solid, gaseous or otherwise) that may be caused or created by or as a result of the continued use of the property as a boatyard. E. There is no indication that continued operation of a boatyard at this site or the materials incidental thereto or produced thereby will give off obnoxious gases, odors, smoke or soot. F. The continued use pursuant to the special exception will not cause disturbing emissions of electrical discharges, dust, light, vibration or noise in excess to any such conditions that exist under the current special exception. Page 13, September 2, 2021 #7546SE Strong's Marine SCTM No. 1000-122-6-12 G. The continued use of the property under the special exception will not cause undue interference with the orderly enjoyment by the public of any parking or of recreational facilities, in the area. H. The grant of a special exception identical to the grant currently in place will not create the necessity for any additional bituminous-surfaced space for purposes of off-street parking of vehicles incidental to the use. The issue of parking has been previously addressed in ZBA# 7014. Tlae grant of this special exception will not require additional parking,. I. No change of use or new structures have been proposed, therefore, no hazard to life, limb or property because of fire, flood, erosion or panic will be created by reason of or as a result of the continued use or by the structures to be used therefor or by the inaccessibility of the property or structures thereon for the convenient entry and operation of fire and other emergency apparatus or by the undue concentration or assemblage of persons upon such plot. J. No overcrowding of land or undue concentration of population will be caused by the grant of a special exception identical to that currently existing. K. The continued use of the property pursuant to a special exception identical to that currently existing is sufficient, appropriate and adequate for the continued use and the reasonably anticipated operation and expansion thereof. L. The boatyard is not unreasonably near to a church, school, theater, recreational area or other place of public assembly. M. The site has been in continuous use as a boatyard pursuant to an existing special exception and is particularly suitable for a continuation of such use. INS I -The special exception as requested will not affect the currently existing and previously approved buffer yards or screening and will protect adjacent properties and land uses froara " possible detrimental impacts of the continued use of the property as a boatyard, o 01_ The previously approved p.rov.isions for the collection and disposal ofstoranwater runoff, sewage, refuse and other liquid, solid or gaseous waste will not be affected by the grant of a special exception for the continued use of the existing boatyard. P. The grant of a special exception for the continued use of the existing boatyard will not cause undue disturbance or disruption of important natural futures, systems or processes and will not cause a risk of pollution to groundwater and surface waters on and off the site. RESOLUTION OF 1111, BOARD: In considering all of the above factors, a motion was offered by Member Dantes, seconded by Member Weisman (Chairperson), and duly carried, to GRANT the special exception to establish a business use consisting of the display, stowage, sale and service of boats consistent with the special exception granted to the prior owner in ZBA File# 4681 of May 5, 1999. SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS 1. The prior ZBA approval (File# 7014 April 6, 2017) to locate the parking of boats in the Residential zoned (R40) portion of the split zoned subject lot shall continue to remain an accessory to the principal use in the Business (B) zoned portion of the property, namely the display, sales, storage and service of boats, in relation to the Special Exception Permit approval granted herein to the applicant. If the applicant changes the business use or sells the business, the applicant or new property owner must apply to the Board of Appeals for Page 14, September 2, 2021 #7546SE Strong's Marine SUM No. 1000-122-6-12 a new Special Exception Permit and to the Building Department for any variance relief or approvals that may be needed 2. The applicant/owner shall continue to maintain in perpetuity the existing solid fencing along the code permitted side and rear yards of the property 3. No storage of boats, trailers, vehicles or equipment shall be permitted in the easterly 15- foot side yard setback from the as built metal storge building, which side yard must remain open and unobstructed at all times 4. The applicant shall continue to abide by the approvals and conditions set forth by the Southold Town Planning Board in their site plan approval dated 7/10/19 That the above conditions be written into the Building Inspector's Certificate of Occupancy, when issued Vote of the Board. Ayes: Members Weisman (Chairperson), Dante, Planamento, Acampora, Lehnert. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). Leslie Kanes Weisman, Chairperson Approved for filing / 7 /2021 From: Lanza, Heather Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2021 4:17 PM To: Palmeri, Allison Subject: FW: Strongs Boat Storage Project and applicant's letter of request for related work to the Army Corps Attachments: Army Corp Letter to Town -July 28 2021.pdf 1 4Z _. For the mail (einail below and attached). AUG 1 2 20 Also,please check the tax map number in Laserfiche as noted below, °.i' i Narring nal, nY�ItltllClCltlh� lr ,Pi1� Ml X08'"M From: Save Mattitucklnlet Sent:Thursday, August 12, 20214:15 PM To: Lanza, Heather<he�lt`,ii�ei la:iza )tov)i soli hol ,n .LHs>; Cummings, Brian A.<hri r�,et�rn�rro ins C town.scru� c�� mlly.0 �> Subject: Re: Strongs Boat Storage Project and applicant's letter of request for related work to the Army Corps Hi Heather and Brian, Attached is a letter from the Army Corps of Engineers to adjacent property owners that the Town also received. We wanted to ensure a copy made its way to the Planning Department as there is an error in the tax map number in the file name on the laserfice. This relates to the travelift extension and bulkhead replacement at the Stron 's Yacht Center site, the former of which the PB had expressed disapproval due to the current SEQR review. Thanks Stephen M. Boscola Anne Sherwood Pundy Save Mattituck Inlet About Save Mattituck Inlet Save Mattituck Inlet. established in 2020 by a group of local residents, seeks to protect and preserve Mattituck Inlet and the surrounding ecosystem. We understand that Mattituck Inlet holds a delicate balance of rich environmental and historical importance while serving as a foundation for local commerce, recreational activity, and scenic beauty. i Save Mattituck Inlet aims to ensure that the community's voice is active in the oversight of development of and around the Inlet by raising awareness and advocating for transparent and responsible development that considers the impact on the economy, the ecology, and the local quality of life. PO Box 592 Mattituck,NY 11952 See our website here: hftps://savemattituckiniet.com See our facebook page here: hftps-://www.facebook.com/qroups/friendsoftheinlet See our Instagrarn here: 25!saayfe-- inatfituck inlet 2 .. cb DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY U.S.ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS,NEW YORK DISTRICT G JACOB K.JAVITS FEDERAL BUILDING d '4 26 FEDERAL PLAZA ` NEW YORK NEW YORK 10278-0090 0 u 1�1 KI l vv n `' �4r .-dlllllll REGULATORY BRANCH July 28, 2021 SUBJECT: Letter of Coordination for Department of the Army Permit Application Number NAN-2021-00523-EMI by Strong's West Mill, LLC The New York District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has received a request for Department of the Army authorization for the following activity.- APPLICANT: ctivity:APPLICANT: Strong's West Mill, LLC c/o Jeffrey Strong P.O. Box 1409 Mattituck, New York 11952 ACTIVITY: Extend an existing travel lift from approximately 24-foot-wide by 60- foot-long to approximately 24-foot-wide by 72-foot-long by extending the existing lift rail by 12 feet and replacing the existing two-foot-wide, by 49-foot-long catwalk along the western lift rail to two-foot-wide by 74-foot-long and replacing the existing two-foot-wide by 59-foot-long catwalk along the eastern rail to two-foot-wide by 72-foot-long. Within the travel lift slip, dredge approximately 93 cubic yards of material from an the approximately 24-foot-wide by 72-foot-long slip area (approximately 1,728 square feet) to a depth of five feet below the plane of Mean Low Water with a maximum over-dredge depth of six feet below the plane of Mean Low Water_ Dredged material will be used as backfill behind the bulkhead with no return flow to the waterway_ Additionally, dredge approximately 38-cubic yards of material to a depth of four feet below the plane of Mean Low Water along an approximately 2,160 square foot area along the bulkhead_ Dredged material will be placed behind the bulkhead as backfill with no return flow to the waterway. Under the Authority of Nationwide Permit 3 — MAINTENANCE: Replace, in-place approximately 216 linear feet of bulkhead_ Along the bulkhead, additionally replace, in-place an approximately five- foot-wide by nine-foot-long platform leading to an.existing ramp and floating dock structure within the marina ***PLEASE USE THE ABOVE 18-CHARACTER FILE NUMBER ON ALL CORRESPONDENCE WITH THIS OFFICE*** REGULATORY BRANCH July 28, 2021 'SUBJECT: Letter of Coordination for Department of the Army Permit Application Number NAN-2021-00523-EMI by Strong's West Mill, LLC - 2 - Within the existing marina, remove an approximately four-foot-wide by nine-foot-long section of an existing four-foot-wide by 91-foot-long float to accommodate the travel lift rail extension. The proposed structures will extend an additional 12-feet into the waterway from the plane of Mean Low Water. The purpose of the project is to allow for the,marina to accommodate larger vessels and improve recreational access to the waterway within the marina. WATERWAY: Mattituck Creek LOCATION° 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York As this is minor in nature, authorization may be by Letter of Permission. This is in accordance with current Federal Regulations governing work in navigable waters of the United States. To accomplish the coordination required, prior to the issuance of a Letter of Permission, your review of the enclosed drawings is requested. Pursuant to Section 307 (c) of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 as amended (16 U.S.C. 1465 (c)(3)(A)), the applicant has certified that the activity complies with and will be conducted in a manner that is consistent with the approved state coastal zone management program_ In order for us to better serve you, please complete our Customer Service Survey located at http://www.nan.usace.2rmy.mil/Missions/Reg IatoN/CustomerSurvey.aspx. To allow for the timely processing of the subject application, please email your questions or comments within 20 days of the date of this letter to Christopher Minck, of my staff, at Christd her.W.Minck usace,artils .mil. Sincerely, Date:2021 07.28 _-10:05:11 -04'00' FOR AND IN BEHALF OF Ronald R. Pinzon Chief, Eastern Section Enclosures PLEASE INCLUDE THE 18-CHARACTER FILE NUMBER ON ALL CORRESPONDENCE WITH THIS OFFICE USACE FILE: NAN-2021-00523-EMI U.S. ARMY CORPS PERMIT APP. No.: REF: NYSDEC APPLICATION I.D._ _W,� _ ......_ ._. _ PROPOSED SITE PLAN FOR: SITE DATA: STRONG'5 WEST MILL, LLG ZONING 015MCT: M-2(MARINE 2) 5TEWART TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY RESIDENTIAL LOW GEN5ITY A(R-80) 5180 VE5T MILL ROAD,MATTITUGK, NY 111152 EmynNs MZAZU COUNTY OF SUFFOLK TOTAL AREA. 32.4554 ACRES N.G.-32.9554 ACRES TOM OF 501LM401 D 0,435,554 SaFT) N.G.-4,435,559 SQ.FT) 5GTM: 1000-10-06-13.4 R-&0 LOT AREA. 16.4434 ACRES NSG.- 16.4934 ACRES (716,474 50FT) NLG.-(118,414 SQFTJ NOTE: MAGHINERY AGGE55 15 PROP05ED M-2 LOT AREA: 16.4620 ACRF5 NLG.- 16.4620 ACRES FROM EXISTING BOAT STORAGE AREA. (117,085 50.FT) N.G.-(711.085 50,FT) WETLAND AREA: 27,333 SOFT. NSG.-21,933 5QFT. BUILDIN6 AREA: 1714A 50.FT. NSG.-81424 SGFT. k HOOUM AREA: 6J ACRE-5 NL.-OJ ACS BASED ON ORIGINAL SL RVEY BY: 51 TE (, ATL NATHAN TAFT CORWIN,LAW SURVEYOR r 41 000'32.93"N ci 1586 MAIN ROAD �t JAW-5PORT,NY 11447 -73'33'01.1-7"H _ a DATUM: NAVD 1966 DATED MAY O9,2017 r AND BASED ON 6ENERAL LAYOUT BY• YOL,N6 AND YOUNG 400 OSTRANDER AVE ` RIVEFttAR NY.11401 (631)12-7-0303,FAX(631)127-0144 h� MAP PREPARED:01-03-2016 t LAST REVISED: II-20-2016 Lu STRONG'S w C) -YACHT CENTER o , 0 3 Z AVE VICINITY MAP: � kn NOT TO SCALE 5 � I 1 er6IF� SITE PLAN FOR: 5TRam%1*5T"LL,LLC PAGE: ., HAUL OVT`91JP EXrU610N AND RELATED NOFBC JEFFREY T.. B G�1 F LE'R,P.E..P.C. 578o w:sT Mui,RD MATTRUGK.Nr nays P.O.BOX 694 5GTFL lO0o�06-03F3.4 SHOREHAM,NEK YORK 02W OF 9070-K Tc"OF gaimew 1 TEL. 631-208h850 FAX,631127.8033 .t76 No. 200052 VRAM BY. RAG L Ifff3FTEY T. WBR.PE DATE. 0}22-2021 APPRgdV 6Y, ITB O1 USAGE FILE: NAN-2021-00523-EMI EOR PROP. DEMOLITION' r n A5PNALT AT EX.HAUL OUT SLIP P J r rqjRFAcE FOR ADDmoNAL wo SEE p na TO REMAIN 'ENl.AR6ED PARTIAL PLAN,SHT 4 + E&2- 1, I ^^,,,'✓✓X � l`;+/p'� ,� �+��R` �`�� EX VINYL p EXI5T. < k BJLKtID p TO REMAIN y "� 1111 = mm EXIST 1`I0ATIN6 DXK _ EX.GATMK t2kf5916 TO 13E EX15TIr6 REPLACED IN KIND,IN PLACE f / I STORY MErPd 'j U I�ILDIt ; n 1 / PP rr° J\ FA. f4'1^4011LO FLOATIN6 DOGIK TO BE Y ipi Al GUT BACK APPROX, f4'(OR A5 REGUREfl I a� TO ACCOMMODATE PROP05EP RAIL rxr L EXTEM510H h5TALLA71014). f! EXI5TINt3 EXI5TIfv.7 rr T N R GOEX15TIN6 KOATIN6 K � NG �' ELEGIIG�_ ��.� � ..... .. 5A SERVICE aux 4 EX 15"x20'66 TETAI RAI-TP,DICC"I FUR ip r1-[FPTM REh^`OV'11..RL COh,T,IECT rr''ST cf'I'tTSTR. EX-STIN6 DILAPIDATED ND PLATFORM TO BE REPLACED(IN KIND,IN PLACE) ra IRRE6ULAfR 5NAFE.19'L6xS'W EXI5TING 15TCRY BULDIN6 EX(3T ri E CaRA�G:V.. r,+ qq `.)PFA6E tiff 'I0 REMAIN dr � MATT K / GREEK ME-All 111611 HATER off' a q o O rF-L`-FwD Xl,IINa + (Al 0116 TIE LIVE) of 2 C A3 , 1 "y� [" Y EOGE CF FETLANDS A5 FLA66ED ESY 12- " EN-CONSUL ara-NNE 2OH PARTIAL SITE PLAN_ - WITH NOTED DEMOLITION F P 56ALE: I. =40'-0° 13 B161Nt SITE PLAN FOR: ss FEST MCL,LLC; PAGE, HAUL OUT SUPP EMEXTBl510H AND DATED 1401aG ",,✓'/ JEFFREY T. BUTLER,P.E.,P.C. 51DO HEST HILL RD. MATrRtYY,NY oq53 PD.BOX 634SGTM OOG16iPb4}qA N 34 YORK Claw OF 91lPOlr Tpi+Q SOUTH" 2- 9 TEL 631.208,89W FAX.691.72-7.8633 . iX7, 2CCXF32 mmi W, RAG [ 1 ..... w fer T.wTL87.PE OATS, 63-32-a(Tj A PRg-w BK JTB.... O 1 2 ®F8 USACE FILE: NAN-2021-00523-EMI EX. �RAILTO OUT) _. EX OPEN TOE&41 EX15TSV n GRAVEL GAE I TO Re-iNN 124'01 T�t+GJ� MATTITUCK GREEK EX VINYL pp KHD TL7 REMAi"l qY _ EX TO REVINYLM N HEAN r11GN PLATER a �I �. i _��_ L� m, P EtA_K EAP 0,0 -. _-. - _�x��'r p y ELECTW, � (ALO"5 TIE LIME) PT, OF MLW n ro nN 6I_.1 i OI LGM Iq 1, r C(LbI x-4.4'± 0 f RMLW 124'EJC 6 2b' m r li rn f'A55 F .f. < rn .. - r dD a3 r © w x LW x u r 1 II + m MLw r� i a TZ ) ➢ EX15T, t24'W x t6O'LG O id I I I= EXTEN51ON I P �d1 , HAUL OUT SLIP WITH A ; µ�' DEEP1N &_&�L,HEAG) uJ m CLEAR OPENING OF t24' REPLAGEMENT NOTE. TO BE MODIFIED • EXC VATO MATERIAL ft's TO k TO CREATE A , ; EULk�}f ANGHORIN5)91ALL It 7 b x 324'W(N O x BEIOREb AND USED A5 FILL 71 HAUL OUT 5LIP W/ E (tWLETION OF ANc+NoRlrl INSrALLATIor� Ij N A CLEAR OPENING OF I r p . DEMOL15N BULKHEAD AND p 11 i� X24 (N.G) l® 19 DEMO MATERIAL SHALL 13E NAi TO AN APF'ROV® X10 rn a z rl.�� y ca x-4 o�t , SITE A, __ rx qq I �; C -,....�_.�.�.�.. MLW II� Q EX.WD } MLVI I x-3 b't 4 G `. - TWALKL�A N i l x x 4 4+ n d> KINREMA - " EXIST. CP MLW 1 i GRAVEL 5LRFACE 9I-.ah' -EX. L24H HAUL-OUT SLIP TO REMAIN ' D i I w !^U l21 6l L6 RAILS 1 z TO BE EXTENDED a rn I ./ x-33'+ FROM 67'TO�1 l'�'I �y t s� `,MLW (SEE SNT 6 FOR it O) z ,0 u r 115T NEST EAST RAIL RAIL , ;✓ z —@HOOD 4 w` ML�d CATWALK u aJ J — EX. t4'Wxq'L6 PORTION OF FLOATING DOCK TO BE k r REMOVED TO ACCOMMODATE PROPO5ED RAIL 1 �` I EXTER51ON INSTALLATION (t4'xt52' PORTION OF EX15TING FLOATING DOCK TO REMAIW. 711U--K ENLARGED PARTIAL SITE PLAN - "a 008- GREEK AT HAUL OUT SLIP + y win" nil I"'IES WITH NOTED DEMOLITION (.ALO ? lit.1_IM'E) 5GALE I' = 10'-0° ac E"RM SITE PLAN FOR: STFZp e5 VAEST"LL,LLG RAGE: FW1L OUf SUP EXTEH510M AID RELATED HOW JEFFREY 1'. Bl1TLER,P.E.,P.C. 5700 Y¢SY MILL RD. MATTMeA W 11452 SGTM, 000-106-03,-0.4 ..".'. F.D.BOX 634 OQ1MY aF SIRQK TO*Of 50flli" 4 SMOMa(AM,NB4 YORK TEL_. 631.30815860 FAX.631371.150-33 W 14ok, 24k)052 Fly, RAG A� F-7 'A'T.anup,PE DATE m 22-2m 1 BY, Jm of - .. _. - _ 3 OF-8 I ' i USAGE FILE: NAN-2021-00523-EMI u �L"AC FORPROPO5ED WORK FA'TI�7�i T _ ?CO�T�IG�C� U 1511N6 EXI5nN6 PRfIPOSED AGnoN. �Ex A`fHA1>< � AT EX. HAUL OUT SLIP Ex FINAL GIRKAGE FOR ADDITIONAL INFO SEE BULKHEAD: LEN51-R LENSTHi fO Rf:'HAIN 9 LEG'Al' lien' REMOVE t REPLACE IN PLACE tlen' ENlAR&fD PARTIAL PLAN,SHT 6 L.E5'Al 116' REMOVE t REPLACE IN PLACE tlb' EX.VINYL RETURN'A3' B. REMOVE t REPLACE IN PLACE 113' BULKHO TO FEMAIN EX15TING TIPBER BA.KFEAO LEGS AND RETURN'Al'THf;v'A3' k g;'--JY SHALL BE REMOVED_ BI- WITH PROP05ED VINYL KNEAD. 5 `✓,zrz SEkv�P ;a1 CK A EK ERAVEL ✓ r f✓ a�'a Fk L`h"tT1Kh DGGs_�. k,. wx ly p ) � vTO RE31AIN f "y/ I 'ry d EXISTIt�S X ` �Cy� 15TORYMETAL u � d d7l`� &IILDING w r x 40°t (N0 WORK) MLW I � 'rb fWiAf 311 r� BUAli 9 LEb ID 4 , L111kT OF Ft:AVATkOI�k � •, �0 � r"^��"x-40 ANCA AGF Ftl(J., HLW J - SEE'PARTIAL SITE PLAN- „" 5 d ,PRDPOSF9 hdD PLATFORM OATIN6 DOCK SEE SHiIIO FOR aJFONYL �� NOP 5 Of H PLA FAi�hD� 4 rkP FL LXI5CII "` ,r (I RA7F011 (1)W SLAB IRs�AARSSIAFF tAl£nbld MArr M6K ° — - PROPOffV x21(o'VINYL ELLKHEADCREEK Ex15TING ON PLACE OF EX TKER BXKW-AD) N57AL LATION UUTL5 I RE04M HFAN�It F"kA r ER FOR I 1 51OF"f EIJIP..DING BU t"r°F ASD (NO EORK) � ��C"r SEE PARTIAL SITE PLfW- � (ALOE r FE LANE) PROP.VNYL BI�k1f 5HT 10 O EXISANC, drg , LEC 51-AB L ''4 r r — I,, �� _ fru pPX BULKFID ,ti��,Jr�pLk"1,6 P.-I df d RETURN f 1�f:rLANG N5 PARTIAL SITE PLAN - �;. FLAGE"..=D FtY EN cord ULTANT5 ON,Ila\.-:)6I I V✓ITII PROPOSED WORK 5GALE I'= 40'-0' @✓<91N� SITE PLAN FOR: STRON9 JEFN I Y T. BUTLER P.E.,P.C. s�rjO sr55 RD. RANDKE.K PAGE: HN1L OUT SUP EKIEti51011 AND i�ATH7 Li'7faC SGTM.1000�OG-0315.4 HY 11957 P.O.BOX 634 LOIMTY Of sprom n"OF 9011TWw SSO M,NEK YORK TEL. 631-208bB60 FMX,631:111.8033 Na, 200052 VRAM[3'.Y'. R11<1 zTi;mY T.O.fL ,PE CMATE. twl-•22µF2 !APRdC7JED B1': JTH O f I I 4 ®F8 USACE FILE: NAN-2021-00523-EMI PT. OF EX VINYL Ba00 EX15T [ pTO REMAIN GRAVEL SURFPfE ORIG � �, IICC � 1F7 fl �lr+, d Nqy � c�c� TO REMAIN o:x '.7�" 1 � ... �m�:...� - - � 4. ELEC.SERV C To REMAIN ;"4 � 12 AQ Iiw —"/"- �� r AREA R t �9 EX HP K XkAY 0 1 FIAINI R4 a E � IN6 r ' TO P50IN © © � I / ✓ ° r r +✓ ,r �/ / r MOP.MO fE MEA 15 LIHTFO TO 1 rX4� r r F PRCFLEN&TH AW N^dIGTTH OF 14 1h h 11 , r FODIFIED HALL Ca is IP, rss r ✓' ? L r M'L(vQ HIPE 012b .FT) s /' ✓ ,s -5.O IriU40,C-63 71AVIPM) b j k x.r LI TH L,�' a FLITH�C1Ak.0vL=F`t IfT O6 6. O �I ✓ rt a �O i GY OF LTOAHIJ rry�r�jF1E� G�TErA r 5POIC_TO BE Ue-f-I?A I3At'.KfILL, r r t2 I''O 2OL6+ r' T _ I r RIL BII� A ° r LN RkxT9 A J & P G2 I G � r , r r s ter _ uj MATTI TUCK GREEK .. ✓✓ r r_ ELEGTRIG W U) {j I L I ✓ J� f�EA\H16H 1-IAfER r SERVICE w9' / X uULKHE4 D IT �� irk :7# d , � ,� r r TO REMAIN ui (rt1-016 TIE LINE) —v11 1 r r a L-T T"O6A � f%T �r7* THE ' u, 100 m Far "d' r r FSC r 5d7� r r I tl rIC' T 1I 1I' rn :+ac ENLARGED I� I'� ✓` � �� ,� � +I �, r x,r, PARTIAL SITEI,'LA -3b AT HAUL OUT SLIP Mew a�' I x r 1m � WPM PROPOSED WORK 61_., x .0� `� r+ +"�' r r'+ r/ , 7'� gg , �kTiFEATEE i �: G�Ph� tQ !A „ 1 ,/r ✓r ✓ r " IN PLACE OF EX. I 'xt9"L6 .VICIE� �.r^ , �, �. CATWALK ALONG RA L r PXT�� F iIIAL / 1) rSEAW Ey °' ! r ° bd00D C mer a f ,,r qp GT r 'r ✓ ✓ yrr r °, r CTAT +Lr W JX T ( Nr 1 C 0A Ia z r �� Lr Pally ��'.f"� � �� .� �� ✓"�" ��1 r:r' �. r � "" � ,_, h R4, x s •' ,, r' �� '' r �� _ ....,-..,�..�...� ,—.—.. n «1,. �. r � WA K XTLW,51 bN aF'O G F N T-10N E TI 'Jv x 6IMG� GATWLri K TQ RE A7 r"C1 .1T )I-IP Il_ F� N:ION CEO tTI I a tI3'"L f * 121 CGA TIP' M PILE 8 4.12 CGA 61RDEP5(TYP) GAD-ALK EXFER510H�� AILII X FOR DE516WIN5TALL'N REO'MNT5 51M5HT B PROP05FD OVER ALL F115+ED LPN6TH= 02' t2a.4'(Ex.f PROP.RAMS,OUT„TO 0JTJ DORM SITE PLAN FOR: 5TRDK95 resT"LL,LLO PAGE P.O.BO%63< �t HILL OUT SUP EXfEtl51C41 AND RR3.AWf 1 452 �..� .(J'.J'(�JIC'."4"_�'. Ji�1.°1"1.1�" ,,1�.L ,.R .�,".. s,eo4£STNu�rm_ r "rTnTXax.lrrnas� xTM, . 6 SMOREM",�YORK CQ1MY OF 9UTO.S R"Or 900tw. TEL-. 631.208ZE60 FAX.631.172.8633 .178 Na. 2lllc<752m"BY, P tei . r T.am ,PE GATE, 05-4-XZ AMWIIM sY- PTB of I I 5OF0 00 elIP LL k I I tl, ✓ As u ? ,I I I I � I 4 �.� J r• �; p� .� {" g •I° I O� I g fl 1 F--i . 1 4"<J I I I C `� r s QV)`/I I A W " Q III-Z r 3 cD tl Nip & 9 m ¢I k I u.3 g� - d I ® , s l W I I I 6 g tl I t,�•�. �M�"^a ti t r�h�� P�w x�;,4�'��; r" LO 0 � t I tl d ( e a�✓ "X r N I I tl lL I p I I I I r t f I I tl LLI o1 n' sol Irl u ai a; pro) a arl Q U[ 4119 'a (n Bier SITE PLAN FOR: ^/- STFZN05 V'f5T"LL,LLG PAVE N.WL OUT SLIP EXTENlSM NO RELATEDWOW7EFFREY T.BUTLER P.E.,P.C. 5780 WEST MIL RO. MATTMY—K,NY 11957 SCTM,�oa�aoe o3 As P.O.BOX 634 GGVt+1Y of%MLA Tt"Of SHOREMAM,Nai YORK TEL 631.3oam5o FAX,691.T2TwB u 200062 T3Y, p � Y T.affLBZ,PE DATE, o3-22-20A �wvsmrFn 13Yns of I 6 USAGE FILE: NAN-2021-00523-EMI _.._ Cv c F"Yat\.FLOAfl,*C(XK ' / 15T E,A5T EXI5TIN6 �-y 15TORY METAL RAIL RAIL GATS E�1ILDING - t (NO 104 GGA GAT L06(T"YT~`)~~- y 10 0 GGA / AI DEADMAN(IYP) x r 1 O W pr u! y {� + 1.0 6ALV. Z 1 TIE ROD(Typ)-^ PROP.GGA 10'0 GGA FOLLOl4H2 f(YP) TIM13ER ELWV PILE WJAJLE CAII , 1/0. (TYP OF ) rt�'b;`rP au4D � Pip a a7nfiPa�Gr.( � Fxsnry-r0 I PARTIAL SITE PLAN EX151. 15TY BLPG ��,� �� PROPOSED VINYL BU �� A Q Al 'BULKH-AD LE6 PROP05ED a 3191'L6 PROP.VINYL BULKHEAD p ON PLACE OF EX TRRER BIKWAP) 7 E r d VIN L BULKHEAD _.. EUyJiEAD!E6 MODEL No.S6560,24'HIGH f Gc tib'L6 PROP.VINYL&WEAD APPROXIMATE LENSTH = t216'I (N PLACE cP Fx TIFF RUREA12) I I NGLUD N6. BULKHEAD RETURN LEG 'Al,N ti4T'LONS, J f3'L6 PROP.VINYL BULKHEAD LEE, 'A2',O)1161-0145 AW (N PLACE or Ex nmE3z E!1L*EoD) LEG'A3',(1)13'LOW-,RETURN N w ,ro I I ' tfA YN�Qp Eo rDA, jj �til �! FLAG 002 ' EQCk OF HETLAN05 A5 FLAG-GED EY t EN-C- INSULTANT5 ON.JJgE 2011 ►�+ SITE PLAN FOR: sr WY5 W:5T KU,LLC PAGE: HMC JEFFREY T.Kai i (,R,,P.E.,P.C, ear+n5180 W:f.T ae�aTM RD��i � o PA.Box 634 SGTM.IOOO�O6-O''�KiA 5HOREH M,NEW YORK TEL., 01.200EB50 FAX.631.117E038 JOB No, 200052 GRAN BY. RAG .;fREY T.SITUR,PF-I OATE. 03--22-201 APWtDJ®sy, _m. of 7OF3 I CL M ash `arl ntil arl �I srl ml n,I 'a I 00 LL I I I I I C.} (:3 ml nr er � cw, nr I '� W 'N' �?S' INIV�l"ll LL 'r s<r >P! - l I LLS n- e� .. I I , ,� �,• ' J� o "„{ i” I : rw�„�,.r;*,r'W"�,rr'w*�`r' �'�u"`1x�� h �*•»,� W.r W�rP�x„� �'i`'�"wrW,✓ �s�,u yr .,w�W' ^��,��wf � ,F.'k� � W'^ i E l I I { I Q l,,w'''\,,� ;�✓.r",.�C„;� ".W``w` ,,.�er� ,. "fr�r r.,., " W'^•"''err,/r;",✓�.,;�Wf"f✓J,✓✓�,PW`� Q P 0 I I m W ti 1 w LC I V aL I I tih tis MI1Vb13F3dd0 F C a ® I h y K d3a?co2ldd d) w p k FOlti* ° i I c � F o.0to LL Cl P I w"' o z I _ mom¢ N S gyp, w I �0ww �N¢a w Q a w s� O x O " Q i� — fN rvnw¢mwl 1 x FF tl O '��r I w� l W�`�rWw,. l I f L6 LL I 6 1 I I D� :'.r M L] .I mv^ rc O p f G I F fi.{ Jl ui '7 .!1, 1 "`. CIII� t W t 1 1 rh1 qt I I (0) � SITE PLAN FOR;, snZONBr QST"LL'u_a PAGE: H r WL OUT 5UP EXIB6 0H ANB D ATED HOW JEFFREY T.BUTLER,RE„P.C. 5780VESTM,R,T�N"'q5' 1 1 e, PD.Wx 634 COR"OF 4U91OLI. T"d 501fiNAD %WRB AH.NE34 YORK TEL.,631.2OB886O FM691.1278033 1 mNO, 20062 VRAM BY, RAC C '1' IF .!»Y T.�lTLH2,PE DATE O}g� A F BY. fTH O1 I I C5 N CD n��.(" O 47 co mow o ®moo N CD O " 01)C) CD LL N Sm w o o a m ssVIO-ISMIA �h rM. }p� g 1 I H 1 L 4 rt k o IU t W 1-3 0 O C/) rq m ED _. ..� a 0 ED ED t F I _-, 0 O I Oi CLI pi 0 N ' I M ,:ay G./7 C1 CFo r D 0 CL 11 0 d 0 rtJ a LLJ N YORKr" � � � �� ,t� ��Ar, ��- � ..: .�� ..... OPPORTUNITY � and Historic Preservation � � � ANDREW M. CUOMO ERIK KULLESEID f U f:', 0 2 20 21 Governor Commissioner ;,r i, a3.nu,, July 22, 2021 Carol Weed Independent Contractor 50 Saw Mill Rd. Unit 13108 Danbury, CT 06810 Re: DEC Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 W Mill Rd, Mattituck, Suffolk County, NY 11952 21 PR04396 Dear Carol Weed: Thank you for requesting the comments of the Division for Historic Preservation of the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP). We have reviewed the submitted materials in accordance with the New York State Historic Preservation Act of 1980 (Section 14.09 of the New York Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law). These comments are those of the Division for Historic Preservation and relate only to Historic/Cultural resources. We have reviewed the report of the Phase IA archaeological study. The report correctly states that there are no previously recorded Native American archaeological sites shown in OPRHP's online system (CRIS) within one mile of the project area. However, the Southold Indian Museum has the field notebooks of the late Charles Goddard, former president of the Long Island Chapter of the New York State Archaeological Association and resident of Mattituck. Mr, Goddard's 1922 field notebook indicates that he identified Native American artifacts along the Mattituck Creek in the vicinity of the project area. If any additional archaeological reports are submitted for this project, OPRHP recommends that this information be included in the report. OPRHP has scans of the Goddard field notebooks and can direct you to the digital files in CRIS. OPRHP concurs with your recommendation to conduct Phase IB archaeological testing at locations where proposed ground disturbances will take place in relatively level intact soils. If further correspondence is required regarding this project, please refer to the OPRHP Project Review (PR) number noted above. If you have any questions, please contact me via email. Sir cereiy, Tim Lloyd, Ph.D. Scientist- Archaeology timothy.Iloyd@parks.ny.gov via e-mail only ... Pres Division for Historic .... . servation P O.Box 189,Waterford, New York 1 21 88-01 89®(518)237-8643-parks ny.gov w NEWYORK Parks,Recreation, OPPOR I UNOY and Historic Preservation AUG 0 2 2,021 - e� ANDREW M.CUOMO ERIK KULLESEIC Governor Commissioner r r 1, In ref July 29, 2021 Mr. Charles Vandrei Agency Historic Preservation Officer NYS Environmental Conservation Division of Lands and Forests 625 Broadway Albany, NY 12233-4255 Re: DEC Strong's Yacht Center— Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 W Mill Rd, Mattituck, Suffolk County 21 PR04396 Dear Mr. Vandrei: Thank you for requesting the comments of the Division for Historic Preservation of the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP). We have reviewed the submitted materials in accordance with the New York State Historic Preservation Act of 1980 (section 14.09 of the New York Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law). These comments are those of the Division for Historic Preservation and relate only to Historic/Cultural resources. They do not include potential environmental impacts to New York State Parkland that may be involved in or near your project. Such impacts must be considered as part of the environmental review of the project pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (New York Environmental Conservation Law Article 8) and its implementing regulations (6NYCRR Part 617). We note that the proposed undertaking is adjacent to Water Tower and Building (3380 West Mill Road), which is eligible for listing in the State and National Registers of Historic Places. We have reviewed the submission received on July 6, 2021, including the Reconnaissance Level Historic Resources Survey dated July 2021. Based on that review, the OPRHP has no building/above ground historic resources concerns. Before a determination can be rendered by this office, consultation with our Archaeology Unit must continue. Please see and respond to Tim Lloyd's request for additional information via the response wheel in CRIS. If you have any questions, I can be reached at (518) 268-2170. Sincerely, sX •- Robyn Sedgwick Historic Site Restoration Coordinator e-mail: robyn.sedgwick@parks.ny.gov via e-mail only cc: M. Terry—Town of Southold C. Cuddy—Owner CRIS List �.w_. .... _ ............ Division for Historic Preservation P.O.Box 189,Waterford,New York 121 B8-0189®(518)237-8643 o parks.ny.gov OFFICECI v 0. II ESS: Town Hall Annexe F Sf P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 � Southold, NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) " Telephone: 631 765-1938 Southold, NY www.southoldtownny.gov r �UUNT`1 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM To: Glenn Goldsmith, President Town of Southold Board of Trustees From: James H. Rich III, Vice Chairman Members of the Planning Board ` Date: May 19, 2021 Re: Application of STRONG'S WEST MILL, LLC SCTM# 1000-106-6-13.4 The Planning Board has been made aware of a pending request before your Board for a Wetland Permit to construct improvements at the Strong's West Mill Marine property. The application is to modify existing haul-out slip dimensions from 24' x 60' to 24' x 72' by welding 12 If extensions to two (2) existing steel travel lift rails over additional piling foundation; remove and replace existing 2' x 59' wood catwalk adjacent to easterly travel lift rail with 2' x 72' wood catwalk, and construct 2' x 25' extension to existing wood catwalk adjacent to westerly travel lift rail; remove and replace (in-place) approximately 216 If of timber bulkhead with vinyl bulkhead, incidentally dredge up to 10 feet seaward off reconstructed bulkhead to max. depth of-4' MLW, and use approx. 38 cy spoil as backfill; remove 4' x +9' portion of existing 4' x 91' floating dock to accommodate prop. rail extension (4' x 82' portion of ex. float to remain), and remove and replace (in-kind/in-place) ex. +5' x 9' platform leading to float (ex. 2.5' x 20' aluminum ramp between platform and float to be temporarily removed and reset); and maintenance dredge interior of modified haul-out slip to max. depth of-5'MLW(with max. 6" overcut), using approx. 93 cy spoil as backfill behind reconstructed bulkhead. Located: 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck. Be advised that the Planning Board, as Lead Agency under SEQRA, has issued a Positive Declaration for an action on the same property and under the same ownership for the construction of two storage buildings which is currently under Planning Board 1 1 Page commercial site plan review; a Draft Environmental Impact Statement is required. It is the determination of the Planning Board that portions of the proposed work are connected to the whole action and, consequently, approving them could be considered segmentation of the SEQR review process. This work, which includes the extension of the travel lift and work associated with the travel lift extension, as well as any other new work, should not be allowed to move forward until the SEQR process has been concluded. As an Involved Agency, the Board of Trustees will be informed of every step of this process. It is the position of the Planning Board, however, that the removal and replacement (in- place) of approximately 216 If of timber bulkhead with vinyl bulkhead is not a substantial change and can proceed if it is necessary and not functioning. Furthermore, maintenance dredging can also proceed using 38 cy and 93 cy spoil as backfill behind the reconstructed bulkhead. This position is based on 6 NYCRR Part 617.5(c)(1) of SEQR regulations which allows for the "maintenance or repair involving no substantial changes in an existing structure or facility". cc: William Duffy, Town Attorney Damon Hagan, Assistant Town Attorney 1 P a g e OFFICELOCATION: 1aOE Sid but LING SS: Town Hall Annex P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) CIO Telephone: 631 765-1938 Southold, NY 11971 LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM To: Glenn Goldsmith, President Town of Southold Board of Trustees From: Mark Terry, Assistant Town Planning Director LWRP Coordinator Date: May 18, 2021 Re: Local Waterfront Coastal Consistency Review for ILL, LLC SCTM# 1000-106-6-13.4 En-Consultants on behalf of STRONG'S WEST MILL, LLC requests a Wetland Permit to Modify existing haul-out slip dimensions from 24' x 60' to 24' x 72' by welding 12 If extensions to two ( ) existing steel travel lift rails over additional piling foundation, remove and replace existing 2' x 59' wood catwalk adjacent to easterly travel lift rail with 2' x 72' wood catwalk, and construct 2' x 25' extension to existing wood catwalk adjacent to westerly travel lift rail; remove and replace (in-place) approximately 216 If of timber bulkhead with vinyl bulkhead, incidentally dredge up to 10 feet seaward off reconstructed bulkhead to max. depth of-4' MLW, and use approx. 38 cy spoil as backfill; remove 4' x +9' portion of existing 4' x 91' floating dock;to accommodate prop. rail extension (4' x 62' portion of ex, float to remain), and remove and replace (in-kindlin-place) ex. +5' x 9' platform leading to float (ex. 2.5' x 20' aluminum ramp between platform and float to be temporarily removed and reset) and maintenance dredge interior of modified haul-out slip to max, depth of 5'MLW (with max. 6" overcut), using approx. 93 cy spoil as backfill behind reconstructed 'bulkhead. Located: 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-106-6-13.4 The proposed action has been reviewed to Chapter 268, Waterfront Consistency Review of the Town of Southold Town Code and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) Policy Standards. Based upon the information provided on the LWRP Consistency Assessment Form submitted to this department, as well as the records available to me, it is my recommendation that the proposed action is CONSISTENT with policies 10, 10.1(a) and 10.5 of the LWRP. The proposal improves infrastructure for the continued operation of an existing water dependent use (Marina) in an area of focused maritime activity and a maritime center (Mattituck Inlet and Creek). Policy Standards Policy 90 Protect Southold's water-dependent uses and promote siting of new water- dependent uses in suitable locations The intent of this policy is to protect existing water-dependent commercial, industrial, and recreational uses and to enhance the economic viability of water-dependent uses by ensuring adequate provision of infrastructure for water-dependent uses and their efficient operation. 10.1 (a) Protect existing water-dependent uses. The term Water-dependent use means a business or other activity which can only be conducted in, on, over, or adjacent to a water body because such activity requires direct access to that water body, and which involves, as an integral part of such activity, the use of the water. Existing uses should be maintained and enhanced where possible and appropriate. Strong's West Mill, LLC Marina is a water dependent use. The Town of Southold has identified Mattituck Inlet and Creek, Mill Creek and the Village of Greenport as the focus of its maritime activity. These will be the targets for improvements to existing infrastructure, such as water and sewer lines, maintenance dredging of navigation channels and anchorage basins, docks and piers, bulkheads, boat ramps, and pump out stations. This infrastructure, which is often too expensive for many water-dependent businesses to maintain or provide on their own, is necessary to sustain water-dependent uses. A. Provide adequate navigation infrastructure. Dredging is an essential activity but with costs and impacts that require it to be undertaken only to the extent necessary to meet the current and future needs of water- dependent uses of the Town of Southold. The Town of Southold will work in cooperation with New York State, Suffolk County, the Village of Greenport and private owners of water-dependent uses to: 2. Maintain necessary public and private channels and basins at depths consistent with the needs of water-dependent uses. Discontinue or modify navigation channel or basin maintenance dredging where project depths exceed vessel needs. It is recommended that the Board clarify the vessel depth needs. 4. Provide new or expanded navigation lanes, channels, and basins when necessary to support new, or expansion of existing, water-dependent uses. Dredging may be necessary to support a water-dependent use when: a. an existing use, or a new use in a suitable location, would be generating vessel traffic that requires the navigation infrastructure, b. the amount of dredging, including the project depth, is consistent with shipping needs. 10.5 Provide sufficient infrastructure for water-dependent uses. B. Provide and maintain efficient infrastructure for water-dependent uses. Maintain existing infrastructure and improve or provide new infrastructure, particularly in Mattituck Inlet and Creek, Mill Creek and the Village of Greenport, for commercial and recreational vessels and water-dependent uses. The Town of Southold will work with the federal government, New York State, Suffolk County, the Village of Greenport and private owners of water-dependent uses to: 3. Maintain existing, and, where necessary for water-dependent uses, construct new, shoreline stabilization and engineering structures such as piers, wharves, jetties, and bulkheads. 4. Maintain facilities to meet safety requirements associated with vessel operations. 7. Promote the provision of appropriate vessel services for commercial and recreational vessels, including berthing, repairs, information, and fueling services. In the event the action is approved, turbidity controls are required (Chapter 275 Wetland and Shorelines) to further Policy 6 and protect water quality and surrounding wetlands. Pursuant to Chapter 268, the Board of Trustees shall consider this recommendation in preparing its written determination regarding the consistency of the proposed action. Cc: Damon Hagan, Assistant Town Attorney From: Cummings, Brian A. r Sent: Monday, April 19, 2021 9:14 AM �" - � , �; ... To: Michaelis,Jessica Subject: FW: Strong's West Mill, LLC Attachments: 20210419072846.pdf; 20210419072746.pdf ,N`R Ji ,0 ^� ray i. i r 1 For mail please nril it ,i I )atd From: Cantrell, Elizabeth Sent: Monday, April 19, 2021 8:32 AM To: Cummings, Brian A. Subject: Strong's West Mill, LLC Hi Brian, As discussed on the phone, attached is a few pages of our wetland permit application to which on page 2 at the bottom is a detailed project description. The second attachment is a sit plan of the location of the proposed. Please advise if the Trustees can proceed with this application, or if the Planning Board would like us to wait until their determination has been made. Thank you. Eby l ea4rra Senior Office Assistant Town of Southold Board of Trustees Office: 631-765-1892 Entail. iN�a°tiic �f'r,eu�rlGaal�ar� �r°ia�t r ,oa° I Glenn Goldsmith,Pim identTown Hall Annex Michael J.Domino,Vice-PresidentP' Y 54375 Route 25 fs ' P.O.Box 1179 John M_Bredemeyer III Southold,New York 11971 A.Nicholas Krupski „� �$ Telephone(631)765-1892 Fax(631) 765-6641 Greg Williams cz- BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD This Section For OfficeUse�_.. �......__. Only Coastal Erosion Permit Application y� X Wetland Permit Application 9 Administrative Permit — trletadnier t/,rr.insler�Extension . Received Appticattots._—... � I MAR 2 6 2021 Received lee: ... .. .Gly ..... _,K,_._..._Conapletcd Application' _ Southold'1`rts n Incomplete: .._M.. m..... fl rvii'r of Trustees SEQRA Classification: TypeI Type II Unlisted Lead Agency Determination Date: _...._. �LWfT Consistency Arsessnent 1°'o Sent: . .. __..�._.- .�...�. CAC Referral Sent _... Hate of tnspecdow , Receipt of CAC Report: ... ........... _..v V Public,Rearing Held: "ecl�nical Review � � g Resolution: Name of Applicant Strong's West Mill,LLC c/o Jeffrey Strong,Meraiber Address PO Bos 1409, Mattituck„NY 11952 Phone Number: (631) 786-1392 Suffolk County Tax Map Number: 1000 - 106-6-13.4 Property Location:5780 West Mill Road,Mattituck (property is tos:we�cl on east and south sides of West Mill Road) _..- . .w..... . ......... ...... ... ............ ...... ... ..,....._ _._........._. (provide LILCO Pole #, distance to cross streets, and location) AGENT: En-Consultants ( f applicable) Address: 1319 North Sea Road, Southampton,NY 11968 Phone:631-283-6360 E3oetrd of Trustees Apr cgLtiori GENERAL DATA Land Area(in square feet),,, 16.76 acres Area Zoning:_, M-II Previous use of property:—,Commercial marina and shipyard Intended use of property: No change Covenants and Restrictions: Yes . X No If"Yes", please provide copy. Does this project require a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals Yes X No If"Yes",please provide copy of decision. Will this project require any demolition as per Town Code or as determined by Building Dept.. Yes X No Does the structure(s) on property have a valid Certificate of Occupancy X Yes No Pric)r perrtaits/ap'prov'alls for site in' provemerits: Agency Date SnutfurWd A'ruxflusfl—uh.N.,111 6(�"P-gbyy So hA� NO 2zi y rs snwen,i a Tresxerm Prrvm,M,279 1 N4,.a l,kt:®N[%'�:V5'an wd P,n 1-5V Southold Trustees Permit No.1500 10-8-81 Southold Trustees Permit No.209 1.-18-85 Southold Trustees Permit No.M94 94 1.0.30 85 Southold Trustees Permit No.4957 1-28-98 Southold Trustees Permit No.5058 9-22.99 Southold Trustees Permit No.5198 7-19-00 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 (use attachments if necessary);: Modify existing haul-out slip dimensions from 24'x 60'to 24'x 72'by welding 12 if extensions to two(2) existing steel travel lift rails over additional piling foundation;remove and replace existing 2'x 59'wood catwalk adjacent to easterly travel lift rail with Tx 72'wood catwalk,and construct Tx 25'extension to existing wood catwalk adjacent to westerly travel lift rail;remove and replace(in-place)approximately 216 if of timber bulkhead with vinyl bulkhead, incklentally dredge tup to 10 1M seawaid off reco ivtructed bulkhead tra jmLx.depth of-4'ML,W,and use approx. 38 cy spoil as backfill;remove 4'x+9'portion of existing 4'x 91'floating dock to accommodate prop. rail extension(4'x 82'portion of ex.float to remain),and remove and replace(in-kind/in-place)ex.-r5'x 9'platform leading to float(ex. 2.5'x 20' aluminum ramp between platform and float to be temporarily removed and reset); and maintenance dredge interior of modified haul-out slip to max.depth of-5'ML W(with max. 6" overcut),using approx. 93 cy spoil as backfill behind reconstructed bulkhead,all as depicted and further described on the site plan prepared by Jeffrey T, Butler,P.E:.,P.C., last dated March 22,2021. Board of Trustees Applic ion WETLAND/TRUSTEE LANDS APPLICATION DATA Purpose of the proposed operations: To improve utility and efficiency of existing boat haul-out slip by extending length of slip and maintenance dredging slip;and maintaining existing functional bulkheading through its in-place removal and replacement. Area of wetlands on lot: 27,333 .... .....—`quare feet io Percent coverage of lot: 3.74 _ Closest distance between nearest existing structure and upland edge of wetlands': 0 feet ex.bulkheading Closest distance between nearest proposed structure and upland edge of wetlands: 0 feet prop.bulkheading Does the project involve excavation or filling? N o X Yes (dredged spoil from maintenance dredging of slip& If yes, how much material will be excavated? 13 +/- 1 cubic yards incidental dredging adjacent to reconstructed bulkhead) . � How much material will be filled. +/-131 cubic yards (dredged spoil to be used as backfill) ? _m Depth of which material will be removed art°lelat itt tl: _ -5' 1-W feet(max.) Proposed slope throughout the area of operations: N/A Manner in which material will be removed or deposited: Approx.93 cy of material to be dredged from within boat haul-out slip and approx.38 cy of material to be incidentally dredged within 10 feet of reconstructed bulkhcad via land-based excavator and/or barge-mounted clamshell bucket will be deposited as backfill landward of reconstructed bulkhead. Statement of the effect, if any, on the wetlands and tidal waters of the town that may result by reason of such proposed operations (use attachments if appropriate): The project is designed to improve the utility and efficiency of an existing boat haul-out slip within a commerical marina facility by increasing the overall length of the slip by 12 feet via extension of the existing steel travel rails;maintenance dredging within the slip; and replacing and/or extending the catwalks running alongside the travel rails. Also proposed is the in-place replacement of the adjacent, [one remaining section of old timber bulkhead with a vinyl bulkhead,which will _. tie into the existing section vinyl bulkhead constructed pursuant to Town Wetlands Permit No. 5058,issued in 1999. To.. mitigate the temporary potential imparts of the associated incidental dredging adjacent to the bulkhead and maintenance dredging of the slip,such as ephemeral turbidity,a silt curtain will be employed during construction;and a minimum distance of approximately 20 feet will be maintained between the incidental dredging and the nearest vegetated intertidal marsh to the southwest. Thus,as designed,the project will have no significant adverse impacts on the adjacent tidal wetlands or waters of Mattituck Creek. I n u t OG i . A',i, 61,'38 Z,6ToZOS 9Tti.L �05`69 M£k;.Z£obLS SLN.T. h _ ,Tb'ES M 8£'9zaLOS 1-L'6J 3OZ)faSTS EWS. � f i (I 4 LI 1£E9T.OhS [Th?]. �„ "SL, � ,r ✓� HSIIV W DNO'TV3NI"I_4LL (39NV151Q ONV 3521nDJ wd MO 199 12MH9 335) + f gat 9i co gfse I HS2IdWd03rJQ3rJA10-I6"3I lrl't�L Xmaw wnn ntui a I<. uoa 9rrr rrr aw u Sd9 OKI NO GIIIV133 E'Yh, ONV SNV-1.1 37Id ab'3HXYG 335 dOd US 9Ma NO SW Id TI121Vd 33S Qd9H�l 19 1J.NIA 0350d023d HlIM �� ( (30V1d NO GT30Vld3a 39 01 CPd3HN1(19 F,T4lL 1 14� ?139WI1 d0ld Nil 91n.1131VWIXOitUJv ad7NxnflHIM 1Nfl010N109 NI Xdb'W Jv rf T (9w i,Z.d0 914I0d0 HY210rt �rlrf 7 r1 JM d1191f10-InIm 91,aa X �� V avV 4d0 01 O39WIOOW 39 Ol bZ4 d0 9NIN3WO 2IV310 V I-mm di-)5 1nO TWH 91,09 X MAIFT'3AI191X3 ct of FCL _O V38V V"DHVSIHINI rti i`tlL q„ � 1 SIHl NI>NOM NOIlIlOW3❑ Ra 03Sodo'dd o3Sodo23d H0=1 Hoa Wu>adwn d. zds zds i''x a I an Ir � "�VIH7M MW y _ •=ff M(�ail I'4R a ,...- ay-'317dd^ICY�2L7M�9 NI�'033��i37A 32I"fllti I I :.'Mi9 Trvi5NI r�II u.iaaa iTvlsNl tr �I��2I� �a4llY L ,3MaN A M7N-TIVIW e l09-3AO1,921 I ; �� , �� ' ,• 1 n iTrTZ�FT� . � L'H.I, S 01 31X7 dil5 Q7S6c40L1d 5 r �' 4" � I I ul 3 �3zian of Hy 015a TIV r !1 CrZiVN91&3O 7C1ISl(IO It �V��V 1 7�� .-, v;>SI2 At1 ON >Na4 I (� -1,12Pf2KJdW3J.TTVJ16141'I 69ZoOZ,S ET4LL �r 7 ,9L'997 M£09Oa815 ZT£LL 43 ,LZ9h TT,65TqZS 01 al �l t I 6! .. L � d�I S��'JO'd,4�13NIHOq'W 8£"Zb A2 REZ,TotRfi 6£GL _d.LON 6L hR 3.QT 6Ta£S "t, .,lr V 0 L�Z d 90,.,h�,6S hE[i. 90"9 M,OZA£.OSS 9fu H32IV 03400M TO'hZT ' 9b,LT,6S V3dV 9N1011170 061h H cb,6E,TR19 v£T.t a V3JNQNVIJ3M Oz"I`L 3£580o6S F. .06'OS A195TSA99 'V 101 Z-W „'h9'6'Lf H 859Oo0IS I£u d32d 1D1 09 2 (30Nd15 a ONb 992!00 2304 M013flaUtW')9991 CIVUHN-ma JNOZv aNI'I 3iL ;V37JV Rd101 m �alollnsa ,draw AWIl;I C ; I `1OI2LL5I0 9NIN0Z7TJ-I �' 111 na r r ciloru.nos do NMo.I G �lOd3 5 3O J IN}00 1UJ, G q'G 0b fTIH lc_z M OQL6 IIdV3 5NI 3'1111 1"emai5 3 O1159N S, N0rJ2d S T cI 691' _'L,00-169-99M L9 'r r tf"1 Cl )gr f __e.._ ,oa"hz a,.00us.Szs r ,Otr3,�9b SAo N FLlJ.N9`31 d 1521r10:7cul I OFFICE LOCATION: : MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex , P.O.Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) c Telephone: 631 765-1938 Southold, NY www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD April 6, 2021 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Dear Mr. Cuddy, The Planning Board has reviewed your letter of February 26, 2021 and the request to reconsider items in the Final Scope for the project referenced above. While the Board, as Lead Agency, feels that there was nothing irrelevant in the scope as adopted, we have reviewed the list of objections provided by PWGC and provide a response to each in the attached document. Sincerely, James I- , Rich 111 Vice-Chairman Strong's Storage Buildings Planning Board Clarifications and Comments in Response to Final Scope Amendment Request from the Applicant April 5, 2021 Item from PWGC 1. Impact on Water Resources • The Final Scope is requiring that the DEIS include the "impacts to groundwater quantity available to neighboring wells...based on field studies over four seasons." The proposed project includes a connection to the public water Supply and discontinuing the use of existing on-site private wells for the entire facility, thus reducing the amount of water currently being withdrawn on the site to only that which may be required for landscaping.The applicant has also consulted and obtained a letter of water availability from the Suffolk County Water Authority (SCWA), which will be included in the DEIS. Conducting a four-season groundwater quantity study would be appropriate for projects that are considering new supply wells, or significant increases in supply wells,that would increase the volume of water being withdrawn from the aquifer. As this project seeks to reduce the volume of Water withdrawn on the site for a connection to the SCWA,there is no rational basis for a year long study of groundwater quantity.We recommend removal of such study from the DEIS. Planning Board Response Conducting this study is necessary to analyze the impacts to groundwater quantity available to the neighboring wells. This is rational because the DEIS must address potential moderate to large impacts from significant soil excavation on-site that is potentially capable of affecting the hydrology and zones of influence for nearby private wells, and the quantity of water available after excavation is completed. Because the aquifer can fluctuate seasonally, conducting this study over time is important to account for all seasons including summer when quantities may be significantly lower due to less rainfall. ................ Item from PWGC • The Final Scope is requiring that the DEIS "analyze and discuss in detail the impacts on private wells in the surrounding area including technical details on groundwater depth, quality, quantity, freshwater lens, saltwater interface, amount of flow in GPM, direction of travel,and travel times.Include zones of influence from each wellhead." This required stud),is requesting,, the applicant to monitor the individual wellheads from all private wells for-,i project that does not require the installation of new wells,but rather the discontinuing of the use of existing supply wells. Further, the application includes conversion of the existing on-site individual S.11-11tan system to an I/A 'this conversion would reduce nitrogen load and improve groundwater quality.Additionally,the STRONG'S FINAL SCOPE OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES proposed project will recharge all stoimwater on site,which will continue to recharge the aquifer. Finally, the proposed action does not involve any dewatering or excavation in groundwater. Accordingly, since the project is discontinuing the use of on-site wells, is improving the conditions on site and does not involve dewatering,there is no rational basis for such a study.We recommend removal of this analysis from the DEIS. Planning Board Response • The monitoring of specific wellheads is not intended to be included within the final scope or DEIS. • This is rational because the DEIS must address potential moderate to large impacts from significant soil excavation on-site that is potentially capable of affecting the hydrology and zones of influence for nearby private wells, and the quantity of water available after excavation is completed. Because the aquifer can fluctuate seasonally, conducting this study over time is important to account for all seasons including summer when quantities may be significantly lower due to less rainfall. • Below are clarifications of what must be included: a. Will the proposed action adversely impact any wellhead zone of influence, or the quantity or quality of water in the aquifer that supplies nearby residential wells? b. An analysis of the groundwater on site and its contributions to the aquifer serving nearby wells under existing conditions, and the potential adverse effects, if any, to the aquifer serving nearby wells following excavation. c. Conduct the analysis over the course of a year to account for seasonal fluctuation. d. Study and describe the nature of the aquifer that supplies the nearby wells, and the relationship of the subject property as a contributing source to that aquifer; or show that this subject property is not a contributing source and that the proposed excavation will not affect the quantity of water available to nearby wells. e. Direction of groundwater travel and travel times: What direction is groundwater traveling on site? Would the excavation disrupt or interrupt groundwater travel or timeframes to reach surface waters? f. Depth of freshwater lens and elevation of the saltwater interface: Will the proposed excavation alter-the saltwater interface in a way that may cause saltwater intrusion into the aquifer or nearby wellhead zones of influence? Will the proposed excavation cause upconing and saltwater intrusion by reducing the amount of fresh water entering the aquifer used by the nearby wells. At what elevations does potable freshwater-begin and end (at the expected saltwater-interface) on site pre and post excavation? Item from PWGC • The Final Scope is requiring the DEIS to "discuss the narrowness of the creek in this area and tidal flow restrictions in an acceptable model.Include the increase tidal flow volume and velocity restrictions that could result from the increase in boats or 2 STRONG'S FINAL SCOPE OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES docks (if any)." On page 23 of the Final Scope, the "extent and quality of the information existing and needed" indicates "Water/Tidal flow modeling/study in front of the Marina including docks and boats (applicant generated)." The proposed application is for the construction of two storage buildings for indoor, heated storage,within a facility that has existed for nearly 60 years for the purpose of boat storage, dockage, and maintenance.As repeatedly indicated by the applicant and the project team,the proposed application does not include any docks. Furthermore, the proposed application does not include any Inlet modification that would alter tidal flow,and does not introduce a vessel length that is currently not using the Inlet today. It is unclear why the use of Mattituck Inlet for boat travel to SYC for the purpose of winter storage requires a water/tidal flow modeling/study.The DEIS will present NO AA data as published at as well as an independent Mattituck Inlet Survey with soundings at low tide -already conducted by H&L Contracting LLC in April 2020.Please confirm that this is acceptable. Planning Board Response • The narrowness of the creek in the area and the effect of the proposed action on tidal flow is being required to be discussed in the DEIS. • Although the applicant states that "the proposed action does not include any docks; the DEIS must discuss the proposed action in relation to potential growth and construction of future new docks and marina expansion. • If it is the intent of the applicant to not request the construction of new docks or a marina expansion now, or in the future, that should be made clear in the DEIS. • The NOAA data and Mattituck Inlet Survey suggested may be acceptable to include in the DEIS in place of a new water/tidal flow model/study if they provide sufficient information to determine whether there will be an impact to water quality resulting from potential lower velocity of tidal flow from additional large boats. • Discuss the effect of mooring large boats at the marina on tidal flow as compared to current conditions, and if there are adverse impacts, what mitigation could be achieved. .......... • Item from PWGC 2. Impacts on Transportation • The Final Scope is requiring"real-time" traffic data and roadway user group and analysis over four seasons. It is unclear what the to "real-time traffic data" is intended to mean. In Traffic Engineering terms, "real time" data usually refers to traffic data that is continuously recorded and available whenever called for.Beal-tiriie data Is used Ili Traffic Management ZD $Tstems such as NYSDOT's INFORM system in Hauppauge as input to the traffic control system managing traffic signals,ramp meters,and variable message signs. Please define"real-time data" for the purpose of this study. 3 STRONG'S FINAL SCOPE OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES Planning Board Response • In the context of the Lead Agency's Final Scope, real-time traffic data refers to traffic counts in the field over a certain timeframe. • For clarification, "roadway user group" means the user groups using the roadways and their respective activities in type, frequency and location, including vehicles, pedestrians, runners, and cyclists. Item from PWGC Conduct of the traffic analysis over four seasons is inappropriate. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) recommends that traffic analyses be conducted based on average yearly traffic data (the average day throughout the year). The ITE, NYSDOT and the Suffolk County Department of Public Works all use "Seasonal Adjustment Factors"to adjust traffic data taken any time during the year to the Average day's traffic.The same seasonal adjustment factors cart be used to take data taken any time during the year to traffic experienced during any particular month. The "average day is typically done throughout Long Island 'with the exception of the five eastern Towns,where peak summer data is typically used.Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours and the Saturday Peak Hours are studied to deten-nine the proposed project's impact on roadway's experiencing peak traffic conditions. According to data from the NYSDOT Permanent Count Station on Route 25 in the Town of Southold peak traffic occurs during August. It must be noted that the traffic analysis is intended to examine the traffic impacts related to the construction of the project and in particular the removal of soil, construction of drainage facilities and the retaining walls.This work is going to be done between September 15th and May 15th so as to not interfere summer activities in the area. Boats stored in the completed project building are too large to trailer and will arrive after Labor Day and be put back into the water in the Spring. The project will have no traffic impact in the Summer,and we see no valid reason to collect data during the Surnmer. Based on the above,it is reconarnended the traffic data be collected in April of 2021 and be adjusted as necessary using seasonal adjustment factors. Planning Board Response • "Traffic analysis is intended to examine impacts related to the construction of the project..." As you are aware, the intent of SEQR is to analyze the whole action. The Planning Board finds it necessary to assess potential adverse impacts from traffic for all phases of construction and operation of the Marina property. To omit the summer months in an assessment would not meet the intent of SEQR regulations. • The proposal to collect traffic data only in April of 2021 and adjust the numbers using the seasonal adjustment factors is a deficient assessment. The Lead Agency requires 4 STRONG'S FINAL SCOPE OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES four seasons of traffic counts to ensure the analysis accurately reflects the traffic situation in Southold Town. • While August may appear to be the peak of traffic based on Rt. 25 counts,what happens on the other roads is not captured by those counts and cannot be relied upon to accurately reflect peak traffic times. • Traffic influences in the Town of Southold are no longer limited to "seasons". It is expected that day torward traffic data will reflect post pandemic increases in traffic due to population increase and higher tourism influx. The NYSDOT Permanent Count Station located on NYS Route 25 does not reflect traffic conditions on Suffolk County Route 48 and therefore it is not accurate to extrapolate traffic conditions from there to other roadways. • As such, seasonal adjustment factors based on that one roadway's data are too generalized to gauge the actual traffic impacts, and traffic counts must be done at key intersections at several times of the year. Item from PWGC The Final Scope also does not specify the type of analysis to be conducted with respect to roadways such as West Mill road and Cox Neck Road. The Final Scope does not define which roads are to be studied;but lists many roads; some of which may never see project traffic. It is typical to set a threshold as an indication of whether the project's traffic may have a potential impact. Typically, the ITE recommends a 5% threshold,indicating that if the project's traffic exceeds 5% of the existing traffic volume, that the project's impact on roadway or intersection should be examined Planning Board Response • In addition to Level of Service counts,the Lead Agency is requiring an analysis to assess the impacts of the proposed action to the safety of all user groups along the route for vehicles to and from the subject site. This includes a Traffic Safety Evaluation and a Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety Evaluation. • Elements of these evaluations include but are not limited to the following: o Sight distances at intersections and around curves in the roadways o Width of pavement • Locations and width of shoulders along the route. • Assessment of the amount of space a pedestrian or cyclist would have on the pavement when two vehicles pass each other. • Assessment of any other existing traffic, pedestrian or cyclist safety infrastructure (e.g. signage or pavement markings). it Assessment of the safety of a pedestrian when two vehicles pass each other while a cyclist or pedestrian is traveling on the shoulder. 5 STRONG'S FINAL SCOPE OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES ■ Assessment of the perceived safety by pedestrians and cyclists given the pavement width and speed limits along the route and expected traffic generated by this project. • Assessment of large trucks' turning radii and their ability to complete safe turning movements at all intersections and safely navigate all corners in the streets along the route, e.g. truck template for route traveled by the largest vehicles expected to make regular trips in and out of the site. o Accident data from the New York State Accident Location Information System for the last three years for intersections and their immediate vicinity. o Driveway locations and operation including the potential for stacking on the public street during busy times. West Mill Road and Cox Neck Road in particular must have these evaluations. Item from PWGC • The Final Scope does not identify the study intersections requiring a Level-of Service analysis. Final Scopes typically define the intersections to be studied. The intersection of Sound Avenue at North Road (CR 48) and Cox Neck Road could be appropriate although it is very unlikely to show any impact, as the additional traffic added by the project will would not typically influence the capacity of the intersection. Planning Board Response Level of Service analyses should correlate to the routing plan for vehicles to and from the subject site. At a minimum the following intersections should be included: o Intersection of West Mill Road and Cox Neck Road o Intersection of Cox Neck Road and Sound Avenue/ County Route 48 Item from PWGC The Final Scope is requiring the DEIS to "provide a comprehensive boat (vessel) traffic study analysis...of the potential moderate to large significant increase of boats to the Mattituck Inlet.Include the existing conditions analysis and potential impacts on: Water Quality — include a discussion on the current and potential adverse moderate to large impacts to surface water quality in the short and long term (duration). Provide the 1VYSDEC shellfish closure areas, types of pollutants occurring in the creek currently, types of chemicals in marina and vessel maintenance needs in the proposed construction and operation of the marina facility and mitigation.Include,but not limited to,dissolved oxygen,clarity,eutrophication, and sustainability for estuarine and marine life, as well as existing sources of stormwater. The potential for sedimentation during construction, and resulting, post-construction, long-term stormwater runoff contributions from the site will be described and quantified." 6 STRONG'S FINAL SCOPE OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES On page 23 of the Final Scope, the "extent and quality of the information existing and needed" indicates "Water quality assessment of current conditions in Mattituck Inlet overall all four seasons (applicant generated)." First, an assessment of the potential impacts to water quality due to boats arriving to the site for storage and leaving the site to return to their base marinas or docks is more appropriately addressed in the Impacts to Water ResourLts (Groundwater and SUL&Lt Waters). We propose-to move this assessment out of the transportation section,which best addresses the impacts on transportation infrastructure. Planning Board Response 0 The Planning Board agrees that the potential impacts to water quality could be addressed in the Water Resources section. Item from PWGC Second, we would like to request clarification of the assessment included. The Final Scope seems to suggest that the applicant is to collect surface water quality data to document the water quality of the Mattituck Inlet although published data through various programs is available, including data provided by the Suffolk County Department of Health - Bureau of Marine Resources for five water quality sampling locations in Mattituck Creek from 2000 to 2020. The DEIS proposes to rely upon the published data from Suffolk County, as sourced below, as well as scientific data and literature that exists for the Mattituck Inlet,including: • Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS), 2021. Surface water quality monitoring data provided by the SCDHS Office of Ecology,Yaphank,N.Y • Existing Cornell Program data at the SYC Facility (Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk Count),—Long Island Shellfish Restoration Project) • NYSDEC water quality data for shellfish protection—to be obtained through FOIA request to Town of Southold Trustees office for data. Suffolk County Subwatershed Wastewater Management Plan,Jul),2020. Long Island Sound Study and the 2015 revised Cmipi-ebensipc Conseivalion and 11(m(goeniciii Plana. As excerpted from the NYSDEC's SEAR Manual, Fourth Edition, 2020, "the use of existing comprehensive plans, prior ElSs, and natural resource inventories expedites scoping and reduces the need to develop extensive ne-,- data for the current EIS." Accordingly,our proposed methodology is consistent with the NYSDEC guidance.Please verify if such baseline data is acceptable. Planning Board Response • Existing water quality baseline data are acceptable to be included within the DEIS so long as they are current (2020 data are acceptable). -------------- ;R ............ ........................ Item from PWGC 7 STRONG'S FINAL SCOPE OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES To assess the potential wwiter quality impacts from the additional boats traveling to and from SYC for winter storage purposes, the DEIS will rely upon the aforementioned published resources for baseline data and the potential impacts of the boats to be stored on site would be evaluated as follows: * Number of existing boats under the control of Strong's Marine that use the Inlet. * Number of projected additional boats that would travel to/from SYC for the purpose of entering and exiting storage (i.e., 88). * Quantify for the expected additional boats: boat type (length and make); types of engines-, and environmental discharge data from the boat and/or engine manufacturers for in water movement and at idle. Total number of boats that utilized Mattituck Creek/Inlet in the 2020 boating season. Impact of the projected additional boats for storage facility. e The comprehensive boat (vessel) traffic study analysis is further requested to "discuss the impact of increased boat traffic due to the expanded activities including devising a methodology to police and monitor the water quality." This request seems to further the general misunderstanding that this project will lead to an increase in continuous boat traffic that will lead to an impact to the quality of the Inlet.The proposed action includes two buildings for the purpose of winter boat storage. The project does not include the use of these buildings year-round, does riot propose year-round boat traffic in an out of the facility, does not propose any additional docks, Of any other facilities to house boats that arrive to the site for storage. As expressed by the applicant throughout the process to date, the purpose of the project is to provide indoor,heated storage for boats. The boats will arrive to the facility at the close of boating season (i.e., October-November) and the same boats will be removed from storage and exit the Inlet in the beginning of the boating season (i.e.,April-May). It is estimated that approximately 88 boats per season would be stored in the new buildings. Accordingly, given an eight-week eframe for entry to storage in the Fall and the same timeframe to remove boats from storage in the Spring, this equates to an average of approximately 11 boats per week or less than two boats per day. Based on the actual proposed use, the request for the applicant to devise methodology to police and monitor water quality suggests a much more intense use. Also, it is important to note that the Mattituck Inlet currently has three marinas/docking facilities (Strong's Yacht Center, Strong's Water Club & Marina and Mattituck Fishing Station), two public boat launches (Mattituck Creek Watei\vay Access Site and North Road Inlet), two fueling stations (at the two Strong's-owned marinas), one pump out boat owned by SYC (as the existing pump out station at the Mattituck Creek Watelvay Access Site has been inoperable for r\-,7o years), and is an authorized area for boats to anchor overnight. Recognizing that Mattituck Creek is a heavihi-traveled waterway in the Town, there is no ID possible xvay to police and monitor water quality solely related to boats that dock or elect to be stored at SYC. NVe propose to address those items that are within the control of SYC. Planning Board Response 0 Thank you for the clarification on the boat storage operations. Please include this discussion within the DEIS. Although the increase in boat traffic in the inlet as a result of this action is a fact. The discussion on potential impact to water quality (turbidity 8 STRONG'S FINAL SCOPE OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES impacts and chemical introduction through bottom paints and other boat maintenance practices) to the water body must be discussed in the Water Resources Section. • The Planning Board remains concerned about the effects of boats not only traveling to and from the storage facility, but also the effect of multiple large boats potentially stacking up in the inlet as they wait to be lifted and stored. Also what effect the new facility might have during the summer. Will there be additional boats traveling to the site for repairs during the summer? • The Planning Board amends the requirement regarding the need to develop a methodology to police and monitor water quality to only those actions within the control of the applicant. Item from PWGC 3. Impacts on Air Quality • The Final Scope is requiring an air quality analysis for boat traffic. The request for an air quality analysis is not reasonable when considering the projected number of boats (88 vessels twice per year) and the purpose of the project(i.e.,indoor, heated storage). Given an eight-week tinieframe for entry to storage in the pall and the same timeframe to remove boats from storage in the Spring,this equates to an average of approximately 11 boats per week or less than two boats per day.Averaged annually, the total 176 trips (88 boat trips in the Spring and 88 boat trips in the Fall) equates to 0.48 boat trips per day. Planning Board Response • Thank you for the information on the projected number of boats. Note that SEQR requires assessment not of just what is proposed, but also existing conditions. The Planning Board will remove the requirement for an air quality analysis for boat traffic but continues to require an assessment on the potential adverse impacts to air quality from construction activities and marina operations. Item from PWGC 4. Construction-Related Impacts • "Mining" is not proposed and the Final Scope should be amended to reflect the proposed project. 9 STRONG'S FINAL SCOPE OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES Repeated throughout the Final Scope is the team "min.ing," which is not proposed as part of this development and the proposed action is not subject to a NY SDEC Mined Land IRcclarnation Permit. "Mining," as defined by the NYSDEC,is defined as "the extraction of overburden and mincralf from the eay z°/); the prqparalion and proa°,J:u'/ll of minerals, includin ,g any arfirilie.j or processes used for-the extraction or removal of mineralf•fironi their oq,,inal location and the Preparation such as u)ashhgo, cleanh�(), crushin 0, slorkpikn�? or other processiqg at the mine location that makes a mineral suilable Jnr commerev'a4 indil-r1rial, or construction use." The rise of the term "a-irning" is suggesting that this .1pplicint is proposing to remove materials for some monetary benefit and should be revised to "excavation"" or "cut". Planning Board Response 0 Please provide official documentation in the DEIS that no action on-site constitutes mining. Item from PWGC 5. Consistency with Community Plans and Studies 0 The Final Scope requires the DEIS to include "an in-depth analysis of the action on the following policy and planning documents, legislation, and implementing rules and regulations...2019 Suffolk County Special Grand jury Report: Illegal Dumping& Mining, Suffolk County." The inclusion of this document in this applicant's Final Scope suggests some illicit activity orInvolvement in "Operation Pay ]Dirt."" As the proposed removal of material from the subject properq,is for the sole purpose of constructing a marine development at-grade with the Niattituck Creek, the inclusion of this source suggests otherwise and should be removed in its entirety from the Final Scope.The DEIS will not address this source and the applicant requests an amended Final Scope be issued, Planning Board Response 0 The reference to the "2019 Suffolk County Special Grand Jury Report: Illegal Dumping and Mining Suffolk County" was an oversight and will be removed from the final scope. ................ .......... .................................................... ..... Item from PWGC 0 The Final Scope is requiring studies and analyses that seem to be in direct conflict with the Town's recently adopted (September 2020) Comprehensive Plan Update. The subject property= has existed for marine use for over 60 Years. In 2017, the Strong's 1\1,a.r1ne family-acquired the former Ntatntuck Inlet Marina and Shipy-aid (now Strong's Yacht 10 STRONG'S FINAL SCOPE OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES CenteKand applicant) as well as Matt-a-Mar (now the Strong's Water Club &Marina), and only one other marina (Mattituck Fishing Station) remain on the Mattituck Inlet. In the Southold 2020 Comprehensive Plan,adopted September 2020,one of the economic development goals stated is "(.' :Ll i- 13rcsln—, ' -11:;-q, aLW-Qx1! JC11 , ,111d [�)Jturc kh�lritirrlc Us&s y;,_,,iyy_Ini ortant BUSil'ICSS SMOr WithiH time The ability for 1, mantras antras to expand services that cater to customer needs Was specifically recngnizv.d. As excerpted from the. stated Objective. 5.4 for Fconomic Development, "Large marinas are facing pressures to expand their services to include swimming pools,restaurants, boat rentals, storage space, and other services that cater to their customer's needs. In order to accommodate this demand and continue to promote Southold's traditional maritime heritage,the Town should consider zoning amendments for marinas of appropriate size and location to better match the needs of their clients."(emphasis added)-\M:ii1e this objective seeks zoning amendments to allow for such uses,the subject application does not require any such relief under the Marine-II zoning. Further, the importance of Mattituck Inlet was specifically addressed in Objective 5.7 to "Enhance the connection between Mattituck Inlet and Hie lixinter cent(T," As excerpted, .between "Mattituck Inlet is an important economic,environmental,and recreational resource in the hamlet of Mattituck.Located just north of the ha et center,Mattituck Inlet runs two miles into the North Fork from Long Island Sound,and is the only harbor on the±50 mile stretch between Port Jefferson and Orient Point. As such, Mattituck serves as an important maritime location with the Inlet being -it popular destination for boaters. The hamlet's accessibility to water, in addition to a designated anchorage, -a Town park and boat ramp, marinas, and maritime uses located close to the hamlet center make it a key economic driver." It is recognized that viewshed and maintaining the corru-nunity character is of importance (Objective 5.5: llrcscrve the scenic vlc\� alclqq,, tile TgAyn's a tKJn1c thrcpui -P:li continued —!M; L, Wclude cc, I� bnd and :,,i r,,tatg�of and,pnblic and the Final Scope has identified the potential visual impacts as an impact issue to be evaluated. I lowever,the request for year-long studies of traffic, roadway user groups,surface water quality and groundwater quality given the scope of the project for storage space only, seems to be in direct contradiction to the stated economic development goals in the Town's comprehensive plan Planning Board Response 0 The discussion about requiring studies that are in direct conflict with the Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) is noted and should be included within the DEIS. However, none of the goals and objectives mentioned preempt the regulatory authority of SEQR assessment of a Type I action. -------------------------- -—----------------------------------- Item from PWGC 6. DEIS Outline is Redundant or Too General 11 STRONG'S FINAL SCOPE OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES The Final Scope includes sections for Impacts on Ecological Resources,and Impacts on Plants and Animals.These sections are proposed to be combined as Ecological Resources includes plants and animals. • The Final Scope includes a section for Impacts on the Environment,requesting the DEIS to "discuss the operations of the site and the overall impact on the environment." Pimli-ant to Section 617.2(1) of the implementing regulations of SEQRA, the definition of"environment"is as follows: (1) Eni)ironmenl means The p)ysical conclifions lbw' i ill be qf 1, , �feaed lay a propoied action, includinp land, air,2vale8' minerair,flora,l'af'una, noise, rejources qfegricullur(14 arebeolo'?iCal, hisionc or aestbefic signficance, exislin,,(,; pallern; qf Poj)ulalion conCenlralion, disinbution or, ubborbood cbaracter, _�rmvth, exisfin,�j colnmuni�,� or neig, and buman beallh, Accordingly, the Impacts to the Environment is accomplished through the preparation of the DEIS and the various impact sections and is not appropriately handled in its own section as it would require summarizing the content of the DEIS.We propose to address the requested elements (Items 2, 3 and 4) in their respective sections — ecological resources and water resources. • The Impacts on Transportation includes a comprehensive boat (vessel) traffic study that includes water quality assessment that is more appropriate for inclusion in the Water Resources section.We propose to address the potential impacts on surface water quality in the Water Resources section. • In the "Proposed Organization and Overall Content of the DEIS",it is noted that: Section 4.1 duplicates Section 3.8 Section 4.2 duplicates Section 3.1 • Our proposed outline is as follows: Planning Board Response • The Planning Board agrees with the amended outline for the DEIS Executive Summary 1.0 Description of the Proposed Action 1.1 Project Location and Site Conditions 1.2 Project Design and Layout 1.3 Project Objectives and Benefits 1.4 Construction and Operations 1.5 Required Permits and Approvals 2.0 Natural Environmental Resources 2.1 Impact on Soils and Topogripla� 12 STRONG'S FINAL SCOPE OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES 2.1.1 Existing Conditions 2.1.2 Potential Impacts 2.1.3 Proposed Mitigation 2.2 Impact on Water Resources (Groundwater and Surface Water) 2.2.1 Existing Conditions 2.2.2 Potential Impacts 2.2.3 Proposed Mitigation 2.3 Impact on Ecological Resources 2.3.1 Existing Conditions 2.3.2 Potential Impacts 2.3.3 Proposed Mitigation 2.4 Impact on Flooding 2.4.1 Existing Conditions 2.4.2 Potential Impacts 2.4.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.0 an Environmental Resources 3.1 Impact on Human Health 3.1.1 Existing Conditions 3.1.2 Potential Impacts 3.1.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.2 Impact on Transportation 3.2.1 Existing Conditions 3.2.2 Potential Impacts 3.2.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.3 Impact on Aesthetic Resources 3.3.1 Existing Conditions 3.3.2 Potential Impacts 3.3.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.4. Impact on Community Character 3.4.1 Existing Conditions 3.4.2 Potential Impacts 3.4.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.5 Impact on Open Space and Recreation 3.5.1 Existing Conditions 3.5.2 Potential Impacts 3.5.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.6 Impact frorn Noise 13 STRONG'S FINAL SCOPE OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES 3..6.1 Existing Conditions 3.6.2 Potential Inipacts 3.6.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.7 Impact on it Quality 35.1 Existing Conditions 3.7.2 Potential Impacts 3.7.3 Proposed Mitigation 18 Social andEconornic Impacts 3.8.1 :114'xisting Conditions 3.8.2 Potential Impacts 3.8.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.9 Construction.-Related Impacts 3.9.1 Description ofProposed Construction Schedule and.Activides 3.9.2 Potential Impacts 3.9.3 Proposed Mitigation 3..147 Consistency with Community Plans and Studies 3.11 1.1 Existing Conditions 3.10.2 Potential Impacts 3.10.3 Proposed mitigation 111 Impact on Archeological and Cultural Resources 111.1 Existirig Conditions 3.11.2 Potential Impacts 111.3 Proposed Mitigation 4.0 Other Required Sections 4 1 Use and Conservation of.Energ), 42 Adverse Impacts That Cannot Be Avoided (Short-Terriiand Long.-'rerm) 4.3 Irretrievable and Irreversible Commitment of Resources 4.4 Growth-Inducing Impacts 1.4 STRONG'S FINAL SCOPE OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES 5.0 Alternatives and Potential Impacts 5.1 Alternative 1-No-Action 5.2 Alternative 2-Alternative Material Removal Plan Using Barges 5.3 Alternative 3- Construct Project on Another Parcel 5.4 Alternative 4—Construct Proposed Storage Building(s)'Without Excavation 5.5 Alternative 5—Construct Smaller building(s)with Less Excavation 5.6 Alternative 6—Reconfigure or Reconstruct Existing Buildings On-site for Larger Boat Storage. 6.0 References 15 OFFICE LOCATION: , MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex w P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 � � u gr Southold, NY 11971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold,NY � °i, Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD April 6, 2021 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: SEQR AMENDED Final Scope - Strong's Storage Buildings 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: The following resolution was adopted at a meeting of the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, April 5, 2021: WHEREAS, this site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the Mil and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings; and WHEREAS, on February 10, 2020 the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) 6 NYCRR, Part 617, determined that the proposed action is a Type I action pursuant to 617.4(b)(10): Any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space, including any site on the Register of National Natural Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994 [see 617.17]. The physical alteration of 3.74 acres exceeds 25% of the 10 acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6); and WHEREAS, on August 10. 2020 the Southold Town Planning Board declared itself as Lead Agency and issued a Positive Declaration for the action; and WHEREAS, on September 11, 2020 the applicant submitted a Draft Scope prepared by P.W. Grosser Consulting Inc.; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Regulations of the State of New York Title 6 Department of Environmental Conservation Chapter VI General Regulations Part 617 State Environmental Quality Review the Planning Board held a public hearing on the Draft Scope on November 2, 2020; and Stron 's Storage Buildings l:' a g e � 2riles 6, 2021 WHEREAS, on November 16, 2020 the public comments received to date were discussed at a Planning Board work session; the public comment period was held open until December 7, 2020 and additional written comments were received; and WHEREAS, The Planning Board, as Lead Agency, included in this Final Scope all rationale, reasoning, comments and elements necessary to thoroughly analyze all identified potential adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project; and WHEREAS, certain clarifications and corrections were agreed to by the Planning Board at the applicant's request; therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board adopts the Amended Final Scope for Strong's Yacht Center Proposed Boat Storage Buildings dated April 5, 2021. The Amended Final Scope is available on the Town's Website at hftp://24.38.28.228:2040/weblink/O/doc/1047267/Pagel.aspx If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this resolution, please contact the Planning Board Office. Respectfully, James H. Rich III Vice Chairman Encl. Scott Russell, Southold Town Supervisor Yvette Aguilar, Riverhead Town Supervisor Southold Town Clerk for Southold Town Board Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Engineer Southold Town Police Department Southold Town Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator Southold Town Highway Department Southold Tree Committee Southold Economic Advisory Council Mattituck Fire District Suffolk County Department of Public Works Suffolk County Department of Health Services Suffolk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Commission Suffolk County Legislator Albert Krupski Sheri Aicher, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Michelle Gibbons, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation NYS Natural Heritage Program New York State Department of Transportation PSEG Long Island/ National Grid Environmental Notice Bulletin Town Website Any Interested Party File Amended Final Scope DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT STRONG'S YACHT CENTER—PROPOSED BOAT STORAGE BUILDINGS 3430 MII,1,ROAD MATTITUCK,TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NY SCTM NO.: DISTRICT 1000, SECTION 106,BLOCK 6,LOTS 10& 13.4 April 5, 2021 Introduction This document is the Final Scope for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for a site plan application to the Town of Southold Planning Board that includes the development of two boat storage buildings of 52,500 square feet (sq. ft.) and 49,000 sq. ft., along with associated improvements including water supply, sewage disposal, site grading and drainage, landscaping and lighting, to support the existing operations of the Strong's Yacht Center. The proposed development would be situated on a 32.96±-acre parcel located on the west side of Mattituck Creek,which is zoned Marine I1 (M-II) and Residential Low-Density A (R-80). All development is proposed to occur on the portion of the site zoned M-II. The subject property is designated Suffolk County Tax Map (SCTM)Nos. 1000-106-6-10 and 13.4. The proposed action is subject to permits and approvals from the Town of Southold Planning Board (site plan), Town of Southold Trustees (Wetlands Permit), Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS) (Water Supply and Sanitary Disposal), and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) (State Pollution Discharge Elimination System [SPDES] Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activity). The proposed application has been reviewed by the NYSDEC and has received an Article 25 (Tidal Wetlands)Permit for select regulated project components and a Non-Jurisdictional determination for all work landward of the 10-foot contour, by permit dated January 31, 2020 (Permit ID 1-4738-01843/0028). The permit, however, was granted prior to the Positive Declaration under SEQRA. The proposed application has been reviewed by Suffolk County Water Authority (SCWA) and the availability of water has been determined through an extension of the water main. The Suffolk County Planning Commission (SCPC) has General Municipal Law planning review authority over the proposed action. Utility service connections are also required from PSEG Long Island and National Grid. The proposed application was filed with the Town Building Department on August 27, 2018. A Notice of Disapproval requiring site plan review before the Town Planning Board was issued on September 18, 2018. Subsequent to the filing of the application and the Notice of Disapproval, and at the request of the Town Planning staff, the Applicant attended a work session with the Town Planning Board on October 15, 2018. The Applicant continued to provide additional project information in 2018 and 2019. d Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Matlituck, Town of Southold,NY On February 10,2020,the Planning Board classified the action as Type I and commenced coordinated review with the involved agencies. After review of Part 1 of the Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) and materials transmitted thereafter, the Planning Board caused to be prepared Part 2 and Part 3/Detemlination of Significance and identified one or more significant adverse impacts that may result from the proposed project. On August 10, 2020, a Positive Declaration was issued by the Planning Board, as lead agency. To ensure that the DEIS will address all significant issues, in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) regulations set forth at 6 NYCRR §617.8, formal scoping is being undertaken. This Final Scope provides a description of the proposed action and the proposed content for the DEIS, based upon the FEAF Part 2 and FEAF Part 3/Determination of Significance, as prepared by the Town Planning Board. This Final Scope has been prepared in accordance with 6 NYCRR §617.8(e) and sets forth the following: • Brief description of the proposed action; • Potentially significant adverse impacts; • Extent and quality of information needed to adequately address potentially significant adverse impacts; • Initial identification of mitigation measures; and • Reasonable alternatives to be considered. The proposed organization and overall content of the DEIS is also included herein. Brief Descrl )tirrn of the llt .)g ed Proje t The proposed action includes the construction of two boat storage buildings of 52,500 SQ. FT. and 49,000 SQ. FT. to support the operations of the Strong's Yacht Center,with associated improvements including gravel-based driveways and parking areas, water supply, sewage disposal, site grading and drainage, landscaping and lighting. Also proposed is the removal of a pool and patio. The Strong's Yacht Center is situated on a 32.96±-acre parcel located south of Old Mill Road and on the west side of Mattituck Creek on lands zoned M-II (approximately 16.46 acres) and R-80 (approximately 16.5 acres). Prior to its purchase by Strong's in April 2017, the subject site was known as the Mattituck Inlet Marina and Shipyard which existed as a frill-service marina, maintenance, repair and storage operation for over 60 years. As illustrated on the proposed site development plans prepared by Young & Young, the subject property is currently comprised of 40 boat slips with associated ramps and fueling and developed with eight buildings to support the operation of the marina, as well as the sale, maintenance, dockage and storage of boats. The eight existing buildings include the following: • Building l: One-story residence (1,610 SQ. FT.) • Building 2: Two-story office (2,702 SQ. FT.) 2 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—proposes'Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold, NY • Building 3: One-story storage (17,320 SQ. FT.) • Building 4: One-story storage (169 SQ. FT.) • Building 5: One-story storage (341 SQ. FT.) • Building 6. One-story storage (10,766 SQ. FT.) • Building 7: One-story storage (15,076 SQ. FT.) • Building 8: One-story storage (22,425 SQ. FT.) The two proposed buildings would become Building 9 (49,000 SQ. FT.) and Building 10 (52,500 SQ. FT.). Upon implementation of the proposed action, the total gross floor area of all buildings would increase from 69,245 SQ. FT. to 171,929 SQ. FT. The proposed buildings would be situated to the west of Buildings 7 and 8, which would allow direct access and transport of yachts from the existing lift station to each of the proposed buildings. The purpose of the proposed action is to provide indoor and heated winter storage for yachts that utilize local waters in the peak season but are required to be transported to warmer climates in the winter months due to a lack of adequate storage in the Town of Southold and across the entire east end of Long Island. Based upon an average yacht size of 60 feet, it is estimated that approximately 88 yachts could be stored within the proposed buildings during the winter months; all of which would arrive to the site via Mattituck Inlet (as confirmed by surveys and soundings for the entire Inlet). It is also expected that maintenance and repair activities for larger vessels would occur on the subject property, having direct access from the Mattituck Inlet via the existing lift, further supporting a demand of the existing local boating market. There are approximately 13 full-time staff at the Strong's Yacht Center and, upon implementation of the proposed action, the Applicant expects to create an additional 15 career positions. The subject parcel is adjacent to Federal and State-regulated Tidal Wetlands (Mattituck Creek), with a portion of the site located within a 100-year floodplain (Zone AE: Elevation 8). The proposed buildings would be constructed in a portion of the site located within a 500-year floodplain (Zone X) at Elevation 10.0. The proposed action has been reviewed and approved by the NYSDEC by permit dated January 31, 2020,however this permit was granted prior to the proposed action being classified under SEQRA as a Type I action and receiving a positive declaration from the Lead Agency. Additional review from the NYSDEC tidal wetlands permitting agency may be required. Due to significant grade changes on the site, the proposed project will require approximately 134,000 cubic yards of cut for the placement of the proposed buildings at Elevation 10.0. The proposed excavation plan includes two routes for truck movements and would occur over a projected duration of approximately seven (7) months based upon loads of 30 cubic yards per truck and six-day work weeks. An additional six months is projected to complete the proposed project, inclusive of the retaining wall, infrastructure and two buildings (i.e., total construction duration is 13 months). The proposed plan includes the installation of a concrete and evergreen retaining wall along the west side of Buildings 9 and 10 and along the north side of Building 10, which serves to both stabilize the slope as well as enhance the visual screening of the subject property. The total proposed disturbance is 3.9t acres, with approximately 493 trees of six-inch diameter or greater proposed for removal. J Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold, NY As part of the proposed action, one new on-site wastewater treatment system (I/A OWTS) would be installed and an existing on-site sanitary system would be replaced with an I/A OWTS. The two systems would be designed to serve the Strong's Yacht Center operations, inclusive of all buildings, the office and marina. Also proposed is an extension of the water main from Naugles Drive by 765 feet to allow for the site to be served by the public supply system. Upon implementation of the proposed action, the existing on-site supply well would be available for non-potable use. Regarding stormwater management, the proposed action includes the installation of on-site leaching pools, French drains and the use of pervious gravel to accommodate stormwater from the proposed development. The proposed stormwater management plan is designed to accommodate a two-inch rain event, in accordance with Town of Southold regulations. It is noted that in addition to the full-service marina operation, the Strong's Yacht Center currently hosts six commercial fishing boats, and also supports the Marine Program of the Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County, by hosting eight (8) FLUPSYs (Floating Upweller Systems), which provide protected nurseries for hard clam seed to assist with the NYS Shellfish Restoration Initiative. None of these activities would be affected by the proposed action. In order to develop the site as proposed, the following approvals are required: Agency _ Permit/Approval Town of Southold Planning Board Site Plan Review and Approval w....... m....... ... ,.m. Town of Southold Trustees Wetlands Permit Suffolk County Department of Health Services Wastewater Disposal and Water Supply Suffolk Count Plana..._ �n_�... . ....... ...... m__. _.... . Planning _ ,view and Approval County m� Commission Re.. .�.......... ..___ ..... _ New York State Department of Environmental State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Conservation (SPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharge during Construction Activities Tidal Wetlands Permit and Non-Jurisdictional Determination (Permit ID 1-4738-01843/0028 dated _ Januar 31,__0 0 .... y � � Suffolk County Water Allthol'it Extension of Water Main and New w Connection 1.PSEG Lon- Island/National _ s. — c final Grid Electric and Natural Ga.. service connection Town o......_..._... _... ... ..........._ Review temporary road apron, pnssihle curh cat f Southold Highway Superintendent permit required. NYS Office of Parks, Recreation. Review for archeological significance and Historic Preservation The section of the DEIS entitled Description of the Proposed .4clion will provide a thorough 1 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold, NY description of the existing conditions on the 32.6±-acre subject property and the proposed action. The Description of the Proposed Action section of the DEIS will specifically include information relating to the following: • Project location, setting, land use and zoning (with appropriate maps and aerial photographs). • Summary of the surrounding land uses and zoning. • Physical characteristics of the site, including property acreage, site cover types(e.g.,pervious and impervious areas), and existing structures. • Project layout and design, including information about the proposed development, zoning compliance, changes in site cover types, site access and circulation, and parking. • Infrastructure requirements, including water supply, sanitary waste disposal, drainage, and utilities. • Solid waste generation and the proposed plans for on-site minimization and recycling. • Project objectives and benefits to the community, including a summary of the project's consistency with the proposed land uses set forth in the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP). • Projected construction schedule. • Required permits and approvals. Potentially SignilicLnt Adverse lnj raets The DEIS will be prepared in accordance with this Final Scope promulgated by the lead agency and in accordance with 6 NYCRR §617.9(b). Based upon review of the site, architectural plans and elevations, site plans and the FEAF Part 1 prepared by the Applicant, the Planning Board prepared a FEAF-Parts 2 and 3/Determination of Significance,for the proposed application which indicates that one or more significant adverse impacts may result from the proposed project. The Planning Board issued a Positive Declaration on August 10, 2020, specifically identifying as potential moderate to large impacts to Land, Surface Waters, Groundwater, Flooding, Air, Plants and Animals, Aesthetic Resources, Noise, and Community Character. The DEIS will fully address the identified potential significant adverse impacts, as well as other relevant issues. Where the impact analyses conducted in the RETS indicate the potential for significant adverse impacts, the DEIS will set forth measures to mitigate those impacts. 5 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mallituck Town of Southold, NY A description of each section of the DEIS is set forth below, followed by a proposed outline for the DEIS. Natural Impact on Soils and Topography This section of the DEIS will identify the existing soil type(s) on the subject property, based upon the Suffolk County Soil Survey and any available test hole data. The grading program will also be discussed, based upon the required plans and data (e.g., estimates of volumes of soil excavated, cut/filled, removed from site and maximum depths of cut/fill). The topographic conditions will be evaluated, and a topographic map will be provided. The existing and proposed changes to slopes will be included, and stabilization measures will be identified in detail. Construction-related impacts will also be discussed, including truck trips for soil removal and associated truck routes. Mitigation measures for soil limitations/constraints, erosion, sedimentation, and dust generation, to the extent necessary, will be included. See the section on Construction-related impacts for more details. The DEIS will also: 1. Discuss the types and tested physical characteristics of the soils on site that will be subject to excavation, future load bearing, and installation of sanitary systems and stormwater conveyance systems. The location, size, and thickness of any clay or buried peat formations will be described and mapped. 2. Discuss potential adverse impacts to sea grass and on shellfish from potential sedimentation. 3. Discuss possible mitigation for these potential adverse impacts. Impact on Water Resources (Groundwater and Surface Waters) This section of the DEIS will describe the groundwater conditions, including depth to groundwater and groundwater quality beneath the subject property, based upon relevant documentation. The Groundwater Management Zone IV (as classified under Article 6 of the SCSC) within which the subject property is located, and site drainage characteristics will be described. Groundwater flow direction based upon Suffolk County Groundwater Contour Maps and field study will be identified and an assessment of the potential impacts to downgradient resources and nearby wells will be included. The location of private and public wells will also be determined and a study to determine any impacts this action might have on the quantity and quality of potable water for those wells will be provided. This section will also include calculations of projected sanitary flow, discussion of the proposed method of sanitary disposal (i.e., the on-site wastewater treatment systems [I/A OWTS]), and consistency with Article 6 of the SCSC. The SCDHS Notice ot'Incomplete Application issued for the proposed action will also be included and consultations with the SCDHS would be undertaken as part of the DEIS and described herein. The proposed installation of four, 2,000-gallon liquid propane aboveground tanks and consistency with Article 12 of the SCSC would be evaluated. ZD Groundwater quantity (i.e., water usage) will also be evaluated, including the extension of the public water supply main to the subject property and the availability of water supply based upon 6 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattiluck, Town of'Southold, NY consultations with the SCWA. The post-development benefits of the water supply main would also be identified. The impacts to groundwater quantity available to neighboring wells will also be evaluated based on field studies over four seasons. The impacts to surface waters would be evaluated, including the appropriateness of the proposed use given the site's location and existing marina operations. Drainage and post-development stormwater management measures, and erosion control measures, will also be discussed and evaluated in accordance with the relevant standards. The surrounding wetlands will be described and the findings of the NYSDEC will be included. An assessment of the Trustees standards for the issuance of a Wetlands Permit will also be included. Finally, the effects of climate change as it relates to sea level rise and flooding will be addressed. Mitigation measures which may reduce potential water quality or quantity impacts will also be identified, as necessary. The DEIS will also: 1. Analyze and discuss in detail the impacts on private wells in the surrounding area including technical details on groundwater depth, quality, quantity, freshwater lens, saltwater interface, amount of flow in GPM, direction of travel, and travel times. Include zones of influence from each wellhead. 2. Analyze and discuss the effect of excavation on groundwater, as well as any expected impacts to neighboring wells. Include an analysis on the potential for salt-water intrusion into neighboring well as a result of the excavation's effect on groundwater in the area. 3. Discuss onsite and nearby tidal wetlands and the NYSDEC's input, ecological communities in those wetlands and their ecosystem services and values, including contributions to surface water quality. 4. Water quality — include a discussion on the current and potential adverse moderate to large impacts to surface water quality in the short and long term (duration). Provide the NYSDEC shellfish closure areas,types of pollutants occurring in the creek currently, types of chemicals in marina and vessel maintenance needs in the proposed construction and operation of the marina facility and mitigation. Include, but not limited to, dissolved oxygen, clarity, eutrophication, and sustainability for estuarine and marine life, as well as existing sources of stormwater. The potential for sedimentation during construction, and resulting, post- construction, long-term stormwater runoff contributions from the site will be described and quantified. 5. Discuss the potential impacts to water quality from an increase in boat traffic from large boats as a result of this action, including increased turbidity and chemical introduction through bottom paints and other boat maintenance practices. 6. Discuss the narrowness of the creek in this area and tidal flow restrictions in an acceptable model. Include a discussion on added restrictions to the tidal flow volume and velocity that could result from the increase in the size and number of boats moored or docked in the creek as a result of this action, and any additional future docks, and potential effects on water quality from reduced tidal flushing that may result. 7. Discuss possible mitigation for these potential adverse impacts. 7 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Allattituck, To-wn of'Southold, NY 8. Clarifications • Will the proposed action adversely impact any wellhead zone of influence, or the quantity or quality of water in the aquifer that supplies nearby residential wells? • An analysis of the groundwater on site and its contributions to the aquifer serving nearby wells under existing conditions, and the potential adverse effects, if any, to the aquifer serving nearby wells following excavation. • Conduct the analysis over the course of a year to account for seasonal fluctuation in rainfall and aquifer recharge. • Study and describe the nature of the aquifer that supplies the nearby wells, and the relationship of the subject property as a contributing source to that aquifer; or show that this subject property is not a contributing source and that the proposed excavation will not affect the quantity of water available to nearby wells. • Direction of groundwater travel and travel times: What direction is groundwater traveling on site? Would the excavation disrupt or interrupt groundwater travel or timeframes to reach surface waters? • Depth of freshwater lens and elevation of the saltwater interface: Will the proposed excavation alter the saltwater interface in a way that may cause saltwater intrusion into the aquifer or nearby wellhead zones of influence? Will the proposed excavation cause upconing and saltwater intrusion by reducing the amount of fresh water entering the aquifer used by the nearby wells. At what elevations does potable freshwater begin and end (at the expected saltwater interface) on site pre and post excavation? Impact on Ecologi"d Restmr-ccs Environmental studies will be detailed and undertaken over a multi-season period (all four seasons) to properly assess potential impacts. This section of the DEIS would address the existing ecological resources on the subject property. As part of the DEIS, a qualified biologist/ecologist will inspect the site to determine the vegetation, wildlife, and general habitat character. An inventory of flora and fauna, as observed, will be prepared and included in this section of the DEIS, and an assessment of the species that could be expected to utilize the subject site will be performed. Protected native plants; plant and animal species listed as endangered, threatened, and special concern (or with other protective status), will be identified, including the noted piping plover, southern sprite, and Eastern box turtle, and suitability of habitat as roosting or summary foraging habitat for protected New York State and Federally-protected bat species. An assessment of potential impacts to the contiguous Town of Southold woodland identified as 25.29 acres to the south (SCTM#1000-106-6-20.3) and the adjacent tidal wetlands of Mattituck Creek will also be performed. Consultations with the New York Natural Heritage Program will be undertaken for site information. This section of the DEIS will include the quantitative impacts to habitats as well as a qualitative assessment of the impacts to plants and animal species. Mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts will be identified. The DEIS will also: 8 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattitzzck, Town ofSozahold, NY Impact on Plants and Animals 1. Discuss potential adverse impacts to sea grass and on shellfish. 2. Provide a complete description of the ecological communities represented in the forest and their ecological relationships to those ofthe adjoining'Town-owned preserve. Forests provide 1nlportanL ecosystem services within their bounds and for the surrounding landscape and waterways; these ecosystem services will be described. For example, the forest ecosystem of the subject property, contiguous with forest protected by the Town, is the last relatively large block of native forest supplying clean groundwater to Mattituck Inlet that has not been converted to farmland or interrupted by residential and commercial development, with their attendant sanitary system and stormwater impacts. 3. Discuss the cumulative effect of the elimination of the forest on the subject property on the total native forest cover in the Town of Southold.Native forest cover in the Town is relatively rare in comparison with agricultural land and residential/commercial development;remaining patches are isolated from one another, existing as "islands" in the overall landscape. What patches do remain are of varying sizes, spatial relationships with wetlands and waterways, and habitat value. 4. Include a discussion on the potential adverse impacts of net forest loss on wildlife species that have large home ranges, including birds and bats, and that seek deep forest cover and travel between forest patches. 5. Provide a complete analysis and discussion on the proposed destruction of the forest on the slopes,the forest interior exposed and new forest edge, proximity to the boundary of a 25.29- acre, Town-owned, preserve. Include the following: direct harm to the preserve by reducing the overall size of the forest and by removing its buffer area trees that had developed in a high-wind environment; exposure of trees that grew in an environment protected from high wind to northeast, with attendant potential for: destabilization of root systems and tree throw; drying of soils; increased light exposure from sunlight and night-time lighting at the storage facility and marina (effects on plants, as well as insects and wildlife, requiring shade and moisture); introduction of invasive species to disturbed soils; higher soil temperatures and effects on seedling growth and forest regeneration; reduction in forest litter because of convective drying and wind; result in reduction of nutrients available for plants and increase in the effects of drought conditions in summer and the depth of freeze events in the winter; increase in the ratio of forest edge to forest interior that results from decreasing the overall size of the forest, including impacts of physical damage and biological invasions; reduction of uninterrupted forest cover on successful nesting of warblers, thrushes, vireos and other songbirds; reduction or loss of populations of wildlife species requiring the seclusion offered by forest interiors and those requiring nocturnal conditions without artificial light intrusion; degradation of habitat because of noise reaching further into the forest, both during construction and permanently, from traffic and operations at the marina and storage site. 6. Evaluate and discuss the need to remove 493 trees and carbon sequestration and if planting of trees elsewhere can be accomplished to offset tree loss. 9 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of'Soarthold,NY 7. Assess the action to Mattituck Inlet and the Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat (SCFWH) documentation. 8. Tidal marsh—include an assessment on the impacts from current and increase boat traffic on low and high marsh areas within the creek. Discuss the impact from boat wakes, emissions and chemicals (bottom paints) on the ecosystem. 9. Discuss possible mitigation for these potential adverse impacts. Impact to the Environment The DEIS will also: 1. Discuss the operations of the site and the overall impact on the environment. 2. Describe the short- and long-term impacts to the ecosystem,biodiversity habitats and the rarity and significance of Mattituck Creek as an estuary, both from construction activities as well as from operations. Discuss the impacts to the wetlands on east side of inlet and wildlife (egrets, osprey and waterfowl). 3. The subject property's relationship to surrounding land uses and location within surface-and groundwater contributing areas to Mattituck Creek will be described and mapped. 4. Discuss possible mitigation for these potential adverse impacts. Impact on Flooding 1. Climate Change and Resiliency: The DEIS will describe the potential adverse impact on the parcel resulting from climate change and sea level rive. The DESI will: • Discuss SEQRA's implementing regulations and measures to avoid or reduce impacts associated with the effects of climate change such as sea level rise and flooding. See NYCRR:617.9(b)(5)(iii)(i)]. Include the potential impacts associated with coastal flooding, storm events, and rising sea levels. The future physical climate risk due to storm surge (including sea level rise) and flooding should be considered in project design. The analysis will specifically analyze the effect of rising groundwater on upland resources. The analysis will also consider the effects of intensifying precipitation-- including more seasonal precipitation and higher rates and more total precipitation during storms-- both during construction and operation. The action will be assessed-to the following: 2014 C1imAID update (Horton et al. 2014) and the New York State Community Risk and Resiliency Act (CRRA) SLR projections. Using Natural Measures to Reduce the Risk of Flooding and Erosion Guidance (NYDEC). Community Risk and Resiliency Act Guidance for Consideration of Flood Risk in Smart Growth Public Infrastructure Assessment (NYDEC). 10 Final Scope for-Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattiluck, Town of'Soulhold, NY a USGS Groundwater-Flow Modeling - Long Island,New York. 2. The relationship of final landscape elevations to the potential for nor'easter and other weather events to inundate the property during and post construction will be discussed in the DEIS to fully afford proper review of adverse water quality impacts. 3. The increase in frequency of potential inundation events related to predicted climate change effects will also be discussed. 4. Discuss possible mitigation for these potential adverse impacts. Human Resources Impact on Human Health 1. Provide an analysis on the chemicals stored and disposed on site and the potential adverse impacts from the increase in volume of chemicals used and stored on site during the proposed action. 2. Provide NYSDEC regulations related to the storage of chemicals on site. 3. Assess potential impacts to neighboring wells (see section on Water Resources for more details). 4. Discuss possible mitigation for these potential adverse impacts. Impact on Transportation The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact by significantly increasing the number of vehicles (including construction and service vehicles) on local and regional roadways for long durations. Capacity of the roadways may be adversely impacted. The proposed action will add substantial traffic to the area and due to current road conditions, traffic, and intersection conditions, the roads may not have the ability to handle it. The level of service (LOS) at intersections may be adversely impacted. The design and condition of the roads leading to the site (route) is a concern. Many areas exhibit stress cracks on the pavement. The design of the roads and the ability to increase traffic on these roads,including construction traffic and trucks, is a significant concern. Curves,declines and inclines exist on the route to the parcel. Receptors along the route to the parcel may be adversely impacted for long durations. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impacts to the public and user groups from the increase of vehicular traffic on local and regional roads affecting the public's use and enjoyment of the roads while conducting activities (driving, walking, biking). The number of truck trips proposed could result in large, adverse impacts to West Mill Road, Cox Neck Road, Suffolk County Route 48, New York State Route 25, Sound Avenue, Northville Turnpike, Suffolk County Route 58 and other local and regional roads. This section of the DEIS will: Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold, NY 1. Provide a comprehensive vehicle traffic study in the DEIS conducted by an traffic engineer of all local and regional roads (include vehicle trips on Cox Neck Lane and West Mill Road)which includes real time data gathered over four seasons for all phases (including mobilization and demobilization of resources) of the proposed action: The study shall include: Real time traffic counts on Cox Neck Lane, West Mill Road, Suffolk County Route 48 and Sound Avenue, and best available data for NYS Route 25. Include the road capacity, existing number of vehicles (trucks) using the roadways, types of vehicles and anticipated vehicle trips and times, Level of Service at intersections, accident data (including data from the Southold Police Department) and the geometry of the roadways along the proposed truck routes. The traffic study shall include vehicle trip data sets from the operations of the marina facility and potential impacts from trucks hauling large boats on local roads. Discuss traffic mitigation including possible limitations on the trucks per day and limit the number of hours per day, and include how this would affect the duration of the construction phase. Discuss what temporary traffic signals will be considered. What traffic control measures will be implemented? Discuss what private resources that will be required to control traffic. The traffic study would include, but not be limited to; • Traffic counts over four seasons. • Site and area visits for observations of existing traffic movements at various times of the day and under different conditions. • Collection of data and evaluations as described above. • Review of available traffic data from the NYSDOT and the Suffolk County Department of Public Works. • Consultations with the Town of Southold Highway Department regarding local roadway conditions. • Evaluation of accident data from the NYSDOT and Southold Town Police Department to determine if there are any existing accident problems and whether construction traffic may affect the existing accident patterns. • Review the estimates of traffic anticipated to be generated during the construction of the proposed development. Determine the make-up of the added traffic and hourly new traffic volumes to be placed on the existing road system. • Provide and discuss a vehicle routing plan for all phases of the project (site preparation, construction and operations after construction). Identify the roads used, speed limits, existing road condition with photographic representation, all intersections, all school zones, anticipated traffic levels and traffic chokepoints along a proposed route. Determine the dimensional characteristics of the road and the existing traffic control provided. Examine 12 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mallituck, Town of Southold, NY whether the additional construction related traffic can safely be accommodated on the existing roadways Discuss the suitability of the road capacity. The traffic flow along Cox Neck Lane and West Mill Road and how vehicles will navigate the curves on the roadways. • Examine the proposed construction access road for the site from the standpoint of location, design and traffic safety. • Discuss the potential damage and destruction of local and regional roads by trucks and all other vehicle types involved in the staging, clearing, excavation, site preparation, construction and post construction and operations of the facility. Include the aprons at the access points. Provide all specifications of the loaded and unloaded trucks involved in the excavation and construction. • Discuss specific provisions for a performance guarantee to assure appropriate reclamation/restoration of any areas (including local roadways) that may be required, or in the event that the project does not come to completion after a specifically defined period of time. • Potential mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts will be identified. 2. Evaluate and discuss the duration of potential adverse impacts from all vehicle trip types included in each phase and post construction, the wear and tear on roadways caused by vehicle types, quality of life impacts to the community and receptors along the routes including adjacent Towns where vehicles will be travelling. 3. Discuss the potential increase in trailered vessel traffic and if trucks should be limited to certain hours, low speeds and the number of trucks per day. 4. Include a roadway user group safety study and analysis in the DEIS during all four seasons on the use of the roadways (route) by user groups, including potential adverse impacts on pedestrians walking (with Strollers),jogging, biking and children waiting for the school bus that will could be adversely impacted by vehicles including loaded trucks. Include an analysis of the proposed truck route's road width and the capacity to accommodate two vehicles passing at the same time and location as a pedestrian or cyclist, and whether the roads are currently safe for such an interaction, including the perceived safety from the perspective of the pedestrian or cyclist. 5. Discuss the impacts of vibration from loaded trucks on structures along the vehicle route(s). 6. Discuss the effects of excavation and vibration from machinery, heavy equipment and trucks on structures surrounding the site. 7. Provide a detailed analysis on the potential, long-term adverse impacts to adjacent roadways (surfaces, condition), surrounding properties, neighborhood(s), and region through the clearing. excavation, storing and transporting of cleared vegetation, excavated materials and construction 13 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold NY of the site over a multi-month period in multiple phases. 8. Include a discussion about whether using barges to transport materials is a viable alternative for mitigating impacts from transporting materials associated with the site preparation and construction of the project. 9. Discuss how streets will be repaired. The DEIS will also address specific provisions for performance bonding to assure appropriate reclamation/restoration of any areas (including local roadways) that may be required after excavation, or in the event that the project does not come to completion after a specifically defined period of time. 10. Provide a comprehensive boat (vessel) traffic study analysis in the DEIS of the potential moderate to large significant increase of boats to the Mattituck Inlet. Include the existing conditions analysis and potential adverse impacts on: a. Boat Characteristics - Include the number of additional new boats added to Mattituck Inlet, average size of these boats, average draft and maximum draft? b. Navigation - Provide the depth of inlet from Long Island Sound to the marina. Navigation suitability of Mattituck Inlet, navigation impediments, narrowness of the creek in the area to the north west of the marina. Discuss if the project will include dredging in the future and any potential impacts from dredging. c. Discuss the washing,fueling of, and operation of boats and potential threats from these practices of introducing pollutants into the waterway. The impact of potential fuel spills and cleaning materials spills. d. Provide the potential growth inducing aspects resulting for the action of a significant moderate to large increase of large boats using the Mattituck Inlet/Creek. Include the management of boats on site, staging areas of arriving boats, sufficiency of current dock, plans for additional docks, dredging, any new dock configurations and facility configuration to accommodate vessels, sufficiency of dimensions of travel lifts to haul boats, and other anticipated impacts on the waterway to user groups. User groups include boats of all sizes, manual and engine powered, kayaks, paddleboarders, swimmers and commercial fisherman. e. Include hours of operation, particularly of heavy machinery. During the hauling and launchinc, season the hours of operation of the travel lift. Other boat moving machinery and cleaning apparatus. Identify additional equipment needed to haul-out, put-in, transport, service and store boats. f. Provide an assessment of all boat support services in the area including the availability of functioning pump out boats and stations. How does the marina handle sanitary and solid waste in boats? What advisories does or will the marina provide to boaters on pollutants (coliform bacteria) capable of entering the waterway. How will the disposal of solid and sanitary waste be prevented in the waterway? g. Discuss possible mitigation for these potential adverse impacts. 11. Clarifications" 14 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposes'Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of'Southold, NY • Level of Service analyses should correlate to the routing plan for vehicles to and from the subject site. At a minimum the following intersections should be included: o Intersection of West Mill Road and Cox Neck Road. o Intersection of Cox Neck Road and Sound Avenue/ County Route 48. • The Lead Agency is requiring an analysis to assess the impacts of the proposed action to the safety of all user groups along the route for vehicles to and from the subject site. This includes a Traffic Safety Evaluation and a Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety Evaluation. • Elements of these evaluations include but are not limited to the following: o Sight distances at intersections and around curves in the roadways. o Width of pavement. ■ Locations and width of shoulders along the route. • Assessment of the amount of space a pedestrian or cyclist would have on the pavement when two vehicles pass each other. • Assessment of any other existing traffic, pedestrian or cyclist safety infrastructure (e.g. signage or pavement markings). • Assessment of the safety of a pedestrian when two vehicles pass each other while a cyclist or pedestrian is traveling on the shoulder. • Assessment of the perceived safety by pedestrians and cyclists given the pavement width and speed limits along the route and expected traffic generated by this project. • Assessment of large trucks' turning radii and their ability to complete safe turning movements at all intersections and safely navigate all corners in the streets along the route, e.g. truck template for route traveled by the largest vehicles expected to make regular trips in and out of the site. o Accident data from the New York State Accident Location Information System for the last three years for intersections and their immediate vicinity. o Driveway locations and operation including the potential for stacking on the public street during busy times. o West Mill Road and Cox Neck Road in particular must have these evaluations. Impact on Aesthetic Resources If constructed the subject proposal may significantly alter the shoreline and community character of Mattituck Inlet environs and this potential impact must be frilly evaluated. The proposed action is of scale and dimension that will be visible from publicly accessible scenic resources (Mattituck Creek) by operators of vessels using the waterway during seasonal use resulting in a potential moderate 15 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold NY impact to scenic enjoyment of the waterway. Note that Mattituck Creek is a Federal waterway. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact to the aesthetic resource (Mattituck Creek) through the diminishment of public enjoyment by users and members of the community under different circumstances and activities in a location that also has an important role in recreation and tourism economy. Both are important and changes to scenic and aesthetic resources may have adverse impacts on both the quality of life of residents and broader economic impacts. This section of the DEIS will describe the existing viewshed and general consistency or compatibility with existing elements of the community. As part of the assessment of impacts on visual resources, 3D computer-generated imagery would be provided to depict post-development viewshed changes from Mattituck Creek and the adjacent roadway. The proposed buildings and cement and evergreen retaining wall, as well as the site and building lighting, would be described. The impacts to the community character as it relates to changes to the existing natural landscape with the proposed development would be evaluated. The impacts to community character as it relates to the viewshed from waterway (Mattituck Creek) will be evaluated and the project's consistency with the proposed use of land as set forth in approved LWRP, will be discussed. Measures to mitigate impacts will be identified, as appropriate. The DEIS will: 1. Provide a detailed visual impact analysis for the action, including (dimensional relief and color of site structures existing and proposed) identification of the project's zone of visual influence (ZVI), identification of sensitive receptors (scenic views including views from Mattituck Creeks, outdoor recreation facilities, historic properties, etc.) within that zone, and viewshed analyses to determine if and how sensitive receptors would be affected. Computer- generated imagery for viewshed changes should not be limited to views from Mattituck Creek and the adjacent roadway. 2. Include detailed visual renderings of the proposed action, and alternative actions, to reflect how the development would be viewed from the waters of Mattituck Inlet, as well as any surrounding residential development. 3. Include a visual rendering of a typical yacht to be stored in the building as it would appear traveling south down the creek towards the marina from the perspective of a person in a kayak on the creek headed north. 4. Possible mitigation for adverse impacts. Impact to Community Character The proposed action could result in an irreversible, adverse impacts to existing community character (physical alteration on site over a multi-year period, large building size and noise) and from the intensity of the proposed operations near residences. Adverse impacts could occur to the community from the construction timeframe in increased intensity and long duration. The DEIS will discuss and analyze: 1. Flow the proposed action conforms to the town's community character priority (as stated in the Comprehensive Plan Update), which is to "protect its scenic resources. 2. The historic and rural character of this section of Mattituck Inlet defined by in part by the presence of the steeply sloped, thickly vegetated forest on and adjoining the site. 3. The potential permanent and irreversible adverse impacts on neighborhood character related 16 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town ofSozahold, NY to destruction of the forest on the slopes of the subject property. 4. The potential adverse impacts of introducing big-box storage facilities on the neighborhood character surrounding the site, the areas facing the site from across Mattituck Inlet, and the character of the general area traversed by boaters using the inlet should be presented and given thorough analysis. 5. The aesthetic impacts of removing native forest and hillside upon the bucolic setting of the site. 6. The potential adverse impacts from Transportation on community character (see above). Impact on Open Space and Recreation The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact and significantly interfere with nesting/breeding, foraging or overwintering habitat by removing 3.94 acres of vegetation, including the removal of important habitat features such as dead trees used for nesting and cover. This habitat area is connected to a 25.29 acre parcel with similar habitat that is protected by the Town of Southold (SCTM# 106-6-20.3) to the south. This woodland assemblage comprises the largest undeveloped acreage in the Mattituck Creek watershed. Other areas of woodland to the south and to the west on the R-80 zoned portion of the parcel may also be affected. The DEIS will discuss and analyze: 1. Discuss the potential adverse impacts to the Town owned preserved property, the deforestation and impacts to the user groups of the property including hikers. 2. Analyze the adverse impacts related to noise, changes in view-sheds, the effect on wildlife, and alteration of a sense of place from this project on the public's enjoyment of the Town owned preserved property during all phases of the action. 3. Discuss the impacts of the increased large vessel traffic in the inlet, and its effects on small local vessels, kayaks, and paddle boarders attempting to navigate the narrow creek. 4. Potential mitigation for adverse impacts. Impact from Noise The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact from excessive noise levels during multiple phases over long duration. Noise associated with the operation of heavy equipment and trucks includes but is not limited to; engine noise, noise from moving and backing up heavy equipment (reversal warning sound) and the operation, accelerating and deceleration and Jake braking of trucks on site and on roadways. Similarly, operation of chain-saws and wood chippers for long durations may generate large, adverse noise impacts to receptors in the neighborhood. The DEIS will HICILide, discuss and analyze the following: I. A comprehensive noise study. Include M the assessment existing ambient noise levels, noise produced by all phases of the project, the sources of the noise, and including hours, duration, decibel level both at the source and at the receptor sites (e.g., the outdoor spaces of neighbors' properties such as decks or back yards), and impact on tranquility for residents within hearing range, as well as wildlife. Discuss the duration of each type of noise expected. Include an evaluation of cumulative noise generation where multiple machines/activities 17 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town qf'Sozahold, NY might be running simultaneously. Include protocols for monitoring of the noise level during construction and during operations and include how noise will be attenuated or mitigated. 2. Analyze and discuss the potential significant adverse impacts from noise on the quality of life and to public health resulting from all phases of site work and construction over long durations over a multi-month period. 3. Include the potential adverse impacts from noise on receptors and wildlife generated by the operation of machinery, heavy equipment and trucks both on-site and off-site as they travel through neighborhoods and the region including: ➢ Noise from the operation of machines, heavy equipment and truck engines moving and backing up(reversal warning sound),accelerating and deceleration. ➢ Noise from Jake braking of trucks on roadways. ➢ Noise from the operation of chain-saws and wood chippers for long periods and potential large, adverse impacts to receptors in the neighborhood and wildlife. ➢ Noise generated by each alternative. 4. Clarify whether or not blasting will be conducted, 5. Discuss the adverse impacts on the quality of life from the noise generated from the action and what mitigation is proposed to lessen adverse impacts. Impact on Air Quality The proposal involves the operation of heavy machinery and trucks on and off site over a long duration of time that could result in moderate adverse impacts to local air quality. This section of the document will address mobile source impacts (i.e., those related to construction activity)and post-development impacts to biomass as a result of the proposed land clearing activities. An air quality assessment will be performed and appended to the DEIS and summarized in the body of the text. The air quality assessment would include the following: ➢ Mobile Sources - The latest version of the Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES2014b), developed by the USEPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality,will be used to estimate emissions associated with off-road and on-road mobile engines. If available, emission factors will be obtained from the NYSDEC or NYSDOT MOVES specific data for the County of Suffolk, otherwise national average emission factors in MOVES for Suffolk County using default distribution assumptions will be used. Mitigation measures, as required, will also be identified. N'lb, 1'.__._oLi le F'q-ij-i'r'ac"itit - Activity levels (i.e. hours of operation) of each piece of equipment will be estimated based on the square footage of the construction area and the associated activity type. The activity levels represent the total number of hours each piece of equipment is anticipated to be used for the duration of the project. Operating hours will be based on the projects need for the equipment rather than assuming continuous i oJ 18 Final,Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Maltituck, Town qf'Southold, NY operation. It is assumed that all off-road equipment will operate on diesel fuel. Off-road mobile equipment emission rates for criteria pollutants will be computed and compared with USEPA National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Emission rates for hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) will be computed and compared to New York State Department of Environmental Conservation DAR-1 Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Ambient Air Contaminants Under Part 212. ➢ On-Roa,d Mobile Vehicles - Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data for each on-road construction vehicle and employee trips will be estimated from roundtrip distances and the number of vehicles and employees based on the activity specific construction schedule. It is assumed that all on-road equipment will use either gasoline or diesel fuel. Typical vehicle types will be passenger car, passenger truck, single unit short-haul, and commercial short-haul. The emission rates for criteria pollutants on-road construction vehicles will be computed and compared to USEPA National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Emission rates for hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) will be computed and compared to New York State Department of Environmental Conservation DAR-1 Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Ambient Air Contaminants Under Part 212. ➢ Fui(ive Dust - Fugitive dust emissions (particulate matter or PM) from site preparation, land clearing, equipment movement on unpaved areas, material handling will be calculated utilizing USEPA published emission factors (USEPA, Air Emission Factors and Quantification, AP-42: Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors). Erosion control measures and water programs to minimize fugitive dust and particulate emissions at construction sites will be considered in the analysis. Estimated emission rates for particulate matter (PM) will be computed and compared to USEPA National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for PM2.5 and PM 10. ➢ Carbon Seq'i,teste'i"J'iwo — The proposal also involves the removal 3.94 acres of soil and vegetation including 493+ hardwood trees contributing to carbon sequestering. Carbon sequestration is the process by which atmospheric carbon dioxide is taken up by trees, grasses, and other plants through photosynthesis and stored as carbon in biomass (trunks, branches, foliage, and roots) and soils. The oak is the genus with the most carbon- absorbing capabilities, there are other notable deciduous trees that sequester carbon as well. Carbon sequestering estimates will be determined utilizing published sources, including but not limited to: USEPA, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Greenhouse Gas Mitigation in U.S. Forestry and Agriculture carbon sequestering factors; U.S.Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Method for Calculating Carbon Sequestration by Trees in Urban and Suburban Settings; and/or 2006 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Sources will be dependent on the most up to date and appropriate specific to the types of vegetation/soil conditions and the classification of the area to be cleared. Soil types will be identified from soil boring logs and published data through the USDA Suffolk County Soil Survey. 19 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattiluck, Town of Southold; NY Construction-Related Impacts This section will address the construction-related impacts related to vegetation and material removal, site preparation, and construction activities. The proposed excavation plan will be presented, and the impacts associated with noise, traffic and land disturbance activities (e.g., dust) will be assessed. Measures to mitigate impacts will be identified, as appropriate. The DEIS will: 1. Identify specific materials e.g., excavated materials, vegetation, concrete and building materials. 2. Discuss the potential adverse impacts from water line and natural gas extensions on public roads. 3. Discuss why the project is necessary as proposed. 4. Discuss why this parcel is suitable for this project. This project will require large amount of forest, slope and soil removal. 5. Discuss why the construction of the buildings requires the need to excavate 134,921CY of soil and why the buildings cannot be constructed without excavation. 6. Clarify if the cubic yard calculation of soil to be excavated from the site includes a "swell" factor. 7. Discuss why the length of construction is necessary (13 months). 8. Discuss how the R-80 zoned portion of the parcel will be affected by the proposed action, 9. Provide a complete evaluation of impacts associated with all proposed mining, erosion, materials transport (including roadway impacts and impacts on nearby residential development), materials storage, materials sales, materials processing, vehicle operations, and habitat destruction. The proposed action requires an extensive amount of excavation,Which Will ultimately result in significant off-site transport of sands and gravels extracted from the site. Please provide official documentation in the DEIS that no action on-site constitutes mining. 10. Assess the noise from all stages of site preparation and construction as described in more detail in the Noise section above. 11. Describe in detail the process by which the temporary road will be constructed and the impacts that will result including but not limited to noise, vibration, vegetation and soil removal, and tree removal. 12. Discuss the potential of slope failure and effect of excavation and ground vibration from the operation of machinery, heavy equipment and trucks on existing neighboring structures. 20 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Matliluck, Town of Southold, NY 13. Discuss the potential of destabilization of adjacent properties and impacts from vibration and excavation on adjacent properties, the impact of timing in between each phase, the threat of catastrophic soil loss and erosion if there is a pause in the project schedule due to weather or other event, and the future maintenance, type of construction, inspection schedules and monitoring for defects of the retaining wall. The potential catastrophic failure of the retaining wall, in whole or in part and effect on adjacent properties. 14. Address growth inducing actions and if there will be a future request to develop the property and/or increase the size of the marina/docks as a result of this proposed project. And if the marina and docks will be expanded as a result of this proposed project, discuss whether or not that would constitute the segmentation of the SEQRA review if that expansion is not included in this review. 15. Discuss the potential need to increase the boat storage capacity of the current site and for a future travel lift, boat staging, in water docking and the impact on adjacent wetlands. 16. Discuss if the excavated material can be removed by barge through Mattituck Inlet for off- site disposal. 17. Discuss how the unexpected site conditions,weather,pandemic, and work flow and schedule changes will be addressed to not impact the community? 18. Provide a complete evaluation of impacts associated with all proposed mining, erosion, materials transport (including roadway impacts and impacts on nearby residential development), materials storage, materials sales, materials processing, vehicle operations, and habitat destruction. 19. Discuss alternative plans for disposal of any excavated material that cannot be sold, and provide an evaluation of any disposal sites, other than commercially-operated sites specifically designed to receive fill. Identify the off-site disposal location. 20. Include a plan for specifically targeted and carefully undertaken soil borings to inform an excavation plan that is designed to prevent catastrophic mass soil movement and soil slumping. The DEIS will not rely solely on published soil surveys or soil borings performed by others for a project involving excavation of I34,000CY of a forested hill's soil, especially one adjoining a waterway. Without specifically targeted and carefully undertaken soil borings to inform an excavation plan, the potential exists for a catastrophic mass soil movement event during, or subsequent to, disturbance of the steep slopes by heavy equipment. The proposed excavation could cause sudden faulting and structural disturbances associated with the slope and soil slumping to the immediately adjoining and steeply sloped preserve, as well as cause sedimentation in the waterway. Sedimentation can have a devastating effect on the estuarine life in the inlet because of rapid burial and destruction of benthic organisms, such as shellfish or Crustacea. 21. Discuss the effect of precipitation on the re-established steep slope with regard to potential exacerbation of soil movement. It also will show the new retaining structure can adequately 21 Final Scope.for•Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Allattiluck, ToWn of'Southold NY support the final slope and resulting hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. 22. Mitigation of potential adverse impacts. Consistency with Community Plans and Studies In 2020, the Town adopted The Southold Comprehensive Plan, the proposed project will be assessed to the goals and objectives of this plan and others. The DEIS will: 1. Include a section focused on the consistency between the proposed action (and alternative actions), and the relevant goals, objectives, and standards of existing planning, land use and policy documents relevant to the subject site and its surroundings. 2. An in-depth analysis of the action on the following policy and planning documents, legislation, and implementing rules and regulations: o Southold Town Comprehensive Plan al Natural Resources and Environment Community Character Land Use and Zoning (Marine Zoning Update) Natural Hazards Economic Development Transportation and Infrastructure o Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan & Policies o State and local wetlands protection laws o The Mattituck Watershed Management Plan o "NYSDEC Environmental Resource Mapper" -with respect to wildlife evaluation o NYSDOS Coastal Significant Fish and Wildlife Habitat designations (Mattituck Inlet) o Articles 6,7 and 12 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code Impacts on Archeological and Cultural Resources The parcel is located within an area with historic use and buildings. The DEIS will discuss the following potential, adverse impacts to archeological and cultural resources from the action. The DEIS will: 1. Discuss the project's potential impacts to historic and archeological resources. a. Part 11 of the Full EAF for the project indicates that the project is not adjacent to a historic or archeological site. However, NYSDEC guidance on how to prepare the EAF notes that in preparing responses in this section of the EAF one must ask "Does the project site I with, a known archaeological site, I contain, or is it contiguous w even though it may not be 72 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact,51atement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Maltituck, Town of'Soulhold, NY included on the NY SHPO inventory?" As no archeological survey of the project area has been made it is not possible to answer this question in the negative. b. Although NYS OPRHP's Cultural Resources Information System (CRIS) does not identify the project area as archeologically sensitive, this should not be construed as meaning that the area does not have the potential to contain potentially significant archeological resources. CRIS relies on the prior identification of archeological sites in proximity to a given area to evaluate sensitivity. CRIS's archeologically sensitive GIS layer specifically states: "Note that locations outside of the buffer areas may also be archaeologically sensitive." In the case of the project area the failure to identify it as "sensitive" is a reflection of the total lack of prior archeological surveys in the immediate vicinity of the project. The project area's location on high ground adjacent to Mattituck Creek (believed to be part of a principal portage route used by Native Americans to travel from the North to South shores of Long Island), suggests that evidence of Native American occupation could be present. c. There are three unevaluated structures listed in CRIS within approximately 1000 feet of the project area. Include an evaluation as to if and how these structures may be visually or otherwise (noise, vibration during construction) affected by the project and, if potentially affected, if they satisfy the eligibility criteria for the State Register of Historic Places. Other Yee uired Segeti ions Social and Economic Impacts 1. Describe the public benefit to the community. 2. Economy a. Provide a full economic analysis/study of the positive and negative impacts on the community and economy from the action, include the short- and long-term impacts and the viability of the commercial use. The number of jobs created (full-time and part time). Include the current levels of employment by Strong's at the site and employment that would be generated by job description, salary benefit levels, etc. Assess the impact of additional employees. b. Discuss the claimed benefit to the local economy. It should include data about stored boat ownership and where the boat is docked during the season. 3. Threat to Public Safety: Fire The DEIS will discuss the threat of fire and explosion on site from all ignitable sources. Include the evaluation of potential fire hazards, and if the Mattituck Fire Department is adequately equipped to respond to a fire at the site. This is of special concern given the size of the structures and the combustibles within the stored boats. Use and Conservation of Energy - This section of the DEIS will describe the proposed energy sources, expected levels of consumption and means to reduce consumption. Consultations with the service providers (PSEG LI and National Grid) will be undertaken and the findings and recommendations of these providers will be included. 23 Final Scope fore Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mallituck, Town ql"Southold; NY Unavoidable Adverse Effects - This section enumerates those short and long-term impacts that cannot be mitigated. Irretrievable and Irreversible Commitment of Resources — This section includes a brief discussion of natural resources consumed as a result of project implementation. The discussion should include the irreversible impacts from excavation of sand, deforestation, on the Town owned preserve. Include a discussion on the irreversible adverse short and long-term impacts on community character resulting from the potential degradation of the quality of life. Growth-Inducing Aspects - The potential growth-inducing aspects of the project will be presented in this section. (See above) Etent and QLtaliljref Information Existing and Neg4gd To conduct the analyses of potential adverse impacts, available information will be collected and reviewed, and empirical information will be developed. While it is not possible to determine all information sources to be used, the following represent sources/research that have been preliminarily identified as necessary to perform the required analyses in the DEIS. Impact on Soils and Topography • USDA, Suffolk County Soil Survey • USGS Topographic Map • Proposed Site Development Plans • Proposed Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan • Soil Boring Logs • Cut/Fill Estimates • Soil borings performed on site to inform the excavation Impact on Water Resources • Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) • Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan & Policies • Water quality assessment of current conditions in Mattituck Inlet over all four seasons • Water/Tidal flow modelling/study in front of the Manna. • Study the groundwater supply to determine any impacts to neighboring, wells on quality and quantity of groundwater as a result of this action (applicant generated) • USGS Water Table map and monitoring well data, as available • Suffolk County Groundwater Contour Maps • Mattituck Inlet Surveys with Soundings • Relevant plans, standards and regulations, including the SCDHS Suffolk County Sanitary Code, New, York Slandards and SpeciJicationsfbr Erosion and Sediment Control, New York 24 Final Scope, r Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong°s Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of'Southold, NY State Stormivater Management Design Manual, and the Suffolk County Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan. • NYSDEC Freshwater and Tidal Wetland maps • NYSDEC Letter of Non-Jurisdiction • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service—National Wetlands Inventory • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps • Chapter 236 (Stormwater Management) of the Town Code Impact on Ecological Resources • Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) • Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan & Policies • Correspondence with the New York Natural Heritage Program • Field investigations • Published material regarding the potential presence of protected native plants, plant and animal species listed as endangered, threatened, and/or special concern (or with other protective status) and significant habitat areas on or in the vicinity of the project site • Ecological Communities Map • Ecological Inventory of Site for Observed Plants and ecological communities and observed/expected wildlife • Tree Removal Plan updated with Tree Species, as identified during field visits • State and local wetlands protection laws • The Mattituck Watershed Management Plan • NYSDEC Environmental Resource Mapper" - with respect to wildlife evaluation • NYSDOS Coastal Significant Fish and Wildlife Habitat designations (Mattituck Inlet) • Articles 6,7 and 12 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code Impact on Transportation • Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) • Four season Traffic Study analyzing real-time data (applicant generated) and including the construction phase as well as the operations of the completed site. • Four season roadway user group study (applicant generate • Regional and local vehicle routing study and plan (applicant generated) • Four season comprehensive boat (vessel) traffic study (applicant generated) • Most-recent three-year accident data, as published by NYSDOT and accident data from the Southold Police Department if more recent or more detailed than that available from the NYSDOT • The Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition • The Institute of Transportation Engineers, Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition • Highway Capacity Manual, latest edition • Consultations and/or review of available information from the Town of Southold Highway Department, NYSDOT and SCDPW 25 Final Scope for•Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattittick, Town of'Southold, NY Impact on Aesthetic Resources and Community Character • Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) • Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan & Policies • Visual Impact Study that includes computer-generated imagery for viewshed changes from Mattituck Creek and adjacent roadways (Applicant generate • Architectural plans and elevations • Site and area inspections • Chapter 172 (Lighting, Outdoor) of the Town Code Impact on Air Quality • Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) • Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan & Policies • Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES2014b) • Published emission factors from NYSDOT,NYSDEC or USEPA • Construction schedule, with projected truck and equipment types • USEPA, Air Emission Factors and Quantification, AP-42: Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors • Carbon sequestering estimates to be based on published sources, including but not limited to USEPA, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Greenhouse Gas Mitigation in U.S. Forestry and Agriculture carbon sequestering factors; U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Method for Calculating Carbon Sequestration by Trees in Urban and Suburban Settings; and/or 2006 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. • Tree Survey and Tree Identification, as provided by Land Use Ecological Services, Inc. • Code of Federal Regulations — Title 40, Part 50, National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). • New York State Department of Environmental Conservation: DAR-1 Guidance (August 2016). Impact from Noise • Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) • Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan & Policies • Comprehensive Noise Study (Applicant Generated) • Chapter 180 Noise of the Southold Town Code Impact on Archeological and Cultural Resources • Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) • Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan & Policies • Cultural Resource Survey including NYS CRIS system findings. • Consultation with the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation office. 26 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mallituck, Town of'Southold, NY Social and Economic Impacts • Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) • Comprehensive Social and Economic Impact Study on the Community and Town (Applicant Generated) Construction-Related Impacts • Proposed Site Development Plans • Proposed Excavation Plan, including soil borings to evaluate and inform the plan • Proposed Construction Schedule • Traffic Study, User Group Study and Routing Plan (see above) • Chapter 180 (Noise) of the Town Code Initial Identification of Mitigation N'legasures As the DEIS analyses have not yet been conducted, no specific mitigation measures have yet been developed. Nonetheless, where the impact analyses conducted in the DEIS indicate the potential for significant adverse impacts, the DEIS will set forth measures to mitigate those impacts within the topic sections, as presented herein. Reasonable Alternatives to Be Considered Pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617, the DEIS must contain a description and evaluation of reasonable alternatives to the proposed action that are feasible, considering the objectives and capabilities of the project sponsor. This DEIS will analyze the impacts of the following alternatives and compare (quantitatively and qualitatively) these impacts to those associated with implementation of the proposed action, based upon the specific issues outlined above: 1. No-Action (site remains as it currently exists). 2. Alternative Material Removal Plan — This alternative is intended to mitigate the impacts associated with the removal of material via trucks over local roadways and will include the barging of cleared vegetation including trees, stumps and excavated materials. 3. Constructing the project on another site. 4. tl Constructing g the proposed storage buildings without the need for excavation. 5. Constructing smaller building(s) with less excavation. 6. The reconfiguration or reconstruction of existing buildings on-site for larger boat storage. l"I"ODOsed Or,x1111iZatiOfl and Overall Content of the DEIS The DEIS will conform with the basic content requirements as contained in 6 NYCRR Part 617.9 (b)(3). The proposed outline of the DEIS is as follows: 27 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattitzick, Town ofSowhold, NY Executive Summary 1.0 Description of the Proposed Action 1.1 Project Location and Site Conditions 1.2 Project Design and Layout 13 Project Objectives and Benefits 1.4 Construction and Operations 1.5 Required Permits and Approvals 2.0 Natural Environmental Resources 2.1 Impact on Soils and Topography 2.1.1 Existing Conditions 2.1.2 Potential Impacts 2.1.3 Proposed Mitigation 2.2 Impact on Water Resources (Groundwater and Surface)'Vater) 2.2.1 Existing Conditions 2.2.2 Potential Impacts 2.2.3 Proposed Mitigation 2.3 Impact on Ecological Resources 2.3.1 Existing Conditions 2.3.2 Potential Impacts 2.3.3 Proposed Mitigation 2.4 Impact on Flooding 2.4.1 Existing Conditions 2.4.2 Potential Impacts 2.4.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.0 Human Environmental Resources 3.1 Impact on Human Health 3.1.1 Existing Conditions 3.1.2 Potential Impacts 3.1.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.2 Impact on Transportation 3.2.1 Existing Conditions 3.2.2 Potential Impacts 3.2.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.3 Impact on Aesthetic Resources 3.3.1 Existing Conditions 3.3.2 Potential Impacts 3.3.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.4. Impact on Community Character 3.4.1 Existing Conditions 3.4.2 Potential Impacts 3.4.3 Proposed Mitigation 15 Impact on Open Space and Recreation 3.5.1 Existing Conditions 3.5.2 Potential Impacts 28 Final Scope for Final En.vironniental linpacl Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Bid1dings Malliffick Town of'Sowhold, NY 3.5.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.6 Impact from Noise 3.6.1 Existing Conditions 3.6.2 Potential Impacts 3.6.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.7 Impact on Air Quality 3.7.1 Existing Conditions 3.7.2 Potential Impacts 3.7.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.8 Social and Economic Impacts 3.8.1 Existing Conditions 3.8.2 Potential Impacts 3.8.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.9 Construction-Related Impacts 3.9.1 Description of Proposed Construction Schedule and Activities 3.9.2 Potential Impacts 3.9.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.10 Consistency with Community Plans and Studies 3.10.1 Existing Conditions 3.10.2 Potential Impacts 3.10.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.11 Impact on Archeological and Cultural Resources 3.11.1 Existing Conditions 3.11.2 Potential Impacts 3.11.3 Proposed Mitigation 4.0 Other Required Sections 4.1 Use and Consenation of Energy 4.2 Adverse Impacts That Cannot Be Avoided (Short-Term and Long-Term) 43 Irretrievable and Irreversible Commitment of Resources 4.4 Growth-Inducing Impacts 5.0 Alternatives and Potential Impacts 5.1 Alternative I- No-Action 5.2 Alternati�,e 2- Removal Plan Using Barges 53 Alternati%,e 3 - Construct Project on i-knother Parcel. 5.4 AfterriqtWe 4 Construct Proposed Storage Building(s) Withot.it Excavation 5.5 z1.1 tern.,atWe 5 Construct Smaller buit6 ig(s) With Less Excavation. 5.6 'UternatiNe 6 Reconfigure or Reconstruct Eosting Buildings On-site fo.r Larger Boat Stonagc. 6.0 References 29 OFFICE LOCATION: V MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex m P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 �� 'ry� Southold, NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) , Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.s outholdt ownny.gov co N PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD February 9, 2021 Rea Adoption of Final Scope for the Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Boatyard Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 To Whom It May Concern: Please find the Final Scope for Strong's Boatyard Buildings adopted by the Planning Board on February 8, 2021. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call this office at 631-765-1938. Rtft�Ii , J es H. Rich 111 "ice-Chairman Encl. cc. Scott Russell, Southold Town Supervisor Yvette Aguilar, Riverhead Town Supervisor Southold Town Clerk for Southold Town Board Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Engineer Southold Town Police Department Southold Town Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator Southold Town Highway Department Southold Tree Committee Southold Economic Advisory Council Mattituck Fire District Suffolk County Department of Public Works Suffolk County Department of Health Services Suffolk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Commission Suffolk County Legislator Albert Krupski Sheri Aicher, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Michelle Gibbons, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation NYS Natural Heritage Program New York State Department of Transportation PSEG Long Island/National Grid Environmental Notice Bulletin Town Website Any Interested Party File OFFICE LOCATION: MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex so P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) " 5 Telephone: 631 765-1938 Southold, NY www.southoldtowrniy.gov VUNTI w� PLANI\TTNG BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD February 9, 2021 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 . Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: SEQR Final Scope - Strong's Storage Buildings 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: The following resolution was adopted at a meeting of the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, February 8, 2021:. WHEREAS, this site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq, ft.„ located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings; and WHEREAS, on February 10, 2020. . the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) 6 NYCRR, Part 617, determined that the proposed action is a Type I action pursuant to 617.4(b)(10): Any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space, including ,any site on the Register of National Natural Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994. [see 617.17]. The physical alteration of 3.74 acres exceeds 25% of the 10 acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6)„ and WHEREAS, on August 10. 2020 the Southold Town Planning Board declared itself as Lead Agency and issued a Positive Declaration for the action; and WHEREAS, on September 11, 2020 the applicant submitted a Draft Scope prepared by P.W. Grosser Consulting Inc.; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Regulations of the State of New York Title 6 Department of Environmental Conservation Chapter VI General Regulations Part 617 State Environmental Quality Review the Planning Board held a public hearing on the Draft Scope on November 2, 2020; and Stron 's Stora a Buildin s Page 12 Februa[y0 2021 WHEREAS, on November 16, 2020 the public comments received to date were discussed at a Planning Board work session; the public comment period was held open until December 7, 2020 and additional written comments were received; and WHEREAS, The Planning Board as lead agency included in this Final Scope all rationale, reasoning, comments and elements necessary to thoroughly analyze all identified potential adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project; therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board adopts the Final Scope for Strong's Yacht Center Proposed Boat Storage Buildings dated February 8, 2021. The Final Scope is available on the Town's Website at hft ://24. 8.28,.228:20400/weblink]O/doc/104,7267/Pa, el.as If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this resolution, please contact the Planning Board Office. Res ctfully„ ,.la es H. Rich IIII Vice Chairman Encl. Scott Russell, Southold Town Supervisor Yvette Aguilar, Riverhead Town Supervisor Southold Town Clerk for Southold Town Board Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Engineer Southold Town Police Department Southold Town Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator Southold Town Highway Department Southold Tree Committee Southold Economic Advisory Council Mattituck Fire District Suffolk County Department of Public Works Suffolk County Department of Health Services Suffolk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Commission Suffolk County Legislator Albert Krupski Sheri Aicher, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Michelle Gibbons, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation NYS Natural Heritage Program New York State Department of Transportation PSEG Long Island/ National Grid Environmental Notice Bulletin Town Website Any Interested Party File Final Scope DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT STRONG'S YACHT CENTER—PROPOSED BOAT STORAGE BUILDINGS 3430 MILL ROAD MATTITUCK,TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NY SCTM No.:DISTRICT 1000, SECTION 106,BLOCK 6,LOTS 10& 13.4 bruary 8,2021 ... .. tntroduc:ticar�. This document is the Final Scope for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for a site plan application to the Town of Southold Planning Board that includes the development of two boat storage buildings of 52,500 square feet (sq. ft.) and 49,000 sq. ft., along with associated ian1, cots '..support flee existing operations of the Stro�aag's Yacht �iarg �ane�l ela�aia��ttge, laandscapang ta�a��el rovcr� incitading water saapply, sewage disposal, site gr,rel 1tglw[illg, to supe g I e-v. 'enter. The proposed deve;�lopnlel:at would be situated on a 32.96±-acre parcel located on the wcst side of Mattituck Creek,which is zolled Marine II (M-II) and Residential Low-Density A (R-80). All development is proposed to occur on the portion of the site zoned M-II. The subject property is designated Suffolk County Tax Map (SCTM)Nos. 1000-106-6-10 and 13.4. "flare proposed action is subJect ter hermits and approvals from the: "l oWn of Soaathold Planning Bm,,ard. C own Soaathold Triste e1 We t�a gels Pe emit), Sarffolk =,onnty Departirient of Heidth. (site l�al�anjln Town eel e' Services 1S (Water Stalapl . Y Dis acrs al 1, arrcl New nark State Depaar` lent of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) (State 11olltition 1_)ischa�age, Elimination Systerla [SPD.ESM Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activity). The proposed application has been reviewed by the NYSDEC and has received an Article 25 (Tidal Wetlands)Permit for select regulated project components and a Non-Jurisdictional deterinination 161' x111 wo It landward of the 10 ]bot contour, by permit dated January 31 . 2020 (Pe.rnrit ID 1-4738-01843/002,S). The pernnit, however, was granted prior to the Positive Declwaaation under St.t�'): A. The 1)rojiosed ,applicaataatat' has 1)een reviewed by SLItfolk County Water Aaathority (S(',VA) and the availability of water has been determined through an extension of the water rri,ain. The Suffolk County Planning Commission (St:PQ has Gencral Municipal plaarinlna, review authority over the proposed action. Utility services connections are also required from 1)SL(J bong Island and National Grid. The proposed ::apal)lication was filed with the Town Middi.n(J l..)epa.arin-ictal on /V-gn_ist 27. :x018. A Notice of Disaj-)proval requiring site plan review before the town plaaaaariara1 13aaa11d ways iSSHeal on Septe:naber 18, 2018. Subsequent to the filing of then appheaation arid tlae Na.atice, eel`l.:)js al.lprovaal, and at the request of the Town Planning staff, the Applicant attended a work session with the Town Planning Board on October 15, 2018. The Applicant c011011elCd to provide additional project information in 2018 and 2019. Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold, NY On February 10,2020,the Planning Board classified the action as Type I and commenced coordinated review with the involved agencies. After review of Part 1 of the Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) and materials transmitted thereafter, the Planning Board caused to be prepared Part 2 and Part 3/Detennination of Significance and identified one or more significant adverse impacts that may result from the proposed project. On August 10, 2020, a Positive Declaration was issued by the Planning Board, as lead agency. To ensure that the DEIS will address all significant issues, in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) regulations set forth at 6 NYCRR §617.8, formal scoping is being undertaken. This Final Scopeprovides a description of the proposed action and the proposed content for the D: EIS, based upon the FEAF Part 2 and FEAF Part 3/Determination of Significance, as prepared by the Town Planning Board. This Final Scope has been prepared in accordance with 6 NYC'RR §617.8(c) and sets forth the following: • Brief description of the proposed action; • Potentially significant adverse impacts; • Extent and quality of information needed to adequately address potentially significant adverse impacts; • Initial identification of mitigation measures; and • Reasonable alternatives to be considered. The proposed organization and overall content of the DEIS is also included herein. Briel' escri ation of the PLO utusC(I Project The proposed action includes the construction of two beat storage buildings of 2,500 SQ. FT. and 49,000 SQ. FT.to support the operations of the Strong"s Yacht Center, with �rssoc late d in aproverricnts including gravel-based driveways and parking areas, %vate°r supply, sew�,rgc ddsp()sal, site Trading an(] drainage, landscaping and lighting. Also proposed is the removal of a pool and patio. The Strong's Yacht Center is situated on a 32.96±-acre parcel located south of Old Mill Road and on the west side of Mattituck Creek on lands zoned M-11 (approximately 16.46 acres) and R-80 (npl.)roximately 16.5 acres). Prior to its purchase by Strong's in AI)ril 2017, the subject site rugs l<nciwn as the Mattituck Inlet Marina and Shipyard which existedas a full-sen,,ic.c i anima, maintenance, repair and storage operation for over 60 years. As illustrated on the prol)(')Scd site development plans prepared by Young & Young, the subject property is currently comprised of 40 boat slips with ZrsSOei�,bted ramps and fueling Rind de,ve°lolmred with eight buildings to support the operation of the niarin�r.. as well as the sale, mainte�naruc.e, dock,, and storage of boats. The eight existing buildings include the following: • Building 1: One-story residence (1610 SQ. FT.) • Building 2: Two-story office (2;702 SQ. FT.) 2 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY • Building 3: One-story storage (17,320 SQ. FT.) • Building 4: One-story storage (169 SQ. FT.) • Building 5: One-story storage (341 SQ. FT.) • Building 6: One-story storage (10,766 SQ. FT.) • Building 7: One-story storage (15,076 SQ. FT.) • Building 8: One-story storage (22,425 SQ. FT.) The two proposed buildings would become Building 9 (49,000 SQ. FT.) and Building 10 (52,500 SQ. FT.). Upon implementation of the proposed action, the total gross floor area of all buildings would increase from 69,245 SQ. FT. to 171,929 SQ. FT. The proposed buildings would be situated to the west of Buildings 7 and 8,which would allow direct access and transport of yachts from the existing lift station to each of the proposed buildings. The purpose of the proposed action is to provide indoor and heated winter storage for yachts that utilize local waters in the peak season but are required to be transported to warmer climates in the winter months due to a lack of adequate storage in the Town of Southold and across the entire east end of Long Island. Based upon an average yacht size of 60 feet, it is estimated that approximately 88 yachts could be stored within the proposed buildings during the winter months; all of which would arrive to the site via Mattituck Inlet (as confirmed by surveys and soundings for the entire Inlet). It is also expected that maintenance and repair activities for larger vessels would occur on the subject property, having direct access from the Mattituck Inlet via the existing lift, further supporting a demand of the existing local boating market. There are approximately 13 full-time staff at the Strong's Yacht Center and, upon implementation of the proposed action, the Applicant expects to create an additional 15 career positions. The subject parcel is adjacent to Federal and State-regulated Tidal Wetlands (Mattituck Creek), with a portion of the site located within a 100-year floodplain (Zone AE: Elevation 8). The proposed buildings would be constructed in a portion of the site located within a 500-year floodplain (Zone X) at Elevation 10.0. The proposed action has been reviewed and approved by the NYSDEC by permit dated January 31, 2020,however this permit was granted prior to the proposed action being classified under SEQRA as a Type I action and receiving a positive declaration from the Lead Agency. Additional review from the NYSDEC tidal wetlands permitting agency may be required. Due to significant grade changes on the site,the proposed project will require approximately 134,000 cubic yards of cut for the placement of the proposed buildings at Elevation 10.0. The proposed excavation plan includes two routes for truck movements and would occur over a projected duration of approximately seven (7) months based upon loads of 30 cubic yards per truck and six-day work weeks. An additional six months is projected to complete the proposed project, inclusive of the retaining wall, infrastructure and two buildings (i.e., total construction duration is 13 months). The proposed plan includes the installation of a concrete and evergreen retaining wall along the west side of Buildings 9 and 10 and along the north side of Building 10, which serves to both stabilize the slope as well as enhance the visual screening of the subject property. The total proposed disturbance is 3.9± acres, with approximately 493 trees of six-inch diameter or greater proposed for removal. 3 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Maitituck, Town of Southold, NY As part of the i)roposed action, one new on-site wastewater treatment systein ([/A OWTS) would be installed and an existing on-sate sanitary system would be replaced.with aii I/A CWCS. The two systems would be designed to serve the Strong's 'Yacht Center operati ons, inclusive ol"all buildings, the office and rnarina. Also proposed is an extension of the water main froni Naugles Drive by 765 feet to allow for the site to be served by the public supply system. Upon implementation of the proposed action,the existing on-site supply well would be available for no I n-potable use. sturniwater management, the proposdacoincludes ithe installation of on-siteleaching rdiolsFrench drainsandtile Use of pervious grvel toconirnodate storrilwater froill the proposed development. The proposed stormwater management plan is designed to accomiliodate a two-inch rain even(, in accordance with Town of SOUthold regulations. It is noted that in addition to the full-service inari ria operation, the Strong's Yacht Center currently hosts six commercial fisbing boats, and also supports the Marine Program of the Cornel I Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County, by hosting eight (8) FLUPSYs (Floating Upweller Systeins), which provide protected nurseries for hard clarn seed to assist with the NYS Shellfish Restoration Initiative. None of these activities would be affected by the proposed action. In order to develop the site as proposed, the following approvals are required: Om7 aTne w and Approval "I M�1101M Town of Southold Planning Board Site Plan Review and Approval P i ........... ..... Town of Southold Trustees Wetlands Permit S-uffolk County Department of Health Services Wastewater Disposal and Water Supply Suffolk County Planning Commission Review and Approval Di"s'"c'harge Elimination System ....... tan New York State Department of Environmental State Conservation (SPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharge during Construction Activities Tidal Wetlands Permit and Non-Jurisdictional Determination (Permit ID 1-4738-01843/0028 dated January 31- 2020*. ..... Suffolk County Water Authority Extension of Water Main and New Connection 1.11............. ............. Electric and Natural Gas service connections PSEG Long Island/National Grid ....... .....__ - _ -_ ...... .... Review ternporary road apron, possible curb cut I Town of Southold Highway Superintendent permit required. ................... ....... ....... ..... ................. ............... Review for archeological significance NYS office of Parks, Recreation. and Historic . ........... .................. Preservation . .......... ...................... ..........____......... Final Scope for Final Environmental hnpact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY The section of the'DEIS entitled Description of the Proposed Action will provide a thorough description of the existing conditions on the 32.6±-acre subject property and the proposed action. The Description of the Proposed Action section of the DEIS will specifically include information relating to the following: • Project location, setting,land use and zoning (with appropriate maps and aerial photographs). • Summary of the surrounding land uses and zoning. • Physical characteristics of the site,including property acreage, site cover types (e.g.,pervious and impervious areas), and existing structures. • Project layout and design, including information about the proposed development, zoning compliance, changes in site cover types, site access and circulation, and parking. • Infrastructure requirements, including water supply, sanitary waste disposal, drainage, and utilities. • Solid waste generation and the proposed plans for on-site minimization and recycling. • Project objectives and benefits to the community, including a summary of the project's consistency with the proposed land uses set forth in the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP). • Projected construction schedule. • Required permits and approvals. I,"otentiall ^ Si A e�rrita�wts The DEIS will be prepared in accordance with this Final Scope promulgated by the lead agency and in accordance with 6 NYCRR §617.9(b). Based upon review of the site, architectural plans and elevations, site plans and the FEAF Part 1 prepared by the Applicant, the Planning Board prepared a FEAF -Parts 2 and 3/Determination of Significance,for the proposed application which indicates that one or more significant adverse impacts may result from the proposed project. The Planning Board ugust 10, 2020, specifically identifying as potential moderate to issued a Positive Declaration on A large impacts to Land, Surface Waters, Groundwater, Flooding, Air, Plants and Animals, Aesthetic Resources, Noise, and Community Character. The DEIS will fully address the identified potential significant adverse impacts, as well as other relevant issues. Where the impact analyses conducted in the DEIS indicate the potential for significant adverse impacts, the DEIS will set forth measures to mitigate those impacts. 5 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Matlituck, Town of Southold, NY A description of each section of the DEIS is set forth below, followed by a proposed outline for the DEIS. Natural Ettyirt'nnienta Resout Impact on Soils and Topography This section of the DEIS will identify the existing soil type(s) on the subject property, based upon the Suffolk County Soil Survey and any available test hole data. The grading program will also be discussed, based upon the required plans and data (e.g., estimates of volumes of soil excavated, cut/filled, removed from site and maximum depths of cut/fill). The topographic conditions will be evaluated, and a topographic map will be provided. The existing and proposed changes to slopes will be included, and stabilization measures will be identified in detail. Construction-related impacts will also be discussed, including truck trips for soil removal and associated truck routes. Mitigation measures for soil limitations/constraints, erosion, sedimentation, and dust generation, to the extent necessary, will be included. See the section on Construction-related impacts for more details. The DEIS will also: 1. Discuss the types and tested physical characteristics of the soils on site that will be subject to excavation, future load bearing, and installation of sanitary systems and stormwater conveyance systems. The location, size, and thickness of any clay or buried peat formations will be described and mapped. 2. Discuss potential adverse impacts to sea grass and on shellfish from potential sedimentation. 3. Discuss possible mitigation for these potential adverse impacts. Impact on Water Resources (Groundwater and Surface Waters) This section of the DEIS will describe the groundwater conditions, including depth to groundwater and groundwater quality beneath the subject property, based upon relevant documentation. The Groundwater Management Zone IV (as classified under Article 6 of the SCSC) within which the subject property is located, and site drainage characteristics will be described. Groundwater flow direction based upon Suffolk County Groundwater Contour Maps and field study will be identified and an assessment of the potential impacts to downgradient resources and nearby wells will be included. The location of private and public wells will also be determined and a study to determine any impacts this action might have on the quantity and quality of potable water for those wells will be provided. This section will also include calculations of projected sanitary flow, discussion of the proposed method of sa; iltary d1sl)c sal (i.e.. the 011-site wastc•Nvaler treatillerit systenis [l/r OW]"SI), aril consistency with Article 6 of"dic SCSC ". Tli4e SC;IA IS Notice of° h)coniI,)lc:tc; r° l)l)�jc xtioii issued for the proposed action will also be included and co suftatia, ris vv"Ih the SClN IS would tie cII miken as lia t of the DEIS and described herein. The proposcd installation oh' four. 2.f:00 gallon liquid prof)ane aboveground tanks and const'steticy with Article: 12 of the SCSC would bC ewdHated. 6 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town raj"Southold,NY Groundwater quantity (i.e., water usage) will also be evaluated, including the extension of the public water supply main to the sul:apect property and the availability of water supply based upon consultations with the SCWA. "lµhe post-development benefits of the water supply main would also be identified. The impacts to groundwater quantity available to neighboring wells will also be evaluated based on field studies over four seasons. Surface location ;.and�xexi existing marin<acope.operations. D aiahgappropriateness and. posticvelopnhent storanwate l"haw impacts to gp pose use graven tlaa� site's to r management measures, and erosion control nicasures, willalso be disenssed and evaluated ill accordance with the be ancluded.at.An assessmentoftae 1'�rtsteesl aa�}�„wetlands will be aYie�l and the l�r�a.lirugs of the NYSDEC for than issuance of a. Wetlands Permit will also be included. Finally, the effects of climate change as it relates to sea level rise and flooding will be addressed. Mitigation measures which may reduce potential water quality or quantity impacts will also be identified, as necessary. The DEIS will also: 1. Analyze and discuss in detail the impacts oil private wells in the, surroUnding area including technical details on groundwater-depth, cluality, quantity, freshwater lens, saltwater inter lace, amount of flow in GPM, direction of travel, and travel tinges, lncltade zones of inffaaence ,froin each wellhead. 2. Analyze and discuss the effect of excavation on groundwater,as well as any expected impacts to ncigliboring wells. Include an analysis on the potential for salt-water intrusion into neighboring well as a result of the excavation's effect on groundwater in the area. 3. Discuss onsite and nearby tidal wetlands and the NYSDEC's input, ecological communities in those wetlands and their ecosystem services and values, including contributions to surface water quality. 4. Discuss the narrowness of the creek in this area and tidal flow restrictions in an acceptable model. Include the increase in tidal flow volume and velocity restrictions that could result from the increase in boats or docks (if any). 5. Discuss possible mitigation for these potential adverse impacts. 1.trar :rat r:>rr I�caala"r Fir:ral I�ar�soara-aWra.s Environmental studies will be detailed and undertaken over a multi-season period (all four seasons) to properly assess potential impacts. This section of the DEIS would address the existing ecological resources on the subject property. As part of. tl'ac 1)fAS, a qualified l�iaaIogist/ec olo(gist will inspect tile. Sate to deternrirle tlae vegeli atir: n, wildlrlc, and oeneml latabitat c har�actcr. An inven9ory of flora Omand f�aaaaa a gas observed, will be prepared and ane;ludecl ill this sectitan of t1w 1)EIS. -and an asse,ssnae.nt of ffic Species tlrw.at c.crcald be e' )ectc(l tai stili e that ,aalapec:t site; will Ira g-10TOaraaeal 11raatccted n:aWle plants; plant and ranirnal species listed as ., l lcrr with oilier protective statcrst, will be identified; cncaaras7c,rca.l. t.l'aac atcraed. aaacl ae.aKul e.ewraa a'a as including) Clic noted taalaaaas pl(Alel', scrcatlaca n slag-itc, and Eastern box turtle, and suitability of habitat as aaa�.y traa, or , �l irjo larabitwIt J'or protected New York State and Federally-protected bat sliecies An �_issc:ssn'Caat crl l)otentt:al in_al`cacls tea tlaeC c�rata.UUOcas Tc WtI asf`Soutlrcalcl wcaa.Pdlband idenlilled r ,5. tic rc tr.a tlm � sc.aaatla 1 4 1'1\"I i l sand tlae� adjacent tidal avetleitatls of Mcattat7.ack Creek will also be performed. Consultations with ific New Ywk Matcrral 1 leritkatwc I acal,r rm v�ill be 7 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boaz Storage Buildings Mallituck, Town of Southold, NY undertaken for site information. This section of the DEIS will include the quantitative impacts to habitats as well as a qualitative assessment of the impacts to plants and animal species. Mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts will be identified. The DEIS will also: Impact on Plants and Animals 1. Discuss potential adverse impacts to sea grass and on shellfish. 2. Provide a complete description of the ecological communities represented in the forest and their ecological relationships to those of the adjoining Town-owned preserve. Forests provide important ecosystem services within their bounds and for the surrounding landscape and waterways; these ecosystem services will be described. For example, the forest ecosystem of the subject property, contiguous with forest protected by the Town, is the last relatively large block of native forest supplying clean groundwater to Mattituck Inlet that has not been converted to farmland or interrupted by residential and commercial development, with their attendant sanitary system and stormwater impacts. 3. Discuss the cumulative effect of the elimination of the forest on the subject property on the total native forest cover in the Town of Southold.Native forest cover in the Town is relatively rare in comparison with agricultural land and residential/commercial development;remaining patches are isolated from one another, existing as "islands" in the overall landscape. What patches do remain are of varying sizes, spatial relationships with wetlands and waterways, and habitat value. 4. Include a discussion on the potential adverse impacts of net forest loss on wildlife species that have large home ranges, including birds and bats, and that seek deep forest cover and travel between forest patches. 5. Provide a complete analysis and discussion on the proposed destruction of the forest on the slopes, the forest interior exposed and new forest edge,proximity to the boundary of a 25.29- acre, Town-owned, preserve. Include the following: direct harm to the preserve by reducing the overall size of the forest and by removing its buffer area trees that had developed in a high-wind environment; exposure of trees that grew in an environment protected from high wind to northeast, with attendant potential for: destabilization of root systems and tree throw; drying of soils; increased light exposure from sunlight and night-time lighting at the storage facility and marina (effects on plants, as well as insects and wildlife, requiring, shade and moisture); introduction of invasive species to disturbed soils; higher soil temperatures and effects on seedling growth and forest regeneration; reduction in forest litter because of convective drying and windblow; result in reduction of nutrients available for plants and increase in the effects of drought conditions in summer and the depth of freeze events In the winter; increase in the ratio of forest edge to forest Interior that results from decreasing the overall size of the forest, including impacts of physical damage and biological invasions*, reduction of uninterrupted forest cover on successful nesting of warblers, thrushes, vireos and other songbirds; reduction or loss of populations of wildlife species requiring the seclusion offered by forest interiors and those reqn1ring nocturnal conditions without artificial light i intrusion; degradation of habitat because of noise reaching further Into the forest, both during construction and permanently, from traffic and operations at the marina and storage site. 8 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY 6. Evaluate and discuss the need to remove 493 trees and carbon sequestration and if planting of trees elsewhere can be accomplished to offset tree loss. 7. Assess the action to Mattituck Inlet and the Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat (SCFWH) documentation. 8. Discuss possible mitigation for these potential adverse impacts. Impact to the Environment The DEIS will also: 1. Discuss the operations of the site and the overall impact on the environment. 2. Describe the short-and long-term impacts to the ecosystem,biodiversity habitats and the rarity and significance of Mattituck Creek as an estuary, both from construction activities as well as from operations. Discuss the impacts to the wetlands on east side of inlet and wildlife (egrets, osprey and waterfowl). 3. The subject property's relationship to surrounding land uses and location within surface-and groundwater contributing areas to Mattituck Creek will be described and mapped. 4. Discuss possible mitigation for these potential adverse impacts. Impact on Flooding 1. Climate Change and Resiliency: The DEIS will describe the potential adverse impact on the parcel resulting from climate change and sea level rive. The DESI will: • Discuss SEQRA's implementing regulations and measures to avoid or reduce impacts associated with the effects of climate change such as sea level rise and flooding. See NYCRR:617.9(b)(5)(iii)(i)].Include the potential impacts associated with coastal flooding, storm events, and rising sea levels. The future physical climate risk due to storm surge (including sea level rise) and flooding should be considered in project design. The analysis will specifically analyze the effect of rising groundwater on upland resources. The analysis will also consider the effects of intensifying precipitation-- including more seasonal precipitation and higher rates and more total precipitation during storms-- both during construction and operation. The action will be assessed-to the following: 2014 C1imAID update (Horton et al. 2014) and the New York State Community Risk and Resiliency Act (CRRA) SLR projections. Using Natural Measures to Reduce the Risk of Flooding and Erosion Guidance (NYDEC). Community Risk and Resiliency Act Guidance for Consideration of Flood Risk in Smart Growth Public Infrastructure Assessment (NYDEC). USGS Groundwater-Flow Modeling - Long Island, New York. 9 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY 2. The relationship of final landscape elevations to the potential for nor'easter and other weather events to inundate the property during and post construction will be discussed in the DEIS to fully afford proper review ofadverse water quality impacts. 3. The 111crease in frequency of potential inundation events related to predicted climate change effects will also be discussed. 4. Discuss possible mitigation for these potential adverse impacts. fluman Resources Impact on Human Health 1. Provide an analysis on the chemicals stored and disposed on site and the potential adverse impacts from the Increase in V0111111e, of chemicals used and stored on site during the proposed action. 2. Provide NYSDEC regulations related to the storage of chemicals on site. 3. Assess potential impacts to neighboring wells (see section on Water Resources for more details). 4. Discuss possible mitigation for these potential adverse impacts. Impact on Transportation The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact by significantly increasing the number of vehicles (includingconstruction and service vehicles) on local and regional roadways for Ion- durations. Capacity oaf the roadways may be adversely impacted. The proposed an ctiowill add substantial tj,ajffic to the area and due to current road conditions, traffic, and intersection conditions, the roads may not have the ability to handle it. The level of service (LOS) at intersections may be adversely impacted. The design and condition of the roads leading to the site (routc) IS as c0ucefll. Many areas exhibit stress cracks on the pavenicrit. The design of the roads and the ability to increasc traffIc on t1lese roads,including construction traffic and trucks,is a signi.ficant concern, Curves,deciii-iesand inclines exist on the route to the parcel. Receptors along the route to the parcel may be adversely impacted for long durations. The proposed action could result in a ii-iodenite to large adverse impacts to the public and user groups from the increase of vehicular traffic on local and regional roads affecting the public's use and enjoyment of the roads while conducting activities (driving, walking, biking). The number of truck trips proposed Could result in large, adverse impacts to West Mill Road, Cox Neck Road, Suffolk County Route 48, New York State Route 25, Sound Avenue, Northville Turnpike, Suffolk County Route 58 and other local and regional roads. This section of the DEIS will: I. Provide a comprehensive vehicle traffic study in the DEIS conducted by an traffic engineer of z:1 10 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY all local and regional roads (include vehicle trips on Cox Neck Lane and West Mill Road) which includes real time data gathered over four seasons for all phases (including mobilization and demobilization of resources) of the proposed action: The study shall include: Real time traffic counts on Cox Neck Lane, West Mill Road, Suffolk County Route 48 and Sound Avenue, and best available data for NYS Route 25. Include the road capacity, existing number of vehicles (trucks) using the roadways, types of vehicles and anticipated vehicle trips and times, Level of Service at intersections, accident data(including data from the Southold Police Department) and the geometry of the roadways along the proposed truck routes. The traffic study shall include vehicle trip data sets from the operations of the marina facility and potential impacts from trucks hauling large boats on local roads. Discuss traffic mitigation including possible limitations on the trucks per day and limit the number of hours per day, and include how this would affect the duration of the construction phase. Discuss what temporary traffic signals will be considered. What traffic control measures will be implemented? Discuss what private resources that will be required to control traffic. The traffic study would include, but not be limited to: • Traffic counts over four seasons, • Site and area visits for observations of existing traffic movements at various times of the day and under different conditions. • Collection of data and evaluations as described above. • Review of available traffic data from the NYSDOT and the Suffolk County Department of Public Works. • Consultations with the Town of Southold Highway Department regarding local roadway conditions. • Evaluation of accident data from the NYSDOT and Southold Town Police Department to determine if there are any existing accident problems and whether construction traffic may affect the existing accident patterns. • Review the estimates of traffic anticipated to be generated during the construction of the proposed development. Determine the make-up of the added traffic and hourly new traffic volumes to be placed on the existing road system. • Provide and discuss a vehicle routing plan for all phases of the project (site preparation, construction and operations after construction). Identify the roads used, speed ]limits, existing road condition with photographic representation, all intersections, all school zones, anticipated traffic levels and traffic chokepoints along a proposed route. Determine the dimensional characteristics of the road and the existing traffic Control provided. Examine whether the additional construction related traffic can safely be accommodated on the existing roadways Discuss the suitability of the road capacity. The traffic flow along Cox Il Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattiluck, Town of Southold,NY Neck Lane and West Mill Road and how vehicles will navigate the curves on the roadways. • Examine the proposed construction access road for the site from the standpoint of location, design and traffic safety. • Discuss the potential damage and destruction of local and regional roads by trucks and all other vehicle types involved in the staging, clearing, excavation, site preparation, construction and post construction and operations of the facility. Include the aprons at the access points. Provide all specifications of the loaded and unloaded trucks involved in the excavation and construction. • Discuss specific provisions for a performance guarantee to assure appropriate reclamation/restoration of any areas (including local roadways) that may be required, or in the event that the project does not come to completion after a specifically defined period of time. • Potential mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts will be identified. 2. Evaluate and discuss the duration of potential adverse impacts from all vehicle trip types included in each phase and post construction, the wear and tear on roadways caused by vehicle types, quality of life impacts to the community and receptors along the routes including adjacent Towns where vehicles will be travelling. 3. Discuss the potential increase in trallered vessel traffic and if trucks should be limited to certain hours, low speeds and the number of trucks per day. 4. Include a roadway user group safety study and analysis in the DEIS during all four seasons on the use of the roadways (route) by user groups, including potential adverse impacts on pedestrians walking (with Strollers),jogging, biking and children waiting for the school bus that will could be adversely impacted by vehicles including loaded trucks. Include an analysis of the proposed truck route's road width and the capacity to accommodate two vehicles passing at the same time and location as a pedestrian or cyclist, and whether the roads are currently safe for such an interaction, including the perceived safety from the perspective of the pedestrian or cyclist. 5. Discuss the impacts of vibration from loaded trucks on structures along the vehicle route(s). 6. Discuss the effects of excavation and vibration from machinery, heavy equipment and trucks on structures surrounding the site. 1 7. Provide a detailed analysis on the potential, long-term adverse impacts to adjacent roadways (surfaces, condition), surrounding properties, neighborhood(s), and region through the clearing, excavation, tD storing o and transportingof cleared veoetation. excavated materials and construction of the site over a multi-month period in multiple phases. 12 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,IVY 8. Include a discussion about whether using barges to transport materials is a viable alternative for mitigating impacts from transporting materials associated with the site preparation and construction of the project. 9. Discuss how streets will be repaired. The DEIS will also address specific provisions for performance bonding to assure appropriate reclamation/restoration of any areas (including local roadways) that may be required after excavation, or in the event that the project does not come to completion after a specifically defined period of time. 10. Provide a comprehensive boat (vessel) traffic study analysis in the DEIS of the potential moderate to large significant increase of boats to the Mattituck Inlet. Include the existing conditions analysis and potential adverse impacts on: a. Boat Characteristics - Include the number of additional new boats added to Mattituck Inlet, average size of these boats, average draft and maximum draft? b. Navigation - Provide the depth of inlet from Long Island Sound to the marina. Navigation suitability of Mattituck Inlet, navigation impediments, narrowness of the creek in the area to the north west of the marina. Discuss if the project will include dredging in the future. c. Tidal marsh — include an assessment on the impacts from current and increase boat traffic on low and high marsh areas within the creek. Discuss the impact from boat wakes, emissions and chemicals (bottom paints) on the ecosystem. d. Water quality —include a discussion on the current and potential adverse moderate to large impacts to surface water quality in the short and long term (duration). Provide the NYSDEC shellfish closure areas, types of pollutants occurring in the creek currently, types of chemicals in marina and vessel maintenance needs in the proposed construction and operation of the marina facility and mitigation. Include, but not limited to, dissolved oxygen, clarity, eutrophication, and sustainability for estuarine and marine life, as well as existing sources of stormwater. The potential for sedimentation during construction, and resulting, post-construction, long-term stormwater runoff contributions from the site will be described and quantified. e. Discuss the washing,fueling of, and operation of boats and potential threats from these practices of introducing pollutants into the waterway. The impact of potential fuel spills and cleaning materials spills. f Provide the potential growth inducing aspects resulting for the action of a significant moderate to large increase of large boats -using the Mattituck Inlet/Creek. Include the management of boats on site, staging areas of arriving boats, sufficiency of current dock, plans for additional docks, any new dock configurations and facility configuration to accommodate vessels, sufficiency of dimensions of travel lifts to haul boats, and other anticipated impacts on the waterway LO User groups. User groups include boats of all sizes, manual and engine powered, kayaks, paddleboarders, swimmers and commercial fisherman. Include hours of operation, particularly of heavy machinery. During the hauling and launching season the hours of operation of the travel lift. Other boat moving machinery and cleaning apparatus. Identify additional equipment needed to haul-out, put-111, transport, service and store boats. 13 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mallituck, Town of Southold, NY h. Provide an assessment of all boat support services in the area including the availability of functioning pump out boats and stations. How does the marina handle sanitary and solid waste in boats? What advisories does or will the marina provide to boaters on pollutants (coliform bacteria) capable of entering the waterway. How will the disposal of stalid and sanitary waste be prevented in the waterway? i, Discuss the impact of increased boat traffic due to the expanded activities including devising a methodology to police and monitor the water quality. J, Discuss possible mitigation for these potential adverse impacts. Impact on Aesthetic Resources If constructed the subject proposal naamay significantly alter the shoreline and community c liarracter of Mattituck Inlet environs acid this potential impact must be fully evaluated. The proposed action is of scale and dimension that will be visible from publicly accessible scenic resources (Mattituck Creek) by operators oil° vessels, using the waterway during seasonal use resulting in a potential moderate impact to scenic enjoyment of the Waterway. mote that Mattituck Creek is a Federal waterway. The proposed action could result in aw rnoderate to large adverse impact to the aesthetic resource (Mattituck Creek) through the diminishment of public enjoyment by users and members of the con-n`runity under di f er•ent circUnIsaaraces and activities in a location that also has an irripo;rtant tole in recreation and tourism economy.Both are important and changes to scenic and aesthetic resources may have adverse impacts on both the quality of life of residents and broader economic impacts. This section of the DEIS will describe the existing viewshed and general consistency or compatibility with existing elements of the corninunity. As part ofthe assessment of imlracts ori visual resour-ces, 3D cornprater-generated imagery would .be provided to depict post-development viexvslied c,harrges la'0111 M.arttituck Creek and the adjacent roadway. The proliosed buildings and cement and evergreen retaining wall, as well as the site and building lighting, would be described, I"he inrparcta to tluc community character as it relates to changes to the existing natural landscape with the proposed development would be evaluated. The impacts to community character as it relates to the viewshed from wartervvay (Mattituck Creek) will be evaluated and the project's consistency with the proposed use of land as set forth in approved LWP, will be discussed. Measures to mitigate impacts will be identified, as appropriate. The DEIS will: I. Provide a detailed visual impact analysis for the action, including (dimensional relief and color of site structures existing and proposed) identification of the project°s zone of visual influence (ZVI), identification of sensitive receptors (scenic views including views from Mattituck Creeks, outdoor-recreation facilities, historic properties, etc.) within that zone, and viewshed analyses to determine if and how sensitive receptors would be affected. Computer- generated imagery for viewshed changes should not be limited to views from Mattituck Creek and the adjacent roadway. 2. Include detailed visual renderings of the proposed action, and alternative actions, to reflect how the development would be viewed from the waters of Mattituck Inlet, as well as any surrounding residential development. 3. Include a visual rendering of a typical yacht to be stored in the building as it would appear- traveling south down the creek towards the marina from the perspective of a person in a kayak on the creek headed north. 14 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,IVY 4. Possible mitigation for adverse impacts. Impact to Community Character The proposed action could result in an irreversible, adverse impacts to existing community character (physical alteration on site over a multi-year period, large building size and noise) and from the intensity of the proposed operations near residences. Adverse impacts could occur to the community from the construction timeframe in increased intensity and long duration. The DEIS will discuss and analyze: 1. How the proposed action conforms to the town's community character priority (as stated in the Comprehensive Plan Update), which is to "protect its scenic resources. 2. The historic and rural character of this section of Mattituck Inlet defined by in part by the presence of the steeply sloped, thickly vegetated forest on and adjoining the site. 3. The potential permanent and irreversible adverse impacts on neighborhood character related to destruction of the forest on the slopes of the subject property. 4. The potential adverse impacts of introducing big-box storage facilities on the neighborhood character surrounding the site, the areas facing the site from across Mattituck Inlet, and the character of the general area traversed by boaters using the inlet should be presented and given thorough analysis. 5. The aesthetic impacts of removing native forest and hillside upon the bucolic setting of the site. 6. The potential adverse impacts from Transportation on community character(see above). Impact on Open Space and Recreation The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact and significantly interfere with nesting/breeding, foraging or overwintering habitat by removing 3.94 acres of vegetation, including the removal of important habitat features such as dead trees used for nesting and cover. This habitat area is connected to a 25.29 acre parcel with similar habitat that is protected by the Town of Southold (SCTM# 106-6-20.3) to the south. This woodland assemblage comprises the largest undeveloped acreage in the Mattituck Creek watershed. Other areas of woodland to the south and to the west on the R-80 zoned portion of the parcel may also be affected. The DEIS will discuss and analyze: 1. Discuss the potential adverse impacts to the Town owned preserved property, the deforestation and impacts to the user groups of the property including hikers. 2. Analyze the adverse impacts related to noise, changes in view-sheds, the effect on wildlife, and alteration of a sense of place from this project on the public's enjoyment of the Town owned preserved property during all phases of the action. 3. i Discuss the impacts of the large vessel traffic in the inlet, and its effects on small local vessels, kayaks, and paddle boarders attempting to navigate the narrow creek. 4. Potential mitigation for adverse impacts. 15 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong'S Yacht Center -Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town ?/'Southold, NY Impact from Noise The proposed action could l-est,11t in a moderate to 1,11-ge adverse impact frorn excessive noise levels during, multiple Phases Over brig duration. Noise associated with the operation of heavy equipment and trucks includes b,0 is 110t linlit"C' to; engine, noise, noise from moving and backing up heavy equipment (reversal waning sound) arnd tl,w operation, accelerati,41,and decelcralion and wlake braking of trucks on site and on roadways, similarly, rly, operation oCchain-saws and wood chippers for long durations may generate large, adverse noise [1,11pacts to receptors in the neighborhood. 'I'lle DEI S will include, discuss and analyze the following: I. A comprehensive noise Study. Include in the assessment existing ambient noise levels, noise produced by all phases of the project, tilesources of the noise, and including hours,duration, decibel level both at the source and at the receptor sites (e.g., the outdoor spaces of neiglibors' properties such as decks or back yards), and impact on tranquility for residents within hearing range,as well as wildlife.Discuss the duration of each type of noise expected. InClUde an cvaluation of cunitdative noise generation where jIll.11tiple machines/activities might be running siniultancOuSly. IRCIL'ide protocols for monitoring of the noise level during construction and during operations arnd include how noise will be attenuated or juitigated. 2. Analyze and discuss the potential significant adverse impacts from noise on the quality of life and to public health rest,ilting from all phases of site work and construction over long durations over a multi-month period. 3. Include the potential adverse impacts froill noise on reccptors and wildlife generated by the Operation of nlachinery, heavy equipment and trucks both on-site and off-site as they travel through neighborhoods and the region including: ➢ engines Noise from the operation of machines, heavy equipment and truck engi moving and backing up(reversal warning sound),accelerating and deceleration. ➢ Noise from Jake braking of trucks on roadways. periods and ➢ Noise from the operation of chain saws and wood chippers for long potential large, adverse impacts to receptors in the neighborhood and wildlife. ➢ Noise generated by each alternative. 4. Clarify whether or not blasting will be conducted. S. Discuss the adverse impacts on the quality of life from the noise generated from the action and what mitigation is proposed to lessen adverse impacts. Impact on Air Quality The proposal involves the operation of heavy machinery and trucks on and off site over a long duration ol'time that could result in moderate adverse impacts to local air quality. This section of the document will address mobile source unpacts (i.e., those related to CODSITUction activity)and post-development ]Impacts to biomass as a reSLIH ofthe proposed land clearing nctivllies. 16 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY An air quality assessment will be performed and appended to the DEIS and summarized in the body of the text. The air quality assessment would include the following: ➢ Mobile Sources - The latest version of the Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES'201.4b), developed by the US1;PA Office of"Iransportation and Air QLiality,will be used to estimate emissions associated with off-road and on-road mobile engines. If available, emission factors will be obtained from the NYSDEC or NYSDOT MOVES specific data for the C01111ty of Suffolk, otherwise national average emission factors in MOVES for Suffolk County rasing default distribution assumptions will he used. Mitigation measures,as required, will also be identified. ➢ t fl-1 orad h r)bile E rlanaer�t - Activity levels (i.e�. hour;s of operaticmn) ofeach piece cif` equipment will be cstirriated parsed on the square footage of the constraactio:rr area and the associated activity type.The activity levels represent the total number cafhatrrr s cacti piece of equipment is anticipated to be used for the duration of the project Operating hoarrs will be based on the projects need for the cgiiipme.nt rather than aassunaing continuoras operation. ;It is assurried that all off-road equipment will operr:ate on diesel fuel. Off-road itlobile equipment emission rtes for criteria pollutants will be computed and compared with 1.15EPA National ,4unblent Air Quality Starndartls (NAAQS). Emission rates for hazardous air pollutants (HAPS) will be curnprrted and conapared to New York State Depaartrnent of Environmental Coarservation DAR-I Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of AmbientAir Contaminants Under Part 212. ➢ (tri larrdNlobale Ve 'icls - Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data for each on-road corlsIXIIc,tiorr vehicle and employee trips will be estimated from roundtrip distances and the number of vehicles and employees based on the activity specific construction ,;claedrrle. It is .assunied that all on-road egaripin nt will use either gasoline or diesel fuel. Typical vehicle types will be p assen;gel- carr; passenger truck, single arr:ait short-haul, and cominerciarl short.-haul. The enaissiota rates for criteria pollutants on-roartl construction vehicles will be computed and compar-ed to USEPA National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Emission rates for hazardous air pollutants (HAPS) will be conrptited and compared to New York State Departrnent of Errvim.onnaentarl C omervation ,,\ -'1 Garidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Ambient Air t c;r minin ants Under Part 212. Provide air quality analysis for boat traffic. � 1'ru��rtrva 1.>aus( - Fugitive dust emissions (particulate matter or PM) from site preparation, land cicaar�rm:. equipment rarovernerrt on unpaved at-eas, rrrwill be calculated aitilizing USFTA J)Llh fished emission factors (USl l'A, Air l-rmrrssic.rrr. Factors p Pollutant Emission Factors). Erosion 1 mals, tcl,rimif nAZc Po itr�vc alryrtSt Arrd paoicVtrl aa. c ills ca' . . � raarssrc.. Quantification, AP Compilation 1 and�W'arlrare tsarres uatacl w�a9et �rrr,�^a�VE ..it ecrrastructtori :kites will lea: consrdctr(l tar the �rm� alaysrs 1 trrrraared a rrrrs�rc�ir r�rtewd err' l�.ar acr.rlatc wau4.ttter tl'M) will lie a �:;ola prrt�d altrc.l Col Air tart l.1Sl:�l'A i artrarnarl , ra l.mIerrt Air (?r.ohty' Staaradairds (NAAQS) ['or YIN/12.5 and PM10. 17 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposes'Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY ➢ Cai"bon� S_ e 11lj iii- — The proposal also involves the removal 3.94 acres of soil and vegetation including 493+ hardwood trees contributing to carbon sequestering. Carbon sequestration is the process by which atmospheric carbon dioxide is taken up by trees, grasses, and other plants through photosynthesis and stored as carbon in biomass(trunks, branches, foliage, and roots) and soils. The oak is the genus with the most carbon- absorbing capabilities, there are other notable deciduous trees that sequester carbon as well. Carbon sequestering estimates will be determined utilizing published sources, including but not limited to: USEPA, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Greenhouse Gas Mitigation in U.S.Forestry and Agriculture carbon sequestering factors;U.S.Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Method for Calculating Carbon Sequestration by Trees in Urban and Suburban Settings; and/or 2006 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Sources will be dependent on the most up to date and appropriate specific to the types of vegetation/soil conditions and the classification of the area to be cleared. Soil types will be identified from soil boring logs and published data through the USDA Suffolk County Soil Survey. Construction-Related Impacts This section will address the construction-related impacts related to vegetation and material removal, site preparation, and construction activities. The proposed excavation plan will be presented, and the impacts associated with noise, traffic and land disturbance activities (e.g., dust) will be assessed. Measures to mitigate impacts will be identified, as appropriate. The DEIS will: 1. Identify specific materials e.g., excavated materials, vegetation, concrete and building materials. 2. Discuss the potential adverse impacts from water line and natural gas extensions on public roads. 3. Discuss why the project is necessary as proposed. 4. Discuss why this parcel is suitable for this project. This project will require large amount of forest, slope and soil removal. 5. Discuss why the construction of the buildings requires the need to excavate 134,921 CY of soil and why the buildings cannot be constructed without excavation. 6. Clarify if the cubic yard calculation of soil to be excavated from the site includes a "swell" factor. 7. Discuss why the length of construction is necessary (13 months). 8. Discuss how the R-80 zoned portion of the parcel will be affected by the proposed action. 18 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY 9. Provide a complete evaluation of impacts associated with all proposed mining, erosion, materials transport (including roadway impacts and impacts on nearby residential development), materials storage, materials sales, materials processing, vehicle operations, and habitat destruction. The proposed action requires an extensive amount of excavation, which will ultimately result in Significant off-site transport of sands and gravels extracted from the site. 10. Assess the noise from all stages of site preparation and construction as described in more detail in the Noise section above. 11. Describe in detail the process by which the temporary road will be constructed and the impacts that will result including but not limited to noise, vibration, vegetation and soil removal, and tree removal. 12. Discuss the potential of slope failure and effect of excavation and ground vibration from the operation of machinery, heavy equipment and trucks on existing neighboring structures. 13. Discuss the potential of destabilization of adjacent properties and impacts from vibration and excavation on adjacent properties, the impact of timing in between each phase, the threat of catastrophic soil loss and erosion if there is a pause in the project schedule due to weather or other event, and the future maintenance, type of construction, inspection schedules and monitoring for defects of the retaining wall. The potential catastrophic failure of the retaining wall, in whole or in part and effect on adjacent properties. 14. Address growth inducing actions and if there will be a future request to develop the property and/or increase the size of the marina/docks as a result of this proposed project. And if the marina and docks will be expanded as a result of this proposed project, discuss whether or not that would constitute the segmentation of the SEQRA review if that expansion is not included in this review. 15. Discuss the potential need to increase the boat storage capacity of the current site and for a future travel lift, boat staging, in water docking and the impact on adjacent wetlands. 16. Discuss if the excavated material can be removed by barge through Mattituck Inlet for off- site disposal. 17. Discuss how the unexpected site conditions, weather,pandemic, and work flow and schedule changes will be addressed to not impact the community? 18. Provide a complete evaluation of impacts associated with all proposed mining, erosion, materials transport (including roadway impacts and impacts on nearby residential development), materials storage, materials sales, materials processing, vehicle operations, and habitat destruction. 19. Discuss alternative plans for disposal of any excavated material that cannot be sold, and provide an evaluation of any disposal sites, other than commercial]y-operated sites 19 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold, NY specifically designed to receive fill. Identify the off-site disposal location. 20. Include a plan for specifically targeted and carefully undertaken soil borings to inform an excavation plan that is designed to prevent catastrophic mass soil movement and soil slumping. The DEIS will not rely solely on published soil surveys or soil borings performed by others for a project involving excavation of 134,000CY of a forested hill's soil, especially one adjoining a waterway. Without specifically targeted and carefully undertaken soil borings to inform an excavation plan, the potential exists for a catastrophic mass soil movement event during, or subsequent to, disturbance of the steep slopes by heavy equipment. The proposed excavation could cause studded faulting and st1°uctUral disturbances associate(,[ with the slope and soil slu.ua'nping to the inirn .diately adjoFning and steeply sloped. preserve, as well as cause sedimentation in the waterway. Sedimentation cautu have a devastating effect on the estuarine life in the inlet because of rapid burial and destruction of benthic organisms, such as shellfish or crustacea. 21. Discuss the effect of precipitation on the re-established steep slope with regard to potential exacerbation of soil movement. It also will show the new retaining structure can adequately support the final slope and resulting hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. 22. Mitigation of potential adverse impacts. Consistency with Community Plans and Studies In 2020, the Town adopted The Southold Comprehensive Plan, the proposed project will be assessed to the goals and objectives of this plan and others. The DEIS will: 1. Include a section focused on the consistency between the proposed action (and alternative actions), and the relevant goals, objectives, and standards of existing planning, land use and policy documents relevant to the subject site and its surroundings. 2. An in-depth analysis of the action on the following policy and planning documents, legislation, and implementing rules and regulations: o Southold Town Comprehensive Plan • Natural Resources and Environment • Community Character • Land Use and Zoning (Marine Zoning Update) Natural Hazards Economic Development Transportation and Infrastructure o Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan & Policies o State and local wetlands protection laws o The Mattituck Watershed Management Plan 20 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold, NY o "NYSDEC Environmental Resource Mapper" -with respect to wildlife evaluation o NYSDOS Coastal Significant Fish and Wildlife Habitat designations (Mattituck Inlet) o Articles 6,7 and 12 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code 0 2019 Suffolk County Special Grand Jury Report: Illegal Dumping & Mining, Suffolk County Impacts on Archeological and Cultural Resources The parcel is located within an area witil historic use and buildings. The DEIS will discuss the following potential, adverse impacts to archeological and cultural resources from the action. The DEIS will: 1. Discuss the project's potential impacts to historic and archeological resources. a. Part 11 of the Full EAF for the project indicates that the project is not adjacent to a historic or archeological site. However, NYSDEC guidance on how to prepare the EAF notes that in preparing responses in this section of the IAAF one must ask "Does the project site contain, or is it contiguous with, a known archaeological site, even though it may not be included on the NY SHPO inventory?" As no archeological survey of the project area has been made it is not possible to answer this question in the negative. b. Although NYS OPRHP's Cultural Resources Information System (CRIS) does not identify the project area as archeologically serlsitive, this should not be construed as mcaning that the area does not have the potential to contain potentially significant arch olearrg cal resources. CRIS relies on the prior identification of archeological sites in proximity to a given arca to evaluate sensitivity. CRIS`s archeologically sensitive GIS layer specifically states: "Note that locations outside of the laufler areas nrraa:y also be ,Irchaaeolog ically sensitive." In the case of the project area the failure to identify it as sensitive is a reflection of the total lack o;fpno.r archeological :surveys ill tlic ia.aainiediate vicinity of the pr,(:� cct. l'he project a eat'.s locaation 011 high groundadjacent to Mattitt:ack Creel (believed to be Dart oa, principal portage routeused se°d lay Nalive nierracatl'as to travel ll'oni the North to Smith shores of long Island), suggesIs that evidence of Native American occupation could be present. C. There are three unevaluated structures listed in CRIS within approximately 1000 feet of the project area. Include an evaluation as to if arra)cl 11()%Vt'lIcsc s1111ctures a wy be visaaally or otlrrcrwise (noise, vibration during constrr•trc,tjon) al fcctervd by the paalle ct an(], al.'potentially affected, if they satisfy the eligibility criteria loa- tl°ae_ State Register of Ilisl.oric PlOces, Other ll+a.t:uired Sections Social and Economic Impacts 1. Describe the public benefit to the community. 2. Economy a. Provide; a full economic analysis/steady of the pc:asitive and ncg,ativc� iaaap�.act on the coanaaa�rrunity and economy from the action. include tlac "short- and ]caa�al� tca�arrrr iarroi'rraacl:� and the 21 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY viability of the commercial use. The number of jobs created (full-time and part time). Include the current levels of employment by Strong's at the site and employment that would be generated by job description, salary benefit levels, etc. Assess the impact of additional ernployees. b. Discuss the claimed benefit to the local economy. It should include data about stored boat ownership and where the boat is docked during the season. 3. Threat to Public Safety: Fire The DEIS will discuss the threat of fire and explosion on site from all ignitable sources. Include the evaluation of potential fire hazards, and If the Mattituck Fire Department is adequately equipped to respond to a fire at the site. This is of special concern given the size of the structures and the combustibles within the stored boats. Use and Conservation of Energy - This section of the DEIS will describe the proposed energy sources, expected levels of consumption and means to reduce consumption. Consultations with the service providers (PSEG 1.,1 and National Grid) will be undertaken and the findings and recomiriendations of these providcrs will be included. Unavoidable Adverse Effects - This section enumerates those short and long-term impacts that cannot be mitigated. Irretrievable and Irreversible Commitment of Resources — This section includes a brief discussion of natural resources consumed as a result of project implementation. The discussion should include the irreversible impacts from excavation of sand, deforestation, on the Town owned preserve. Include a discussion on the irreversible adverse short and long-term impacts on community character resulting from the potential degradation of the quality of life. Growth-Inducing Aspects - The potential growth-Inducing aspects of the project will be presented in this section. (See above) Extent and Quality o Jnfo -niati:)n Existing and Needed To conduct the analyses of potential adverse impacts, available information will be collected and I I reviewed, and empirical information will be developed. While it is not possible to determine all information sources to be used, the following represent sources/research that have been preliminarily identified as necessary to perform the required analyses in the DEIS. Impact on Soils and Topography • USDA, Suffolk County Sol] Survey • USGS Topographic Map Z__ • Proposed Site Development Plans 22 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Slrong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,IVY • Proposed Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan • Soil Boring Logs • Cut/Fill Estimates • Soil borings performed on site to inform the excavation Impact on Water Resources • Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) • Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan & Policies • Water quality assessment of current conditions in Mattituck Inlet over all four seasons (applicant generated) • Water/Tidal flow modelling/study in front of the Marina including docks and boats_(applicant generated) • Study the groundwater supply to determine any impacts to neighboring wells on quality and quantity of groundwater as a result of this action (applicant generated) • USGS Water Table map and monitoring well data, as available • Suffolk County Groundwater Contour Maps • Mattituck Inlet Surveys with Soundings • Relevant plans, staildards and regulations, inch ding the SCDHS SLIffolk County Sanitary Code, New YorkSlandardY a.ndSpec�fications for Erosion and Sedinient Control, New )"ork State Stormwater Management Design Manual, and the Suffolk County Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan. • NYSDEC Freshwater and Tidal Wetland maps • NYSDEC Letter of Non-Jurisdiction • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service—National Wetlands Inventory • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps • Chapter 236 (Stormwater Management) of the Town Code Impact on Ecological Resources • Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) • Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan & Policies • Correspondence with the New York Natural Heritage Program • Field investigations • 1-lutilished inawrial regardlng, the potenli�d presence of 1�;)rotected native plants, plant and Mlil-11ji species listed as endangered, threatenCLI, i andkr special concern (or with odier I i protective status) and significant habitat areas on or in the vicinity of the project site • Ecological Communities Map • Ecological Inventory of Site for Observed Plants and ecological communities and observed/expected wildlife • Tree Removal Plan updated with Tree Species, as identified during field visits • State and local wetlands protection laws • The Mattituck Watershed Management Plan • NYSDEC Environmental Resource Mapper" - with respect to wildlife evaluation 23 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold, NY 0 NYSDOS Coastal Significant Fish and Wildlife Habitat designations (Mattituck Inlet) 0 Articles 6,7 and 12 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code 0 2019 Suffolk County Special Grand Jury Report: Illegal Dumping & Mining, Suffolk County Impact on Transportation • Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) • Four season Traffic Study analyzing real-time data (applicant generated) and including the construction phase as well as the operations of the completed site. • Four season roadway user group study (applicant generated) • Regional and local vehicle routing study and plan (applicant generated) • Four season comprehensive boat (vessel) traffic study (applicant generated) • Most-recent three-year accident data, as published by NYSDOT and accident data from the Southold Police Department if more recent or more detailed than that available from the NYSDOT • The Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition • The Institute of Transportation Engineers, Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition • Highway Capacity Manual, latest edition • Consultations and/or review of available information from the Town of Southold Highway Department,NYSDOT and SCDPW Impact on Aesthetic Resources and Community Character • Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) • Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan & Policies • Visual Impact Study that includes computer-generated imagery for viewshed changes from Mattituck Creek and adjacent roadways (Applicant generated) • Architectural plans and elevations • Site and area inspections • Chapter 172 (Lighting, Outdoor) of the Town Code Impact on Air Quality • Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) • Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan & Policies • Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES2014b) • Published emission factors from NYSDOT,NYSDEC or USEPA • Construction schedule, with projected truck and equipment types • USEPA, Air Emission Factors and Quantification, AP-42: Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors • Carbon sequestering estimates to be based on published sources, including but not limited to USEPA, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Greenhouse Gas Mitigation in U.S. Forestry and AoriC1,11 -C ca&on sequestering Jacwi-s; U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information L, 1AIItD Administrotioll- Method l'or Calcul,,,wng Carbon Sequestration by Trees in Urban and C; :14 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mallituck, Town of Southold, NY Suburban Settings; and/or 2006 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. • Tree Survey and Tree Identification, as provided by Land Use Ecological Services, Inc. • Code of Federal Regulations — Title 40, Part 50, National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). • New York State Department of Environmental Conservation: DAR-1 Guidance (August 2016). Impact from Noise • Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) • Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan &Policies • Comprehensive Noise Study (Applicant Generated) • Chapter 180 Noise of the Southold Town Code Impact on Archeological and Cultural Resources • Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) • Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan & Policies • Cultural Resource Survey including NYS CRIS system findings. • Consultation with the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation office, Social and Economic Impacts • Southold Town Comprehensive Plan (2020) • Comprehensive Social and Economic Impact Study on the Community and Town (Applicant Generated) Construction-Related Impacts • Proposed Site Development Plans • Proposed Excavation Plan, including soil borings to evaluate and inform the plan • Proposed Construction Schedule • Traffic Study, User Group Study and Routing Plan (see above) • Chapter 180 (Noise) of the Town Code Initial Identification of'Mitigation Measures As the DEIS analyses have not yet been conducted, no specific mitigation measures have yet been developed. Nonetheless, where the impact analyses conducted in the DEIS ]indicate the potential for significant adverse impacts, the DEIS will set forth measures to mitigate those impacts within the topic sections, as presented herein. 25 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Maltituck, Town oj'Sozahold, IVY Reasonable Alternatives to Be Considered Pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617, the DEIS must contain a description and evaluation of reasonable alternatives to the proposed action that are feasible, considering the objectives and capabilities of the project sponsor. This DEIS will analyze the impacts of the following alternatives and compare (quantitatively and qualitatively) these impacts to those associated with implementation of the proposed action, based upon the specific issues outlined above: 1. No-Action (site remains as it currently exists). 2. Alternative Material Removal Plan — This alternative is intended to mitigate the impacts associated with the removal of material via trucks over local roadways and will include the barging of cleared vegetation including trees, stumps and excavated materials. 3. Constructing the project on another site. 4. Constructing the proposed storage buildings without the need for excavation. 5. Constructing smaller building(s) with less excavation. 6. The reconfiguration or reconstruction of existing buildings on-site for larger boat storage. Prol)oscd Organization and Overall Content of the DEIS The DEIS will conform with the basic content requirements as contained in 6 NYCRR Part 617.9 (b)(3). The proposed outline of the DEIS is as follows: Executive Summary 1.0 Description of the Proposed Action 1.1 Project Location and Site Conditions 1.2 Project Design and Layout 1.3 Project Objectives and Benefits 1.4 Construction and Operations 1.5 Required Pen-nits and Approvals 2.0 Natural Environmental Resources 2.1 Impact on Soils and Topography 2.1.1 Existing Conditions 2.1.2 Potential Impacts Analysis 2.1.3 Proposed Mitigation 2.2 Impact on Water Resources 2.2.1 Existing Conditions 2.2.2 Potential Impacts Analysis 2.2.3 Proposed Mitigation 2.3 Impact on Ecological Resources 2.3-1 Existing Conditions 23.2 Potential Impacts Analysis 2.3.3 Proposed Mitigation 26 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattiluck, Town of Southold, NY 2.4 Impact on Plants and Animals 2.4.1 Existing Conditions 2.4.2 Potential Impacts Analysis 2.4.3 Proposed Mitigation 2.5 Impact to the Environment 2.5.1 Existing Conditions 2.5.2 Potential Impacts Analysis 2.5.3 Proposed Mitigation 2.6 Impact on Flooding 2.6.2 Existing Conditions 2.6.3 Potential Impacts Analysis 2.6.4 Proposed Mitigation 3.0 Human Environmental Resources 3.1 Impact on Human Health 3.1.1 Existing Conditions 3.1.2 Potential Impacts Analysis 3.1.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.2 Impact on Transportation 3.2.1 Existing Conditions 3.2.2 Potential Impacts Analysis 3.2.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.3 Impact on Aesthetic Resources 3.3.1 Existing Conditions 3.3.2 Potential Impacts Analysis 3.3.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.4. Impact on Community Character 3.4.1 Existing Conditions 3.4.2 Potential Impacts Analysis 3.4.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.5 Impact on Open Space and Recreation 3.5.1 Existing Conditions 3.5.2 Potential Impacts Analysis 3 3.5.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.6 Impact from Noise 3.6.1 Existing Conditions 3.6.2 Potential Impacts Analysis 3.6.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.7 Impact on Air Quality 3.7.1 Existing Conditions 3.7.2 Potential Impacts Analysis 3.7.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.8 Social and Economic Impacts 3.8.1 Existing Conditions 27 Final Scope for Final Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold, NY 3.8.2 Potential Impacts Analysis 3.8.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.9 Construction-Related Impacts 3.9.1 Description of Proposed Construction Schedule and Activities 3.9.2 Potential Impacts Analysis 3.9.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.10 Consistency with Community Plans and Studies 3.10.1 Existing Conditions 3.10.2 Potential Impacts Analysis 3.10.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.11 Impact on Archeological and Cultural Resources 3.11.1 Existing Conditions 3.11.2 Potential Impacts Analysis 3.11.3 Proposed Mitigation 4.0 Other Required Sections 4.1 Social and Economic Impacts 4.2 Threat to Public Safety 4.3 Use and Conservation of Energy 4.4 Adverse Impacts That Cannot Be Avoided (Short-Tenn and Long-Term) 4.5 Irretrievable and Irreversible Commitment of Resources 4.6 Growth-Inducing Impacts 5.0 Alternatives and Potential Impacts 5.1 Alternative 1: No-Action 5.2 Alternative 2: Alternative Material Removal Plan Using Barges 5.3 Alternative 3. Constructing the project on another parcel. 5.4 Alternative 4. Constructing the proposed storage building(s) without the need for excavation. 5.5 Alternative 5. Constructing smaller building(s) with less excavation. 5.6 Alternative 6. The reconfiguration or reconstruction of existing buildings on-site for larger boat storage. 6.0 References 28 Southold Town Planning Loard Work Session — February 8. 2021 — Page 2 Project Name: 870 Love Lane Professional Office and SCTM#:; 1000-140-2-17 Apartment Location: 870 Love Lane, Mattituck Description: This proposed site plan is for the conversion of an existing two-story single family dwelling to a 1,430 sq. ft. Professional office on the first floor: and 830 sq. ft, apartment on the second floor with nine parking stalls on 0.7 acres in the Residential Office (RO) Zoning District. Status: = Pending Action: Approval Extension & Review for CO Attachments: Staff Report Project Name: Peconic Landing Duplex Conversions (5) SCTM#:i 1000-35-1-25 Location: 1205 Route 25, Greenport Description: This amended site plan is for the proposed conversion of five (5) existing 1-story single family dwellings (units #19, 20, 60, 68, 74) to two family dwellings with no expansion of living area and no basement, 4 parking stalls on a Hamlet Density (HD) and R-80 split zoned parcel totaling 143 acres. Status: Pending Action: Update & Review for Determination Attachments; Staff Report SG Project Name: Stronc 's Storage BuildingsSCTM# 1000-106-6-13.4 r� Location: 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck ..........-_..._._....,. --._.___ Description. This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. Status: Pending Action: SEQRA Final Scope Review Attachments: Staff Report Discussions ❖ Draft Monthly Report for January Southold Planning Department Staff Report Site Plan Application Work Session —Supplemental Summary Date February 8, 2021 Prepared By: Mark Terry I. Application Information Project Title: Strong's Boatyard Buildings Applicant: Strong's Yacht Center Date of Submission: July 20, 2018 Tax Map Number: 106.-6-10 & 13.4 Project Location: 5780 West Mill Road Hamlet: Mattituck Zoning District: Split R—80/Marine II (M-II) II. Description of Project Type of Site Plan: Commercial Acreage of Project Site: ±33 acres (R80 @ 16.5ac+MII @ 16.5 ac) Building Size 101,500 sq. ft. This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. III. State Environmental Quality Review Process 1. Final Scope - The final scope is prepared by the lead agency. It establishes the framework and content of the DEIS. The final scope identifies relevant, substantive issues that require analysis, discussion and possible mitigation in the DEIS. Once adopted the final scope must be published on the website and in the NYSDEC ENB. The timeframe to produce the final scope is within 60 days of receiving the draft scope unless the timeframe is extended by mutual agreement. The timeframe to produce the final scope was extended on November 2, 2020 to December 7, 2020 and then to February 8, 2021 by mutual agreement between the applicant and the Planning Board. IV. Final Scope It is recommended that the Planning Board adopt the Final Scope dated February 8, 2021 (attached). 1. L,t I w 1 5-outhold TOW1 Planirning (Board February 1,2021 VIA EMAIL and FIRST CLASS MAIL Mr. Donald Wilcenski,Chair Town of Southold Planning Board 54375 State Route 25 PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Change of zone application SCTM-1000-106-6-13.3 and 1000-106-6-13.4 Dear Mr.Wilcenski, On behalf of Save the Mattituck Inlet, I am requesting the status of the change of zone application filed by MIMS Holding, LLC filed in 2006. Prior to said application both parcels were zoned R-80 and the application was made to change both to M 11. 1 have attached a more detailed history prepared by fellow board member,Stephen Boscola,to this letter,as well as a memorandum of a June 8,2000 board meeting requiring an amended site plan be required for a similar proposal due to zoning restrictions. The file on the Town of Southold website has the application in its"Pending"folder and the last communication by your office,signed by you on February 9, 2009 lists the deficiencies in the Part I Environmental Assessment Form.The file does not contain any items remedying these deficiencies or any other indication of subsequent action. The current zoning map for the hamlet of Mattituck,dated April 29, 2016 and also attached,shows lot 1000-106-6-13.4 currently zoned as MII and lot 1000-106-6-13.3 zoned as R-80.The current Suffolk County tax map shows the two lots combined into lot 1000-106-6-13.4 and that entire lot zoned as"commercial." I am requesting the current status of these two lots and the application to change their zoning.We respectfully requestthat this issue be addressed prior to the adoption of the scope,to determine whether this project can proceed at all. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. I can be reached directly at 718-303-3277 and tnt34@cornell.edu. Very truly yours, cc:Scott Russell,Supervisor Thomas N.Tcrscano, Esq.,Attorney at Law Heather Lanza, Director Member,Save the Mattituck Inlet Bill Duffy,Town Attorney Save the Mattituck Inlet P.O. Box 592 ♦ Mattituck, NY 11952 * www.SaveTheMattitucklnlet.com INLET January 19, 2021 Re: Strong's Storage Buildings Proposal and Zoning Changes at SCTM#: 1000-106-6-10, 13.4 Statement from group member, Stephen Boscola: I have an intimate familiarity with the subject property as my grandfather was the operator of the marina from 1961 to 1985 and a partial owner of the entire property from 1961 to 2004. My grandmother sold the partnership interest in the property to the majority partner, William Pape, in August 2004. Once that sale was completed, along with a similar transaction with another partner, the Pape family controlled the entire property—both the marina and upland. I would like to note the following: L During the entire period of combined ownership (1961-2004), the property held two zonings — "commercial light," (now M-II) where the marina sits up to the start of the cliffside, and R-80 for the upland(from the edge of the cliffside to West Mill Road),where a major subdivision was contemplated. a. These are shown on the last approved site plan dated 1984 (when the last shed was extended). 2. In 2000, the Town Clerk noted in a memo (enclosed)that a similar plan from the Pape family,required an amended site plan, for which there is no record of a new/amended site plan. a. The R-80 zoning is mentioned in the memo: "The degree of excavation and regrading that is proposed [by two 80' x 250' storage buildings] and its intrusion into the Residential zoning district, along with the actual size of the proposed structures and close proximity to the waterfront..." b. The above referenced project is even larger than the proposed project from 2000. c. A survey map of the property in the Town files from 2000 shows the proposed zoning, but there is no approved site plan after the 1984 plan showing the change. The survey map is marked"received",not"approved." d. No additional documents in the file show an advancement of that proposal. A new proposal filed in 2007 (noted below) for the same zoning change is evidence that the zoning was not changed in 2000. 3. In 2007,the Pape family formally applied for a zoning change for a portion of the R-80 upland property to M-11. It appears the zoning was never actually changed once again. Note the following: a. My family was on the list to be formally notified but never received a registered letter, nor is there evidence of mailings in the Town files. b. The files show detailed correspondence for 2 years, concluding with a final letter from the Town to the Pape's attorney in 2009, listing 18 deficiencies in the Part I Environmental Assessment Form. There is no indication of remedies or subsequent action. 4. The Pape family sold the marina and upland property to the current applicant in 2016. There is no record of the current applicant filing for a change of zoning. Save the Mattituck Inlet ♦ P.O. Box 592 ♦ Mattituck, NY 11952 ♦ www.SaveTheMattitucklnlet.com PLANNING BOARD MEMBE . BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. � � �, � ��`��y. Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Chairman " Southold,New York 11971-0959 M WILLIAJ. CREMERS CD F KENNETH L.EDWARDS Fax (631) 765-3136 GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,JR. iw Telephone (631) 765-1938 RICHARD CAGGIANO PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM TO: Edward Forr;ster, Code Enforcement Officer FROM: Valerie Scopaz, Town PIanner J� RE: Mattituck Inlet Marina Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM# 1000-106-6-13.3 DATE: June 8, 2000 The Planning Board reviewed the proposed addition of two 80'by 250'storage buildings at the above-referenced site at its work session on June 5 '. The degree of excavation and regrading that is proposed and its intrusion into the Residential zoning district, along with the size of the proposed structures and the close proximity to the waterfront: all were factors in the Board's decision that an amended site plan be required for this proposal. Please direct the applicant to secure an appointment with Robert Kassner to review the site plan requirements at his earliest convenience. Long Island Seu�x�3 attituck/Laurel Zoning rt with Protected \\\ \ \\ Snf$y \ \ Lands ZONING I-1-1111 PMP, \ \ \ NUNN N \\ AC \\ a \\\ \ - \ AHD Av iis\ NW LB L.I .\ \ �I �— �a y - g - \\ 1{! \\ j R-40 R-80 Rp \\ \\ `\ Protected � y` �� \� �-� � �� '� mW HamletCentermg- 64v A z Map Prepared by Town of Southold Geographic Information System y Apri129,2016 Suffolk County Real Property Tax Service Agency 0_� 1., ARMS and Tax Map Copyright 2016, d. 0,25 Mile County of Suffolk,NY Subs y il. .I� tl�J 2 8 2I,��21 h��TI1.di� I 13am:i January 25, 2021 Donald Wilcenski, Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall Annex Building 54375 Route 25 PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Chairman Wilcenski, We hereby request party-in-interest status with respect to Strong's Boat Storage Buildings, 1000-106.-6-10 for all matters related to this project's application. Please keep us informed. Our email address is savernattituckinlet2 maiLcom Our mailing address is: Save the Mattituck inlet PO Box 592 Mattituck, NY 11952 Our phone is: (917) 612-1863 Thank you, X' Anne"Sherwood Pundyk Save Mattituck Inlet cc: Heather Lanza, Town Planning Director d Mark Te ry,Assistant Town Planning Director OFFICE LOCATION: � ; MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annexe P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 ��'" �� Southold, NY 11971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) " Southold, NY ° Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Field Inspection Minutes January 4, 2021 Attending Planning Board Members: Donald J. Wilcenski, James Rich III, Mary Eisenstein Planning staff. Mark Terry, Brian Cummings, Heather Lanza Landowner: Jeff Strong The inspection began in the marina area to view the existing docks, bulkhead, boat lifts and existing buildings, as well as the condition of the creek and the nearby fringe marsh. The bottom of the bank where the excavation is proposed was viewed, as well as some boats on site that represented the size of boat the applicant expects to store in the proposed new buildings. Next the landowner guided everyone to the markers in the wooded area at the top of the bank that showed where the edges of clearing would be. Also inspected were the approximate location of the top of the proposed retaining wall. The proximity of the adjacent house to the north was observed to be relatively close to the proposed area of clearing and excavation. The entire perimeter of the proposed area of clearing and excavation was walked, and the location of the proposed road to move materials off site was observed. The landowner assisted with finding the survey stakes marking the area of clearing. Communication amongst the Board members and with the landowner were limited to fact- finding and observation of the site. Three Planning staff and one Planning Board member also visited the site via the adjacent street to view the property from the southern adjacent area where there are several residential neighbors. CHARLES R. CUDDY Attorney at Law 445 Griffing Avenue Riverhead,NY 11901 Mailing Address: Tel.:(6'31)369-8200 PO Box 1547 Fax:(631)369-9080 Riverhead,NY 11901 e-mail:charlesewddti,(�t.lc)ptotiline.net December 30, 2020 ZC E I I E „„ Donald Wilcenski, Chairman Planning Board Town of Southold g ::I)oa d PO Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Re: Strong's West Mill LLC-3430 Mill Road,Mattituck,NY SCTM#1000-106-6-13.4 Dear Chairman Wilcenski: The applicant has considered the request in your letter of December 28, 2020. Under the circumstances set forth Strong's is willing, to extend the tinieta-ame for the adoption of the Final Scope to February 8, 2021. Very truly yours, µ� °`� r M Charles R. Cuddy CRC:ik Enclosures cc: Heather Lanza, Planning Director u CHARLES R. CUDDY ��' Attorney at Law 01, r,`120 445 Griffing Avenue Riverhead,NY 11901 Mailing Address: I e7; (631)369-8200 _.. PO Box 1547 Fax: (63 1)369-9080 Riverhead,NY 11901 e-rnawl:ol�acle.sa� rIrec1a �rlizae,suet' December 30,2020 Donald Wilcenski, Chairman Planning Board Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Re: Strong's West Mill LLC-3430 Mill Road,Mattituck,NY SCTM#1000-106-6-13.4 Dear Chairman Wilcenski: The applicant has considered the request in your letter of December 28, 2020. Under the circumstances set forth Strong's is willing to extend the timeframe for the adoption of the Final Scope to February 8,2021. Very truly yours, Charles R. Cuddy CRC:ik Enclosures cc: Heather Lanza, Planning Director OFFICE LOCATION: MI1IL7NG ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex �;�d "� P.O.Box 1179 54375 State Route 25Southold, NY 11971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) , b+ NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Southold www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD December 28, 2020 Charles Cuddy Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Request for Extension of Time to Produce the Final Scope Strong's Boatyard Buildings Site Plan Application 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: As you are aware, the public hearing on the Draft Scope for the application referenced above was closed on December 7, 2020. The Planning Board has been working diligently to produce a Final Scope, however this public hearing produced an unusually large number of comments. This large number, together with the Planning Department being short-staffed, the holidays, and the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, have created a situation where the Board has found they need more time to produce the Final Scope. The Planning Board is requesting an extension of the timeframe for the adoption of the Final Scope to February 8, 2021, The Board feels this is a reasonable request given the circumstances. It will provide enough time for them to review all the public input, as well as conduct site visits and produce a thorough Final Scope. Please let us know if your client agrees to this request. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the Planning Department at (631)765-1938. r ectfuly, r , Donald Wilcenski Chairman Southold Town Planningw Board Work Session — November 16, 202 _ Iia„fie 2 Project Name: Northside Beverage _ _ SCTM#: 1000-122-7-6.7 Location: 1795 Old Main Road, Laurel Description building into wholesale/retail beverage distribution, office and storage p p e on 1.1 acres in the General Business (B) Zoning District. _ .... Status: Approved Action: Review for CO Attachments: Staff Report ....... ..... Project Name The Heritage at Cutchogue (Harvest SCTM#: 1000-102-1-33.3 Pointe) Location: 75 Schoolhouse Road, on the n/w corner of GrifFing Street and Schaal pp y adCutcha Nouse Lane, a roximatel .1,079 feet n/o the Main Ro , in _gue Description: This Residential Site Plan is for the development of 124 detached and attached dwellings. Status. Approved with Conditions Action. 8 Units for CO Attachments: Staff Report Project Name: tr,' Strong's Storage Buildings SCTM#: 1000-106-6-13.4 Location: 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck Description, This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat, storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 i sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. Status: Pending Action. SEQRA Draft Scope Review Attachments. Staff Report Discussion: •3 Draft October Monthly Report •3 Draft 2021 PB Schedule Southold Planning Department Staff Report Site Plan Application Work Session —App. Research Update Date November 16, 2020 Prepared By: Brian Cummings I. Application Information Project Title: Strong's Boatyard Buildings Applicant: Strongs Yacht Center Date of Submission: July 20, 2018 Tax Map Number: 106.-6-10 & 13.4 Project Location: 5780 West Mill Road Hamlet: Mattituck Zoning District: Split R— 80/Marine 11 (M-11) I. Description of Project Type of Site Plan: Commercial Acreage of Project Site: ±33 acres (R80 (c)i / 16.5ac + Mll @ 16.5 ac) Building Size 101,500 sq. ft. This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the Mll and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. III: Application Rescarcli lUpdate The application has been found to potentially be non-compliant with Town Code §280-9 Lot Recognition. Pursuant to 280-9 B "All lots which are not recognized by the Town ... shall not receive any building permits or other development entitlements." No evidence that the Subject parcel meets the Town's lot recognition code has been submitted. Further research into the Planning Department's files provides evidence that appears to show that the parcel known as tax map as SCTM# 1000-106-6-13.7, which is entirely surrounded by the subject parcel, was never formally subdivided from the marina parcel. This causes the subject parcel to be non-compliant with 280-9. Related to this, the applicant's agent has alerted staffthat the application cannot be reviewed by Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS) because the parcel boundaries have changed Without their approval. Both the Town and County situations will need to be rectified for the application to receive any Town approvals or County Health Department review and approval. I Southold Planning Department Staff Report Site Plan Application Work Session —Supplemental Summary Date November 16, 2020 Prepared By: Mark Terry 1. Application Information Project Title: Strong's Boatyard Buildings Applicant: Strongs Yacht Center Date of Submission: July 20,2018 Tax Map Number-. 1106.-6-10 & 13.4 Project Location: 5780 West Mill Road Ham let: Mattituck Zoning District: Split R— 80/Marine 11 (M-11) 11. Description of Project Type of Site Plan: Commercial .Acreage of Project Site: +33 acres (R80 Oa 16.5ac+MTI , 16.5 ac) Building Size 101,500 sq. ft. This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two(2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. ,and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MIl and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. 111: SEQR Timeframe On February 10, 2020 the Planning Board classified the proposed action as a Type 1. On August 10, 2020 the Planning Board issued a Positive Declaration requiring the submittal of adraft scope document. On September 11,2020 the applicant submitted a draft scope document for public review and comment. The NYSDEC offers the-following guidance on scoping. The purpose of scoping is to narrow issues and ensure that the draft EIS will be a concise, accurate and complete document that Is adequate for public review. The scoping process is intended to: • Ensure public participation in the EIS development process-, • Allow open discussion of issues of public concern; and • Permit inclusion of relevant, substantive public issues In the final written scope. The scoping process can also allow the lead agency and other involved agencies to reach agreement on relevant issues to 11111111TIIZC the ilICILIS'1011 Of Unnecessary Issues. The Planning Board had accomplished the following pertaining to the draft scope: 1 a. Distributed the draft scope document by email/and or letter to involved and interested agencies and persons. b. Sent to NYSDEC ENB and posted on the Town website. Published in October 21, 2020 ENB. c. Scheduled public hearing for November 2 on the document. IV. SEQR Process The SEAR process involves the following Planning Board steps for this application: a. Held hearing on draft scope on November 2, 2020. Note that the following public notice was published in the NYSDEC ENB. Notice qfAvailability qf'Drafi Seope and Public Scoping Session Suffolk County- The Town of Southold, as lead agency, has made the Draft Scope for the proposed Strong's Storage Buildings available. The draft Scope is available from. Southold Town Planning Department, .54375 NYS Roule 25, SoWhold, NY 11971 and on line at: hti.p.-1124.38.28.228:20401weblinkl0ldocl987065IPagel.aspx. A puhlic seilfin conunen The action involves a site plan is for the proposed construction oj'two (2) buildings jbr boat storage, one at 52,500 square foot and the other at 49,000 square foot, located on 32.6 acres in the M11 and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 square foot of existing boatyard buildings. The project is located at 3430 Mill Road in Matliftick, Town of Southold, New York. Contact:Mark Terry, Town oJ'Southold, P.O. Box 1179, Southold, NY 11971, Phone: (631) 70-1938, E-InClik inork.lerry(a town.sowho Id.ny.z is. b. The Planning Board produces final scope within 60 days of receiving the draft scope (November 10, 2020) unless timeframe is extended. The timeframe to produce the final scope was extended on November 2,2020 to December 7,2020 by mutual agreement to allow the filing and notice of the Positive Declaration in the NYSDEC ENB. c. Applicant Submits Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS) that is drafted to the final scope content. d. Within 45 days the Planning Board determines if the DEIS is adequate, e. Planning Board holds public hearing on the DEIS for a rninil-nUrn ol'30 days. f. Within 45 days of filing the DEIS prepare the Final Environmental Impact Statement. V. Discussion. The draft scope has been reviewed to the Positive Declaration and the following is recommended: 1. Impact on Land b. The proposed action may involve construction on slopes sof 15% or greater. A potential large, adverse impact may Occur through the excavation of 134,921 ICY (cut) of earthwork/sand/soil removal, construction on slopes of 15% or greater, excavating steep slopes, leaving slopes steeper than that which exist and removing large areas of t, C5 vegetation on steep slopes and in other areas fi-orn the site. STAFF: Included on Page 6. PUBLIC COMMENT: Concern about the affect of excavation of land area and slope failure and erosion impacts to existing,adjacent structures. d The proposed action may involve the excavation and removal of n7ore than 1,000 1011S of natural material. A potential large, adverse impact may occur through the excavation and removal of 134,921 CY of sand (364,286,700 lbs)or 182,143.35 tons. STAFF: Included on Page 6. PUBLIC COMMENT: Concern about the 134,921 cubic yards proposed to be excavated and that this is the wrong site for such a project. The proposed action may involve construction that continues for more than one year or in multiple phases. A potential large, adverse impact may Occur to adjacent roadways, SUITOUndingo properties, neighborhood(s), and region through the clearing, excavation, transportinc, of materials and construction of the site during a multi-year period in multiple phases. 'fie proposed action may significantly adversely impact the quality of life of residents and visitors. STAFF: The draft scope does not include the details of a analysis on the long term adverse impacts to adjacent roadways, surrounding properties, neighborhood(s), and region through the clearing, excavation, transporting of materials and construction of the site during a multi-year period in multiple phases in the DEIS and needs to be added to the final scope. The duration of potential adverse impacts from all vehicle trip types included in each phase and post construction, wear and tear on roadways caused by vehicle types, quality sof life impacts to the community and receptors along the routes including adjacent Towns' where vehicles will be travelling needs to be analyzed. Alternate methods to eliminate and/or shorten the duration of potential adverse impacts also needs to be discussed. f The proposed action may result in increased erosion, -vi,hefherftoin physical disturbance or vegetation removal (includingf-on? treatment by herbicides). A large increase in erosion may occur through the clearing and excavation of a total of 3.94 acres which includes the removal of large arriounts of vegetation in multiple phases. STAFF: Included on Page 6. PUBLIC COMMENT 1. Concerns about water quality impacts to groundwater and effect of excavation and vibration from machinery on existing surrounding structures. 3. Impacts on Surface Waters d. The proposed action may involve construction within or aqjoining a freshwater or tidal wetland, or in the bed or banks of any other water body. The proposed action involves construction on a parcel adjoining a tidal wetland: Mattituck Creek. An area of tidal marsh located in the east of the property. STAFF. Included on Page 6. e. The proposed action may create turbidity in a waterbody, either from upland erosion, runoff or by disturbing bottom sediments. The proposed action proposes to remove and transport large quantities of upland soils, including during the winter months. A moderate adverse impact could occur. STAFF: Included on Page 6. h. The proposed action may cause soil erosion, or otherwise create a source of'storniwater discharge that may lead to siltation or other degradation qfreceiving water bodies. Extensive site work is proposed that will clear large areas of vegetation and cause landforin changes that could potentially cause turbid storm water runoff to enter Mattituck Creek during storm events. STAFF: Included on Page 6. i. The proposed action may affect the water quality (?f any water bodies within or downstream of the site of the proposed action The propose action may affect water quality of Mattiwclt Creek and Long Island Sound. Adverse impacts from storm water runoff capable of overflowing impervious surfaces may introduce chemicals, nutrients, sediments or 0thC1-P011LItantS Into the waterbody. STAFF: Included on Page 6. In 4. Impacts on Groundwater f The proposed action may require the bulk storage (?/' pelroleum or cheinical products over ground-�i;aler Or 017 Oqllijer. 4 The proposal includes the bulk storage of chemical and/or petroleum products over the Sole Source Aquifer Nassau-Suffolk. Four 2,000 gallon liquid propane above ground tanks are proposed. The storage of chemicals used in Marina and vessel maintenance is expected. STAFF: A discussion on the types and use of chemicals in Marina and vessel maintenance needs to be added to the final scope. 5. Impact on Flooding b. The proposed action may result in development ivithin a 100 year floodplain. The proposed action will develop a 100 year and 500 year floodplain adjoining Mattituck Creek. Flooding of portions of the parcel during storm events is expected within the FEMA Flood Zone AE El 8. The proposed storage buildings are located within Flood Zone X; (unshaded); an area of minimal risk. However, the potential effects of climate change on the site must be evaluated. STAFF: Included on Page 6. d The proposed action may result in, or require, modification of existing drainage patterns. The proposed action involves the clearing, excavation and manipulation of the existing landform and therefore existing natural drainage patterns will be altered. A large area of the lot will be converted to impervious surfaces that require engineered storm water controls. A potential, moderate adverse impact could occur to existing drainage patterns as a result of the action. STAFF: Included on Page 6. 6. Impact on Air Other.- The proposal involves the operation of heavy machinery and trucks on and off site over a long duration of time that could result in moderate adverse impacts to local air quality. The proposal also involves the removal 3.94 acres of soil and vegetation including 493+ hardwood trees contributing to carbon sequestering. Carbon sequestration is the process t� by which atmospheric carbon dioxide is taken up by trees, grasses, and other plants through photosynthesis and stored as carbon in biomass (trunks, branches, foliage, and roots) and soils. The oak IS the genus With the most carbon-absorbing capabilities, there are other notable deciduous trees that sequester carbon as well. STAFF: Included on Page 8. Page 7. Impact on Plants and Animals 5 a. The proposed action may cause reduction in population or loss of'individuals of any threatened or endangered species, as listed by New York State or the Federal government, that use the site, or are found on, over, or near the site. NYSDEC records indicate that the piping plover (Charadrius inelodus) and the southern sprite(Nehalennia integricollis) potentially occur near the site, however, due to iandform changes and use of the site,the occurrence of these species near or on-site is unlikely and low. Conversely,the Northern long-eared bat(Myotis septentrionolis) ,a listed federally- threatened species under section 4(d) of the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 could potentially Occur on the parcel. The clearing of 3,94 acres of woodland habitat could result in large, adverse impacts to the protected species. STAFF: Included on Page 7. b- The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used by any rare, threatened or endangered species, as listed by New York State or the federal government. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impacts to habitat. Habitats are used by Insects, reptiles, amphibians, fish, mammals, birds for breeding, hibernation, reproduction, feeding, sheltering, migration or overwintering. The habitats may be used year-round, seasonally, or on a transient basis (passing through the area or during migration.). The clearing, excavation and grading of 3.94 acres of woodland habitat (a large area of woodland when assessed locally) may result in potentially large, ,adverse impact to all fauna on site (protected and unprotected). Death and displacement of species could occur. STAFF: Included onPage 7. d The proposed action inay cause reduction in population, or loss oj'individuals, of any ,species qf'speciol concern or conservation need, as listed by New York Sicae or the Federal government, that use the site, or are found on, over, or near the site. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact to the Woodland Box Turtle (Terropene carolina corolina), a New York State-listed species of Special Concern on the parcel. The clearing, excavation and grading of 3.94 acres of woodland liabiltat (a large area of woodland when assessed locally) may result in potentially large adverse impacts to the species. STAFF: Included on Page 7. d. The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habiial used by any species of special concern and conservation need, as listed by Netii, York ;Stale or the Federal government. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact through the clearing and excavation of3.94 acres of woodland habitat FeSUltil](11 in a 6 Reduction or elimination of the Woodland Box Turtle(Terropene carolina carolina), ,a New York State-listed species of Special Concern from the area. STAFF: Included on Page 7. 9- The proposed action may substantially interfere with nesting/breeding, foraging, or over- wintering habitat far the predominant species that occupy or use the project site. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact and significantly interfere with nesting/breeding, foraging or overwintering habitat by removing 3.94 acres of vegetation, including the removal of important habitat features such as dead trees used for nesting and cover. This habitat area is connected to a 25.29 acre parcel with similar habitat that is protected by the ]'own of Southold (SCTM4 106-6-20.3)to the south. This woodland assemblage comprises the largest undeveloped acreage in the Mattituck Creek watershed. Other areas of woodland to the south and to the west on the R-80 zoned portion of the parcel may also be affected. STAFF: Included on Page 7. 9. Impact on Aesthetic Resources C. The proposed action may be visible from publicly accessible vantage points: i. Seasonally (e.g., screened by sunnner foliage, but visible during other seasons) ii. Year round The proposed action is of scale and dimension that will be visible from publicly accessible scenic resources (Mattituck Creek) by operators of vessels using the waterway during seasonal use resulting in a potential moderate impact to scenic enjoyment of the waterway. Note that Mattituck Creek is a Federal waterway. STAFF: Included on Page 8. e. The proposed action may cause a dinfinishment of the public enjoyment and appreciation of the designated aesthetic resource. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact to the aesthetic resource (Mattituck Creek) through the diminishment of public enjoyment by users and members of the community under different circumstances and activities in a location that also has an important role in recreation and tourism economy. Both are important and changes to scenic and aesthetic resources may have adverse impacts on both the quality of life of residents and broader economic impacts. STAFF: Included on Pa(ye 8. 13. Impact on Transportation a. Projected traffic increase may exceed capacity q/existing road ne4�,ork. The proposed action Could result in a moderate to large adverse impact by significantly increasing I rl� the number of vehicles (including C011SIRICtion and service vehicles) on local roads for long C, durations. Capacity of the roadways may be adversely impacted. The proposed action will add 7 substantial traffic to the area and due to current road conditions, traffic, and intersection conditions,the roads may not have the capacity to handle it. Capacity considers the traffic conditions, road way characteristics, and traffic controls Such as the signing or signals at intersections. It addresses the physical amount of vehicles and pedestrians a road can handle and does not depend on the total number of vehicles demanding service, but is influenced by the relative distribution of vehicles by lane. The geometric design of the road influences capacity(NYSDEC). The design and condition of the roads leading to the site (route) is a concern. Many areas exhibit stress cracks on the pavement. The design of the roads and the ability to increase traffic, including trucks, is a significant concern. Curves, declines and inclines exist on the route. The level of service (LOS) at intersections may be adversely impacted. While road capacity gives a quantitative measure of the amount of traffic that can be handled, level of service gives a qualitative measure of how well that traffic flows. For a given road, capacity would be constant, although it may vary at intersections. But actual traffic flow will be different for different days and different during a day itself. The intention of LOS is to relate the quality of traffic service to a given flow rate. LOS is a term that designates a range of operating conditions, based on delay, on a particular road or at an intersection (NYSDEC). In addition to the above assessment, a routing plan is necessary to adequately assess potential impacts to transportation. STAFF: Included on Pages 7 and 8. PUBLIC COMMENT: Concerns about the impacts from traffic during business operations on the quality of life. d. The proposed action will degrade existing pedestrian or bicycle accommodations, The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impacts to the public and user groups from the increase of vehicular traffic on local and regional roads affecting the public's use and enJoyrnent of the roads while conducting activities (driving, walking, biking). The large number of truck trips proposed could result in large, adverse impacts to West Mill Road, Cox Neck 'Road, Suffolk County Route 48, New York State Route 25, Sound Avenue, Northville Turnpike, Suffolk County Route 58 and other local and regional roads. STAFF: The draft scope is not specific enough. A detailed assessment of the potential adverse impacts to pedestrian and bicycle user groups of local and regional roadways needs to be included in the final scope. Impacts related to safe navigation of roadways by vehicles and impacts from noise and enjoyment of roadways. PUBLIC COMMENT: Concerns about the quality of life impacts and the existing traffic conflicts with user groups using the local roadways. Concerns about the increase of traffic including trucks and safety of user groups on local roadways. 15. Impact on Noise, Odor, and Light 0. The proposed action may-produce sound above noise levels established by local regulation. The proposed action Could result in a moderate to large adverse impact fi-orn excessive noise levels during ]on,, duration of site work and Construction over a multi-yeas- period. 8 Noise associated with the operation of heavy equipment and trucks includes but is not limited to; engine noise, noise frons inoving and backing Lip heavy equipment (reversal warning sound) and the accelerating and deceleration and Jake braking of tracks, both on- ,site and as they travel through neighborhoods. Similarly, operation of chain-saws and wood chippers for long periods may generate large, adverse noise impacts to receptors in the neighborhood. STAFF: Draft scope is not specific enough. A detailed discussion on the potential moderate to large adverse impacts on: 1. Excessive noise levels during long duration of site work and construction over a multi-year period. 2. Noise associated with the operation of heavy equipment and trucks including but is not limited to; engine noise, noise from moving and backing up heavy equipment (reversal warning sound) and the accelerating and deceleration and Jake braking of trucks, both on-site and as they travel through neighborhoods. Similarly, operation of chain-saws and wood chippers for long periods may generate large, adverse noise impacts to receptors in the neighborhood and region. 3. Mitigation on the potential adverse impacts from excessive noise levels during long durations to receptors from site work and construction on-site, adjacent to the site and along the route over a multi-month period. 4. Construction times beginning and end as well as days of the week should be identified. 5. The effect of noise on wildlife also should be included. 18. Consistency with Community Character e. The proposed action is inconsistent with the predominant architectural ectural scale and character. The proposed action could result in a moderate adverse impact to existing C01111111_111ity character (physical alteration on site over a multi-year period, large building size and noise). The intensity of the proposed action operations is different from the surrounding LlSeS. The potential, adverse moderate to large adverse impacts could OCCUr to community C character from the multi-year construction timeframe in intensity and duration. linpacts are expected to be long in duration from the construction and operation of the proposed action. STAFF: Included on Page 8. Pj-()pose6j action is inconsisient rjith the character of1he existing nomral lowlseape. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact to the character of Z� the existing natural landscape through the clearing and excavation of 3.94 acres of land area including woodland in the N4attitUck Creek watershed. 9 STAFF: Included on Page 8. PUBLIC COMMENT: Add a discussion on the potential adverse impacts specific to clearing"native"woodlands and on the forest edge. 9. Other: The proposed action could result in a moderate to large impact to community character frorn the increase of vessel traffic and potential, additional dockage in Mattituck Creek thereby affecting the water quality, public use and access of the creek. The size of expected vessels to be stored and serviced oil-site in relation to the adequacy of the navigability of Mattituck Creek must be addressed. STAFF: Needs to be added. Include a discussion on the size of expected vessels to be stored and serviced on-site in relation to the adequacy of the navigability of Mattituck Creek. Impacts from service of vessels and operations of a marina and vessel maintenance including the chemicals used and potential effect on water quality should be discussed. A discussion on improvements (if any) to dockage and bulkheads, travel lift routes etc. to accommodate the mooring and transportation of large vessels should be added to the final scope to prevent segmentation of review. Other recommended changes: Page 12: Reasonable Alternatives to be Considered. STAFF COMMENT: Qualify the materials as excavated. PUBLIC COMMENT: Add alternative of constructing one building on site. PUBLIC COMMENT- Add alternative of not excavating the site. VI. Recommendations Accept staff comments public comments and include in final scope. 10 PVVW � R��CETVED November 12, 2020 ��::eP"Ka ld �.r°para Ha"airon ni j I[3oaairma°I VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL _�. ............... . Town of Southold Planning Board Planning Board Office Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 Attn: Heather Lanza,AICP Town Planning Director Re: Site Plan Application of Strong's Yacht Center—Response to Public Scoping Comments Dear Ms. Lanza: The applicant and project team are presenting this correspondence in response to select public comments made at the scoping meeting before the Planning Board on November 2, 2020. The comments .appear to be based upon a misunderstanding of the scope of the proposed action, the purpose and intent of the applicant and the existing operations at Strong's Yacht Center (SYC). As the public scoping period is still ongoing and will end on December 7, 2020, we believe that the below responses may provide beneficial clarification and alleviate select concerns. Comment 1: Existing operation is resulting in traffic associated with vehicles with boat trailers and the proposed action will increase that traffic. Response: SYC does not operate a boat launch and the proposed action will not create a boat launch. Vehicles with boat trailers on Mill Road are likely heading to the DEC- County boat launch located on Nau,gles Road at the Mattituck Creek Waterway Access Site or the boat ramp at the Mattituck Fishing Station off of a private road on Nau,gles Road. Comment Z. Project will result in increased vehicle traffic from the new boats.. Response: The proposed boat storage buildings will accommodate large vessels/yachts,which cannot be transported via roads. The average vessel/yacht size for these new buildings is approximately 65 feet in length, 17 feet in width and 32 feet tall. All vessels/yachts to be stored in the proposed buildings will arrive to the property in the Fall season via the Inlet. Upon arrival to SYC, the vessels will he lifted and transported into the buildings via a "travelift." Entry back into the water will occur in the Spring season via the Inlet. q � 6°:S0ry,�__��JOJytP'd`. D ' 'VEN Sr, 1 Ey7 l ✓T Y f T ) t' I Fa 0 H ENI I J(\, rJ�+� I B �E 6 H ; t.)._ _•)1 _,�7.S,, EOMI SLAND - MANS-;Ai IAN - SARATOGA SFRING`} S RACUS- SE=A i LL - SHELION @ci�PMr �irm�,��s Any increase in traffic as a result of the project will be from increased staffat the site, which would include specialty marine trades that are trained in the preparation of these types of vessels for storage and entry back into the waters. SYC anticipates approximately 1S new staff(some of which may be new SYC employees and others as subcontractors). It is noted that Dunn Engineering Associates,P.C.is the traffic consultant for SYC and is preparing a comprehensive traffic evaluation for inclusion in the DEIS. Comment 3.Applicant is excavating in order to sell the material. Itis..oj;:"yes SYC is located on a Marine-Industry II-zoned parcel that is approximately 16.46 acres in size.and includes the existing operation,as developed. Elevations of the existing SYC range from 6.0 feet to 8.0 feet. The project proposes the excavation of materials from approximately 4.4± acres of land area that ranges from Elevation 10.0 to 51.0. The project area rewires excavation in order to build the storage buildings at Elevation 10.0. All yachts to be stored in the building must be transported and hauled from the Inlet via a travellift to the building. The travelift cannot go"uphill." It is noted that the adjacent 16 acres that is zoned residential is not a part of this proposed building project other than to allow trucks removing sand to travel over it to remove the sand to minimize truck travel. It is further noted that the material to be removed does in fact have value; however, relative to the total scope and cost of the project,the material represents less than 10 percent of the total project cost. Comment 4.Applicant was clearing land on Saturday,October 17. Respot s_e: SYC has emergency access roads coming off of West Mill Road. SYC was performing annual routine maintenance to pick up fallen trees and trim overgrown grass that was partially blocking the access pathways. That was the full extent of the routine maintenance work being performed. It is also to be noted that the ecological consultant for the proposed action,Dr.William P.Bowman of Land Use Ecological Services,has been actively performing a tree survey and ecological inventory of the project area. Comment 5. Well Water would be impacted by the proposed development. gj^r��r �r.The proposed project includes the placement of buildings at finished floor elevation 10.0 and does not include any excavation below grade. The proposed project also includes an extension of the Suffolk County Water Authority infrastructure from Naugles Drive and SYC would cease using its existing water wells for potable purposes. Upon completion of the project, all potable water for SYC would be supplied by the SCWA and the extension of the water main would become available for select properties upon application for a new connection to the SCWA, The DEIS will include g ( fz `.qa ,. P t i,)f j L�.N, C.f?:�� rt"C Fv�. l.,.�9rt`I<_ i�..;(ix_.:.!2 , z.i? :GF0LC4 1S-T. 'f�C. oISPp��. C-) LONG ISLAs` D MAM iAi TAS! SAR TOGA SPRIN(_—:�S S �: @RNGC C . l0TR,NV`:N S 0Y..11.d"'il0145 information provided by SCWA on properties that will be able to connect after project completion. The DEIS will identify the location of surrounding wells based on data provided by the SCWA and will evaluate the potential impacts from proposed changes in stormwater recharge, sanitary discharge and effluent quality, .and reduced well supply due to the proposed connection to the SCWA water infrastructure. It is important to note that the proposed action includes upgrades from conventional sanitary systems to Innovative and Alternative Wastewater Treatment Systems, and an application for permit has already been filed with the Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS). Finally, it is important to note that the proposed project will include the installation of drainage infrastructure that will capture.and recharge all stormwater on-site; and the proposed drainage system has been designed in accordance with the Town of Southold and New York State Department of Environmental (Conservation requirements and recommendations for stormwater management. Comment 6: Noise would occur frlom rooftop,l VAC and propane. ftspQnse- No rooftop HVAC units are proposed. The proposed storage buildings will not be air conditioned. Heating will be radiant sourced from propane gas. All controls would be interior to the buildings and the proposed propane tanks would be placed in vaults. Accordingly,no noise to neighbors would occur from rooftop units or propane. If requested, we would be happy to present the above responses at the Planning Board work session on November 16, 2020 or the final scoping meeting on December 7, 2020. Thank you. Regards, P.W. GROSSER CONSULTING Kim A, Gennaro-IOancea,M.S.,AICP CEP Vice President Cc: J.Strong C.Cuddy, Esq. �3 C r x r � L( H� L �`�ID NIAfd i � lA SARd T�3( SPRINGS (I '%' '�I1`, ` F_/� . F L � S�Ii-Li0r, OFFICE LOCATION: MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annexso .„ P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 �f " % Southold, NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Telephone: 631 765-19313 Southold, NY www.s ou thol dtownny.gav Irou Ix . PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SC3'[. THOLD November 4, 2020 Charles iR. Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Positive Declaration and Public Hearing for the Draft Scrape Strong's Storage Buildings 3430 Mill Road, IVI'attituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: On, August 10, 2020 the Southold Town Planning Board issued a Positive Declaration for the Strong's Storage Buildings. As you are aware, it was 'brought to our attention that the Positive Declaration was not filed with the New'York State Environmental Notice Bulletin (ENB) as required by State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) 6 NYCRR, Part 617.12. To rectify this, the Positive Declaration will be filed with the ENB this week. In addition, at their public hearing for the Draft Scope on November 2, 2020, it was mutually agreed by you and the Planning Board that the time within which to issue a Final Scope would be extended to allow time for the Positive Declaration to be filed. Also, the public hearing on the draft scope was held open through December 7, 2020. Written comment on the draft scope will be accepted during this timeframe, and the public will have another opportunity to comment at the public meeting on December 7. Public comments received on the draft scope at the November 2, 2020 public hearing and written comments received will be discussed at the next work session held on November 16, 2020 together with 'Planning Board staff comments. Any additional comments received after November 16 will be discussed at the December 7 work session, and a decision on the (Final Scope will be made as soon as possible. If you have any questions, please contact the Planning Board Office. Respectfully, as:�j �� ' Donald J. UWilcenski Chairman RECEI . NOV 2 2020 LAW OFFICES WICKHAM, BRESSLER.& GEASA,P.C. _ ._. .:o'°"� t anruing 'fir , 13D IS MAIN ROAD, RO,BOX 1424 WILLIAM WICKHAM(06.02) MATTITUCK,LONG ISLAND ERIC J.BRESSLER NEW YORK 11952 ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM JANET GEASA 631-298-8353 TELEFAX NO.631-298-8565 ebressler@wbglawyers.com November 2, 2020 Southold Town Planning Board 54375 Route 25 P.C. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Re: Strong's Storage Buildings Scoping Proposal ("Scoping") Ladies and Gentlemen: We are the attorneys for Mr. James Neumann and write regarding the Scoping. The Scoping is deficient in that it fails to set forth all of the relevant alternatives to the proposed project. Specifically,while the Scoping recognizes "No Action" and" Alternative:Material Removal Plan" as alternatives, it fails to recognize "scaled down project" as an alternative. A scaled down project is logistically and readily applicable to the project as the project involves the construction of two large buildings. The alternative of one building certainly merits discussion in the SEQRA process. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Very tr ly yours, Erictl Bressler EJB/es cc—James Neumann (I CHARLES R. CUDDY L f0 Attorney at Law 445 Griffing Avenue „ Wi..a Riverhead,NY 11901 �d Mailing Address: Tel:(631)369-8200 PO Box 1547 Fax: (631)369-9080 Riverhead,NY 11901 e-mail: charlescuddy@optonline.net October 30, 2020 Brian Cummings, Town Planner Planning Department Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Re: Strong's West Mill LLC-3430 Mill Road, Mattituck, NY SCTM#1000-106-6-13.4 Dear Mr. Cummings: Enclosed please find ail Affidavit of Mailing and Posting along with green/white rc cLipts and the green signature cards. Please note that one(1 ) notice of hearing was sent.by a registered letter since the property owner's address is in Canada and a certified mail is not permitted for international. mailings. Please make it part of your file. Very truly yours, 4�" � I Charles R. Cuddy CRC:ik Enclosures AIFFIQAVIT OF POSTING This is to serve notice that I personally posted the property known as k, Read , -X44444- by placing the Town's official poster notice(s) within 10 feet of the front property line facing the street(s) where it can be easily seen, and that I have checked to be sure the poster has remained in place for at least seven days prior to the date of the public hearing on I Q/72/a0 I have sent notices by certified mail — return receipt, the receipts and green return receipt cards of which are attached, to the owners of record of every property which abuts and every property which is across on Your Name (print) 4 Signature 44-5 Grjrffjrjg Avenue 2 Riverhead , NY 11901 Address jn /�Q go Date W Notary Public jVlo�,JA KODYNI �, YO rk Not"Iry (.,0 UI'TtY 22013 PLEASE RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT, CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS & GREEN RETURN RECEIPT CARDS BY. 12:00 noon, Fri., 10/30120 Re: Stronq's Storage Buildings SCTM#s: 1000- 106-6-13.4 Date of Public (Hearing: Monday, November 2, 2020, 6:01 :m 71 > > 0 > W -Do a - a 0 0 q- rt CD H a 0 SD — 3 pi, cD =3 0 (D rt —= CD I IN I —j z Fj- N > =— 0 ru co C c) rt tl CD =r :�E C: C3 C37 (D cz 14 f t"I,Q cD co 0 H. 00 0 0) CD P, (a 3 3 3 Ln E) Pv H H Uorlfflod MW Fae cr ii, N) 1. H 0 TL CL (D CI) 4'3 51% rCr ru M OQ E; �"7 -i Almy .mYr -0 ig, 0 CZ) 1 PL 0 CD $ CI), C3 a E3 F- Er CL =5 $ C) (1) R- a 0 0)c-j CD C,) 1:3 $ r-3 C) 77 M [j AduR S�gu&Wm FImphull D 0) Ln 11�11whwv$ 0 NO M 0 a E3 CD CO -0 C3 rJosiv 0 a 0 CD =r cr " g000m CD (o 3CD CD Er rU TOW Plaftige andi L (D (D 0 (D Ul SD r=1 C3 til-xvi;-a r ru E32 ---------- U11100000op -0 10000>> p P3 X 0 o(D o CL CL(1) UF M (nCD __ 0 a a M(D E S C/)= < CD CD �R CL Lt. OD co -u 0 Ra Q ;n > 5' 0 03 —:3 0. A) In 1.4 A. 0 M. o Z a rt 0 z U) QCD (o m - o =r ?L IL I a a(D rt -�4 -t -=r R a 6 0 (D CD EO rL rm PI(=D' -J 0 r3 3 U -ro' (D 10 1 = ;z Q a ru S4 4h, 0 n 00 0 SD (D OL 0 a E� 3 El M PV H �q vi L (D W Z� vL- HI (n'a 00 0 000 a ig, M RM C? 02 0 0 M�q LA.�t w o w 5 n m fD 3 CID 0 cm -4 tj co (D 0 -u M c.0 '0 (D CL CL CD (D @ C3 00 3 w c* CD t-n 0 a U) CA (D C.0 r-3 — —0 z >(Q>� 0 CL 9 M CO =r 0 =3 6 S3 CL CD 0 3 CA) — @ a j (D C:) al 1 3 0 (D 0 0 CD CD F: (D CD C) L-j CD 0 < CO C3 -4 (D C) CD w 0 SD CD C3 El 110 1:1 El 1:1 P 0000>>Cn p P3 X ?> C3 ;2 "... CL Ir W I f YIP U So ID CD i M i,7nn�7ri oif a��Ir��..............~-- ----- Z M W CD o $jehtjck 3.55, 03 CL C3 42 Qm `m $ CL r-I ---------LLI Q 'R65ZR-vx-,w&F'57@8 �%Yjd4 fal q,') ) O ITTP�v CD 8E� R,qwln Arfu4pl OlurdoopVl $--- Q 9 -ED-OL- 0 E3 (Gw`tfflv1ir) $ M 2 �tftlod DeUval CD' GertnWed Mail 11jes $ CL @D [ZI Aduft Signahim nequived $ co rr 3 • C3 : 3 00 0 000 °5 E� h 0 r=1 TO—tfT' P--00taDO a PId Ir r=1 .......... M C-3 Sont'ro R So'F nu Cynthia Kaminsky--........................ -------------— To 0 a?.6 xM Z ID< > Q? C3 0 CL CD r%- M a M @ :3 0 = — Wog#,4if.f-,,-Dr. ......... ------------- CD < CO 75 4 00 (D W �Iattituck, NY 11952 a CD (D D IA N t7 C-4onwullu, Q w N FJ- a1 D O D O o O rt 0 ¢r o 03 Cyl rl m. o W c cfl rt tml fD W a 3� w o m Q' m �_ .. ®m W ', �13 O � G 'RC1 �J °- N � � C m rL �CT f) F'• O w O O O 0) m M Os m R4 d �tl F� 1 ..: c � N �mmomx F" G 7� a s Q. O � � — _ -C (D (D . i..�r " J 'G .. %d ��, Fi O G'i Ort .(D..N .•a S O tl;, `�j r9 + ~ II d,' O �G A. O QQ 0 �. � Q. Pa "F 9u7nru kuaa'w�ra Ra�rnyx mr�r, nrnaUYv:g 5 CJl �_ SA,`f II'iaaRauoro 118uacarVUnU Q�mmuu&cCyUmJ� ..,.,,..:.—.._.m�t'V P„„ O O . Y....� Cr �Q = r-3 Q.0 a 6aB.ur B prore(9 ick znenucip _ Y ";S_ F z uhr rf,r z H O n O w C,OdMed Haase RI rrkl m dv '1 rn _ to X m Cn � U Aatl'uJY4;u�naaUuuvs NEa toVu w O N Q U ��auo0d naapauue Y'isanllrVcma�rU II Yca6M��tezr T1 r.q CO a 0 e " 11? *m O r� Fd_i. wit g aarrmo00 N pu 0 OCo m S (ACD W COD O CO N fUo Lla-mesF s Diane Cetu a .w.._... .......__. . .m � J❑❑❑❑❑❑w_ on an ;a o m tuck, NY 11952 � CC D a »a m .. •e. m m m a a n o » m m 0,0 0 � Q .�Q � f0 e Cp M N m m t3 w--® mD CL am mm v m Cn OT D WHO DoDN D0 m � 3 P� N O r{ O �' O a o �•S� � `u O rt w rt CD � 0 33 3 � v o �ri O 3 rt u, t� � y �*� w.< � � � o O O 3 CD CD O FJ_ C l] C- cn CD c Imimm ! o m o C3 p o r• a n CCL ru O � � W 1 1 J cn O) p phi u. � O Q w ° c o �,� P Z 0 to O 1.— •� n ai w Ei 3 m00 ❑ ❑ m ❑ ❑ --4 O CO Ul N rt !?CO M CO t7_1 O m EMT O w m O L-J9x < IpCY CD w CO c � o [rf Al N _ O C3 0) < 6 w O FD' N Ulla � �i� �4 IIID nn m Ir o o z c c m Ilia_� �i Ir vv �° °�—I N ' fel rr c� c c m m 0,r'ILV ® � � w ry r � � p� C�x7r'�,ErrutlrYd�i�G��9�(•M7�IM4�t�CM�a d�rtaAf�n'Y m m r3 r �u a�� or�u,o�ne Ouul,rar sr $ Yi"i .n U'4akuuuxu N�a"restlryW.d!auYaur Ynou•"Ya:q ,� '� r 41eJ 0 0 o B wand urd w i Yrara r. Aduft gUnstulrs Requi rsNd t $, ......i r a 11 u �»du r0•^ a < m Qop �- YdrYll f Pnult¢rGd Y$ ttPYn?err9 N.' YGverr � u G (D dG m rn a' Om m-0 r-I Total Postage and m ® J. co hu ra a r CD @ art arxFriFrak,aProject t LL�m ( �_ icJanzu.z vcom ❑ � o ...,»__.. ..r_._ :3 °ma o m o r— , ._ CD _ latt�tuck NY11952 i NIIN CD iv n mfo mmi &, mm ni uw TI rq p ' an a m aW O O CO f'h v,r, - � 'r� •r0+7 O CID (D rr M. �' d...X r m I z II. x ar 1 C3 3 C!J n l0 i V] �'p N •D O (D N ' (D u) r 0 0 w m s �l .a, �� >e c p N wW aSD m m m 0 "Ir1 Be .a Vim.N��'to i twwa^h'. m,axu°nd lr��ra flti p N N °�j v r_ r 0 O O 1 9 wlre MhPoNsr _. 1-3 F-3 o ��g FRE'a I 4 —,,, O m O� i-G rn fA R r9 0I 8otum a d w rg.fh. 0 'Mirtrkouv,�ffaDc�PgvG Nie TreeuHO $ N I fl b�_ �'Qd n�'�CIIC311'Nd � � � O � I--` �. N N Q Q •w D N':a nfiDuu a Da uqa a _... N d l N Neu Z O �o 0 0 m w O nAdulIt aJgpmiaawours 148OquuPvj $ .fll c4 CD N O N N 1a .........,. aaYtw°�py'$.. 7 ow O ea" G� Q- O Postage .....� rty(�G L u4 .� I �'Pa rnn,lauRtnrrm IIVkV4v8pw.p P5 r� J tl .,a m o E-' W N ro o m o c 7aNsu9 si"rua N ro .�.fl.J OITN ',a' O E+ < � O cn �. m N ru w (D (D C3JOsej" Tr�rea- rar rl r„raa� 'i Vii...•. ...............V, AVe .O cl � �}. .._„„ _.,.m_.. 133 C ttituck, NY 11952 L-' y o o m m QEaa�Q vu m u. c oa...maa mm. mm �.... n .ECD (/) IV i Nm 031 T D D o D 0 'o 0 70 a a zP3 LTI rt � m o ami o_ o a �Do 9 0 CD CD z00 C a a �'.+ O (D m aO �i m q,.. C1 f7 O O N (DOL Q C- N F'imm ' j a Q 2 Ell 3 N ai ^ ' 't o ma v a Na ry r�yy o 3 ❑❑ ❑ ❑❑❑ . 3 j Q' N O07 -j m 3Q. O O 3IO � F— w OQ- Q � � o` � E! aar n Z m 0O) � SOT.' NCCA CD w m a13 m3 n�i a N °3 o 3 o y 0CL m o m O c CD m m 0 0 o —] ` W (D a o ® (D ' Ul mCD o __ N cylw "� 0 Ln SD m Il.l aanuw mmu m .n. mu ]❑o❑❑❑❑w CL 00 v 07 D ° nn mu'o QODD 3,Z. C C_(D _(/1_ 43 U� ~ N m m W (np aru Y 3NO m, (D CD C < f N CD Lr) 5 m m tirnM.d Mall r r 8 d.%.a, _.._ `m m n �. w rWc FjP5W,T ae�i.m Be$dr�,r CL r-q m a 7 m ZC�va 0 IaI[3 FWtum Bpt V Nk cpll'.bms4Vwem, fa 1 dYJ ..,. f'�i'a Trti iSl m w m Z o � a� m ® O '� d"idz i �v O o UH rted cr �,... a FcgmroA (wy Q ❑❑ 11 ❑❑❑ CD $ � Uff "D " —ro � 3 rEa9Pgakti$m and a jm o O ni0U^a CL � ❑ � ❑❑ Q' �a gn>° m W m Z UcemIM % ..,,..,..... CD I T@0 C3 CL 13D CV r m a >> n 0 N d,tfp�°�..A£IgRdn7,,Nps- . .. i CD CD w,.” .. I I n > 00 C t=l0 > O -u 0 CD (p rj :V� �M 0), z co M Id > -mr ID,0 C < CO ru C) 0rL CL :Z a M 3 (0 0 Ln L SR W co t-4 co 0 0 0 A) Q x - 0 M (D ID :3 0 0 rflrleJWVwjI—Fee C- -- 3 2 -4 Cl =! - lrllrqc� H 0 0 PL a p- S UP GQ - @D ru o) 0 a 17 -0 6 SEEM H H C? s - CL FO 0 Q :3 01 (D -CL 0) I== M 0 0 0) 0) C3 lrwtulm ll:uMeIpt(OWIMI VC) s—A,—rjl b-', IM C) CL CL -0 cy =`CL :3 r l -0 Fj fl) fl) CD 0 Q CL C3 CerfiNd 161WIl R.bMDWWyT cn E:3 0)C) 0 0)0 @—4fLI-4L4 z C) ;K* 'n CO C3 11 Adult Ugnatuirs Reqidmd 1—4 f--�444-,� cm C3 0 Aduk'Monature Rntl0ed lWyery$ IV w C3 C3 00 CD $ 6 CO0 rr S 0 (D C) 3 , -i C,) ia ru F6-&rv)s—t5ue-4fnd CD R - 5 95, 9 -6 < (0 Q Er $ (D rqLn CD 311 To 0 C3 At ni ve 6 Aspr C3 10 DOODO P Imp 4- C.,.0 5? Ck w p P3 x aw- Milzimai ffifto wyli DF M 0) CD 0 (DL M�FL Q Ln CL ca, Cm 00P g. CL CD ;nK1 d > 0 > Co 0 E-u C) CL co 0 EL =0 101) Sr, E] z CD ID 0 Q C, co r r.0 rt co C) 0 0 0ID 0 M CL C- C)-1 00 CD l< I N) = - �J 0 td CL a (D W 0 00 0 000 p Er (In. 3 x mm g�*ow m m C:) aMM En 'a CD 0 CL ro a, 0) := 4 0 F 0 Ul CD 0 3 CtT q M M C) = a 0- :3 � mQl --a F- 0 CL CL Rag z CD C) `° 0 C', 11 El m D 0 cj) :1 X, 4 C3 110 ,a- -9 Z !a aro cn Wo C3 (0 Ln 0 a 0) 5. Co 0 0 .11 MUM a CD M OD C:> L-- 9 0 , - CD 1p 1 3 6 :7 -5, CD R. CD CD 0 -1 - C) N) C) M Cil 47 0 CA Ln SID r,u mm -j L- r 02 loocl000p CO L- col C>L k co p P3 -X > ru CD vm LL i 0 0 CL(F,-ff 0 0 g (D ID i3 Fr M CL 5 -0 a CD cr r%- $ CL Q- Q O < r-q C3 cx PpC3 IM OL:3 CIII Qj M 0 no 0 CIO 0 Cr 3 ir S CBD w ca(D cm am m-0 0 ru Taw—pastugi ca 3 -�g 9, p.s,2 2 Br� 9 pl"L'RP Er accul -g, r=1 SeW ul rj cl [I -0 C3 11 Vl�OL f 0 CL m-To v CL CD cJ 0 ID CD CD -----------------A ----------------- < CD CD CD 17111 D bid D 0D0 -00 O Z iy (D .•* 0 O n ( rt Q 0 n S m Cn rt bd En CD m �a Z cD W o rt D �� '0 CD r=1c o rt rt Q (D 3 c -- Erm m m m -J cr (0 G O rn CD m Jr r 6z O a ,,�,� 1 ,m, c N r. tii Q N m — ' xrr p nap rn � � � �� • C3 .. car"d'tflo 9 Mail res � �'; �C"i+ a, Q oaaamm o-aaaemw� ylry 6-' O — m a p IRetim RacdjpItQdaacaim llry $ iib i I� �a 6aT urW' p O 0 C) (D �b p ..�Call'aoaoud Vu oU Hostgoled d'a tlV airy �_..... C — p h v O Ln Z (D 7v 0 Q m p u u.ulltt NginmaWve R eq u9WJ �—4 ca p ID 00 „O Aduft ftnatuire FlejtecW DolIwva ...... ��,`� ^a p O 3 0 C3 posoge ILC„my°_u _." m E C) p � " CID CD �_ CD O L� �� Cass , o' rae7 d'g'.''�6 � E-' W 7o CD cin p 0 m .. - m (D C3 '„��ira�"�r� W - nj Re Strom C3 r- :10110cloop t ; nmr'Fufi ar P�a. �ddbP C�lk'f,�.+47 Iat "� Ck, NY 11952 �' ,oa(�oaD v D n O O b m a a m —=a a c c N �y vO o aa(p(p n !{TI N m o 33 M— .ma � <m S CD Z i D rrl CL u uxai D d um, m imill mn -, v1 Q 1I CD p a a �. Ln b7 n m m rt O a (D a Er m m m m ® Pi:f��„ �. L ,m �e, � r m� �, C �� iD�f �'"apg I t r � - � I � p O ❑❑ ❑ 000 Dm rk naQ 3.CD me rl 1 mmm 033 �Sin'wD�� ra SNloes&`~� (amoR dwxadd roqp, nm.9 E no II� n81@7 Quadmluy $" O amml 45 0' pyo m 0 C3 Ua&u m P•acm� myrc 9a flm�imiaC $ (� 2u79s'ku adc m m c ro ❑ O N ui ale ru Baru pure u:aau�aur $�� R - r c 00041 C3 ,,,,�d4u[uft gulligrmY�ro Fl4i4qulgNflIXU „�, -' ,«..-.w , y,, 7 G m W O l "ti�y� CL(a Iu ac uw Via&v ll'a7d k Imnp$ yr 4 a 0 3 0 3® r O q, C3PIC�u"Iqa cE3 �,t�F P7, 2C d ,-j Tobill Postage stage awn C3 - _. To nJ Vhomas & Jennifer � Mc unniple C3 yrd�rra9 _ .. Rd. . . ... � MI.attltsaokm".. � 1"_. ...,..... ....".m wm._........, m .�.."." 195 2 � aW �• aom¢aa mm. ,�,a.o, ,.i:m m Ix. m�• rr V�Jyocy � Claf7 if r� III K. Corfl n a NraalSOrVFU-.&-F-e ¢ mair t wti wm mrd raj NII r=1 rl �pua�Airnuaaxa�slpa(onadaea,�� $......'�` m w m m o CAmOled Mall Rashlute d lDefivar � �V Nds m C 1 1 # , Y �r .i �] araGr~aa0gpuroa&u.uva VWa ext Aa o u P �.u,�, ,,,.. �p..11 n p on ag ��watt sra l au eu rr o-iwary$- m dt E g .h ti pro,aIld Cyt'm w" �ra"'r II I V Y n,® rcs B" dk a 11 u7 C-Q "p.al. � d�cn�n� mm r� t 0 co rl �JPa aumVamx�ya0$aa7c IYII�¢miy �` - %Ciyos rl5, C3 o �� ' ...... ....... I lull � C3 Gov Mod WW�Rest.4cled .. ory$ ,v 7r v t rdcR"A""d:EtiPma,ava" 77",L' LC ,Cr 7^i{„; o SBYkS$cID -."""""""""""....... � � de L „� p AW�C Dockside ........... to S uu . . eaw W��m �� 7 �" en Isxee _,".. "........ .__. ._ ._...._... ��', d�.®� rru g % �a�6.�G IP a7 ��py�G vas 9... Er � _"° t land,, NY 3 .0 W® qN "xma Nmm 4W Er SoOr NO C3 rta " °dr� u o°kr''rcar m. .._a.. .._..-_ ............ „ 1aa 4 .... . r __ ...._�._ _.. .mm nn M 'i u F oa e®• uiw" G i'�'u r I ANO IpM� � IIIIU :011111M Ca IIO11 IIIN �. � IIIN 111111 � � �IIIIII MN M a ISN ru w M CrtluM4w d Mail Fee, w t r C 9#W� fPFee � �r °j, I)g1l.°j � _ " r. �.... q,.17 � at�tt�s.awrraatyG're�a udrdruDr�rnw FeG'ki�^� r�Yatr�1 E5+b1{% NAr4Pbr(4 p lttN,� ja s,m^Pu" .wI I'do'"I*Mbar&uurcrn ICV®c•anWlry4�ItAaraVrxrguN� $ 'Fr� stmt � �6roeuvu9�¢v $iP rl f:a u�ttsre a n u Vsc�Ptt PeuadrunocP l 4y d au p Utlaa r Uq !I@tt CawB�sV y 0 R PVI 1,-- pintrplao^ C IM 94awd a Maila& ru�kada uK W p n�CaadMfAow WlulttensttrdedD WIlvary $ .n " ;� r p ➢a�dwi SugPuaa�AW uaewwllru O ¶AduuVk Sy un t ulre Il9awa rjllsarr9 $ g �wP. ..� d•ta ,�uSot��n��IPeuuN�aolP�P�iur�u�Wmuyra's_ ..a P g N (tiadultaU nattuire lfdPIGQIInC;GUM.b OJBROlIOVw P'P q / IM ... .. .�......::........w.�,..__...w „NU 0 postage I� a II II,�o P'q P �traa' __.._......... 0 5!111 r� y. y CDP$1 " '"1 .i...M, .W...•....m.W., @�. �.�^W y W F.li. µ�xd. r "4ie TT'F�stw ana,W r — _ �.. � .�.r. „9 F„ k w d m gd s "tI............ � C3 C3asP aaaf'PAF C3 _..._. .._M... ......_. f� �) d1T x ar e1........- ru James & Kathleen �fiic ael & beth Neumann O _.. ar�a�PsosdaFrt�t�r rare � � cr yes d .. l rcl t _m l� .....m.. _....._... cam rk, NY 10 d _. _ _." e>�� r�.a 029 ew York, NY 10069I :mm rr MP"nPw"N• I IIIIIVa cn PIIII ate s Cd P- ir M Er netfilCalett h� PY f � �Pv O uI oIIPr ..... �ra� Zviaa aarrP�ml' rs rra x �ar�,nm',t Er eirtlified Fee $II d 0 Vu d „ � U �IRetuunm I(hwdrmpyr) s n dou.lit' r9ru� � O f Vu:tteuuumFigm�rpt(WeaawlWa) $ d�l� TAT Po�mwark Rul armricellpt a seas tt O 11CediWuW MWW ulttaaattltr•8ecd I $ �r F�Pt tl e�ml �Cttr a (CIrUrtCar rmuryt#�texquuOi a w. d_d,d VII'd y lyre D IF]Adult e4naauum RwG uuked 9 tewsracrll9d lrotIE: udauR O de tta. P a r r is rl l 5 p ndarsoatdDaallRe V ac Ir � .------. � r9 o u� �i�wsz�uuna ro �� O �I,-c U, m "uV�uuc �� r CI P &tadaretxaurn6 r ,w,,,,,.......__.__....._. _... C3 I eco elexn« awns 11C, N - ... ..._� _m._M...m __.....,.. m.,.,m... .... ......... 1 J & Denise Zellner r Street Apd No C �upf,S s e � or P &"bra Pi�r �a � &AMirudr�...��ara as"wP M�rfd� �y �. m . .. ., . . ...w .p. ._.w ._� h.M r... ...... ........ ...____............ _....... r3 tuck,IL tt.. N b (-�-t� •( s2. i+a `�t tuck, NY 11952 aW .; a� w :I,. m. . I IW A m mWW x@ pU ..� WPw WkP°P ,gym �•". w...,w I b i ww �, ul ullll �, M• Sib ulll, �IIII ullll um I uuu awn a I@.P �� u, u u I aIle OPoI � Illlll 1111111 cc r=1 Ir O B r.. N@ 1jTl @ 0 Y Er .... _I..:"'' Y ud"�',& Ill kmarii[Oos! aidF I... nr I) O rq Erttra Swvla& Fee,r(u Wrwncc trna Budd rwraa'm � agitt�i aye ;P=areaC« A tbrtlrt ri r �` t@d1tl r-11��¢+f.Quwno IIV�a.aau att'uaur�a.cryzyrP . ,. _ 3 i uattwrn H:qA cwdll(a4.(Inas dccM 4 ;r; [7j Ir within H:ecdfltw Ww Am nlc) 6 d PPP E� 'A�&i8 flt p IR-lin 6Wa a 1.r. 8w.cCI Q uwap Postmark ts� e re C3 LVCarfifled Mall H:esCrdrhM wsWllwrslryr s � N�aar� C3 q a as�ws� �u urs a r u uK sl �. l rm_. p V Aduh Sig nM ure Req uinw:i $_............. O9dlift Signartiro Requilmd C rDellliverPostaget�w r aawv �.._ V IO uSG£ttr�lm ,laa�l ifVaasCvdt'CaraN yY b1ayuuVtt II roattveuun YrSaazMfa 4was911 adoflPrr ,� " w , Cd"'� _ '20C13dV[� 21j r13 � PanCage a� �y C3 'aural N tiuq�ra�t aaa�traPi�ckRyan ru David W. Ooar. ._.., A "i' _.afiW a-----------------. .. ....., O1117� Vitra ask'arras:R arPs '. _.JCC} l„. POS_.16_... ......, ._.. __.. ,. Ityw P r � ... __ Anw. �a tuck, NY 11952 r ��,. „, ,, wl@ +. �• '^@ ram a mmx Pwm .Wa m•� r� . .wP tlX rd. w Y d 0 mk v," CertOdled Ma11 Fee 'dr ..... rq Extra Saw":e& 6�t kbrv4rq eAmrsA is r i a n,i FN tr arFlu� I`Giver "mpi) _._. C3 ❑Hoturm AoconrA(eflarYdrr niv) a (mestotterNd�., O ❑0mdi00dWulR-rVu dbul"' y i III tUu i Here p E3 Adult sig nature Iliequlrod $-.............. 4, 9 duet Signature ktwftted Dehery .....„.. _ ; I::uq co .q17 Asn Ii14�ceanflrrw°.� � r� g O � syond 11d�� Town of Southold o ..._._.._ � 5'�'�se� �e naa� r 'oa= ` �`1°�7 9 Registered No. Det, terra Postage$ Extra Services&Fees �Cum krrrauwSl' Extra Services&Fees Cl Signzatuce Confirmation , ❑Registered Mail$ ” d m ❑Return Recept ❑SPgriaturei Confirmation O m u r,tNrtooz)$�„ Restricted Delivery n c� ❑'Rm'd.uriry Receipt I ...... , .. o c �Prendrct$ Foto FBtag +Fees m El Restricted Delivery$ t $ �m Customer Must Declare %c6iv6� by Dom ie.$*ingurance up Co$50,000 Full Value.I.,_I ; i�included Me decisred valoo p lror a�all cel $ Indemnity is km deed.lSea Reverse). OFFICIAL LJSE � s m � r— E o O I'll, Fr' , o a` m v m m m r j — m m J 0 m r o F F— _ r w � ........,�... W—�................. /� ......,.,..,,...,.,.......... . R _. PS Form 3806,Registered Mail Rei eipt Copy 2-Post Office April 2015,PSN 7530-02-000-9051 1 l w I l I OFFICE LOCATION: r� MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 �� Southold, NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov � `'AA PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD October 6, 2020 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq.. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Set Draft Scope Hearing - Strong's Storage Buildings 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: The following resolution was adopted at a meeting of the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, October 5, 2020: WHEREAS, this site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) 6 NYCRR, Part 617, has determined that the proposed action is a Type I action pursuant to 617.4(b)(10): Any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space, including any site on the Register of National Natural Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994 [see 617.17]. The physical alteration of 3.74 acres exceeds 25% of the 10 acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6); and WHEREAS, on February 10, 2020 the Southold Town Planning Board determined that this proposed action is a Type I Action under SEQRA as described above; and WHEREAS, on August 10. 2020 the Southold Town Planning Board declared itself as Lead Agency and issued Positive Declaration for the action, and Stroh g� or.ajeP_u Mldinc Page 12 October 6, 2020 WHEREAS, on September 11, 2020 the applicant submitted a Draft Scope prepared by P.W. Grosser Consulting Inc.; and WHEREAS pursuant to official compilation of codes, rules and regulations and Regulations of the State of New York Title 6 Department of Environmental Conservation Chapter VI General Regulations Part 617. State Environmental Quality Review the Planning Board will hold a public hearing on the Draft Scope-, therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board sets Monday, November 2, 2020 at 6:01 p.m. for a Public Hearing on the Draft Scope for 'Stroing's Yacht Center Proposed Boat Storage Buildings" prepared Iby P. W. Grosser dated September 10, 2020. The Draft Scope is available on the Town's Website at http:/124.38.28,.228:2040/weblink/O/doc/987065/Pagel.aspx The public hearing packet regarding the Town's notification procedure and the sign & post will need to be picked up at the Planning Board Office at the Southold Town Annex when you are contacted to do so. Please return the Affidavit of Postin included in the acket alon with the certified mailing receipts AND the si ned reen return receipt cards before 12:00 noon on Frida October 30 2020. The si nand the ost need to be returned to the Planning Board Office after the public hearing is closed. If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this resolution, Iplease contact the Planning Board Office. Respectfufly, Donald J. Wilcenski Chairman Encl. Scott Russell, Southold Town Supervisor Yvette AgUiar, Riverhead Town Supervisor Southold Town Clerk for Southold Town Board Southold Town Zoning 'Board of Appeals Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Engineer Southold Town Police Department Southold Town Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator Southold Town Highway Department Strongs Storage BUilding, Page 13 October 6, 2020 Southold Tree Committee Southold Economic Advisory Council Southold Fire District Suffolk County Department of Public Works Suffolk County Department of Health Services Suffolk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Commission Suffolk County Legislator Albert Krupski Sheri Aicher, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Michelle Gibbons, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation NYS Natural Heritage Program New York State Department of Transportation PSEG Long Island/ National Grid Environmental Notice Bulletin Town Website File Southold Town Planning Board Notice to A liacent Property Owners You are hereby given notice: 1. That the undersigned has applied to the Planning Board of the Town of Southold for a Site Plan, 2. That the property which is the subject of the application is located adjacent to your property and is described as follows: SCTM#1 1000-106-6-13.4; 3. That the property which is the subject of this application is located in the Mll and R-80 Zoning Districts; 4. This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the Mll and R-80 Zoning Districts where there is 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings.; 5. That the files pertaining to this application are open for your information during normal business days between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. in the Planning Department located in the Town Hall Annex on the corner of Youngs Ave. & (NYS Rte. 25, Southold (2"d Fl., Former Capital One Bank) by appointment only. If you have any questions, you can call the Planning Board Office at (631)765-1938. Information can also be obtained via the internet: 1 , Go to the Town of Southold website www.south old towri ny,,_qov 2. Click on Town Records VVeblink/Laserfiche icon located on the home page-, 3. Click on "Planning Dept." folder; 4, Click on "Applications", then "'Site Plans", then "Pending", 5. Click on the SCTM# (tax map #) of the application (found in #2 above). Or by sending an e-mail message to: Jessica southoldto nn 6. That a public hearing will be held on the matter by the Planning Board on Mondav, November 2, 2020_aL,6:01 .m. virtually via the Zoom online platform, that a notice of such hearing will be published at least five days prior to the date of such hearing in The Suffolk Times published in the Town of Southold; that you or your representative have the right to appear and be heard at such hearing. Petitioner/Owner Name- Strong's West Mill LLC Date.- 10/7/20 OFFICE LOCATION: �x MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex ,� � P.O. lox 1179 54375 State Route 25 �Ax Southold,NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) ` Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1935 vvx w.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING Monday, November 2, 2020 6:00 p.m. This Public Meeting will be held virtually via the Zoom online platform. Pursuant to Executive Order 202.1 of New Fork Governor Andrew Cuomo in-person access by the public will not be permitted. Options for public attendance, • To join via computer: ht1ps 10 F 7452770136?pwci--VkM3VGMwdS8wOVR1 R1ZxbE5EZE0rZz09 Or Online at the website zoom-us, click "Join a Meeting" and enter the Meeting ID: 974 5277 0136 Password: 120140 • Join by telephone: Call 1 (646)558-8656 Enter Meeting ID and password when prompted (same as above) Notice to Adjacent Property Owners Strongs Storage Buildings Mattituck, NY SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 1. 106.-4-3 23. 107.-1-12 2. 106.-4-4 3. 106.-4-5 4, 106.-4-6 5, 106.-6-1 6. 106.-6-3 7, 106.-6-5 & 106.-6-7 9. 106.-6-8 10. 106.-6-13.1 11. 106.-6-13.7 12. 106.-6-20.1 13. 106.-6-20.3 14. 106.-6-23 15. 106.-6-38.2 16. 106.-6-38.3 17. 106.-9-4.1 18. 106.-9-4.9 19. 106.-9-4.10 20, 106.-9-4.11 21. 107.-1-1.3 22. 107.-1-11 _.. �. ..... ._............ 91 LZ o.h£id afY hlv. II 4� �i,;� }nl .11 fit •" "'.�. w- F m sn u n J a r w n. x xxsa r a x. d� " r r r 5 1 wI v r * e n w da � x , l 4 y 7„ ,. v vx.bWMf Y k a n n i v _ m r n r � , rr f I i f .._ ........................................................... E"o yr 77 (53 .................. IN 1! Ji % Nx ......... A�.. .... . . ..... 2. �61 AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING This is to serve notice that I personally posted the property known as by placing the Town's official poster notice(s) within 10 feet of the front property line facing the street(s) where it can be easily seen, and that I have checked to be sure the poster has remained in place for at least seven days prior to the date of the public hearing on I have sent notices by certified mail — return receipt, the receipts and green return receipt cards of which are attached, to the owners of record of every property which abuts and every property which is across on Your Name (print) Signature Address Date Notary Public PLEASE RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT, CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS & GREEN RETURN RECEIPT CARDS BY: 12:00 noon, Fri., 10/30/20 �Re: Strong's Storage Building SCTM#s: 1000- 106-6-13.4 Date of Public Hearing: Monday, November 2 2020, 6:01in. P Town of Southold PCICodehookfor Windows § 55-1. Providing notice of public hearings. [Amended 6-3-2003 by L.L. No. 12-20031 Whenever the Code calls for a public hearing this section shall apply. Upon determining that an application or petition is complete, the board or commission reviewing the same shall fix a time and place for a public hearing thereon. Notice relating to a public hearing on an application or petition shall be provided as follows: A. Town responsibility for publication of notice. The reviewing board or commission shall cause a notice giving the time, date, place and nature of the hearing to be published in the official newspaper within the period prescribed by law. B. Applicant or petitioner responsibility for posting and mailing notice. Ari application or petition, initiated, proposed or requested by an applicant or petitioner, other than a Town board or commission, shall also be subject to additional notice requirements set forth below: (1) The applicant or petitioner is required to erect the sign provided by the Town, which shall be prominently displayed on the premises facing each public or private street which the property involved in the application or petition abuts, giving notice of the application or petition, the nature of the approval sought thereby and the time and place of the public hearing thereon. The sign shall be set back not more than 10 feet from the property line. The sign shall be displayed for a period of not less than seven days immediately preceding the date of the public hearing. The applicant, petitioner or his/her agent shall file an affidavit that s/he has complied with this provision prior to commencement of the public hearing. (2) The applicant or petitioner is required to send notice to the owners of record of every property which abuts and every property which is across from any public or private street from the property included in the application or petition. Such notice shall be made by certified mail, return receipt requested, posted at least seven days prior to the date of the initial public hearing on the application or petition and addressed to the owners at the addresses listed for them on the local assessment roll. The notice shall include description of the street location and area of the subject property, nature of relief or approval involved, and date, time and place of hearing. The applicant, petitioner or agent shall file an affidavit that s/he has complied with this provision prior to commencement of the public hearing. OFFICE L CATION: II DRESS: " Town Hall Annex 1� QF Si , �" P.O. Box 1179 J'� 54375 State Route 25 � ''., Southold, NY 11971 (car. Main Rd. Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 � �viv�w.southoldtnwnny.gov cou PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTOL October 6, 2020 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Set Draft Scope Hearing - Strong's Storage Buildings 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: The following resolution was adopted at a meeting of the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, October 5, 2020: WHEREAS, this site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) 6 NYCRR, Part 617, has determined that the proposed action is a Type I action pursuant to 617.4(b)(10) Any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space, including any site on the Register of National Natural Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994 [see 617.17]. The physical alteration of 3.74 acres exceeds 25% of the 10 acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6); and WHEREAS, on February 10, 2020 the Southold Town Planning Board determined that this proposed action is a Type I Action under SEQRA as described above; and WHEREAS, on August 10. 2020 the Southold Town Planning Board declared itself as Lead Agency and issued Positive Declaration for the action, and Stron_gs Storage Buildings Page 12 October 6 2020 WHEREAS, on September 11, 2020 the applicant submitted a Draft Scope prepared by P.W. Grosser Consulting Inc.; and WHEREAS pursuant to official compilation of codes, rules and regulations and Regulations of the State of New York Title 6 Department of Environmental Conservation Chapter VI General Regulations Part 617. State Environmental Quality Review the Planning Board will hold a public hearing on the Draft Scope; therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board sets Monday, November 2, 2020 at 6:01 p.m. for a Public Hearing on the Draft Scope for `Strong's Yacht Center Proposed Boat Storage Buildings" prepared by P. W. Grosser dated September 10, 2020. The Draft Scope is available on the Town's Website at http://24.38.28.228:2040/weblink/O/doc/987065/Pagel.aspx The public hearing packet regarding the Town's notification procedure and the sign & post will need to be picked up at the Planning Board Office at the Southold Town Annex when you are contacted to do so. Please return the Affidavit of Posting, included in the packet, along with the certified mailing receipts AND the signed green return receipt cards before 12:00 noon on Friday, October 30 2020. The sign and the post need to be returned to the Planning Board Office after the public hearing is closed. If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this resolution, please contact the Planning Board Office. Respectfully, Donald J. Wilcenski Chairman Encl. Scott Russell, Southold Town Supervisor Yvette Aguiar, Riverhead Town Supervisor Southold Town Clerk for Southold Town Board Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Engineer Southold Town Police Department. Southold Town Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator Southold Town Highway Department Strongs a_orage Buildings Page 13 October 6, 2020 Southold Tree Committee Southold Economic Advisory Council Southold Fire District Suffolk County Department of Public Works Suffolk County Department of Health Services Suffolk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Commission Suffolk County Legislator Albert Krupski Sheri Aicher, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Michelle Gibbons, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation NYS Natural Heritage Program New York State Department of Transportation PSEG Long Island/ National Grid Environmental Notice Bulletin Town Website File Southold Town Planninq Board Work Session — September 28 2020 -- Page 2 ............ Project Name: George L. Penny Inc. Contractors Yard SCTM#: 1000-53-2-27.2 Amended Location 67480 Route 25, Greenport Description: This amended site plan is for a proposed contractors yard including eight (8) existing buildings totaling 24,634 sq. ft. on 2.68 acres in the LI Zoning District. Status. Pending _. _ n _ Action: Update _ _. Attachments: Staff Report Project name: Baxter, William J. Jr. SCTM#: 1000-102 5-9.4 ......... . .... Location 260 Griffing Street, Cutchogue Description: This proposal is for a Standard Subdivision of a 2.38-acre parcel into 4 lots where Lots 1, 2 & 3 = 0.6 acres each, and Lot 4 = 0.5 acres, in the Hamlet Business Zoning District. Status: Conditional Preliminary Plat Approval Action, Review C&R's and Engineer Report i. Attachments: Staff Report Project Name. Strong's Storage Buildings SCTM#. 1000-106-6-13.4 Location. 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck Descri tion This site Ian is for the proposed construction of two 2 buildings , p ' p p p O ngs for boat, storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft of existing boatyard buildings. Status: Pending . Action: SEQRA Draft Scope Review ...... Attachments: Staff Report Project Name: Harold R. Reeve & Sons, Inc. SCTM# 1000-140-1-6 Standard Subdivision Location: 1605 Wickham Avenue, Mattityck Description: This proposal is for a Standard Subdivision of a 5.1 acre split-zoned parcel into 4 lots where Lots 1-3 equal 1 acre each in the R-40 Zoning District and Lot 4 equals 1.8 acres located in both the R-40 and LB Zoning Districts. Status. Conditional Preliminary Plat Approval Action: Review for Conditional Final Approval Attachments: Staff Report Southold Planning Department Staff Report Site Plan Application Work Session —Supplemental Summary Date September 28, 2020 Prepared By: Mark Terry and Brian Cummings I. Application Information Project Title: Strong's Boatyard Buildings Applicant: Strongs Yacht Center Date of Submission: July 20, 2018 Tax Map Number: 106.-6-10 & 13.4 Project Location: 5780 West Mill Road Hamlet: Mattituck Zoning District: Split R— 80 / Marine II (M-II) II. Description of Project Type of Site Plan: Commercial Acreage of Project Site. ±33 acres (R80 @ 16.5ac + MII @ 16.5 ac) Building Size 101,500 sq. ft. This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. III: SEQR Analysis On February 10, 2020 the Planning Board classified the proposed action as a Type I. On August 10, 2020 the Planning Board issued a Positive Declaration requiring the submittal of a draft scope document. On September 11, 2020 the applicant submitted a draft scope document for public review and comment. The Planning Board has 60 days to provide a final scope document for the project. The period expires on November 10, 2020. The applicant and Planning Board can agree to extend the 60- day time period if necessary. A public notice or meeting must be held on the draft scope document. The November public meeting is November 2, 2020. The NYSDEC offers the following guidance on scoping. The purpose of scoping is to narrow issues and ensure that the draft EIS will be a concise, accurate and complete document that is adequate for public review. The scoping process is intended to: • Ensure public participation in the EIS development process; • Allow open discussion of issues of public concern; and 1 • Permit inclusion of relevant, substantive public issues in the final written scope. The scoping process can also allow the lead agency and other involved agencies to reach agreement on relevant issues to minimize the inclusion of unnecessary issues. IV. Considerations: 1. Distribute draft scope document by email/and or letter to involved and interested agencies and persons. Send to NYSDEC ENB and post on the Town website. 2. Schedule public hearing on October 5 for November 2 on the draft scope document. 3. Prepare final scope document and accept as final by letter prior to November 10. 4. Send final scope document to NYSDEC ENB and all other involved and interested agencies and persons who commented in writing on the draft scope. Post on the Town website. SULtA. CHARLES R.CUDDY A F GJRNIPY AT ll...AWWr 445 GRIFFING AVENUE, ll�.IVIEE,RI EI\.:[:)vNb W'YC:R.K Planning Sc&°d P.O. Box 1547 F' : (6,31) 369-(. Rnrrcwrke aJ.p NY 11-901 2, mrv.an.L c�-i arlesctiddy cx olpLoiri�nri .iiieN, September 11, 2020 Heather Lanza, Planning Director Planning Department Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Re: Strong's West Mill LLC-3430 Mill Road, Mattituck,NY SCTM#1000-106-6-13.4 Dear Ms. Lanza: Enclosed is the Draft Scope for this proposed action. Please proceed to review and schedule proceedings to permit a Final Scope and submission of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Very truly yours, Charles R. Cuddy CRC:ik Enclosures DRAFT SCOPE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT STRONG'S YACHT CENTER PROPOSED BOAT STORAGE BUILDINGS 3430 MILL ROAD MATTITUCK,TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NY SCTM No.:DISTRICT 1000,SECTION 106,BLOCK 6,LOTS 10& 13.4 September 10,2020 .............. FOR SUBNHSSION TO: RECEIVED ....... . .......... LEAD AGENCY SEP 1 2020 TowN OF SOUTHOLD PLANNING BOARD 3c;u" 0")1 d 'i PLANNING BOARD OFFICElanning Board ................. ...............__-_w ........ TowN HALL ANNEX 54375 STATE ROUTE 25 Souj'HoLD,NY 11971 PREPARED BY: EwiwgmrAj.,CONSULTANT,ro APPLICANT P.W.GROSSER CONSULTING,INC. 630 JOHNSON AvENuE,SUITE 7 BOHEMIA,NY 11716 631.589.6353 ATTN:Kim A.GENNARo-OANCEA,AICP CEP VICE PRESIDENT epAcc CLIEN� MRIPYM4 SOLUTV)NS DRAFT SCOPE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT STRONG'S YACHT CENTER—PROPOSED BOAT STORAGE BLL LDINGS 3430 MILL ROAD MATTITUCK,TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NY SCTM NO.:DISTRICT 1000, SECTION 106,BLOCK 6,LOTS 10& 13.4 September 10,2020 Introduction This document is the Draft Scope for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for a site plan application to the Town of Southold Planning Board that includes the development of two boat storage buildings of 52,500 square feet (SF) and 49,000 SF, along with associated improvements including water supply, sewage disposal, site grading and drainage, landscaping and lighting, to support the existing operations of the Strong's Yacht Center. The proposed development would be situated on a 32.96±-acre parcel located on the west side of Mattituck Creek,which is zoned Marine H(M-II)and Residential Low-Density A(R-80). All development is proposed to occur on the portion of the site zoned M-H. The subject property is designated Suffolk County Tax Map (SCTM)Nos. 1000-106-6-10 and 13.4. The proposed action is subject to permits and,approvals from the Town of Southold Planning Board. (site plan), Town of Southold Trustees (Wetlands Permit), Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS) (Water Supply and Sanitary Disposal), and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) (State Pollution Discharge Elimination System SPDESj Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activity). The proposed application has been reviewed by the NYSDEC and has received an Article 25 (Tidal Wetlands)Permit for select regulated project components and a Non-Jurisdictional determination for all work landward of the 10-foot contour, by permit dated January 31, 2020 (Permit ID 1-4738-01843/0028). The proposed application has been reviewed by Suffolk County Water Authority (SCWA) and the availability of water has been determined through an extension of the water main. The Suffolk County Planning Commission(SCPC)has General Municipal Law planning review authority over the proposed action. Utility service connections are also required from PSEG Long Island and National Grid. The proposed application was filed with the Town Building Department on August 27, 2018. A Notice of Disapproval requiring site plan review before the Town Planning Board was issued on September 18, 2018. Subsequent to the filing of the application and the Notice of Disapproval, and at the request of the Town Planning staff, the Applicant attended a work session with the Town Planning Board on October 15, 2018. The Applicant continued to provide additional project information in 2018 and 2019. 1 Draft Scope for Draft Environmental Impact Statement Sarong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town o fSouthold,NY On February 10,2020,the Planning Board classified the action as Type I and commenced coordinated review with the involved agencies. After review of Part 1 of the Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) and materials transmitted thereafter, the Planning Board caused to be prepared Part 2 and Part 3/Detemiination of Significance and identified one or more significant adverse impacts that may result from the proposed project. On August 10, 2020, a Positive Declaration was issued by the Planning Board, as lead agency. To ensure that the DEIS will address all significant issues, in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) regulations set forth at 6 NYCRR §617.8, formal scoping is being undertaken. This Draft Scope provides a description of the proposed action and the proposed content for the DEIS, based upon the FEAF Part 2 and FEAF Part 3/Determination of Significance, as prepared by the Town Planning Board. This Draft Scope has been prepared in accordance with 6 NYCRR §617.8(e)and sets forth the following: • Brief description of the proposed action; • Potentially significant adverse impacts; • Extent and quality of information needed to adequately address potentially significant adverse impacts; • Initial identification of mitigation measures; and • Reasonable alternatives to be considered. The proposed organization and overall content of the DEIS is also included herein. The proposed action includes the construction of two boat storage buildings of 52,500 SF and 49,000 SF to support the operations of the Strong's Yacht Center, with associated improvements including gravel-based driveways and parking areas,water supply, sewage disposal, site grading and drainage, landscaping and lighting. Also proposed is the removal of a pool and patio. The Strong's Yacht Center is situated on a 32.96±-acre parcel located south of Old Mill Road and on the west side of Mattituck Creek on lands zoned M-II (approximately 16.46 acres) and R-80 (approximately 16.5 acres). Prior to its purchase by Strong's in April 2017, the subject site was known as the Mattituck Inlet Marina and Shipyard which existed as a full-service marina, maintenance, repair and storage operation for over 60 years. As illustrated on the proposed site development plans prepared by Young & Young, the subject property is currently comprised of 40 boat slips with associated ramps and fueling and developed with eight buildings to support the operation of the marina, as well as the sale, maintenance, dockage and storage of boats. The eight buildings include the following: o Buildingl.- One-story residence(1,610 SF) Building 2: Two-story office (2,702 SF) 2 Draft Scope for Draft Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY • Building 3: One-story storage (17,320 SF) • Building 4: One-story storage (169 SF) • Building 5: One-story storage (341 SF) • Building 6: One-story storage (10,766 SF) • Building 7: One-story storage (15,076 SF) • Building 8: One-story storage (22,425 SF) The two proposed buildings would become Building 9 (49,000 SF) and Building 10 (52,500 SF). Upon implementation of the proposed action,the total gross floor area of all buildings would increase from 69,245 SF to 171,929 SF. The proposed buildings would be situated to the west of Buildings 7 and 8,which would allow direct access and transport of yachts from the existing lift station to each of the proposed buildings. The purpose of the proposed action is to provide indoor and heated winter storage for yachts that utilize local waters in the peak season but are required to be transported to warmer climates in the winter months due to a lack of adequate storage in the Town of Southold and across the entire east end of Long Island. Based upon an average yacht size of 60 feet, it is estimated that approximately 88 yachts could be stored within the proposed buildings during the winter months; all of which would. arrive to the site via Mattituck Inlet (as confirmed by surveys and soundings for the entire Inlet). It is also expected that maintenance and repair activities for larger vessels would occur on the subject property, having direct access from the Mattituck Inlet via the existing lift, further supporting a demand of the existing local boating market. There are approximately 13 full-time staff at the Strong's Yacht Center and, upon implementation of the proposed action, the Applicant expects to create an additional 15 career positions. The subject parcel is adjacent to Federal and State-regulated Tidal Wetlands (Mattituck Creek), with. a portion of the site located within a 100-year floodplain (Zone AE: Elevation 8). The proposed buildings would be construction in a portion of the site located within a 500-year floodplain (Zone X) at Elevation 10.0. The proposed action has been reviewed and approved by the NYSDEC by permit dated January 31,2020. Due to significant grade changes on the site,the proposed project will require approximately 134,000 cubic yards of cut for the placement of the proposed buildings at Elevation 10.0. The proposed excavation plan includes two routes for truck movements and would occur over a projected duration of approximately seven (7) months based upon loads of 30 cubic yards per truck and six-day work weeks. An additional six months is projected to complete the proposed project, inclusive of the retaining wall, infrastructure and two buildings (i.e.,total construction duration is 13 months). The proposed plan includes the installation of a cement and evergreen retaining wall along the west side of Buildings 9 and 10 and along the north side of Building 10,which serves to both stabilize the slope as well as enhance the visual screening of the subject property. The total proposed disturbance is 3.9±acres,with approximately 493 trees of six-inch diameter or greater proposed for removal. 3 Draft Scope for Draft Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY As part of the proposed action, one new on-site wastewater treatment system (I/A OWTS)would be installed and an existing on-site sanitary system would be replaced with an I/A OWTS. The two systems would be designed to serve the Strong's Yacht Center operations, inclusive of all buildings, the office and marina. Also proposed is an extension of the water main from Naugles Drive by 765 feet to allow for the site to be served by the public supply system. Upon implementation of the proposed action,the existing on-site supply well would be available for non-potable use. Regarding stormwater management,the proposed action includes the installation of on-site leaching pools, French drains and the use of pervious gravel to accommodate stormwater from the proposed development. The proposed stormwater management plan is designed to accommodate a two-inch rain event, in accordance with Town of Southold regulations. It is noted that in addition to the full-service marina operation, the Strong's Yacht Center currently hosts six commercial fishing boats,and also supports the Marine Program of the Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County, by hosting eight (8) FLUPSYs (Floating Upweller Systems), which provide protected nurseries for hard clam seed to assist with the NYS Shellfish Restoration Initiative. None of these activities would be affected by the proposed action. In order to develop the site as proposed,the following approvals are required: Agency Permit/Approval Town of Southold Planning Board Site Plan Review and Approval Town of Southold Trustees Wetlands Permit Suffolk County Department of Health Services Wastewater Disposal and Water Supply Suffolk County Planning Commission Referral New York State Department of Environmental State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Conservation (SPDES)General Permit for Stormwater Discharge during Construction Activities Tidal Wetlands Permit and Non-Jurisdictional Determination(Permit ID 1-4738-01843/0028 dated January 31, 2020 Suffolk County Water Authority Extension of Water Main and New Connection PSEG Long Island/National Grid Electric and Natural Gas service connections 4 Draft Scope for Draft Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town o Southold,NY The section of the DEIS entitled Description of the Proposed Action will provide a thorough description of the existing conditions on the 32.6±-acre subject property and the proposed action. The Description of the Proposed Action section of the DEIS will specifically include information relating to the following: • Project location,setting,land use and zoning(with appropriate maps and aerial photographs). • Summary of the surrounding land uses and zoning. • Physical characteristics of the site,including property acreage,site cover types(e.g.,pervious and impervious areas), and existing structures. • Project layout and design, including information about the proposed development, zoning compliance, changes in site cover types, site access and circulation, and parking. • Infrastructure requirements, including water supply, sanitary waste disposal, drainage, and utilities. • Solid waste generation and the proposed plans for on-site minimization and recycling. • Project objectives and benefits to the community, including a summary of the project's consistency with the proposed land uses set forth in the Local Waterfront Revitalisation Program (LWRP). • Projected construction schedule. • Required permits and approvals. The DEIS will be prepared in accordance with the Final Scope promulgated by the lead agency and in accordance with 6 NYCRR §617.9(6). Based upon review of the site, architectural plans and elevations, site plans and the FEAF Part 1 prepared by the Applicant,the Planning Board prepared a FEAF-Parts 2 and 3/Determination of Significance,for the proposed application which indicates that one or more significant adverse impacts may result from the proposed project. The Planning Board issued a Positive Declaration on August 10, 2020, specifically identifying as potential moderate to large impacts to Land, Surface Waters, Groundwater, Flooding, Air, Plants and Animals, Aesthetic Resources, Noise, and Community Character. The DEIS will fully address the identified potential significant adverse impacts,as well as other relevant issues. Where the impact analyses conducted in the DEIS indicate the potential for significant adverse impacts, the DEIS will set forth measures to mitigate those impacts. 5 Draft Scope for Draft Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY A description of each section of the DEIS is set forth below, followed by a proposed outline for the DEIS. Soils and Topography This section of the DEIS will identify the existing soil type(s) on the subject property, based upon the Suffolk Cotmty Soil Survey and any available test hole data. The grading program will also be discussed, based upon the required plans and data (e.g., estimates of volumes of soil excavated, cut/filled, removed from site and maximum depths of cut/fill). The topographic conditions will be evaluated,and a topographic map will be provided. The existing and proposed changes to slopes will be included, and stabilization measures will be identified. Construction-related impacts will also be discussed,including truck trips for soil removal and associated truck routes. Mitigation measures for soil limitations/constraints, erosion, sedimentation, and dust generation,to the extent necessary,will be included. Water Resources (Groundwater and Surface Waters) This section of the DEIS will describe the groundwater conditions, including depth to groundwater and groundwater quality beneath the subject property, based upon relevant documentation. The Groundwater Management Zone IV (as classified under Article 6 of the SCSC) within which the subject property is located, and site drainage characteristics will be described. Groundwater flow direction based upon Suffolk County Groundwater Contour Maps will be identified and an assessment of the potential impacts to downgradient resources will be included. The location of private and public wells will also be determined. This section will also include calculations of projected sanitary flow, discussion of the proposed method of sanitary disposal (i.e., the on-site wastewater treatment systems [VA OWTS]), and consistency with Article 6 of the SCSC. The SCDHS Notice of Incomplete Application issued for the proposed action will also be included and consultations with the SCDHS would be undertaken as part of the DEIS and described herein. The proposed installation of four, 2,000-gallon liquid propane aboveground tanks and consistency with Article 12 of the SCSC would be evaluated. Groundwater quantity(i.e.,water usage)will also be evaluated, including the extension of the public water supply main to the subject property and the availability of water supply based upon consultations with the SCWA. The post-development benefits of the water supply main would also be identified. The impacts to surface waters would be evaluated, including the appropriateness of the proposed use given the site's location and existing marina operations. Drainage and post-development stormwater management measures, and erosion control measures, will also be discussed and evaluated in accordance with the relevant standards. The surrounding wetlands will be described and the findings of the NYSDEC will be included. An assessment of the Trustees standards for the issuance of a Wetlands Permit will also be included. Finally,the effects of climate change as it relates to sea level rise and flooding will be addressed. Mitigation measures which may reduce potential water quality or quantity impacts will also be identified, as necessary. 6 Draft Supe for Draft Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY Ecological Resources This section of the DEIS would address the existing ecological resources on the subject property. As part of the DEIS, a qualified biologist/ecologist will inspect the site to determine the vegetation, wildlife,and general habitat character. An inventory of flora and f"auna,as observed,will be prepared and included in this section of the DEIS, and an assessment of the species that could be expected to utilize the subject site will be performed. Protected native plants; plant and animal species listed as endangered, threatened, and special concern (or with other protective status), will be identified, including the noted piping plover, southern sprite,and Eastern box turtle,and suitability of habitat as roosting or summary foraging habitat for protected New York State and Federally-protected bat species. An assessment of potential impacts to the contiguous Town of Southold woodland identified as 25.29 acres to the south (SCTM 1000-106-6-20.3) and the adjacent tidal wetlands of Mattituck Creek will also be performed. Consultations with the New York Natural Heritage Program will be undertaken for site information. This section of the DEIS will include the quantitative impacts to habitats as well as a qualitative assessment of the impacts to plants and animal species. Mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts will be identified. aUlga,it fiaggz= Transportation This section of the DEIS will describe the existing traffic conditions and evaluate the effects of the proposed action on the surrounding area roadways and parking. A written letter report setting forth the findings and conclusions of the professional traffic engineer will be included as an attachment to the DEIS and summarized in the body of the document. The assessment will examine the traffic aspects of this project and determine the project's traffic impact on the existing street system. The factors that will be considered are existing traffic flow, traffic generation, traffic distribution, capacity, safety, and access. In the preparation of this assessment, the traffic assessment would include the following: • Site and area visits for observations of existing traffic movements at various times of the day and under different conditions. • Review of available traffic data from the NYSDOT and the Suffolk County Department of Public Works. • Consultations with the Town of Southold Highway Department regarding local roadway conditions. • Evaluation of accident data from the NYSDOT to determine if there are any existing accident problems and whether construction traffic may affect the existing accident patterns. • Review the estimates of traffic anticipated to be generated during the construction of the proposed development. Determine the make-up of the added traffic and hourly new traffic vohunes to be placed on the existing road system. 7 Draft Scope for Draft Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY • Determine the anticipated route and distribution of the site construction traffic. • Examine the anticipated route of the construction traffic. Determine the dimensional characteristics of the road and the existing traffic control provided. Examine whether the additional construction related traffic can safely be accommodated on the existing roadways. • Examine the proposed construction access road for the site from the standpoint of location, design and traffic safety. • Mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts will be identified. Aesthetic Resources and Community Character This section of the DEIS will describe the existing viewshed and general consistency or compatibility with existing elements of the community will be described. As part of the assessment of impacts on visual resources, 3D computer-generated imagery would be provided to depict post-development viewshed changes from Mattituck Creek and the adjacent roadway. The proposed buildings and cement and evergreen retaining wall, as well as the site and building lighting, would be described. The impacts to the community character as it relates to changes to the existing natural landscape with the proposed development would be evaluated. The impacts to community character as it relates to the viewshed from waterway (Mattituck Creek) will be evaluated and the project's consistency with the proposed use of land as set forth in approved LWRP,will be discussed.Measures to mitigate impacts will be identified, as appropriate. Air Quality This section of the document will address mobile source impacts (i.e., those related to construction activity)and post-development impacts to biomass as a result of the proposed land clearing activities. An air quality assessment will be performed and appended to the DEIS and summarized in the body of the text. The air quality assessment would include the following: • Mobile Sources - The latest version of the Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES2014b),developed by the USEPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality,will be used to estimate emissions associated with off-road and on-road mobile engines.If available, emission factors will be obtained from the NYSDEC or NYSDOT MOVES specific data for the County of Suffolk, otherwise national average emission factors in MOVES for Suffolk County using default distribution assumptions will be used. Mitigation measures, as required,will also be identified. ➢ Off-Road Mobile Equipment - Activity levels (i.e. hours of operation) of each piece of equipment will be estimated based on the square footage of the construction area and the associated activity type.The activity levels represent the total number of hours each piece of equipment is anticipated to be used for the duration of the project. Operating hours will be based on the projects need for the equipment rather than assuming continuous operation. It is assumed that all off-road equipment will operate on diesel fuel. Off-road 8 Draft Scope for Draft Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY mobile equipment emission rates for criteria pollutants will be computed and compared with USEPA National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Emission rates for hazardous air pollutants (HAPS) will be computed and compared to New York State Department of Environmental Conservation DAR-1 Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Ambient Air Contaminants Under Part 212. ➢ On-Road Mobile Vehicles - Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data for each on-road construction vehicle and employee trips will be estimated from roundtrip distances and the number of vehicles and employees based on the activity specific construction schedule. It is assumed that all on-road equipment will use either gasoline or diesel fuel. Typical vehicle types will be passenger car,passenger truck, single unit short-haul, and commercial short-haul. The emission rates for criteria pollutants on-road construction vehicles will be computed and compared to USEPA National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Emission rates for hazardous air pollutants (HAPS) will be computed and compared to New York State Department of Environmental Conservation DAR-1 Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Ambient Air Contaminants Under Part 212. ➢ Fugitive Dust-Fugitive dust emissions(particulate matter or PM)from site preparation, land clearing, equipment movement on unpaved areas, material handling will be calculated utilizing USEPA published emission factors (USEPA, Air Emission Factors and Quantification, AP-42: Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors). Erosion control measures and water programs to minimize fugitive dust and particulate emissions at construction sites will be considered in the analysis. Estimated emission rates for particulate matter (PM) will be computed and compared to USEPA National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)for PM2.5 and PM10. • Carbon Sequesterin -Carbon sequestering estimates will be determined utilizing published sources,including but not limited to: USEPA, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Greenhouse Gas Mitigation in U.S. Forestry and Agriculture carbon sequestering factors; U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Method for Calculating Carbon Sequestration by Trees in Urban and Suburban Settings; and/or 2006 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change QPCC) Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Sources will be dependent on the most up to date and appropriate specific to the types of vegetation/soil conditions and the classification of the area to be cleared. Soil types will be identified from soil boring logs and published data through the USDA Suffolk County Soil Survey. Construction-Related Impacts This section will address the construction-related impacts related to vegetation and material removal, site preparation,and construction activities. The proposed excavation plan will be presented,and the impacts associated with noise, traffic and land disturbance activities (e.g., dust) will be assessed. Measures to mitigate impacts will be identified, as appropriate. 9 Draft Scope for Draft Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY Mer_R ^t U& d&ctt U1 Use and Conservation of Energy - This section of the DEIS will describe the proposed energy sources, expected levels of consumption and means to reduce consumption. Consultations with the service providers (PSEG LI and National Grid) will be undertaken and the findings and recommendations of these providers will be included. Unavoidable Adverse Effects - This section enumerates those short and long-term impacts that cannot be mitigated. Irretrievable and Irreversible Commitment of Resources — This section includes a brief discussion of natural resources consumed as a result of project implementation. Growth-Inducing Aspects -The potential growth-inducing aspects of the project will be presented in this section. In order to conduct the analyses of potential adverse impacts, available information will be collected and reviewed, and empirical information will be developed. While it is not possible to determine all information sources to be used,the following represent sources/research that have been preliminarily identified as necessary to perform the required analyses in the DEIS. Soils and Topography • USDA, Suffolk County Soil Survey • USGS Topographic Map • Proposed Site Development Plans • Proposed Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan • Soil Boring Logs • Cut/Fill Estimates Water Resources • USGS Water Table map and monitoring well data, as available • Suffolk County Groundwater Contour Maps • Mattituck Inlet Surveys with Soundings • Relevant plans, standards and regulations, including the SCDHS Suffolk County Sanitary Code,New York Standards and Specifications for Erosion and Sediment Control,New York State Stormwater Management Design Manual,and the Stt blk Conntj,Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan. • NYSDEC Freshwater and Tidal Wetland maps • NYSDEC Letter of Non-Jurisdiction • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service—National Wetlands Inventory • Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA)Flood Insurance Rate Maps 10 Draft Scope for Draft Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY • Chapter 236 (Stormwater Management) of the Town Code Ecological Resources • Correspondence with the New York Natural Heritage Program • Field investigations • Published material regarding the potential presence of protected native plants, plant and animal species listed as endangered, threatened, and/or special concern (or with other protective status)and significant habitat areas on or in the vicinity of the project site • Ecological Communities Map • Ecological Inventory of Site for Observed Plants and ecological communities and observed/expected wildlife • Tree Removal Plan updated with Tree Species, as identified during field visits Transportation • Most-recent three-year accident data, as published by NYSDOT • The Institute of Transportation Engineers,Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition • The Institute of Transportation Engineers,Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition • Highway Capacity Manual, latest edition • Consultations and/or review of available information from the Town of Southold Highway Department,NYSDOT and SCDPW Aesthetic Resources and Community Character • Architectural plans and elevations • Computer-generated imagery for viewshed changes from Mattituck Creek and adjacent roadway • Site and area inspections • Chapter 172 (Lighting, Outdoor) of the Town Code Air Quality • Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator(MOVES2014b) • Published emission factors from NYSDOT,NYSDEC or USEPA • Construction schedule,with projected truck and equipment types • USEPA, Air Emission Factors and Quantification, AP-42: Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors • Carbon sequestering estimates to be based on published sources, including but not limited to USEPA, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Greenhouse Gas Mitigation in U.S. Forestry and Agriculture carbon sequestering factors; U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Method for Calculating Carbon Sequestration by Trees in Urban and Suburban Settings; and/or 2006 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. 11 Draft Scope for Draft Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY • Tree Survey and Tree Identification, as provided by Land Use Ecological Services,Inc. • Code of Federal Regulations — Title 40, Part 50, National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)- • New York State Department of Environmental Conservation: DAR-1 Guidance (August 2016). Construction-Related Impacts • Proposed Site Development Plans • Proposed Excavation Plan • Proposed Construction Schedule • Construction-related traffic assessment • Chapter 180 (Noise) of the Town Code As the DEIS analyses have not yet been conducted, no specific mitigation measures have yet been developed.Nonetheless,where the impact analyses conducted in the DEIS indicate the potential for significant adverse impacts, the DEIS will set forth measures to mitigate those impacts within the topic sections, as presented herein. Reasonable Alternatives to Be Considered. Pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617, the DEIS must contain a description and evaluation of reasonable alternatives to the proposed action that are feasible,considering the objectives and capabilities of the project sponsor. This DEIS will analyze the impacts of the following alternatives and compare (quantitatively and qualitatively) these impacts to those associated with implementation of the proposed action,based upon the specific issues outlined above: • No-Action(site remains as it currently exists) • Alternative Material Removal Plan — This alternative is intended to mitigate the impacts associated with the removal of material via trucks over local roadways and will include the barging of materials. The DEIS will conform with the basic content requirements as contained in 6 NYCRR Part 617.9 (b)(3). The proposed outline of the DEIS is as follows: Executive Summary 1.0 Description of the Proposed Action 1.1 Project Location and Site Conditions 1.2 Project Design and Layout 12 Draft Scope for Draft Environmental Impact Statement Strong's Yacht Center—Proposed Boat Storage Buildings Mattituck, Town of Southold,NY 1.3 Project Objectives and Benefits 1.4 Construction and Operations 1.5 Required Permits and Approvals 2.0 Natural Environmental Resources 2.1 Soils and Topography 2.1.1 Existing Conditions 2.1.2 Potential Impacts 2.1.3 Proposed Mitigation 2.2 Water Resources 2.2.1 Existing Conditions 2.2.2 Potential Impacts 2.2.3 Proposed Mitigation 2.3 Ecological Resources 2.3.1 Existing Conditions 2.3.2 Potential Impacts 2.3.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.0 Human Environmental Resources 3.1 Transportation 3.1.1 Existing Conditions 3.1.2 Potential Impacts 3.1.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.2 Aesthetic Resources and Community Character 3.2.1 Existing Conditions 3.2.2 Potential Impacts 3.2.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.3 Air Quality 3.3.1 Existing Conditions 3.3.2 Potential Impacts 3.3.3 Proposed Mitigation 3.4 Construction-Related Impacts 3.4.1 Description of Proposed Construction Schedule and Activities 3.4.2 Potential Impacts 3.4.3 Proposed Mitigation 4.0 Other Required Sections 4.1 Use and Conservation of Energy 4.2 Adverse Impacts That Cannot Be Avoided(Short-Term and Long-Term) 4.3 Irretrievable and Irreversible Commitment of Resources 4.4 Growth-Inducing Impacts 5.0 Alternatives and Their Impacts 5.1 Alternative 1: No-Action 5.2 Alternative 2: Alternative Material Removal Plan 6.0 References 13 OFFICE LOCATION: ILING SS: Town Hall Annex " SO, P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 �`� 1� Southold, NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) w "x' Southold, NY ri Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.s outholdtownny.gov gum PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTL August 11, 2020 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq, P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: SEAR Lead Agency & Determination - Strong's Storage Buildings 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: The following resolutions were adopted at a meeting of the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, August 10, 2020: WHEREAS, this site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) 6 NYCRR, Part 617, has determined that the proposed action is a Type I action pursuant to 617.4(b)(10): Any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space, including any site on the Register of National Natural Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994 [see 617.17]. The physical alteration of 3.74 acres exceeds 25% of the 10-acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6); and WHEREAS, on February 10, 2020, the Southold Town Planning Board has determined that this proposed action is an Type I Action under SEQRA as described above; and Strong's Storage Buildin .s Page_2 August 11,_2020 WHEREAS, the Planning Board performed a coordinated review of this Type I Action pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.7 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA); and WHEREAS, no objection to the Southold Town Planning Board taking Lead Agency for the action was received; therefore be it RESOLVED, the Southold Town Planning Board hereby declares itself Lead Agency for the SEQRA review of this action; and be it further RESOLVED, the Planning Board, as Lead Agency, hereby makes a determination of significance for the proposed action and issues a Positive Declaration. If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this resolution, please contact the Planning Board Office. Respectfully, Donald J. Wilcenski Chairman Encl, OFFICE LOCATION: MAILING DRESS: li Town Hall Annex ��'� ��' P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 � .,,�� '"p �� Southold NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) r " fir? Telephone: 631 765-1938 Southold, NY www.southoldtownny.gov 0 , PLANNING TOWN OF SOUTHOLD State Environmental Quality Review POSITIVE DECLARATION Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft EIS Determination of Significance Tax Map Number: Date: August 10, 2020 1000-106.-6-13.4 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. On February 10, 2020 the Planning Board determined that the action is a Type I action pursuant to the following. 617.4(b)(10) "any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space, including any site on the Register of National Natural Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994 [see 617.17], or" The physical alteration of 3.9 acres exceeds 25% of the 10 acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6) below. 617.4(b)(6) °'activitics, other than the construction of residential facilities, that meet or exceed any of the following thresholds, or the expansion of existing non-residential 1 facilities by more than 50 percent of any of the following thresholds: • A project or action that involves the physical alteration of 10 acres. The project will physically alter greater than 5 acres or 50 percent of 10 acres. The Town of Southold Planning Board as lead agency, has determined that the proposed action described below may have a significant impact on the environment and issues a Positive Declaration and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared. Name of Action: Strong's Storage Buildings SEQR Status. Type 1 JX" Unlisted Description of Action: This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there is 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. The project involves the clearing of 3.9 acres on a parcel substantially contiguous to a Town of Southold owned open space parcel (SCTM# 1000-106-6-20.3) to the south. On February 10, 2020 the Planning Board determined that the action is a Type I action pursuant to the following. 617.4(b)(10) "any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space, including any site on the Register of National Natural Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994 [see 617.17], or" The physical alteration of 3.9 acres exceeds 25% of the 10 acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6) below. 2 617.4(b)(6) "activities, other than the construction of residential facilities, that meet or exceed any of the following thresholds, or the expansion of existing non-residential facilities by more than 50 percent of any of the following thresholds: • A project or action that involves the physical alteration of 10 acres Evaluation: The proposed action has been evaluated for the potential to cause moderate to large adverse impacts using Part 2 - Identification of Potential Project Impacts of the Environmental Assessment Form (EAF). Based on this evaluation, the project has the potential to cause moderate to large adverse impacts. The categories and numbering below correlate to the impact categories in the Part 2 EAF. 1. Impact on Land b. The proposed action may involve construction on slopes of 15% or greater. A potential large, adverse impact may occur through the excavation of 134,921 CY (cut) of earthwork/sand/soil removal, construction on slopes of 15% or greater, excavating steep slopes, leaving slopes steeper than that which exist and removing large areas of vegetation on steep slopes and in other areas from the site. d. The proposed action may involve the excavation and removal of more than 1,000 tons of natural material. A potential large, adverse impact may occur through the excavation and removal of 134,921 CY of sand (364,286,700 lbs) or 182,143.35 tons. e. The proposed action may involve construction that continues for more than one year or in multiple phases. A potential large, adverse impact may occur to adjacent roadways, surrounding properties, neighborhood(s), and region through the clearing, excavation, transporting of materials and construction of the site during a multi-year period in multiple phases. The proposed action may significantly adversely impact the quality of life of residents and visitors. f. The proposed action may result in increased erosion, whether from physical disturbance or vegetation removal (including from treatment by herbicides). A large increase in erosion may occur through the clearing and excavation of a total of 3.94 acres which includes the removal of large amounts of vegetation in multiple phases. 3 3. Impacts on Surface Waters d. The proposed action may involve construction within or adjoining a freshwater or tidal wetland, or in the bed or banks of any other water body. The proposed action involves construction on a parcel adjoining a tidal wetland: Mattituck Creek. An area of tidal marsh located in the east of the property. e. The proposed action may create turbidity in a waterbody, either from upland erosion, runoff or by disturbing bottom sediments. The proposed action proposes to remove and transport large quantities of upland soils, including during the winter months. A moderate adverse impact could occur. h. The proposed action may cause soil erosion, or otherwise create a source of storrnwater discharge that may lead to siltation or other degradation of receiving water bodies. Extensive site work is proposed that will clear large areas of vegetation and cause landform changes that could potentially cause turbid storm water runoff to enter Mattituck Creek during storm events. i. The proposed action may affect the water quality of any water bodies within or downstream of the site of the proposed action The propose action may affect water quality of Mattituck Creek and Long Island Sound. Adverse impacts from storm water runoff capable of overflowing impervious surfaces may introduce chemicals, nutrients, sediments or other pollutants into the waterbody. 4. Impacts on Groundwater f. The proposed action may require the bulk storage of petroleum or chemical products over ground water or an aquifer. The proposal includes the bulk storage of chemical and/or petroleum products over the Sole Source Aquifer Nassau-Suffolk. Four 2,000 gallon liquid propane aboveground tanks are proposed. The storage of chemicals used in Marina and vessel maintenance is expected. S. Impact on Flooding b. The proposed action may result in development within a 100 year floodplain. The proposed action will develop a 100 year and 500 year floodplain adjoining Mattituck Creek. Flooding of portions of the parcel during storm events is expected within the FEMA Flood Zone AE El 8. The proposed storage buildings are located within Flood Zone X; (unshaded); an area of minimal risk. However, the potential effects of climate change on the site must be evaluated. d. The proposed action may result in, or require, modification of existing drainage patterns. The proposed action involves the clearing, excavation and manipulation of the existing landform and therefore existing natural drainage patterns will be 4 altered. A large area of the lot will be converted to impervious surfaces that require engineered storm water controls. A potential, moderate adverse impact could occur to existing drainage patterns as a result of the action. 6. Impact on Air f Other: The proposal involves the operation of heavy machinery and trucks on and off site over a long duration of time that could result in moderate adverse impacts to local air quality. The proposal also involves the removal 3.94 acres of soil and vegetation including 493+ hardwood trees contributing to carbon sequestering. Carbon sequestration is the process by which atmospheric carbon dioxide is taken up by trees, grasses, and other plants through photosynthesis and stored as carbon in biomass (trunks, branches, foliage, and roots) and soils. The oak is the genus with the most carbon- absorbing capabilities, there are other notable deciduous trees that sequester carbon as well. 7. Impact on Plants and Animals a. The proposed action may cause reduction in population or loss of individuals of any threatened or endangered species, as listed by New York State or the Federal government, that use the site, or are found on, over, or near the site. NYSDEC records indicate that the piping plover (Charadrius melodus) and the southern sprite (Nehalennia integricollis) potentially occur near the site, However, due to landform changes and use of the site, the occurrence of these species near or on-site is unlikely and low. Conversely, the Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) a listed federally-threatened species under section 4(d) of the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 could potentially occur on the parcel. The clearing of 3.94 acres of woodland habitat could result in large, adverse impacts to the protected species. b. The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used by any rare, threatened or endangered species, as listed by New York State or the federal government. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impacts to habitat. Habitats are used by insects, reptiles, amphibians, fish, mammals, birds for breeding, hibernation, reproduction, feeding, sheltering, migration or overwintering. The habitats may be used year-round, seasonally, or on a transient basis (passing through the area or during migration.). The clearing, excavation and grading of 3.94 acres of woodland habitat (a large area of woodland when assessed locally) may result in potentially large, adverse impact to all fauna on site (protected and unprotected). Death and displacement of species could occur. 5 C. The proposed action may cause reduction in population, or loss of individuals, of any species of special concern or conservation need, as listed by New York State or the Federal government, that use the site, or are found on, over, or near the site. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact to the Woodland Box Turtle (Terrapene carolina carolina), a New York State-listed species of Special Concern on the parcel. The clearing, excavation and grading of 3.94 acres of woodland habitat (a large area of woodland when assessed locally) may result in potentially large adverse impacts to the species. d The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used by any species of special concern and conservation need, as listed by New York State or the Federal government. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact through the clearing and excavation of 3.94 acres of woodland habitat resulting in a Reduction or elimination of the Woodland Box Turtle (Terrapene carolina carolina), a New York State-listed species of Special Concern from the area. 9. The proposed action may substantially interfere with nesting/breeding,foraging, or over-wintering habitat for the predominant species that occupy or use the project site. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact and significantly interfere with nesting/breeding, foraging or overwintering habitat by removing 3.94 acres of vegetation, including the removal of important habitat features such as dead trees used for nesting and cover. This habitat area is connected to a 25.29 acre parcel with similar habitat that is protected by the Town of Southold (SCTM# 106-6-20.3) to the south. This woodland assemblage comprises the largest undeveloped acreage in the Mattituck Creek watershed. Other areas of woodland to the south and to the west on the R-80 zoned portion of the parcel may also be affected. 9. Impact on Aesthetic Resources C. The proposed action may be visible from publicly accessible vantage points: i. Seasonally (e.g., screened by summer foliage, but visible during other seasons) ii. Year round The proposed action is of scale and dimension that will be visible from publicly accessible scenic resources (Mattituck Creek) by operators of vessels using the waterway during seasonal use resulting in a potential moderate impact to scenic enjoyment of the waterway. Note that Mattituck Creek is a Federal waterway. e. The proposed,action,may cause a diminishment of thepublic enjoyment and appreciation of the designated aesthetic resource. 6 The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact to the aesthetic resource (Mattituck Creek) through the diminishment of public enjoyment by users and members of the community under different circumstances and activities in a location that also has an important role in recreation and tourism economy. Both are important and changes to scenic and aesthetic resources may have adverse impacts on both the quality of life of residents and broader economic impacts. 13. Impact on Transportation a. Projected traffic increase may exceed capacity of existing road network. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact by significantly increasing the number of vehicles (including construction and service vehicles) on local roads for long durations. Capacity of the roadways may be adversely impacted. The proposed action will add substantial traffic to the area and due to current road conditions, traffic, and intersection conditions, the roads may not have the capacity to handle it. Capacity considers the traffic conditions, road way characteristics, and traffic controls such as the signing or signals at intersections. It addresses the physical amount of vehicles and pedestrians a road can handle and does not depend on the total number of vehicles demanding service, but is influenced by the relative distribution of vehicles by lane. The geometric design of the road influences capacity (NYSDEC). The design and condition of the roads leading to the site (route) is a concern. Many areas exhibit stress cracks on the pavement. The design of the roads and the ability to increase traffic, including trucks, is a significant concern. Curves, declines and inclines exist on the route. The level of service (LOS) at intersections may be adversely impacted. While road capacity gives a quantitative measure of the amount of traffic that can be handled, level of service gives a qualitative measure of how well that traffic flows. For a given road, capacity would be constant, although it may vary at intersections. But actual traffic flow will be different for different days and different during a day itself. The intention of LOS is to relate the quality of traffic service to a given flow rate. LOS is a term that designates a range of operating conditions, based on delay, on a particular road or at an intersection (NYSDEC). In addition to the above assessment, a routing plan is necessary to adequately assess potential impacts to transportation. d. The proposed action will degrade existing pedestrian or bicycle accommodations. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impacts to the public and user groups from the increase of vehicular traffic on local and regional roads affecting the public's use and enjoyment of the roads while conducting activities (driving, walking, biking). The large number of truck trips proposed could result in large, adverse impacts to West Mill Road, Cox Neck Road, Suffolk County Route 48, New York State Route 25, Sound Avenue, Northville Turnpike; Suffolk County Route 5,8 and other local and regional roads. 7 15. Impact on Noise, Odor, and Light a. The proposed action may produce sound above noise levels established by local regulation. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact from excessive noise levels during long duration of site work and construction over a multi-year period. Noise associated with the operation of heavy equipment and trucks includes but is not limited to; engine noise, noise from moving and backing up heavy equipment (reversal warning sound) and the accelerating and deceleration and Jake braking of trucks, both on-site and as they travel through neighborhoods. Similarly, operation of chain-saws and wood chippers for long periods may generate large, adverse noise impacts to receptors in the neighborhood. 18. Consistency with Community Character e. The proposed action is inconsistent with the predominant architectural scale and character. The proposed action could result in a moderate adverse impact to existing community character (physical alteration on site over a multi-year period, large building size and noise). The intensity of the proposed action operations is different from the surrounding uses. The potential, adverse moderate to large adverse impacts could occur to community character from the multi-year construction timeframe in intensity and duration. Impacts are expected to be long in duration from the construction and operation of the proposed action. f. Proposed action is inconsistent with the character of the existing natural landscape. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact to the character of the existing natural landscape through the clearing and excavation of 3.94 acres of land area including woodland in the Mattituck Creek watershed. g. Other: The proposed action could result in a moderate to large impact to community character from the increase of vessel traffic and potential, additional dockage in Mattituck Creek thereby affecting the water quality, public use and access of the creek. The size of expected vessels to be stored and serviced on-site in relation to the adequacy of the navigability of Mattituck Creek must be addressed. 8 1tr.Y'itiy'Useordtq lIL^ t+}71ic.. ... �r 0"u 6M Q.'C..0 Yirii 4n1 ii 7 iU,IITI yd: y k t)OtC'. irx 1?CL 2020 Full Environmental Assessment Form Part 3 - Evaluation of the Magnitude and Importance of'Project Impacts and Determination of Significance Part 3 provides the reasons in support of the determination of significance. The lead agency must complete Part 3 for every question in Part 2 where the impact has been identified as potentially moderate to large or where there is a need to explain why a particular element of the proposed action will not,or may, result in a significant adverse environmental impact. Based on the analysis in Part 3,the lead agency must decide whether to require air environmental impact statement to further assess the proposed action or whether available information is sufficient for the lead agency to conclude that the proposed action will not have a significant adverse environmental impact. By completing the certification on the next page,the lead agency can complete its determination of significance. Reasons Supporting This Determination: To complete this section: ® Identify the impact based on the Part 2 responses and describe its magnitude. Magnitude considers factors such as severity, size or extent of an impact. • Assess the importance of the impact. Importance relates to the geographic scope, duration, probability of the impact occurring,number of people affected by the impact and any additional environmental consequences if the impact were to occur. ® The assessment should take into consideration any design element or project changes. ® Repeat this process for each Part 2 question where the impact has been identified as potentially moderate to large or where there is a need to explain why a particular element of the proposed action will not,or may,result in a significant adverse environmental impact. • Provide the reason(s)why the impact may,or will not, result in a significant adverse environmental impact • For Conditional Negative Declarations identify the specific condition(s) imposed that will modify the proposed action so that no significant adverse environmental impacts will result. Attach additional sheets,as needed. The Town of Southold Planning Board as lead agency,has determined that the proposed action described below may have a significant impact on the environment and issues a Positive Declaration and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared See Determination of Significance supplemental narrative dated August 10,2020(attached). Scoping will be conducted by public meeting at Town of Southold Town Hall or alternative method and location due to the current Pandemic. Determination of Significance - Type 1 and Unlisted Actions SEQR Status: ✓ Type I ❑ Unlisted Identify portions of EAF completed for this Project Part I ❑ Part 2 ❑✓ Part 3 ..—.__ FEAF 2019 I-)poll reviinformation recorded on this EAF, as noted, plus this additional support information 9� 4r<<.,a,ln k,Gsr ttf >-9. _ n c c , rlE n r.l: lnarrat c 9�1�i.:N,tit tit 1I).„ C7f.,LtGknrtxr:f}:. and considering both the magnitude and importance of each identified potential impact, it is the conclusion of the Town ofSouthold Planr ing k o and _.._ as lead agency that: A. This project will result in no significant adverse impacts on the environment, and, therefore,an environmental impact statement need not be prepared. Accordingly,this negative declaration is issued. B. Although this project could have a significant adverse impact on the environment, that impact will be avoided or substantially mitigated because of the following conditions which will be required by the lead agency: There will,therefore, be no significant adverse impacts from the project as conditioned, and,therefore,this conditioned negative declaration is issued. A conditioned negative declaration may be used only for UNLISTED actions(see 6 NYCRR 617.7(d)). C. This Project may result in one or more significant adverse impacts on the environment,and an environmental impact statement must be prepared to further assess the impacts)and possible mitigation and to explore alternatives to avoid or reduce those impacts. Accordingly,this positive declaration is issued. Name of Action: Strong°s Storage Buildings Name of Lead Agency: Town of Southold Planning Board Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency: Donald vUilcenski Title of Responsible Officer: Chairman gnature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency. Date v_.... . �........... � � ....... Signature of Prepare` (if different from Responsible Officer} I Date: For further Information: Contact Person: Mark Terry Address: P.O.Box 1179,5309 State Road 25,New York 11971 Telephone Number:631-765-1938 E-mail: Mark.Terry@town.southold.ny.us For Type 1 Actions and Conditioned Negative Declarations,a copy of this Notice is sent to: Chief Executive Officer of the political subdivision in which the action will be principally located(e.g.,Town/City/Village of) Other involved agencies(if any) Applicant(if any) Environmental Notice Bulletin: hT1mJAvwwdec.nv ra rw)pirltJrotl.html P�R.I�N.T....F........... ULL FORM Page 2 oft Southold Town Planning Board Work Session -- July 20 2020 — Page 2 Project Name: Vineyard View SCTM# m v... . _ ... _Y �� _ 1000-40-3-1 Location° 62600 CR 48, Greenport Description: This approved Residential Site Plan is for 50 multiple dwelling units in seven buildings. All units are proposed to be offered for rent at rates set by the federal government for affordability for the next 50 years. The plan`` includes 14 one-bedroom units, 22 two-bedroom units and 14 three- bedroom units, a 2,769 sq. ft. community center, 102 parking spaces; and various other associated site improvements, on a vacant 17.19-acre parcel of which 9.91 acres will be preserved as open space (5.98 acres upland and 3.93 acres wetlands), in the Hamlet Density (HD) Zoning District located on the s/s of County Road 48 ±1,600' n/e/o Chapel Lane, Greenport. Status: roved with Condit �.A.. pp, . ions Action, Review for CO Attachments, Staff Report Pro'ect Name: Storage a 1 _ g„ 00-85-2-9.2 Pindar Stora a Buildin _ SCTM#. 10 Location: 39935 Route 25, Peconic Description: This Agricultural Site Plan is for the relocation and construction of a 1- story 3,259 sq. ft. building for agricultural equipment storage and no basement, located on 70.4 acres in the AC Zoning District where there is 1 sq. ft. of existing buildings. pP _ 7 5 Status: A roved Action, Review for CO ................... Attachments Staff Report Stron s Storage _ Pro�ect Name: �' Buildings� �s SCTM#: 1000-106-6-13.4 Location: 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck Description: This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat-.- storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq, ft. of existing boatyard buildings. Status: Pendia Action: SEQRA Assessment Attachments: Staff Report Project Name: i Pederson Standard Subdivision SCTM#: 1000-21-3-15 Location: 670 Circle Drive, East Marion Description: This proposal is for the Standard Subdivision of a 9.2-acre parcel into 3 lots, where Lot 1 is 5.1 acres, Lot 2 is 2.3 acres, and Lot 3 is 1.8 acres, in the R-40 Zoning District. Status: Conditional Sketch Plan Approval Action: Referral Review Attachments: Staff Report 30, Southold Planning Department Staff Report Site Plan Application Work Session -Supplemental Summary Date July 20, 2020 Prepared By: Brian Cummings I. Application Information Project Title: Strong's Boatyard Buildings Applicant: Strongs Yacht Center Date of Submission: July 20, 2018 Tax Map Number: 106.-6-10 & 13.4 Project Location: 5780 West Mill Road Hamlet: Mattituck Zoning District: Split R - 80 / Marine II (M-II) If. Description of Project Type of Site Plan: Commercial Acreage of Project Site: ±33 acres (R80 @ 16.5ac + MII @ 16.5 ac) Building Size 101,500 sq. ft. This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R- 80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. III: Application Overview February 10, 2020: application is accepted as complete for review, the proposed action is classified as Type I under SEQR& _ February 13, 2020: referrals distributed _ March 91 2020: preliminary public hearing adjourned without a date (written comment held open) to complete the environmental assessment review m. n.._. Site Plan Packet Supplemental Plans General Layout Plan Excavation Phasing Plan 1 of 7 G..... _. _._. 2 of 7 Landscape and alignment plan Landscape Detail Plan Sheet 1 & Sheet 2 Tree Removal Plan - .. 3 of 7: Grading & Drainage Plan __ .. .mm a..Form .. 4 of 7: Utility s / Documents blit Plan 5 of 7: Utility Plan Full EAF revised 1/21/20; EAF attachment revised 12/2/19 6 of 7: Water & 5anitar Details LWRP revised 12/2/19 _ .. _._ _ 7 of 7: Photometric Plan & Details 1 1. Existing: commercial boatyard in MII zone with ±69,245 sq. ft. of existing buildings and vacant woodland in R-80 zone. There is a significant elevation change from the existing building area to the new area (±43 ft. grade change) a. R — 80: 718,474 sq. ft. (16.49 ac) b. M — II: 717,085 sq. ft. (16.46 ac) i. Wetlands area: 27,333 sq. ft. ii. Buildable lands: 689,752 sq. ft. iii. Existing building area: 69,245 sq. ft. 2. Proposed: a. Boat Storage Building #1: 140' x 375' (52,500 sq. ft.) 1 — story b. Boat Storage Building #2: 140' x 350' (49,000 sq. ft.) 1 — story i. Proposed building area: 101,500 sq. ft. ii. Total area of disturbance: 171,929 sq. ft. (3.9 ac area of disturbance) iii. The current proposal is to bring the elevation of the higher area down to the lower level which would require 134,921CY (cut) of earthwork / sand / soil removal. c. Four (4) 2,000 gal. LP above ground tanks d. Water supply (765' public water extension from Mill Rd; 1,162 gpd); e. New sanitary system (standard sanitary system; 1,165 gpd); f. Grading and drainage i. 134,921 CY (cut) of earthwork proposed; cut into higher elevation and slope requiring sand & soil removal. ii. Proposed retaining walls along west and north sides of proposed build-out- 1. 124' long Naturally Vegetated section of wall a. (proposed to be filled with topsoil to allow for seeding by wildlife) C 2. 80' long "Retaining Wall —West" landscaped section a. Plant with a mix of shrubs and groundcover 3. 370' long naturally vegetated section of wall a. (proposed to be filled with topsoil to allow for seeding by wildlife) 4. 157' long "Retaining Wall — North" landscaped section of wall g. Landscaping and lighting 3. SEQRA Draft Assessment completed by Mark Terr (see attachment) od State Environmental Quality Review POSITIVE DECLARATION Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft EIS Determination of Significance Tax Map Number: Date: June 16, 2020 1000-106.-6-13.4 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. On February 10, 2020 the Planning Board determined that the action is a Type I action pursuant to the following. 617.4(b)(10) "any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space, including any site on the Register of National Natural Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994 [see 617.17], or" The physical alteration of-3).9 acres exceeds 25% of the 10 acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6) below. 617.4(b)(6) "activities, other than the construction of residential facilities, that meet or exceed any of the following thresholds, or the expansion of existing non-residential facilities by more than 50 percent of any of the following thresholds: • A project or action that involves the physical alteration of 10 acres 3e- The Town of Southold Planning Board as lead agency, has determined that the proposed action described below may have a significant impact on the environment and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared. Name of Action: Strong's Storage Buildings SEQR Status: Type I Unlisted Scoping- No—X— Yes® If yes, indicate how scoping will be conducted: Description of Action: This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the Mll and R-80 Zoning Districts where there is 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. The project involves the clearing of 3.9 acres on a parcel substantially contiguous to a Town of Southold owned open space parcel (SCTM# 1000-106-6-20.3) to the south. On February 10, 2020 the Planning Board determined that the action is a Type I action pursuant to the following. 617.4(b)(10) "any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space, including any site on the Register of National Natural Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994 [see 617.17], or" The physical alteration of 3).9 acres exceeds 25% of the 10 acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6) below. 617.4(b)(6) "activities, other than the construction of residential facilities, that meet or exceed any of the following thresholds, or the expansion of existing non-residential facilities by more than 50 percent of any of the following thresholds: • A project or action that involves the physical alteration of 10 acres Location: The proposed action has been identified as having the potential to cause moderate to large adverse impacts (see Part 2). Part 2 - Identification of Potential Project Impacts. The below numbers correlate with the form impact categories. 1. Impact on Land b. The proposed action may involve construction on slopes of 15% or greater. A potential large, adverse impact may occur through the excavation of 134,921 CY (cut) of earthwork/sand/soil removal, construction on slopes of 15% or greater, excavating steep slopes, leaving slopes steeper than that which exist and removing large areas of vegetation on steep slopes and in other areas from the site. d. The proposed action may involve the excavation and removal of more than 1,000 tons of natural material. A potential large, adverse impact may occur through the excavation and removal of 134,921 CY of sand (364,286,700 lbs) or 182,143.35 tons. e. The proposed action may involve construction that continues for more than one year or in multiple phases. A potential large, adverse impact may occur to adjacent roadways, surrounding properties, neighborhood(s), and region through the clearing, excavation, transporting of materials and construction of the site during a multi-year period in multiple phases. The proposed action may significantly adversely impact the quality of life of residents and visitors. J, The proposed action may result in increased erosion, whether from physical disturbance or vegetation removal (including from treatment by herbicides). A large increase in erosion may occur through the clearing and excavation of a total of 3.94 acres which includes the removal of large amounts of vegetation in multiple phases. 3. Impacts on Surface Waters d The proposed action may involve construction within or adjoining afireshivater or tidal wetland, or in the bed or banks of any other water body. The proposed action involves construction on a parcel adjoining, a tidal wetland: Mattituck Creek. An area of tidal marsh located in the east of the property. e. The proposed action may create turbidity in a ivaterbody, either fi�om upland erosion, rUnOff'Or by disturbing bottom sediments. The proposed action proposes to remove and transport large quantities of upland sails, including during the winter months. h. The proposed action may cause soil erosion, or otherwise create a source Of stormwater discharge that may lead to siltation or other degradation of receiving water bodies. Extensive site work is proposed that will clear large areas of vegetation and cause landform changes that could potentially cause turbid storm water runoff to enter Mattituck Creek during storm events. i. The proposed action may affect the water quality of any water bodies within or downstream of the site of the proposed action The propose action may affect water quality of Mattituck Creek and Long Island Sound. Adverse impacts from storm water runoff capable of overflowing impervious surfaces may introduce chemicals, nutrients, sediments or other pollutants into the waterbody. 4. Impacts on Groundwater a. The proposed action may require the bulk storage of petroleum or chemical products over ground water or an aquifer. The proposal includes the bulk storage of chemical and/or petroleum products over the Sole Source Aquifer Nassau-Suffolk. Four 2,000 gallon liquid propane aboveground tanks are proposed. The storage of chemicals used in Marina and vessel maintenance is expected. 5. Impact on Flooding b. The proposed action may result in development within a 100 year floodplain. The proposed action will develop a 100 year and 500 year floodplain adjoining Mattituck Creek. Flooding of portions of the parcel during storm events is expected within the FEMA Flood Zone AE El 8. The proposed storage buildings are located within Flood Zone X; (unshaded); an area of minimal risk. d. The proposed action may result in, or require, modification of existing drainage patterns. The proposed action involves the clearing, excavation and manipulation of the existing landform and therefore existing natural drainage patterns will be altered. A large area of the lot will be converted to impervious surfaces that require engineered storm water controls. A potential, moderate adverse impact could occur to existing drainage patterns as a result of the action. 6. Impact on Air f Other: The proposal involves the operation of heavy machinery and trucks on and off site over a long duration of time that could result in moderate adverse impacts to local air quality. The proposal also involves the removal 3.94 acres of soil and vegetation including 493+ hardwood trees contributing to carbon sequestering. Carbon sequestration is r� the process by which atmospheric carbon dioxide is taken up by trees, grasses, and other plants through photosynthesis and stored as carbon in biomass (trunks, branches, foliage, and roots) and soils. The oak is the genus with the most carbon- absorbing capabilities, there are other notable deciduous trees that sequester carbon as well. 7. Impact on Plants and Animals a. The proposed action may cause reduction in population or loss of individuals of any threatened or endangered species, as listed by New York State or the Federal government, that use the site, or are found on, over, or near the site. NYSDEC records indicate that the piping plover (Charadrius melodus) and the southern sprite (Nehalennia integricollis) potentially occur near the site, However, due to landform changes and use of the site, the occurrence of these species near or on-site is unlikely and low. Conversely, the Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) a listed federally-threatened species under section 4(d) of the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 could potentially occur on the parcel. The clearing of 3.94 acres of woodland habitat could result in large, adverse impacts to the protected species. b. The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used by any rare, threatened or endangered species, as listed by New York State or the federal government. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impacts to habitat. Habitats are used by insects, reptiles, amphibians, fish, mammals, birds for breeding, hibernation, reproduction, feeding, sheltering, migration or overwintering. The habitats may be used year-round, seasonally, or on a transient basis (passing through the area or during migration.). The clearing, excavation and grading of 3.94 acres of woodland habitat (a large area of woodland when assessed locally) may result in potentially large, adverse impact to all fauna on site (protected and unprotected). Death and displacement of species could occur. C' The proposed action may cause reduction in population, or loss of individuals, of any species Uf'special concern or conservation need as listed by New York State or the Federal government, that use the site, or are,found on, over, or near the site. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact to the Woodland Box Turtle (Terrcrpene caroling carolina), a New York State-listed species of Special Concern on the parcel. The clearing, excavation and grading of 3.94 acres of woodland habitat (a large area of woodland when assessed locally) may result in potentially large adverse impacts to [he species. d. The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used by any species of special concern and conservation need, as listed by New York State or the Federal government. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact through the clearing and excavation of 3.94 acres of woodland habitat resulting in a reduction or degradation of the Woodland Box Turtle (Terrapene carolina carolina), a New York State-listed species of Special Concern. e. The proposed action may substantially interfere with nesting/breeding,foraging, or over-wintering habitat for the predominant species that occupy or use the project site. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact and significantly interfere with nesting/breeding, foraging or overwintering habitat by removing 3.94 acres of vegetation, including the removal of important habitat features such as dead trees used for nesting and cover. This habitat area is connected to a 25.29 acre parcel with similar habitat that is protected by the Town of Southold (SCTM4 106-6-20.3) to the south. This woodland assemblage comprises the largest undeveloped acreage in the Mattituck Creek watershed. Other areas of woodland to the south and to the west on the R-80 zoned portion of the parcel may also be affected. & The proposed action may substantially interfere with nesting/breeding, foraging, or over-wintering habitat far the predominant species that occupy or use the project site. A large percentage of the woodland vegetation will be removed and replaced with other cover types and structures. The woodland area provides breeding, feeding, and cover functions to species. The removal of the woodland could result in a potentially large adverse impact to species in the area. 9. Impact on Aesthetic Resources C. The proposed action may be visible from publicly accessible vantage points: i. Seasonally (e.g., screened by summer, bliage, but visible during other seasons) ii. Year round The proposed action is of scale and dimension that will be visible from publicly accessible scenic resources (Mattituck Creek) by operators of vessels using the waterway during seasonal use resulting in a potential moderate impact to scenic enjoyment of the waterway. Note that Mattituck Creek is a Federal waterway. e. The proposed action may cause a diminishment of the public enjoyment and appreciation of the designated aesthetic resource. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact to the aesthetic resource through the diminishment of public enjoyment by users members of the community under different circumstances and activities in a location that also has an important role in recreation and tourism economy. Both are important and changes to scenic and aesthetic resources may have adverse impacts on both the quality of life of residents and broader economic impacts. 13. Impact on Transportation a. Projected traffic increase may exceed capacity of existing road network. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact by significantly increasing the number of vehicles (construction and trucks) on local roads for long durations. Capacity of the roadways may be adversely impacted. The proposed action will add substantial traffic to the area and due to current roads, traffic, and intersection conditions, the roads do not have the capacity to handle it. Capacity considers the traffic conditions, road way characteristics, and traffic controls such as the signing or signals at intersections. It addresses the physical amount of vehicles and pedestrians a road can handle and does not depend on the total number of vehicles demanding service, but is influenced by the relative distribution of vehicles by lane. The geometric design of the road influences capacity (NYSDEC). The level of service (LOS) at intersections may be adversely impacted. While road capacity gives a quantitative measure of the amount of traffic that can be handled, level of service gives a qualitative measure of how well that traffic flows. For a given road, capacity would be constant, although it may vary at intersections. But actual traffic flow will be different for different days and different during a day itself. The intention of LOS is to relate the quality of traffic service to a given flow rate. LOS is a term that designates a range of operating conditions, based on delay, on a particular road or at an intersection (NYSDEC). d. The proposed action will degrade existing pedestrian or bicycle accommodations. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large impact to the public and user groups from the increase of vehicular traffic on local and regional roads affecting the public's use and enjoyment of the roads while conducting activities (driving, walking, biking). The large number of truck trips proposed could result in large impacts to West Mill Road, Cox Neck Road, Suffolk County 48; New York State Route 25, Sound Avenue, Northville Turnpike, Suffolk County Route 58 and other- local and regional roads. 15. Impact on Noise Odor and Light a. The proposed action may produce sound above noise levels established by local regulation. The proposed action could result in a moderate to larae. adverse impact by exceeding noise levels permitted under Chapter 180 Noise, Prevention of the Southold Town Code during the operation of heavy equipment on site and trucks through neighborhoods adversely affecting the receptors of such noise during long duration and over a multi-year period of time. Noise associated with the operation of heavy equipment and trucks include but are not limited to; engine noise, noise from moving and backing up heavy equipment (reversal warning sound) and the accelerating and deceleration and Jake braking of trucks. Similarly, operation of wood chippers for long periods may generate large, adverse noise impacts to receptors in the neighborhood. 17. Consistency with Community Character a. The proposed action is inconsistent with the predominant architectural scale and character. The proposed action could result in a moderate adverse impact to existing community character over current condition (physical alteration on site over a multi-year period, structure large building size and noise). The intensity of the proposed action operations is different from the surrounding uses. The potential, adverse moderate to large impacts could occur to community character from the multi-year construction timeframe in intensity and duration. Impacts are expected to be long in duration from the construction and operation of the proposed action. b, Proposed action is inconsistent with the character of the existing natural landscape. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact to the character of the existing natural landscape through the clearing and excavation of 3.94 acres of land area including woodland in the Mattituck Creek watershed. h. Other; The proposed action could result in a moderate to large impact to community character from the increase of vessel traffic and potential additional dockage in Mattituck Creek thereby affecting the water quality, public use and enjoyment of the creek. 31 Agency Use Oa)y[]fapplicable) Full Environmental Assessment Form Project Strong's Si!2g,Buildings Part 2-Identification of Potential Project Impacts Date Part 2 is to be completed by the lead agency. Part 2 is designed to help the lead agency inventory all potential resources that could be affected by a proposed project or action. We recognize that the lead agency's reviewer(s)will not necessarily be environmental professionals. So,the questions are designed to walk a reviewer through the assessment process by providing a series of questions that can be answered using the information found in Part 1. To further assist the lead agency in completing Part 2,the form identifies the most relevant questions in Part I that will provide the information needed to answer the Part 2 question. When Part 2 is completed,the lead agency will have identified the relevant environmental areas that may be impacted by the proposed activity. If the lead agency is a state agency and the action is in any Coastal Area,complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment. Tips for completing Part 2: • Review all of the information provided in Part 1. • Review any application,maps,supporting materials and the Full EAF Workbook. • Answer each of the 18 questions in Part 2. • If you answer"Yes"to a numbered question,please complete all the questions that follow in that section. • If you answer"No"to a numbered question,move on to the next numbered question. • Check appropriate column to indicate the anticipated size of the impact. • Proposed projects that would exceed a numeric threshold contained in a question should result in the reviewing agency checking the box"Moderate to large impact may occur." • The reviewer is not expected to be an expert in environmental analysis. • If you are not sure or undecided about the size of an impact,it may help to review the sub-questions for the general question and consult the workbook. • When answering a question consider all components of the proposed activity,that is,the"whole action". • Consider the possibility for long-term and cumulative impacts as well as direct impacts. • Answer the cluestion in a reasonable manner considei-ing the scale and context of the pn:,)ject, 1. Impact on Land Proposed action may involve construction on, or physical alteration of, NO EYES the land surface of the proposed site. (See Part 1.D.1) If"Yes", answer questions a.-j. 11 "No", move on to Section 2. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action may involve construction on land where depth to water table is E2d FA less than') feet. b.The proposed action may involve construction on slopes of 15%or greater. Elf.......... c.The proposed action may involve construction on land where bedrock is exposed,or IE2a FO generally within 5 feet of existing -round surface. d.The proposed action may involve the excavation and removal of more than 1,000 tons D2a El FA of natural material. e.The proposed action may involve construction that continues for more than one year Dl ❑ FA or in multiple phases. ---- ...................... ------- ... ....... ------- f.The proposed action may result in increased erosion,whether from physical 132e,D2q El 0 disturbance or vegetation removal (including from treatment by herbicides), ___........................ " ........ -oposed action is,or may be, located within a Coastal Erosion hazard area. The pi h.Other impacts: . .. ........ ..................................... .. El ❑ ..... ..... ........ ...... . . . ................. --------------------..........------------- .............. ............. ..................... Pacxe I of 10 FEAF 2019 2. Impact on Geological Features The proposed action may result in the modification or destruction of, or inhibit access to, any unique or unusual land forms on the site(e.g., cliffs, dunes, [Z]NO ❑YES minerals,fossils, caves). (See Part 1. E.2.g) If"Yes", onswer questions a-c. If No",, move on to Section 3. Relevant FNoo r Moderate small Part I small to large impact Question(s) impact impact may m mav occur ay occur occur a.Identify the specific land form(s)attached: E2g D ................................................... . ........................... b.The proposed action may affect or is adjacent to a geological feature listed as a E3c ri registered National Natural Landmark. Specific feature: c. Other impacts: ....................................... ......------ ------ 3. Impacts on Surface Water The proposed action may affect one or more wetlands or other surface water ONO [:1 YES bodies (e.g., streams,rivers,ponds or lakes). (See Part 1.D.2, E.2.h) If"Yes", answer questions a- 1. If"No", move on to Section 4. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action may create a new water body, D2b,DIh 0 EJ ........................ b.The proposed action may result in an increase or decrease of over 10%or more than a D2b 0 10 acre increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water. c.The proposed action may involve dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material D2a 0 from a wetland or water body. d.The proposed action may involve construction within or adjoining a freshwater or E2h 0 tidal wetland,or in the bed or banks of any other water e.The proposed action may create turbidity in a waterbody,either from upland erosion, 132a,D2h 0 runoff or by disturbing bottom sediments. ..... ....................................... 1- ------------ ............... .... f.The proposed action may include construction of one or more intakc(s)for withdrawal D2c 21 El of water from Surface water. 11-1111.................. ............ g.The proposed action may include construction of one or more outfall(s)for discharge D2d 21 of wastewater to surface water(s). .......................... ...... h.The proposed action may cause soil erosion,or otherwise create a source of D2e storniwater dischar,ye that may lead to siltation or other degradation of receiving water bodies. ........................---- ................................................... ............................................................ ............................ i.The proposed action may affect the water quality of any water bodies within or E2h El downstream of the site of the proposed action. j.The proposed action may involve the application of pesticides or herbicides in or D2q7 E2h D around any water body. .... ...... ............... k.The piopused actiun may ieclulit the Consti uctioll of new,or expallsion of existing, Dl a, D2d M wastewater treatment facilities. ............................................... ......... ....... Page 2 of 10 -2, I.Other impacts: .................. ............................. ............. ................ ................ ............ ....... 4. Impact on groundwater The proposed action may result in new or additional use of ground water, or []NO ®YES may have the potential to introduce contaminants to ground water or an aquifer. (See Part 1.D.2.a, D.2.c,D.2.d,D.2.p, D.2.q, D.2.t) If"Yes", answer questions a-h. If"No", move on to Section 5, Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action may require new water supply wells,or create additional demand D2c El on supplies from existing water supply wells. .. ..............— b.Water supply demand from the proposed action may exceed safe and sustainable D2c El withdrawal capacity rate of the local supply or aquifer. Cite Source: ............ c.The proposed action may allow or result in residential uses in areas without water and D1 a,D2c El sewer services. ............. d.The proposed action may include or require wastewater discharged to groundwater. D2d,E21 El ............ e.The proposed action may result in the construction of water supply wells in locations D2c,Elf, n where groundwater is,or is suspected to be,contaminated. EI g,El f.The proposed action may require the bulk storage of petroleum or chemical products D2p,E21 El over ground water or an aquifer. g.The proposed action may involve the commercial application of pesticides within 100 E2h,D2q, El 0 feet of potable drinking water or irrigation sources. E21,D2c h. Other impacts: ................ -------------------------------- El ------------------------------ 5. Impact on Flooding The proposed action may result in development on lands subject to flooding. NO OYES (See Part 1. E.2) If"Yes",, answer questions a-g. If"No", move on to Section 6. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may ... ..........– may occur-- —occur .......... a.The proposed action may result in development in a designated floodway, Eli El Z .................. ........... b.The proposed action may result in development within a 100 year floodplain. E2j EJ c.The proposed action may result in development within a 500 year floodplain. E2k d.The proposed action may result in,or require,modification of existing drainage 1)2b.. [)2e F patterns. ........................ P The prnl)ne-d action may change flood water flows that contribute to flooding. D2b.. E2i. El E4 E2k —--------------------- ................................ .............................. f. If there is a darn located on the site of the proposed action, is the dam in need of repair, Ele El –or-upl-rade? .............. Page 3 of 10 ............ 9-Other impacts: ❑ ........... I'll, .... ...... .......... ...... .......... 6. Impacts on Air The proposed action may include a state regulated air emission source. []NO ©YES (See Part 1. D.21., D.2.h,D.2.g) If"Yes", answer questions a-,f If"No", move on to Section 7. Relevant ............ No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may ay occur occur a.If the proposed action requires federal or state air emission permits,the action may also emit one or more greenhouse gases at or above the following levels: i. More than 1000 tons/year of carbon dioxide(CO,) D2g 121 ❑ ii. More than 3.5 tons/year of nitrous oxide(N20) D2g 21 El iii.More than 1000 tons/year of carbon equivalent of perfluorocarbons(PFCs) D2g 0 El iv.More than .045 tons/year of sulfur hexafluoride(SF6) D2g 0 0 v. More than 1000 tons/year of carbon dioxide equivalent of D2g hydrochloroflourocarbons(HFCs)emissions vi.43 tons/year or more of methane D2h b.The proposed action may generate 10 tons/year or more of any one designated D2g hazardous air pollutant,or 25 tons/year or more of any combination of such hazardous air pollutants. ............... c.The proposed action may require a state air registration,or may produce an emissions D2f,D2g 21 El rate of total contaminants that may exceed 5 lbs.per hour,or may include a heat source capable of producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. ......................... d.The proposed action may reach 50%of any of the thresholds in"a"through"ell, D2gEl 0 above. e.The proposed action may result in the combustion or thermal treatment of more than I D2s El ton of refuse per hour. f.Other impacts: ❑ 0 ........................ ................................................. ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ........... ..... ........... 7. Impact on Plants and Animals The proposed action may result in a loss of flora or fauna. (See Part 1. E.2. m.-q.) NO ZYES If"Yes", answer.,gyq tions a-j. 11"'No", move on to Section 8. ............................----. ........ .............................. ............................ Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action may cause reduction in Population or loss of individuals of any E2o threatened or endangered species,as listed by New York State or the Federal government,that use the site,or are found on,over,or near the site. - —.......................... b.The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used by Ego ❑ any rare,threatened or endangered species,as listed by New York State or the federal government. ............ c.The proposed action may cause reduction in population,or loss of individuals,of any E2p El 0 species of special concern or conservation need,as listed by New York State or the Federal government,that use the Site,or are found on,over,or near the site. d.The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used by E2p any species of special concern and conservation need,as listed by New York State or- the rthe Federal government. - .............. Pae 4 of 10 3p e.The proposed action may diminish the capacity of a registered National Natural E3c 0 Landmark to support the biological community it was established to protect. ..................................... f.The proposed action may result in the removal of,or ground disturbance in,any E2n 0 El portion of a designated significant natural community. Source: g.The proposed action may substantially interfere with nesting/breeding,foraging,or E2rn over-wintering habitat for the predominant species that occupy or use the project site. h.The proposed action requires the conversion of more than 10 acres of forest, El F1 grassland or any other regionally or locally important habitat. Habitat type& information source: ......... ....................... .......... ............................... i.Proposed action(commercial,industrial or recreational projects,only)involves use of D2q El herbicides or pesticides. j.Other impacts: ....... El --------------------------------------- 8. Impact on Agricultural Resources The proposed action may impact agricultural resources. (See Part 1. E.3.a. and b.) NO L_JYES ....... If"No", move on to Section 9. .....If"Yes", answer ns a-h. . ............ Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action may impact soil classified within soil group I through 4 of the E2c,E3b NYS Land Classification System ................. b.The proposed action may sever,cross or otherwise limit access to agricultural land El a,Elb [.1 0 (includes cropland,hayfields,pasture,vineyard,orchard,etc). c.The proposed action may result in the excavation or compaction of the soil profile of E3b n t active agricultural land. d.The proposed action may irreversibly convert agricultural land to non-agricultural El b,E3a EJ cx uses,either more than 2.5 acres if located in an Agricultural District,or more than 10 acres if not within an Agricultural District. ............. .......... e.The proposed action may disrupt or prevent installation of an agricultural land El a,El b j U management system. f.The proposed action may result,directly or indirectly,in increased development C2c,C3, potential or pressure on farmland. D2c,D2d ..................................... g.The proposed project is not consistent with the adopted municipal Farmland C2c Ci Protection Plan. i h.Other impacts: ..... --—------.................................................................................................................................................. .......... Page 5 of 10 Z__ 9. Impact on Aesthetic Resources The land use of the proposed action are obviously different from, or are in NO VIYES sharp contrast to, current land use patterns between the proposed project and a scenic or aesthetic resource. (Part 1. E.1.a, E.Lb, E.3.h.) If"Yes", answer questions a-g. If"No", go to Section 10. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may !Paav—occur occur a.Proposed action may be visible from any officially designated federal,state,or local E3h scenic or aesthetic resource. b.The proposed action may result in the obstruction,elimination or significant 133h,C2b 0 n screening of one or more officially designated scenic views. ................. c.The proposed action may be visible from publicly accessible vantage points: E3h i. Seasonally(e.g.,screened by summer foliage,but visible during other seasons) ii.Year round El d.The situation or activity in which viewers are engaged while viewing the proposed E3h action is: E2q, i. Routine travel by residents,including travel to and from work 0 El ii.Recreational or tourism based activities Elc 0 El e.The proposed action may cause a diminishment of the public enjoyment and E3h El appreciation of the designated aesthetic resource. f. There are similar projects visible within the following distance of the proposed D1 a,Ela, IZI project: Dlf,Dig 0-1/2 mile Y2-3 Mile 3-5 mile 5+ mile ...................... ................................ g.Other impacts: .............. ............... ................................ -------------- .............. El El ..................... ................................. ........................................ ........... J ..................... ................ 10. Impact on Historic and Archeological Resources The proposed action may occur in or adjacent to a historic or archaeological [2]NO F—]YES resource. (Part 1. E.3.e, f. and g.) If"Yes", answer questions a-e. If'"No go to Section 11. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may ...................... a. The proposed action may occur wholly or partially within, or substantially contiguous to, any buildings,archaeological site or district which is listed on the National or E3e LJ State Register of Historical Places,or that has been determined by the Commissioner of the NYS Office of Parks,Recreation and Historic Preservation to be eligible to[- listing on the State Resister of Historic Places. b.The proposed action may occur wholly or partially Within,Or Substantially contiguous E3f to, an area designated as sensitive fol-archaeological sites on the NY State Historic Preservation Office(SHPO)archaeological site inventory. The prnpn,;ed qrfinn may nccur whnlly or partially within,or suhstantially contimioii- E.3- to, an archaeological Site not included on the NY SHPO inventory. Source: ----------- ........................ ...................... ...... ................. Page 6 of 10 d.Other impacts: [.'D rl ..�........... .... ._... If any of the above(a-d)are answered"Moderate to large impact may e. occur",continue with the following questions to help support conclusions in Part 3; i. The proposed action may result in the destruction or alteration of all or part E3e,E3g, ❑ ❑ of the site or property. E3f 0 El ii. The proposed action may result in the alteration of the property's setting or E3e,E3f, integrity. E3g,Ela, Elb iii. The proposed action may result in the introduction of visual elements which E3e,E3f, ❑ ❑ are out of character with the site or property,or may alter its setting. E3g,E3h, C2,C3 11• The proposed action may resultRecreation osof recreational opportunities or ImpactP a y pp a NO YES reduction of an open space resource as designated in any adopted municipal open space plan. (See Part 1. C.2.c, E.l.c., E.2.q.) If"Yes", answer questions a-e. If"Ne",tea to Section 12. .......... ......................... Relevant No............._....... or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action may result in an impairment of natural functions,or"ecosystem D2e,Elb services",provided by an undeveloped area, including but not limited to stormwater E2h, storage,nutrient cycling,wildlife habitat. E2 ,E2o, E2n,E2 b.The proposed action may result in the loss of a current or future recreational resource. C2a,El c, ra :r _..._..... �_n.._ .. .m.._n.._. ,,,m.. ..__..�......_ __. —__. q _ C2c,E2 c.The proposed action may eliminate open space or recreational resource in an area C2a,C2c with few such resources. EIc,E2q d.The proposed action may result in loss of an area now used informally by the C2c,Elc r_a 0 community as an open space resource. e. Other impacts: �'J r 12. Impact on Critical Environmental Areas The proposed action may be located within or adjacent to a critical [✓ NO YES environmental area(CEA). (See Part 1. E.3.d) Lf-')'es", answer questions a c L Na •_a to Sec[ion 13 Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur'- a.The proposed action may result in a reduction in the quantity of the resource or E3d characteristic which was the basis for deli=-nation of the CEA. b.The proposed action may result in a redUCtion in the quality Of the resource or E3d characteristic which was thebasis for designation of the CEA. c.Other impacts: ............. Page 7 of 1 3s 13. Iact on Transportation Tmhepproposed action may result in a change to existing transportation systems, NO YES (See Part 1. D.2j) "Yes", answer qwesCiqpsq-f If"No go to Section 14. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.Projected traffic increase may exceed capacity of existing road network. D2j ❑ b.The proposed action may result in the construction of paved parking area for 500 or D2j more vehicles. c.The proposed action will degrade existing transit access. D2j d.The proposed action will degrade existing pedestrian or bicycle accommodations. D2j 0 e.The proposed action may alter the present pattern of movement of people or goods. D2j EJ f. Other impacts: .................................. .......... ................................................................ ........................................ 14. Impact on Energy The proposed action may cause an increase in the use of any form of energy, NO [:]YES (See Part 1. D.2.k) If "Yes", answeLg.!�estios a- e. ff"No", go to Section 15. . ........................... Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action w�ij�_!�Squire a new,or an upgrade to an existing,substation. D2k ❑El ❑El ............ b.The proposed action will require the creation or extension of an energy transmission D1 f, El 0 or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two-family residences or to serve a Dlq,D2k commercial or industrial use. I' c.The proposed action may utilize more than 2,500 MWhrs per year of electricity, D2k ElEl ---------- d.The proposed action may involve heating and/or cooling of more than 100,000 square D I g El El feet of building area when completed. e.Other lnipacts: '................____ ..... ...... ..... ... ....... ...... El 111111111111111111-11-11-.................................... .... ....................... ------ 15. Impact on Noise, Odor, and Light !D r-71 The proposed action may result in an increase in noise, odors, or outdoor lighting. [:]NO L-,( _JYES (See Part 1. D.2.rn., n., and o.) If"Yes ansiver questions a-f If."No", go to Section 16. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur oFc,u11-.1.... a.The proposed action may produce sound above noise levels established by local D2ni ❑ regulation. ...........__........ b. The proposed action may result in blasting within 1,500 feet of any residence, D2m, El hospital, school, licensed day care center,or nursing home. ...................... . ".- --—---------------_ c.The proposed action may result in routine odors for-more than one hour per day. D2o El ................................................ Page 8 of 10 d.The proposed action may result in light shining onto adjoining properties. D2n ❑ ❑ e.The proposed action may result in lighting creating sky-glow brighter than existing D2n,E1 a ❑ ❑ area conditions. f.Other impacts: - ------- ❑ ❑ . Impact on an 16 The propos d actionmayhavean impact on human health from exposure p re L_J NO ©YES to new or existing sources of contaminants. (See Part 1. .2.q., E.1. d. f. g. and h.) I Yes", answer to Sectionz 17. .......... Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may cccur occur a.The proposed action is located within 1500 feet of a school,hospital, licensed day Eld ❑ ❑ group home,nursing home or retirement community. care center, .�� g b.The site of the proposed action is currently undergoing remediation. Elg,ElhEl c.There is a completed emergency spill remediation,or a completed environmental site Elg,Elh ' remediation on,or adjacent to,the site of the proposed action. d.The site of the action is subject to an institutional control limiting the use of the Elg,Elh ® ❑ property(e.g.,easement or deed restriction). e.The proposed action may affect institutional control measures that were put in place Elg,Elh ❑ ❑ to ensure that the site remains protective of the environment and human health. f.The proposed action has adequate control measures in place to ensure that future D2t ❑ ❑ generation,treatment and/or disposal of hazardous wastes will be protective of the environment and human health. g.The proposed action involves construction or modification of a solid waste D2q,Elf ❑ management facility. h.The proposed action may result in the unearthing of solid or hazardous waste. D2q,Elf El i.The proposed action may result in an increase in the rate of disposal,or processing,of D2r, D2s ❑ solid waste. j.The proposed action may result in excavation or other disturbance within 2000 feet of Elf,Elg ❑ ❑ a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous waste. Elh k.The proposed action may result in the migration of explosive gases from a landfill E1 f,El g ® ❑ site to adjacent off site structures. 1.The proposed action may result in the release of contaminated leachate from the D2s, E If, ® ❑'l project site. D2r m.Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Page 9 of 1 3 L4 17. Consistency with Community Plans The proposed action is not consistent with adopted land use plans- [JNO YES (See Part 1. CA, C.2. and C.3.) If Yes answer questions a-h. If"No", go to Section 18. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. The proposed action's land use components may be different from,or in sharp C2,C3,Ella contrast to,current surrounding land use pattern(s). Ela,Elb b.The proposed action will cause the permanent population of the city,town or village C2 El 0 in which the project is located to grow by more than 5%. c.The proposed action is inconsistent with local land use plans or zoning regulations. C2,C2,C3 0 E] d.The proposed action is inconsistent with any County plans,or other regional land use C2,C2 0 E] plans. e.The proposed action may cause a change in the density of development that is not C3,Dlc, 11 E] supported by existing infrastructure or is distant from existing infrastructure. DId,DIf, Elb f.The proposed action is located in an area characterized by low density development C4,D2c,D2d 0 E] that will require new or expanded public infrastructure. D2j ........................... ......... g.The proposed action may induce secondary development impacts(e.g.,residential or C2a 1:1 0 commercial development not included in the proposed action) h.Other: El ID —------------------------- .......................................... ............ ................ 18. Consistency with Community Character The proposed project is inconsistent with the existing community character, [JNO DYES (See Part 1. C.2, C.3,D.2, E.3) If "Yes", answer qvtestions �N a-,g._ If o",,proceed to Part 3. ................................ _ Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may ....... occur a.The proposed action may replace or eliminate existing facilities,structures,or areas E3e,E3f,E3g 1:1 El of historic importance to the community. b.The proposed action may create a demand for additional community services(e.g.. C4 El El schools,police and fire) e.The proposed action may displace affordable or low-income housing in all area where C2,C3,DI f ❑ El there is a shortage of such housing, Dlg,Ela .............. .................... ........................ .............. -------- d.The proposed action may interfere with the use or enjoyment of officially recognized C2, E3 n or designated public resources. e.The proposed action is inconsistent with the predominant architectural scale and C2,0 El El character. .......... ....... f.Proposed action is inconsistent with the character of the existing natural landscape. C2, C3 n Ela, Elb E2P_E2h ................................ ............ ........................... .................... ....................... ------------ g. Other impacts: .............................................................. F F ....................................................................................... ... .... ................. ..... ... ... ..................................................... ............ ........... PRINT FULL FORM Page 10 of 10 OFFICE LOCATION: MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex OF S0U P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 O�� P.O. Southold, NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Q Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtowrniy.gov �y00UNV,N PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August 11, 2020 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: SEAR Lead Agency & Determination - Strong's Storage Buildings 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: The following resolutions were adopted at a meeting of the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, August 10, 2020: WHEREAS, this site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) 6 NYCRR, Part 617, has determined that the proposed action is a Type I action pursuant to 617.4(b)(10): Any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space, including any site on the Register of National Natural Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994 [see 617.17]. The physical alteration of 3.74 acres exceeds 25% of the 10-acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6); and WHEREAS, on February 10, 2020, the Southold Town Planning Board has determined that this proposed action is an Type I Action under SEQRA as described above; and Strong's Storage Buildings Page 2 August 11, 2020 WHEREAS, the Planning Board performed a coordinated review of this Type I Action pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.7 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA); and WHEREAS, no objection to the Southold Town Planning Board taking Lead Agency for the action was received; therefore be it RESOLVED, the Southold Town Planning Board hereby declares itself Lead Agency for the SEQRA review of this action; and be it further RESOLVED, the Planning Board, as Lead Agency, hereby makes a determination of significance for the proposed action and issues a Positive Declaration. If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this resolution, please contact the Planning Board Office. Respectfully, Donald J. Wilcenski Chairman Encl. f OFFICE LOCATION: MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex OF S�U P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 O�� lyOl Southold, NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Q Southold, NY � � Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov CA ly�4UNTY,�c� PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD State Environmental Quality Review POSITIVE DECLARATION Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft EIS Determination of Significance Tax Map Number: Date: August 10, 2020 1000-106.-6-13.4 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. On February 10, 2020 the Planning Board determined that the action is a Type I action pursuant to the following. 617.4(b)(10) "any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space, including any site on the Register of National Natural Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994 [see 617.17], or" The physical alteration of 3.9 acres exceeds 25% of the 10 acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6)below. 617.4(b)(6) - --"aetivities,other-than-the-eonstr-uetion-of-residential favilities,-that_meet-or-exceed —— any of the following thresholds, or the expansion of existing non-residential 1 facilities by more than 50 percent of any of the following thresholds: • A project or action that involves the physical alteration of 10 acres. The project will physically alter greater than 5 acres or 50 percent of 10 acres. The Town of Southold Planning Board as lead agency, has determined that the proposed action described below may have a significant impact on the environment and issues a Positive Declaration and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared. Name of Action: Strong's Storage Buildings SEQR Status: Type I X Unlisted Description of Action: This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there is 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. The project involves the clearing of 3.9 acres on a parcel substantially contiguous to a Town of Southold owned open space parcel (SCTM# 1000-106-6-20.3) to the south. On February 10, 2020 the Planning Board determined that the action is a Type I action pursuant to the following. 617.4(b)(10) "any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space, including any site on the Register of National Natural Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994 [see 617.17], or" The physical alteration of 3.9 acres exceeds 25% of the 10 acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6) below. 2 617.4(b)(6) "activities, other than the construction of residential facilities, that meet or exceed any of the following thresholds, or the expansion of existing non-residential facilities by more than 50 percent of any of the following thresholds: • A project or action that involves the physical alteration of 10 acres Evaluation: The proposed action has been evaluated for the potential to cause moderate to large adverse impacts using Part 2 - Identification of Potential Project Impacts of the Environmental Assessment Form (EAF). Based on this evaluation, the project has the potential to cause moderate to large adverse impacts. The categories and numbering below correlate to the impact categories in the Part 2 EAF. 1. Impact on Land b. The proposed action may involve construction on slopes of 15% or greater. A potential large, adverse impact may occur through the excavation of 134,921 CY (cut) of earthwork/sand/soil removal, construction on slopes of 15% or greater, excavating steep slopes, leaving slopes steeper than that which exist and removing large areas of vegetation on steep slopes and in other areas from the site. d. The proposed action may involve the excavation and removal of more than 1,000 tons of natural material. A potential large, adverse impact may occur through the excavation and removal of 134,921 CY of sand(364,286,700 lbs) or 182,143.35 tons. e. The proposed action may involve construction that continues for more than one year or in multiple phases. A potential large, adverse impact may occur to adjacent roadways, surrounding properties, neighborhood(s), and region through the clearing, excavation, transporting of materials and construction of the site during a multi-year period in multiple phases. The proposed action may significantly adversely impact the quality of life of residents and visitors. f. The proposed action may result in increased erosion, whether from physical disturbance or vegetation removal (including from treatment by herbicides). A large increase in erosion may occur through the clearing and excavation of a total of 3.94 acres which includes the removal of large amounts of vegetation in multiple phases. 3 3. Impacts on Surface Waters d. The proposed action may involve construction within or adjoining a freshwater or tidal wetland, or in the bed or banks of any other water body. The proposed action involves construction on a parcel adjoining a tidal wetland: Mattituck Creek. An area of tidal marsh located in the east of the property. e. The proposed action may create turbidity in a waterbody, either from upland erosion, runoff or by disturbing bottom sediments. The proposed action proposes to remove and transport large quantities of upland soils, including during the winter months. A moderate adverse impact could occur. h. The proposed action may cause soil erosion, or otherwise create a source of stormwater discharge that may lead to siltation or other degradation of receiving water bodies. Extensive site work is proposed that will clear large areas of vegetation and cause landform changes that could potentially cause turbid storm water runoff to enter Mattituck Creek during storm events. i. The proposed action may affect the water quality of any water bodies within or downstream of the site of the proposed action The propose action may affect water quality of Mattituck Creek and Long Island Sound. Adverse impacts from storm water runoff capable of overflowing impervious surfaces may introduce chemicals, nutrients, sediments or other pollutants into the waterbody. 4. Impacts on Groundwater f. The proposed action may require the bulk storage of petroleum or chemical products over groundwater or an aquifer. The proposal includes the bulk storage of chemical and/or petroleum products over the Sole Source Aquifer Nassau-Suffolk. Four 2,000 gallon liquid propane aboveground tanks are proposed. The storage of chemicals used in Marina and vessel maintenance is expected. 5. Impact on Flooding b. The proposed action may result in development within a 100 year floodplain. The proposed action will develop a 100 year and 500 year floodplain adjoining Mattituck Creek. Flooding of portions of the parcel during storm events is expected within the FEMA Flood Zone AE El 8. The proposed storage buildings are located within Flood Zone X; (unshaded); an area of minimal risk. However, the potential effects of climate change on the site must be evaluated. d. The proposed action may result in, or require, modification of existing drainage patterns. Theproposedaction involves the clearing, excavation and manipulation or— the f —the existing landform and therefore existing natural drainage patterns will be 4 altered. A large area of the lot will be converted to impervious surfaces that require engineered storm water controls. A potential, moderate adverse impact could occur to existing drainage patterns as a result of the action. 6. Impact on Air f. Other: The proposal involves the operation of heavy machinery and trucks on and off site over a long duration of time that could result in moderate adverse impacts to local air quality. The proposal also involves the removal 3.94 acres of soil and vegetation including 493+ hardwood trees contributing to carbon sequestering. Carbon sequestration is the process by which atmospheric carbon dioxide is taken up by trees, grasses, and other plants through photosynthesis and stored as carbon in biomass (trunks, branches, foliage, and roots) and soils. The oak is the genus with the most carbon- absorbing capabilities, there are other notable deciduous trees that sequester carbon as well. 7. Impact on Plants and Animals a. The proposed action may cause reduction in population or loss of individuals of any threatened or endangered species, as listed by New York State or the Federal government, that use the site, or are found on, over, or near the site. NYSDEC records indicate that the piping plover (Charadrius melodus) and the southern sprite (Nehalennia integricollis) potentially occur near the site, However, due to landform changes and use of the site, the occurrence of these species near or on-site is unlikely and low. Conversely, the Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) a listed federally-threatened species under section 4(d) of the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 could potentially occur on the parcel. The clearing of 3.94 acres of woodland habitat could result in large, adverse impacts to the protected species. b. The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used by any rare, threatened or endangered species, as listed by New York State or the federal government. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impacts to habitat. Habitats are used by insects, reptiles, amphibians, fish, mammals, birds for breeding, hibernation, reproduction, feeding, sheltering, migration or overwintering. The habitats may be used year-round, seasonally, or on a transient basis (passing through the area or during migration.). The clearing, excavation and grading of 3.94 acres of woodland habitat (a large area of woodland when assessed locally) may result in potentially large, adverse impact to all fauna on ----site"(protected and-unprotected):--Death•and-displacement of-species-could-oocur:—.---_r..–......— 5 c The proposed action may cause reduction in population, or loss of individuals, of any species of special concern or conservation need, as listed by New York State or the Federal government, that use the site, or are found on, over, or near the site. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact to the Woodland Box Turtle (Terrapene carolina carolina), a New York State-listed species of Special Concern on the parcel. The clearing, excavation and grading of 3.94 acres of woodland habitat (a large area of woodland when assessed locally) may result in potentially large adverse impacts to the species. d. The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used by any species of special concern and conservation need, as listed by New York State or the Federal government. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact through the clearing and excavation of 3.94 acres of woodland habitat resulting in a Reduction or elimination of the Woodland Box Turtle (Terrapene carolina carolina), a New York State-listed species of Special Concern from the area. g. The proposed action may substantially interfere with nesting/breeding,foraging, or over-wintering habitat for the predominant species that occupy or use the project site. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact and significantly interfere with nesting/breeding, foraging or overwintering habitat by removing 3.94 acres of vegetation, including the removal of important habitat features such as dead trees used for nesting and cover. This habitat area is connected to a 25.29 acre parcel with similar habitat that is protected by the Town of Southold (SCTM# 106-6-20.3) to the south. This woodland assemblage comprises the largest undeveloped acreage in the Mattituck Creek watershed. Other areas of woodland to the south and to the west on the R-80 zoned portion of the parcel may also be affected. 9. Impact on Aesthetic Resources C. The proposed action may be visible from publicly accessible vantage points: i. Seasonally (e.g., screened by summer foliage, but visible during other seasons) ii. Year round The proposed action is of scale and dimension that will be visible from publicly accessible scenic resources (Mattituck Creek) by operators of vessels using the waterway during seasonal use resulting in a potential moderate impact to-scenic enjoyment of the waterway. Note that Mattituck Creek is a Federal waterway. ------ --e:,-- ---The pr.oposecl action.ma)r catise_a..diminishment of_th.c pJ?.4_b_l,^,c enjoyment and appreciation of the designated aesthetic resource. 6 The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact to the aesthetic resource (Mattituck Creek) through the diminishment of public enjoyment by users and members of the community under different circumstances and activities in a location that also has an important role in recreation and tourism economy. Both are important and changes to scenic and aesthetic resources may have adverse impacts on both the quality of life of residents and broader economic impacts. 13. Impact on Transportation a. Projected traffic increase may exceed capacity of existing road network. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact by significantly increasing the number of vehicles (including construction and service vehicles) on local roads for long durations. Capacity of the roadways may be adversely impacted. The proposed action will add substantial traffic to the area and due to current road conditions, traffic, and intersection conditions, the roads may not have the capacity to handle it. Capacity considers the traffic conditions, road way characteristics, and traffic controls such as the signing or signals at intersections. It addresses the physical amount of vehicles and pedestrians a road can handle and does not depend on the total number of vehicles demanding service, but is influenced by the relative distribution of vehicles by lane. The geometric design of the road influences capacity (NYSDEC). The design and condition of the roads leading to the site (route) is a concern. Many areas exhibit stress cracks on the pavement. The design of the roads and the ability to increase traffic, including trucks, is a significant concern. Curves, declines and inclines exist on the route. The level of service (LOS) at intersections may be adversely impacted. While road capacity gives a quantitative measure of the amount of traffic that can be handled, level of service gives a qualitative measure of how well that traffic flows. For a given road, capacity would be constant, although it may vary at intersections. But actual traffic flow will be different for different days and different during a day itself. The intention of LOS is to relate the quality of traffic service to a given flow rate. LOS is a term that designates a range of operating conditions, based on delay, on a particular road or at an intersection (NYSDEC). In addition to the above assessment, a routing plan is necessary to adequately assess potential impacts to transportation. d. The proposed action will degrade existing pedestrian or bicycle accommodations. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impacts to the public and user groups from the increase of vehicular traffic on local and regional roads affecting the public's use and enjoyment of the roads while conducting activities (driving, walking, biking). The large number of truck trips proposed could result in large, adverse impacts to West Mill Road, Cox Neck Road, Suffolk County Route 48, New York State Route 25, Sound --------- --------- Avenue;Northville Tur-npilce;-Suffolk:-County Route-58-Mand-*other.loca.l_and_regional_,...*.-..._._r_.,__ roads. 7 15. Impact on Noise, Odor, and Light a. The proposed action may produce sound above noise levels established by local regulation. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact from excessive noise levels during long duration of site work and construction over a multi-year period. Noise associated with the operation of heavy equipment and trucks includes but is not limited to; engine noise, noise from moving and backing up heavy equipment (reversal warning sound) and the accelerating and deceleration and Jake braking of trucks, both on-site and as they travel through neighborhoods. Similarly, operation of chain-saws and wood chippers for long periods may generate large, adverse noise impacts to receptors in the neighborhood. 18. Consistency with Community Character e. The proposed action is inconsistent with the predominant architectural scale and character. The proposed action could result in a moderate adverse impact to existing community character (physical alteration on site over a multi-year period, large building size and noise). The intensity of the proposed action operations is different from the surrounding uses. The potential, adverse moderate to large adverse impacts could occur to community character from the multi-year construction timeframe in intensity and duration. Impacts are expected to be long in duration from the construction and operation of the proposed action. f. Proposed action is inconsistent with the character of the existing natural landscape. The proposed action could result in a moderate to large adverse impact to the character of the existing natural landscape through the clearing and excavation of 3.94 acres of land area including woodland in the Mattituck Creek watershed. g. Other: The proposed action could result in a moderate to large impact to community character from the increase of vessel traffic and potential, additional dockage in Mattituck Creek thereby affecting the water quality, public use and access of the creek. The size of expected vessels to be stored and serviced on-site in relation to the adequacy of the navigability of Mattituck Creek must be addressed. 8 Agency Use Only IlfAppltcablel I'ro)ect IStrong s Storage Buildings Date August 10 2020 Full Ezzvirozrnzezztal Assesszmezzt Form Part 3 - Evaluation of the Magnitude and Importance of Project Impacts and Determination of Significance Part 3 provides the reasons in support of the determination of significance. The lead agency must complete Part 3 for every question in Part 2 where the impact has been identified as potentially moderate to large or where there is a need to explain why a particular element of the proposed action will not,or may,result in a significant adverse environmental impact. Based on the analysis in Part 3,the lead agency must decide whether to require an environmental impact statement to further assess the proposed action or whether available information is sufficient for the lead agency to conclude that the proposed action will not have a significant adverse environmental impact. By completing the certification on the next page,the lead agency can complete its determination of significance Reasons Supporting This Determination: To complete this section: • Identify the impact based on the Part 2 responses and describe its magnitude. Magnitude considers factors such as severity, size or extent of an impact. • Assess the importance of the impact. Importance relates to the geographic scope,duration,probability of the impact occurring,number of people affected by the impact and any additional environmental consequences if the impact were to occur • The assessment should take into consideration any design element or project changes. • Repeat this process for each Part 2 question where the impact has been identified as potentially moderate to large or where there is a need to explain why a particular element of the proposed action will not,or may,result in a significant adverse environmental impact. • Provide the reason(s)why the impact may,or will not,result in a significant adverse environmental impact • For Conditional Negative Declarations identify the specific condition(s)imposed that will modify the proposed action so that no significant adverse environmental impacts will result. • Attach additional sheets,as needed. The Town of Southold Planning Board as lead agency,has determined that the proposed action described below may have a significant impact on the environment and issues a Positive Declaration and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared See Determination of Significance supplemental narrative dated August 10,2020(attached) Scoping will be conducted by public meeting at Town of Southold Town Hall or alternative method and location due to the current Pandemic. Determination of Significance-Type X and Unlisted Actions SEQR Status: Type I ❑ Unlisted Identify portions of EAF completed for this Project: F�/ Part I F✓ Part 2 0✓ Part 3 FEAF 2019 Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF,as noted, plus this additional support information See Determination of Significance supplemental narrative dated August 10 2020(attached) and considering both the magnitude and importance of each identified potential impact, it is the conclusion of the Town of Southold Planning Board as lead agency that- F—] A. This project will result in no significant adverse impacts on the environment,and,therefore,an environmental impact statement need not be prepared. Accordingly,this negative declaration is issued. ❑ B. Although this project could have a significant adverse impact on the environment,that impact will be avoided or substantially mitigated because of the following conditions which will be required by the lead agency: There will, therefore,be no significant adverse impacts from the project as conditioned,and,therefore,this conditioned negative declaration is issued. A conditioned negative declaration may be used only for UNLISTED actions(see 6 NYCRR 617.7(d)). © C This Project may result in one or more significant adverse impacts on the environment,and an environmental impact statement must be prepared to further assess the impact(s)and possible mitigation and to explore alternatives to avoid or reduce those impacts. Accordingly,this positive declaration is issued. Name of Action: Strong's Storage Buildings Name of Lead Agency: Town of Southold Planning Board Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency: Donald Wilcenski Title of Responsible Officer: Chairman Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency: Date:g l I A 202 Signature of Preparer(if different from Responsible Officer) Date: For Further information: Contact Person: Mark Terry Address: P.O Box 1179,5309 State Road 25,New York 11971 Telephone Number:631-765-1938 E-mail: Mark.Terry@town southold.ny us For Type 1 Actions and Conditioned Negative Declarations,a copy of this Notice is sent to: Chief Executive Officer of the political subdivision in which the action will be principally located(e.g.,Town/City/Village of) Other involved agencies(if any) Applicant(if any) Environmental Notice Bulletin: http://www.dec.tmv�ov/enb/enb.htmi PRINT FULL FORM Page 2 of 2 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK RECEIVED SouthOd 1'0114,n � Alarming f.3oard OFFICE OF THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE Steven Bellone SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE Natalie Wright Department of Commissioner Economic Development and Planning April 2, 2020 Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Attn: Elizabeth Neville, Town Clerk Re: Strongs Yacht Center Local File No.: N/A S.C.T.M. No.: 1000 10600 0600 0100000 and 013004 S.C.P.C. File No.: ZSR-20-09 Dear Ms. Neville: The Suffolk Planning Commission at its regular meeting on April 1, 2020, reviewed the referral from the Town of Southold entitled, "Strongs Yacht Center" referred to it pursuant to Section A14-14 thru A14-25, Article XIV of the Suffolk County Administrative Code. The attached Resolution signifies action taken by the Commission relative to this application. Very Truly Yours, Sarah Lansdale Director of Planning , e, By Christine DeSalvo Andrew P. Freleng. Chief Planner APF/cd Division of Planning and Environment cc.: Heather Lanza, Director of Planning H.LEE DENNISON BLDG a 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HWY,4th FI a P.O.BOX 6100 a HAUPPAUGE,NY 11788-0099 x (631)853-5191 File No. SD-20-01 Resolution No. ZSR-20-09 of the Suffolk County Planning Commission Pursuant to Sections A14-14 to thru A14-25 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections A14-14 thru A14-25 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, a referral was received on February 18, 2020 at the offices of the Suffolk County Planning Commission with respect to the application of"Strongs Yacht Center"located in the Town of Southold WHEREAS, said referral was considered by the Suffolk County Planning Commission at its meeting on April 1, 2020, be it therefore, RESOLVED, that the Suffolk County Planning Commission, pursuant to NYS General Municipal Law Section 239-m 1. (c), the Suffolk County Administrative Code section A14-15C., and the Suffolk County Planning Commission Guidebook, Section 2.1A, deems the referred from the Town of Southold Planning Board to the Suffolk County Planning Commission for"Strong's Storage Buildings" proposing the construction of 101,500 SF of boat storage in two one-story buildings (52,500 SF [Bldg. 1.1 and 49,000 SF [Bldg. 2]) plus associated site "improvements" including grading, storm water drainage, water supply, and sewage disposal to be Incomplete, and be it further, RESOLVED, that the above noted referral will not be reviewed until the following information is submitted through the offices of the municipal referring agency: 1. At the time of Site Plan referral to the Suffolk County Planning Commission a full environmental quality review of the proposal shall be included that has further information pertaining to channel depths at the mouth and course of Mattituck Creek particularly in the off shore location creek-ward of the shoreline of Strong's Yacht Center. 2. There is inadequate information regarding the typical type and size of boats to be serviced by the "yacht center" as a result of the proposed new boat storage buildings. Future referral material to the Suffolk County Planning Commission with respect to the Suffolk County Administrative Code Article XIV Section A14 - 25 shall include facts as to the maximum beam, draft, weight and length of water craft that will be serviced at the marina after completion of the proposed boat storage buildings. 3. There is inadequate information regarding the necessity to excavate soils at the subject location of the proposed action. Referral material to the Suffolk County Planning Commission with respect to the Suffolk County Administrative Code Article XIV Section A14-25 shall include an explanation of the need for the proposed elevation of the floor of the boat storage buildings. 4. The Suffolk County Planning Commission would like further clarification on Town of Southold protection of wetland regulations with respect to issues of soil erosion and sedimentation from clearance, grading, excavation or other disturbance of steeply sloped soils to be held by retaining walls on adjacent areas to tidal wetlands. SCPC Stormwater Publication Icktfrflvmrwuffaikcounyyy i ri vl yawl l C purl krroi7�tn�ld�a�&iralira� �,1caar e ul`or c1r r r3cPho ci ( LIL * SCPC Guidebook IalAt�„H era y a[ rriiultyllyJs /Podi fC ,/QIgamY�ti?i,u 'AfPublicatw,rnVSCPC��ro°fekrle l�?a�.�df ZSR-20-09 File No.: SD-20-01 Town of Southold Strongs Yacht Center COMMISSION ACTIONS OF INCOMPLETE RESOLUTION AYE NAY RECUSE ABSENT ANDERSON, RODNEY At�.,� . .. . ............ .................�.�wu.�_. Large X CASEY, JENNIFER....- _ �.. R -Town of Huntington X CHARTRAND, MATTHEW -Town of Islip X SAMUEL—Town of Babylon X CONDZELLA, JOHN —Town of Riverhead X ESPOSITO, ADRIENNE -Villages over 5,000 X JOHN -Tow FINN, n of Smithtown X GERSHOWITZ, KEVIN G.-At Large X KAUFMAN, MICHAEL - Villages under 5,000 X .... ......�.. . MICHAEL .. .... ......... ........ �. KELLY, —Town of Brookhaven X KITT, ERROL—At Large _. _............. .m ......� 9.. X O EHEAD, NICHOLAS —Town of Shelter he .... M R X Island VACANT, -Town of East Hampton McCarthy, Thomas, -Town of Southold X VACANT -Town o.._ f Southampton Motion: Commissioner McCarthy Present: 12 Seconded: Commissioner Anderson Absent: 1 Voted: 12 Recused: 0 Absent: 1 DECISION Incomplete COUNTY OF SUFFOLK C -.... APR 2 2020 * ' — Panning Board Steven Bellone SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE Natalie Wright Department of Commissioner Economic Development and Planning April 7, 2020 Town of Southold 54375 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Attn: Brian Cummings, Planner SEQRA Lead Agency Coordination Re: Strongs Yacht Center Municipal File No.: N/A S.C.T.M.No.: 1000 10600 0600 010000 and 013004 S.C.P.C. No.: SD-20-LD Dear Mr. Cummings: Your notification for SEQR Coordination was received by our agency on February 18, 2020. Please be advised that our agency,the Suffolk County Planning Commission,has no objection to the Town of Southold assuming Lead Agency status for the above referenced. The Suffolk County Planning Commission reserves the right to comment on this proposed action in the future and wants to be kept informed of all actions taken pursuant to SEQRA and to be provided with copies of all EAF's, DEIS's and FEIS's, etc. Please note that pursuant to New York State General Municipal Law section 239 and Article XIV of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, this latest action should be referred to the Suffolk County Planning Commission for review. Please note the following comments: Comment:. I. Because of the subject action's location proximate to Mattituck Creek, matters related to coastal process become important. Issues such as storm water runoff from site,waste water discharge and the treatment of nitrogen containing effluent, periodic tidal flooding and ground water swelling are particular for this site and application. Moreover,the principles of "Climate Change" puts forth the notion of rising seas level, more frequent and sever storm events including more violent storm surges. H.LEE DENNISON BLDG to 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HWY,11th FI a P.O.BOX 6100 a HAUPPAUGE,NY 11788-0099 a (631)853-5191 2. Certain detailed information is lacking that would make environmental quality review of the potential adverse impacts of the proposed action thorough and complete. 3. "Boat storage" is not a water"dependent"use. While"related"to water,boat storage is often accommodated inland away from the waterfront. Storage of boats on site is not essential but is related and enhances the functionality of the operations on site. 4. It is questionable if the excavation and removal of approximately 130,000 cubic yards of soil off site is necessary. Best management practice for site design is to have balanced cut and fill for site development. No soils should be removed. This is not the case here. The intended excavation will create a bowl on site where storm flood waters from Mattituck Creek will surge into. Details shown on plans prepared by Young and Young last revised Nov.20 2018 and referred from the Town of Southold Planning Board show elevation of the finished excavation to be approximately 9 -10 feet above mean sea level. Only a few feet above the base flood elevation and would be susceptible, as are other areas of similar elevations, to surges and flooding from category 2 hurricanes in the least. 5. While the proposed excavation could be considered beneficial to the area for additional flood water storage during storm events, the fact that there is proposed to be building Improvements and infrastructure in the created flood plain (excavation) will only set Lip a "repetitive economic loss" scenario for the boat storage building owners going into the future.An explanation of the need for the proposed elevation of the floor of the boat storage buildings is in order. 6. Conventional subsurface sewage disposal systems and onsite below grade storm water management structures are intended for the expansion of the proposed boat storage area. Details shown on plans prepared by Young and Young last revised Nov. 20, 2018 and referred from the Town of Southold Planning Board suggests that the elevation of the water table during normal groundwater conditions would be 3 feet below the bottom of the drainage rings. Test hole data from only two test holes provided on the plans referred and noted above show depth to water to be 6.4 feet to 7.6 feet below existing grade. It is not clear that, as designed, the existing waste and storm water systems would function during elevations of the groundwater table due to extreme climatic events. 7. A full environmental quality review of the proposal should be included that has further information pertaining to channel depths at the mouth and course of Mattituck Creek particularly in the off shore location creek-ward of the shoreline of Strong's Yacht Center. 8. There is inadequate information regarding the typical type and size of boats to be serviced by the"yacht center"as a result of the proposed new boat storage buildings. Material evidences for this proposed action should include facts as to the maximum beam, draft, weight and length of watercraft that will be serviced at the marina after completion ofthe proposed boat storage buildings. H.LEE DENNISON BLDG m 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HWY,11th FI a P.O.BOX 6100 m HAUPPAUGE,NY 11788-0099 2 (631)853-5191 9. An alternative development approach would be to construct the proposed boat storage buildings in the same locations at or near the existing grade and not excavate down to elevation 9. This would require an access road at an appropriate slope from between any two of the existing storage building to the top of the boat storage building footprint. One such design could, for example, be from between metal storage buildings 7 and 8 and southerly behind building 8 and curl northward to the building envelope. This route runs along the less steeply sloped parts of the site and can mitigate excavation issues. Building at the existing grade lessens the repetitive economic loss concern and also addresses the functionality of the waste and storm water systems proposed. 10. The proposed haul road could still be the temporary construction route and left for emergency access to the site after construction. Opportunities would exist that would warrant the utilization of storm water treatment through natural vegetation and green methodologies. This alternative should be investigated fully. 11. Significant buffering of Mill Road and properties to the south of the new boat storage buildings would be appropriate for this alternative as would "Dark Sky"lighting techniques utilized on site. This is an important mitigation to lessen lighting impacts to the roadway right-of-way and single family housing to the south of the proposed boat storage buildings. 12. The environmental quality review process should include the above information and analysis in order to take a complete and hard look at the potential adverse impacts of the proposed action. Sincerely, ;2 2 By Christine DeSalvo Andrew P. Freleng, Chief Planner Division of Planning and Environment APF/cd H.LEE DENNISON BLDG ■ 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HWY,11th FI a P.O.BOX 6100 a HAUPPAUGE,NY 11788-0099 a (631)853-5191 . CHARLES R.CUDDY : m MONOMER! CO ru : Flu Tu PVC K V A Er ......... ru 909011 m E� co V9 40 S M 1 ,7, 7m t T� -is R:aus e R8bJTnRw>Apt�)hWdC0PY) $ R, p iReWpt(derbudc) $ M 0 Rm-miklod VaRwifli S4 al Qgfll fled MW11 H:ws6cted DONWHY $ Postmark r []pdu�k VgrRttvn H:equIred $ r3 [DAduftSignatuve FWM,fad YI 4T DeRwevy$ C) co D01, C3 C3 "n w^wm nim 41,C1 75 F, Er S J, , Er L�/.1 f6-- —iTl UYU! C3 Total Postage and Fees W postage an't r m m $ - — ......... CO cc $0 7-o r-j Mark D e Strom ........... ------..................... C3 ViPeQUo, C3 I-Im ..................... r '�QAM2A-410 9 Teff "u'ck, NY 11952 9010 Dom "Va I t .......... ........... ..... 0! > Cc 00 1 5 1 1 , ii CL :ra K a I CC (D < zo 6 �Z c 0 a: 27 Q < < z 0 8 E 0 00 00 0,2 a) ccs E 16 El Cl N-5 CC m So-coo a: S E § &IF.-�m 11! E E 'r Ono 0 00 0 a.a: 0 MM U5 co m a) • l E On E 0 9 Ow IS Z B VS C a: cc —a%%88=7 a) T LD a) 0 CL 2,0.m m. ,2 1 "1 P ....' U)rb (D A -0 U) svt� 071, 00 . -- w'S'5 r u=A 5 QQUUUU ------ cl; 11 El❑El m r— ru r%- co CE) LD r=1 C, Lf) co Er C3 ca ce) ru 0 CL 0) 9 M CD CD CD 9 00 C. a) 0 E C) m cli as co 0 aCD M C4 9 ) 0 E(D ce) ID cr) 9 0 rq . C14 C rq 0 -0 C3 1, 0-0 4 Cl) C13 Eo mmmm CO z co Za -;= 0) C3 U) (5 V) 0 r-3 4) ca t: C:] EL vi 4w) 0 -0,4 E 0c) Q C3 z a .8 a) cc Cal 14 CO :5 LO r- = .0 0) 0. CD a) a) c,r -0 E lzr a -a E .c; 0 0 LOQ - t Er C14 :3 CU cn — C\j C3 .2!� ca 4) — x r- 0 CL m ca a) -a — 0 . — LO C3 2:- U 1010 C) E E C\j m C:) a) w sa coo cc ri u a) ca 0 0 't -1 0) CO T. a) -0 co T-- 0 E C, 0 = r-q Emmm T— E r=1 co :3 C) 0 9�— 0') Z C3 0 4J imumm 2-1 LO a: E ■ 5, co A, W a) z M Cf) C) M - —�c a A) -W LO (D r- E 0 .2 p CD 41 �E 0 E co OEM= E 0 0 LL 0 z cd C:) cd 0 C' 0 �,! 0 P4 P4 z C14 Cl) 0 CL m 0 C, (L < li VJ r%- Er C-3 WHO CO ro r-9 r=11 A 2,2 4 ....... T u S E tl......... S -7, C3 ................... C3 M CurWfied Mail Rao M $1,51:5 S CID M CO $ M PY) I f almad Retwin Rece�jpt(havdco Fj Ruhan R-.Gelpt(hwdcojjpy� S Rehan H :"pt(WmAwNc) Ama rq &Apt(WmIvoirb) S rq 11 ]IRetuvnH C-3 Cei Mod MaH flesWcted DeWary $ CP $ M [�]j-flI fled MdI RtWdetrA Deflyery 1' C3 C3 C3 -uft Shpmtura RequInDd 41,4,7 f4�4- . ..... C3 Aduft Ugmture FWgAved S. C,!, -yja�ura Fkotted 0:oWay Aduft SkyMum Rea*kAW[Wvwy Er PoMage 1. c5'5 Pa" C-3 IT- rotat Postaga and Pace Er S C3 0 2/2'-3,�/2 ...... C3 ---—------- N M M .......... ...... ............ CO SUMV; Ca Sofa Tr; Donald & Joseph Leogrande r-q James B. Kaminsky ra 6iP( .......... . ........ .............................. C3 C3 AoXM6.' r- ............ ............. 74,,,"Wq -Dr.......w_."._.._......... ...... �I 14 dly,"DOW, + I Mihe6la, NY 11501 ttituck, NY 11952 m--mn T.—Moo-,M-m-ammmr-IN 1 0 0 'am 00 Ir -0 :0 0 to M -0 w CL 0 M� K 0 LH E z Lb 0 W E z 080 v 08C, 0 0 0. 2-. -5 E3 Fj C, 2:1 M E-Ii m= 0 C, .1 , =gagz W - 0 = "'t M M.0.0 w E � �I'C1� .U)M cc U3❑ E E 000 13 EI 0 0 0 9IWO E w ID g %5 CC CC ts CC (D CC ,L-_D m®¢>> wo 02 V-�g 0 z C6 C6 S2.0.21 0 0 0 (D g i (D LU .04 • CC U) a) :E w cn:�::CD 0 0 0 0 ..4 X cd x 0000. - C';0[10 0 110 1 P- C6 11 El 11 }001 EZI Er ro C13 17=1 r=1 Cr) LOC-3 LCR) C3 o C-4 M T 0 0 �: 92- co 6 Ca C) T :i IM CD r*- — M M E 0) Cd CO - a) 0 E a) 0 = 0 C'J :C 9 9 a) 7- m r--I C� C3 0 A (f) Cri Ce) 0-0 c+ w01 C3 -4 oo 1=1 z am= 00 C-3 z =-- , r-3 co cd C." Q) W 0 0 (D CU -4 0 'D ell 10 �d rz IL a = .0 — O) C3 CL Cd C) -t Er b or -0 TL C) 0 C'r E :cc; 9 P CQ 't CIj :3 0 CL (D R w 00 & m 75 to- a) 44 o 0 0 CIj C\I a) Q) 0 MMOM C:) C:) E E CO E Za �.4 Cn qt 2 u u r-I a) ro Cd FROM 0) -0 T-- 0) .�2 2 rq Pq 10 �:IrO E C3 E 00 �: = a) C:) 00 CD C3 0 -W zoom 0.) Co ;C• z CL M 0 -rI 1-4 P4'ri 0 0-, Cr) 0 U) r%- J-- LO a) E E CO 0 0 Q) �3: 41 sum, -C E rn r4 0 E N 0 -W i 0 0 0 0 C) ILL Ln Cd U- 0 � 'M < 0 rj) -0 (Dr- z CO C4 CL iwu � I Wwun � I • � � �'b um iwu IIS g �;,d um iuo mnm i i u• iuu M :. - : � `1A,, � I14C � >� ��, �� r "�� M llA�R NOFee i�n JSi� m G H�rk1CF��kla�l� 0�VN w Irl C.✓,Ires rraV u� E a nJwru G r �r�,�n, G I 'a e�r1 ' e M rEA�pra&� rllldr,ws&Foua wo,4 )Krpsi°air a dw VMurw Vkcalpatl rowwuzaa . .m �k�RaYkrq C) wrpaxo.malwwirnnulaw0 "idullnRwep#(WiscAlrairw E3 a w M g ¢ � p U Ilsme p R:sgu 61 C3 E.R b Sill r d ui�uu waa ll�m awry Il yJf p p s u" QI Ir- Er � 4aP Nwao c �� e na xO i5a)Remih -r V lib cO "° VTTown of Southold rq North Fork 6�ro ect ..1� c o 1��...Ld Jannuz a C3 rcxtrr��6yAj" ua�¢m � ra �.0 er°i a as a...................................................... . Pa � ;; �'-�d......... ' �� m_w� . u NY 11971 tl.tuck NY 1y. d� u m n u,.. •. r . ,.':a �'T�uLw�� i,.$�Southold,t li�mu"w m 'fat ho .wm w m m www aw. 1 m . . IREM OD N m z a � . � co 080 o 0V ID)) vcc E E m COe IO'4 CO Q Q O Z J E U q 0N a 13 11 13 El E3 ' m ,arnWmacrnm� m O �ac U)co cc y o a xc8IMU5 o¢ • . � ❑❑❑ ❑ El 13 • • gym ❑❑❑ ❑ ❑❑ p • c m • m => Ed o • m g my > o IS cl z ccv Q m mCL �mm a r y(A��O O Cpy U O O Cc to 2__ =� �' �' —0 j) w 0== — �QQUUUU a8 0 8'a Q' [0 O �¢¢C�UUCg� vi❑❑❑❑❑❑I ED ri❑❑❑❑❑❑C a m Er C3 m a a� LO N co v� m o p o CD 04 r m 9 W a nl T � a i r �J� l ca o U ^ .p a • 0) o ,o f,. — co m o, ra •� O rl o >, � M p M r-a m N� a � -WN C14 0 LO y� '6 A2 �;. � � p n v 00 m � cYi u r rn O co a m i ^ � p z N N fes" .-� >_ ` r p fq cam« n n cd b ? ,n cam a CO a• a� o a cc ca m 0 o ti cd � 0 � 0' 0 N ca�- a) r�, p � cli J41 'i r CO 4) O y Y P-1 �+ LCA G >+ r CO y 0) � 0 �I � � C T N �' v� s~ ACVCO rn m >_ � � C z � N SIM 75 m 20 mai � W ? d O ® c0 ° o d `a co cn 4-I t r-� T M CO ® arnQUAM VOv0PCI +1 EE O - O N W E cw U ° g a ° `oQ0 O o c° .__. a a_ H p, M a a M M CIO M 'ra 'ervice X..'I' :etuall RKApt(hMdOoPY) $ IFN um�:WAjjpt�,Mwtmft) $ .......... M -dffled MaH flimWeteJ Dellivery 2 small= iAduft ftnaUv 1119ablchi M E3 E3 nj d M., . ......................... ru C3 $ Er M Total Posw9e aind Fees IOflf "OFT el"II'll 101; N& x Z' lil 0 Er M $6.95 Certilhoct NW11 rea 7-- t ru --------- ........................................................ ro Ej" 515 'ent ro S r=1 Cynthia Kaminsk.y M Extra Surwiro�-�&Fees�41*4kbax,aoafwl 8,'4 M4'I ... .................................................... Mum 111000pt rdnlrp = RoWin F3eiqp�WwAmWo $ flsimrkCay . . 5- liff--Dx......1-�-...-..-.,...-.��.�I.I..�...I...... NV'"nw waR1Mdd*:I IMMN $ Hens 4, ,,,�,1731,,IaZl 4 t'tu 112 r3 Aduft81pahW3vpAmd C3 Poslaga Er aira) -9 C3 7btal Postage awt Fuels 02/28/202k'i ."2 rn $6 9�: a) 1 1 s - (D 7� 0 E E IM ILI 0 M Ir CO —6ow'r—O < �2 z �i =22 aa 00 rq James & Kathleen Neumann_...... 1:113 0-0� 0 0 0 .. — ................. 2 C3 E-2 1' i ii R , , t,4.,.Av.e....AA,5A................................................ 0 4 �? --@ t am&1 1 E a-Ir.0 H Vj'C-o cc 000 0 011E E 0 Z 0' Registered No. Date Stamp mm q'll -Q) m o Postage$ Extri Services Fet-., (—tfn-d)) 'e"1" "'�, � —Q (D a: Extra ServIc s N'ett 0 Signature Confirmation $ �e' "Op A: Is' CL Signature Confirmation Hoceip aT Z.2 Restricted Delivery 28 .2.0.0-g.2 0 0 'ar 1�............................................... ?-T"Q 0�T EO 'D Lu 0 9 5 CO $ 00 Total Postage&Fees ( M>' DtdivurP$................... $ cli 0 0 0 0 0 11 9M r-1 '�% I Cuswm'O'eMtis1 buclafe DompWN, C3 Full Value, M CO L -/233,P1120 D $ Indemnity is krkt�,j&,�Revarse�, U aW cEl c3 U 9 M a LO CD --a 9 (D 0 E 0) a) C) C., c) C3 00, 0-0 4 Lr)6 0 r- f201 10) C3 Lf) E 0 CO cd av0)) '6 -,e E z 2� 0 CO - LL -0 C(I)L e (L P) /7Y I r ......... '@ 0 a) 0 M L M CL -H LH M 0 Cd -r-14d CO 75 E , -0 U 0 C%l e� E E cats �q rq oaf M rZ CO a an 2 Cd ro -W 0) r%- 2 r-1 0 -r-11 E 0 :3 00 0 4 0 4.3 8) z ce) LU To VV/no yll-a P E0 -6 Cd BEEM C) 0 �>' E 0 0 0 'M 0 LL C/3 PS Form 3806,Registered Mail Receipt Copy 1-Customer a- April 2015,PSN 753! 02.,=I-9051 I'See WOMMWOO on Reverse) For domestic delivery information,visit our website at wwwusps,corn CEI 117- —BEEBE= MII III rum ru iz=NOR! 11, 117- STjA U E Fj Er F'U 117Z ............... CO 'jj 'ry 019fll M C113 S j x I ra Sri ry I C"as&Ftn'3 Nftm*'how,0:1(170-4441 1 � / " M EAraSarv4ris f-ODS richorkbox,add hip'v rhrEq) 0 1 Cnaal QIP s Postmark (Amittfad AW11 RvAdMed NAvlovy r Raturn Recelllpt(sioGtguritc) $ []Aduk Signature IRequimd ED IF.]Cwtt-Mal H:9�"'ctwl Daltvaq $-444-1 C3 E3 AdtiftSignaturaRequlmd Diflwory Ell Adult Slgirntuim Reistilcted C3 pwita!ge C%j p6�n Wt e 5C7 Er Ila C3 �111 2F, Er Tittali Postage!and Fe—qo V M ........V M z ts 95 .................... CO Swnf'ro ....... CO AWC Dockside LLC CO To W To r-q Denmelexnic Far,ms kN ......... ................................ rC ". ------............. ........ ------ a'L e Island, NY 10304 1iMattituck, NY 11952 z ru ru I IMMUNE 1 , !1 Er ................. .............................. y, 1:7 .ILml ru CerlFlod Mall T E3 ............... CO $ M Giiiajilud MM Feo CO $3 M A i 7 ','t" FOO!(ctrnk!=,a*Y ri la"'If I." Ej PhAuvi npie.,Mpt gwdcopy) Ratuii u Rucdpt(havdcopy) $ Ruiluirin Ipgwnc pt(eledinnic) $ rq Ce,jg,-�Wj 11"it D 011,,wy $ Here C3 Certified WE Grh RusbMed Doilveivy 4".4 "4 1AWt8ijriatRirOAPqwirud $C3 1� C3 nArduk.Signahbin Required ........... AdvA S%jnatum Rn'lWod rjolivefy$ c.,E ................ .............................. [JAduft S�gnatwe Rastvi&ed Dfillwaiy$ RosWiga $ IT -ind—r-'kvs O M llbtail eastagi L M Total pasta go�Anrj Fj7jj— 2, o 61 5 M .................----—-................. ro aaaratTO .............................. 1-q Michael Neumann & Beth Neumann CO SOM V7 C3 SM6r,i-�l 6�WX'-W"iii P�lf UJZM5�------------------------------------------------------ rq Thomas & Jennifer McGunnig,;�t.............. C3 ................. r- 2-40r- York, NY 10069Y ��"�q"! k N Ln R 17 IZI M 1"vW 1:113 4 L�j' M CIO $ M Fea M ud 10 Retijim Receipt pmi��d $ Ratim i Q rardeopy) 0 Rehm�Remli(A(eiwlmnic) r9 F IgRewlpt(eimbodO M t 171 Dwiffied Mail IRWActed Ddilvevy C3 IF �irtffled MOO Relaldctod DoWeri E3 C3 Ad14+uk Signatum i paa:Ba,Yr,SV IrsmNuuua Ig ad -3 ➢Adult Signature i tOd D06,"Y jj� M $ V-.55 Er g'f�"i 211" r5iE-65gyms f�WNIZ�Ve aii'd f M M 7b $ ............ 01 ........ ...... 7 1 ' I . ....... y1t r sc'XIn'thony & Dorotjhy Demaul.a .o n ..... ------ Patrick gK ............... 8 C3 or po r�x Nn, fti 117- ......... ......... ............... ...... . ........ , , M Ur"Vo, 44 wrFa;" err eA' attituck, NY 1952 =MMM Mattituck NY 11952 L m ffin 32721''IMAMME M'jMM'Mz=M" m uum � PW,d awn u� u x Biu � � � CM8 umn mu Ln i inimi i ni m aw ,w w®<• ae m r.6- Er q .a q g H yI pn C N[ p �tl�k-7) kYmluII1IIM Yom l"^�^ 8i .q� � �i✓ �Gri fpraal Mufl Fla a.� p � � O,U w�, � 5�EI16r�Pu�aai!F°� ...- IR � ` 19 s $r N u OPoXIfiII I�"1 aar M ��o9»sktp5f9„':P4a f-aaa,,.yr:1v a,Xc 4n,mx add �d nkrp�aawrNmt � � "� m._y., mu FaaUaavun IRwa.¢alq uY Qhraou�NaaaFrup m"1 W,m.p a _ f7l 7W UiaiViu: In N a� Pr ca Yn ad � ry � at�J O W r�o IRmrottauutn IRecAp t Q4uavdl pl) $' W Y @!I�„ " [ IRaakumum Raucttrouyrofl QarPar @uunwi0cp ,w"•�1„",1:1.;,,f— IF°aroaTllttuaiiW u, .; 5Y,;a'ugC ""^a, p Relum IRsasl'pt QwOeGlyaarnlcQ I Celllfied MaR RctsfluMan ed N YmaY v a^R '`1�W � err ""ti ' "° 0 "•"•.1,GQurQ k,� 080nAk °a wl ry E IW�.r sC&rr;Cu _, �Aduh.dlUn atomtuils la�aC.ugWiR!.'RSYRestdded I"imallal�eawgm$. �� srr + D'•N&alYd3 ISIAduft Ogpun"4,Cauus'n=im, ll+P�d C`I-W,rm'y'$.— i d "' aRsuae lRancpuuYvua¢t � 0 m O y ,s � umm D " 77 U7A � un o unaa uuuuauW auw:"au u 1 p i 45�kr�l��ra 8 4 m_._ ___... .. _ '° � ,m.� 'uuu 0 rPostage and Foes m �•- a aaX 9tp r „< i"' If YW E3 r� M � ra ro So Scar r .dames F Kin & Diane Cotu no m O F'�"Wduar�rt�dapt�'��a�P FWn arX'a�,taFtrh Xaf Russel J & Den ise.. G._e..l..lm_n...p.r 220-F " 89-5-4 .Dr... . _.._.zfattitucks NY 11952 a...,m.....m .._ ._..,.,... m , a tituck, NY 119'52 m � "» °w -M- P i' min an I mpmm i iwm k, W,8 u� I iww � a'd mmu Lnr- wVW � iwu Er oum m wEr � u J mw�" " aW � upW , pyT1M � r" "^ �„ 1n�� ' '� e fimli U r�r �F CO M TZf—,r3 OUn eg fWg rum g..Yr a .a jl"°aPrr! dd,¢ rn ruwrRtr�rk,auu' .�.1_ „'m, � of fsih u n BINuW9 Retwin g e#a.a aWA r 4 t4�'M .: tun k � �4RuuUrrn lRsasllpH Owde D ,., EI m turf QQ " Return RecmPw�a0111R,aeaedvanW�b�il aar $. W 6 R RAW ..0 W' O dB � } 7 pcMR"n°IrouuvR qd' . . kasllh,�mw, h a , f ...�,. o- Q ori V[jCewMexVMa Raeu ftt.e Ir. y - h. �a. E ," M G 4W ar O Waax uapumak —"a"T -ft— Adult4 - �.rAstuiV¢"mWWywsfluunr lRanvpui0isaaW w..... ....�,�,....�......� _ Y ,5 ^ &g na fijiv IResWratleted DieDvnu $ P�I,Aduft Slo nuapu.uuun lResWam ie911.7eltvaau• $ w' R � co1-4 OI .�.� Cts Q __ N O- hll m � W O W ut9aaR a W tans7k ..� 1TrAtM Palo aro and f^a�aa�as� �y � F taj .. � � G O ^^ 0 W h+" I f1l r ma CO ,S"a d To 7 k4 Tai rq orot Demaula � T.�avid W Cooper _..a._ . ,.m_.,._, _.. O ,PrurXa A "crP. wa.raeX" d. Mar. O ,t'aaEaoreXdx. ia�f¢ arimmXXU„ ............................. ...,._m ..m........ r` 0 ... t46 r- s� EaEua x ,°q �naa ..... w. Mattituck NY 11952 tituck, NY 11952 .m_..''"'__ ..._, ....... ^ m ..n :: .m m�BmW ,m q r..0,k •mm wwmm sm• �.. � „i •u �, wr asa anm k M A Q„b mim iw iwu mm 'i 'i a µamu imi il,mm, M F m. O m 0 co U- m m CO FIR ' .�._�_. .w.w.. _ .—_ -,_..�. a .�.--_.... ;rs'^ z ,f G'rt,rEt,B Wip W Im m "ErV`X;IWbI'adX Y�idl Fe F a W °' co Nm.fl fti I C 4 91 f M L ir'kt.a �1 W$ a ,u am^.N k u, Yisra< Y&aunumuxn F�¢soM 8 rosvatco '�.... Q w � ... p n IRaz&uurvn IRa2�a�01!aR Qlhwur¢9acrolFrogmQ �.. rren w.u.,W c,r'rz asW rm ki iw X vm ""'- -- r-q a ( W ^ _U0 U" C,rW d ark u � 'dWcru�uiroo Fasrv�wlWroH Qslsc¢ouyinbcp �...,�...�..�Y` �Xa4karekGBRaatkh.WluaVll FaraWa.¢oa:£ICDaall4aaau ,_� ,m^m e IRut ui is Raucel rP¢aV¢,tmnusu'p $ ",k.�Je,..m,.Yr.�91,..w. mm's f ... n n✓Q rikl+i 1:3CC �,,.drm--= O 41i @r7d¢a Is10 Faaaflvttuaaadt Ir)aalllaeaau "„aW¢Cua9r"a0&punsPumrea Fsyuuium¢t ..., fie¢.tuaN@;ill prmiRuuivs Vvs¢au0opwcM r ;”" fQW ,mu7uullttawrrstuarna IRauadpvticV¢.cd Irkaaullrrwiryy e2 3 Wi I.R:. ' " 1. ��M Q Y a 1 . W m ttgyiroad oaa am awu 6 u��nu�a,� � �' ��,.e .,.. _.. . @bTFg L� xt� WWW i O '�W11, VWI"'a9nJks5 rWxaepaQWwkW9.Er r u. . 0 O mF �� O �� 0��I:. ��." ':IL�W,OIh"°t s M19 z� '' r, i ra � W 9."a rradT cc "u'cWad Xta Cc , ,a Donny M Boscola ........... ___... ,a Leigh T & Lauren P Salem O "a�a�P�r, ��r'X,�a.n X'sr�t"d� mnrra Xu�� p �r+Ir�;aa,A,tv,n9p"tr.,�'n.�eas h��"Y"��trra i�`cr^ m_.A.._.. ....w.... ............. r` ..�. RO R,?x 5.81.... .... .....A., _.__..._a. ... _ . ...,_.. r- l� I st .,." awNWdXR« .a �ir,�k ,a' . i _..� .,....�.. attituck, NY 11952 '.'__.r,."� Broo��. n, NY 11201 AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING This is to serve notice that I personally posted the property known as 3430 Mill Road Mattituck NY by placing the Town's official poster notice(s) within 10 feet of the front property line facing the street(s) where it can be easily seen, and that I have checked to be sure the poster has remained in place for at least seven days prior to the date of the public hearing on February 27, 2020 1 have sent notices by certified mail — return receipt, the receipts and green return receipt cards of which are attached, to the owners of record of every property which abuts and every property which is across on Charles ]J. Cuddy Your Name (print) Signature w 445 Griffing Ave. , Riverhead, NY-11901 Address y , Date Notary Public IWONA KOnYM a aryP �p lig gym; e r r �,,IovuYork �i idl !r2& �n "xl..iik I4 L ,)ynt L xp r i'Jd cli 3, 20d-; PLEASE RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT, CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS & GREEN RETURN RECEIPT CARDS BY. 12:00 noon Fri.- 3/6/20 Re: Stron 's Storage Buildings SCTM#s: 1000- 106-6-13.4 Date of Public Hearing: Monday, March 9 2020 6.02 p.m. i OFFICE LOCATION: MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex P.O. Box 1179 T 54375 State Route 25 � �0 / Southold, NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov Cori PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 10, 2020 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Public Hearing - Strong's Storage Buildings 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: A Public Hearing was held by the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, March 9, 2020 regarding the above-referenced application. The public hearing was adjourned without a date. The record remains open to written comment during the adjournment. Once a date is set to continue the hearing, a new notice of the public hearing must be completed pursuant to Town Code §55-1. If you have any questions regarding the above, please contact this office. Respectfully, Donald J. Wilcenski Chairman NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION" RECEIVED Division of Environmental Permits, Region 1 SUNY @ Stony Brook, 50 Circle Road, Stony Brook, NY 11790 o0 P: (631) 44403651 F: (631) 4440360 www.dec.ny.gov , _ m Nanning IBoard LEAD AGENCY COORDINATION RESPONSE .. ..... March 2, 2020 Brian Cummings Town of Southold P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: LEAD AGENCY COORDINATION REQUEST Strong's Yacht Center 5780 West Mill Rd. Mattituck, NY 11952 SCTM# 1000-106-6-13.4 Dear Mr. Cummings: This letter is in response to your Lead Agency Coordination Request of February 13, 2020 for the referenced project pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and its implementing regulations (6NYCRR Part 617). This Department has no objection to the Town of Southold assuming lead agency status for this action. The enclosed Tidal Wetlands Permit and jurisdictional determination (1-4738- 01843/00028) was issued on January 31, 2020 for this project. If you have any questions, please call me at 631-444-0403. Sinc "bly, Sherri Aicher Deputy Permit Administrator wolc ertt �rnre"xw I<nvl'rr�r�rrtert't'a1, 4Y6��7CT�Ibuk'1"w Conservation �NEW YORK "'ll'M"'E IDIIEPARTKENT OF ENVIRONMEINTAI,,,,,CONSEIRvAnON Division of Environmental Permits, Region 1 SUNY @ Stony Brook, 50 Circle Road, Stony Brook, NY 11790 P: (631) 444-0365 1 F: (631) 444-0360 www.dec.ny.gov January 31, 2020 Strong's West Mill LLC c/o Mr. Jeff Strong 5780 W Mill Road Mattituck, N.Y. 11952 Re: Permit No. 1-4738-01843/00028 Dear Permittee: RECE, f),l�r`'� In conformance with the requirements of the State Uniform Procedures Act (Article 70, ECL) and its implementing regulations (6NYCRR, Part 621) we are enclosing your permit for the referenced activity. Please carefully read all permit conditions and special permit conditions contained in the permit to ensure compliance during the term of the permit. If you are unable to comply with any conditions, please contact us at the above address. Also enclosed is a permit sign which is to be conspicuously posted at the project site and protected from the weather and a Notice of Commencement/Completion of Construction. Please note, the permit sign and Notice of Com men cement/Com pletion of Construction form are sent to either the permittee or the facility application contact, not both. Sincerely,, ✓gyp �w , � 47 I s 1✓ H d' d' �77 ,. Mary Ii/iaci )anon Environmental Analyst cc: Young & Young, BMHP, File NEWYORK Departrmntof „„.,�,y oa��ustruraa'r� Env'i1"G"A'd'liirriR.tai Conservation DECFacility D 1-4738-01843 i Environmental Conservation Law Under the ....... Permittee and Facility Information Permit Issued To: Facility: Strong's West Mill LLC Strong's Yacht Center C/O JEFF STRONG 5780 W MILL RD 5780 W Mill Rd MATTITUCK, NY 11952 Mattituck, NY 11952 (631) 298-4480 Facility Application Contact: YOUNG & YOUNG 400 OSTRANDER AVE RIVERHEAD, NY 11901 (631) 727-2303 Facility Location: in SOUTHOLD in SUFFOLK COUNTY Facility Principal Reference Point: NYTM-E: 706.1 Latitude: 41'00'30.8" Longitude: 72°32'57.0" NYTM-N: 4542.6 Project Location: 5780 W Mill Rd., Mattituck SCTM#1000-106-6-10,13.4 Mattituck Creek Authorized Activity: Install two dry wells/ leaching pools and concrete retaining wall. Add french drain system to west side of existing one story building. All roadway and parking area material will be gravel only. All work must be done in accordance with the plans prepared by Howard W. Young LLS last revised 1/2/2020 and stamped NYSDEC approved 1/31/2020. Please note, the property landward of the 10 foot contour line as shown on the survey prepared by Howard C. Young LLS last revised 1/2/2020 is beyond Article 25 (Tidal Wetland) jurisdiction. Tidal Wetlands - Under Article 25 Permit ID 1-4738-01843/00028 New Permit Permit Authorizations Effective Date: 1/31/2020 Expiration Date: 1/30/2025 Page 1 of 6 Am dawa NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL Facility DEC ID 1-4738-01843 NYSDEC Approval By acceptance of this permit, the permittee agrees that the permit is contingent upon strict compliance with the ECL, all applicable regulations, and all conditions included as part of this permit. Permit Administrator: SHERRI L AICHER, Deputy Permit Administrator Address: NYSDEC Region 1 Headquarters SUNYpStony BrookJ50 Circle Rd Stony (�ook„ NY 11790 -340 Authorized Signature: YOUNG & YOUNG Bureau of Marine Habitat Protection File Distribution List Permit Components NATURAL RESOURCE PERMIT CONDITIONS GENERAL CONDITIONS, APPLY TO ALL AUTHORIZED PERMITS NOTIFICATION OF OTHER PERMITTEE OBLIGATIONS Date // 31 / � NATURAL RESOURCE PERMIT CONDITIONS - Apply to the Following Permits: TIDAL WETLANDS _ 1. Post Permit Sign The permit sign enclosed with this permit shall be posted in a conspicuous location on the worksite and adequately protected from the weather. 2. Notice of Commencement At least 48 hours prior to commencement of the project, the permittee and contractor shall sign and return the top portion of the enclosed notification form certifying that they are fully aware of and understand all terms and conditions of this permit. Within 30 days of completion of project, the bottom portion of the form must also be signed and returned, along with photographs of the completed work. 3. Conformance With Plans All activities authorized by this permit must be in strict conformance with the approved plans submitted by the applicant or applicant's agent as part of the permit application. Such approved plans were prepared by Howard C. Young, LLS last revised 1/2/2020 and stamped NYSDEC approved 1/31/2020. Page 2 of 6 Am NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION Facility DEC ID 1-4738-01843 4. No Construction Debris in Wetland or Adjacent Area Any debris or excess material from construction of this project shall be completely removed from the adjacent area (upland) and removed to an approved upland area for disposal. No debris is permitted in wetlands and/or protected buffer areas. 5. Materials Disposed at Upland Site Any demolition debris, excess construction materials, and/or excess excavated materials shall be immediately and completely disposed of in an authorized solid waste management facility. These materials shall be suitably stabilized as not to re-enter any water body, wetland or wetland adjacent area. 6. No Disturbance to Vegetated Tidal Wetlands There shall be no disturbance to vegetated tidal wetlands or protected buffer areas as a result of the permitted activities. 7. Storage of Equipment, Materials The storage of construction equipment and materials shall be confined within the project work area and/or upland areas greater than 75 linear feet from the tidal. wetland boundary. 8. Clean Fill Only All fill shall consist of clean sand, gravel, or soil (not asphalt, slag, flyash, broken concrete or demolition debris). 9. Department Airisdiction The department retainsjurisdiction of"all regulated lands where fill has been permitted. Placement of fill shall not be used to alter the department's Tidal Wetland jurisdictional area at the project site. The area remains a regulated area subject to Tidal Wetland Land Use restrictions of 6 NYCRR Part 661. 10. Install, Maintain Erosion Controls Necessary erosion control measures, i.e., straw bales, silt fencing, etc., are to be placed on the downslope edge of any disturbed area. This sediment barrier is to be put in place before any disturbance of the ground occurs and is to be maintained in good and functional condition until thick vegetative cover is established. 11. Driveway/Parking Area of Pervious Material Driveway and parking areas shall be constructed of NYSDEC-approved pervious materials. 12. Direct Runoff Away from Tidal Wetland and Buffer Roads, driveways, and parking areas shall be graded to direct runoff away from tidal wetlands and protected buffer areas. 13. Dry Wells/Leaching Pools Dry wells/ Leaching Pools for roof run-off shall be located a minimum of 100 linear feet landward of the tidal wetland boundary. 14. Contain Exposed, Stockpiled Soils All disturbed areas where soil will be temporarily exposed or stockpiled for longer than 48 hours shall be contained by a continuous line of staked haybales / silt curtains (or other NYSDEC approved devices) placed on the seaward side between the fill and the wetland or protected buffer area. Tarps are authorized to supplement these approved methods. 15. Maintain Erosion Controls All erosion control devices shall be maintained in good and functional condition until the project has been completed and the area has been stabilized. G _ , Am dahas NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION Facility DEC ID 1-4738-01843 16. State Not Liable for Damage The State of New York shall in no case be liable for any damage or injury to the structure or work herein authorized which may be caused by or result from future operations undertaken by the State for the conservation or improvement of navigation, or for other purposes, and no claim or right to compensation shall accrue from any such damage. 17. Precautions Against Contamination of Waters All necessary precautions shall be taken to preclude contamination of any wetland or waterway by suspended solids, sediments, fuels, solvents, lubricants, epoxy coatings, paints, concrete, leachate or any other environmentally deleterious materials associated with the project. 18. State May Require Site Restoration If upon the expiration or revocation of this permit, the project hereby authorized has not been completed, the applicant shall, without expense to the State, and to such extent and in such time and manner as the Department of Environmental Conservation may lawfully require, remove all or any portion of the uncompleted structure or fill and restore the site to its former condition. No claim shall be made against the State of New York on account of any such removal or alteration. 19. State May Order Removal or Alteration of Work If future operations by the State of New York require an alteration in the position of the structure or work herein authorized, or if, in the opinion of the Department of Environmental Conservation it shall cause unreasonable obstruction to the free navigation of said waters or flood flows or endanger the health, safety or welfare of the people of the State, or cause loss or destruction of the natural resources of the State, the owner may be ordered by the Department to remove or alter the structural work, obstructions, or hazards caused thereby without expense to the State, and if, upon the expiration or revocation of this permit, the structure, fill, excavation, or other modification of the watercourse hereby authorized shall not be completed, the owners, shall, without expense to the State, and to such extent and in such time and manner as the Department of Environmental Conservation may require, remove all or any portion of the uncompleted structure or fill and restore to its former condition the navigable and flood capacity of the watercourse. No claim shall be made against the State of New York on account of any such removal or alteration. GENERAL CONDITIONS - Apply to ALL Authorized Permits: 1. Facility Inspection by The Department The permitted site or facility, including relevant records, is subject to inspection at reasonable hours and intervals by an authorized representative of the Department of Environmental Conservation (the Department) to determine whether the permittee is complying with this permit and the ECL. Such representative may order the work suspended pursuant to ECL 71- 0301 and SAPA 401(3). The permittee shall provide a person to accompany the Department's representative during an inspection to the permit area when requested by the Department. A copy of this permit, including all referenced maps, drawings and special conditions, must be available for inspection by the Department at all times at the project site or facility. Failure to produce a copy of the permit upon request by a Department representative is a violation of this permit. Page 4 of 6 Alm aftow NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION Facility DEC I 1-4738-01843 2. Relationship of this Permit to Other Department Orders and Determinations Unless expressly provided for by the Department, issuance of this permit does not modify, supersede or rescind any order or determination previously issued by the Department or any of the terms, conditions or requirements contained in such order or determination. 3. Applications For Permit Renewals, Modifications or Transfers The permittee must submit a separate written application to the Department for permit renewal, modification or transfer of this permit. Such application must include any forms or supplemental information the Department requires. Any renewal, modification or transfer granted by the Department must be in writing. Submission of applications for permit renewal, modification or transfer are to be submitted to: Regional Permit Administrator NYSDEC Region 1 Headquarters SUNY @ Stony BrookJ50 Circle Rd Stony Brook, NY11790 -3409 4. Submission of Renewal Application The permittee must submit a renewal application at least 30 days before permit expiration for the following permit authorizations: Tidal Wetlands. 5. Permit Modifications, Suspensions and Revocations by the Department The Department reserves the right to exercise all available authority to modify, suspend or revoke this permit. The grounds for modification, suspension or revocation include: a. materially false or inaccurate statements in the permit application or supporting papers; b. failure by the permittee to comply with any terms or conditions of the permit; c. exceeding the scope of the project as described in the permit application; d. newly discovered material information or a material change in environmental conditions, relevant technology or applicable law or regulations since the issuance of the existing permit; e. noncompliance with previously issued permit conditions, orders of the commissioner, any provisions of the Environmental Conservation Law or regulations of the Department related to the permitted activity. 6. Permit Transfer Permits are transferrable unless specifically prohibited by statute, regulation or another permit condition. Applications for permit transfer should be submitted prior to actual transfer of ownership. Page 5 of 6 AM dboff NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION IMF Facility DEC ID 1-4738-01843 NOTIFICATION OF OTHER PERMITTEE OBLIGATIONS Item A: Permittee Accepts Legal Responsibility and Agrees to Indemnification The permittee, excepting state or federal agencies, expressly agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Departi-rient of Environmental Conservation of the State of New York, its representatives, employees, and agents (""DEC"" ,for all claims, suits, actions, and damages, to the extent attributable to the pernlittee's acts or oinissiow.; in connection with the permittee's undertaking of activities in connection with, or operation and maintenance of, the facility or facilities authorized by the permit whether in compliance or not in compliance with the terrils, and conditions of the permit. This indemnification does not extend to any claims, suits, actions, or damages to the extent attributable to DEC's own negligent or intentional acts or omissions, or to any claims, suits, or actions naming the DEC and arising under Article 78 of the New York Civil Practice Laws and Rules or any citizen suit or civil rights provision under federal or state laws. Item B: Permittee's Contractors to Comply with Permit The permittee is responsible for informing its independent contractors, employees, agents and assigns of their responsibility to comply with this permit, including all special conditions while acting as the permittee's agent, with respect to the permitted activities, and such persons shall be subject to the same sanctions for violations of the Environmental Conservation Law as those prescribed for the permittee. Item C: Permittee Responsible for Obtaining Other Required Permits -of- The peri-nittee is responsible for obtaining any other permits, approvals, lands, easements and rights-of- way that may be required to carry out the activities that are authorized by this permit. Item D: No Right to Trespass or Interferemitwith Riparian 'Rights This pennit does not convey to the Pertee any right to trespass Lipon the lands or interfere with the riparian rights of others in order to perform the permitted work nor does it authorize the: impairment of any rights, title, or interest in real or personal property held or vested in a person not a party to the permit. Page 6 of 6 MArTTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT PO BOX 666, PIKE STREET MATTITUCK, NEW YORK 11952-0666 Commissioners David F. Haas, Chairman Brian K. Williams, Vice Chairman James D. Roache Jason P. Haas Edward Hanus Jr. March 5, 2020 Southold Town Planning Board Attn: Brian Cummings P O Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck (Strong's Storage Buildings) SCTM#: 1000-106.-6-13.4 Dear Mr. Cummings; Jessica Harris, Secretary Amy Ball, Treasurer .i c tiu.:h o � a. VW NaN°aningIf:.ia=rd The Mattituck Fire District and Mattituck Fire Chiefs have reviewed the above-mentioned Site Plan and do not have any recommendations as long as roads and drives within the site plan are constructed and maintained to Southold Town Code (280-109c). If you require any additional information please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Jessica Harris Fire District Secretary cc: Board of Fire Commissioners Chief Office (631) 298-8837 Facsimile (631) 298-8841 Submissioll Without a, Cover Letter Scade,r: C hour�ts cclkdd,�—� R, E C E I V E-.' D 56utfRild fown FlanNng Board &N� V Subject- gvc �3 SCTMP: 1000 ® � & - 4 rate: -3 1 Lo I r2 -O Comments: N, C'� PO �_w . (rein Csi�� AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING This is to serve notice that I personally posted the property known as 3U0 Mill Read Mattituck NY by placing the Town's official poster notice(s) within 10 feet of the front property line facing the street(s) where it can be easily seen, and that I have checked to be sure the poster has remained in place for at least seven days prior to the date of the public hearing on February 27, 2020 I have sent notices by certified mail — return receipt, the receipts and green return receipt cards of which are attached, to the owners of record of every property which abuts and every property which is across on 2 2 Charles R. Claddy Your Name (print) Signature I,' 445 Griffing Ave., Riverhead, NY -11901 Address ■ m Notary Public IWON a KODYM Notary Pr.Nic, t: f err FA oml Fork 0 u-cflified ir, S jjTfoji, GoLmty O�71mission Expires Cup ardo i 0, 20,,94 PLEASE RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT, CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS & GREEN RETURN RECEIPT CARDS BY. 12:00 noon Fri. 3/6/20 Re: Stroh 's Storage Buildings SCTM#s: 1000- 106-6-13.4 Date of Public Hearing: Monday, March 9 2020 6:02 p.m. J CO ..0 ru r - 0r ru I rq O O O M 0' M M CO r -q IM r- &/ —0 .0 r� EM I O M ,3 rz! 0 f`- 0 ti r - Er ru m ra 0 0 0 0 117 0 M 43 ra 0 r` d c It r m >�m mam M d c m d E d m E EL U la 0 (2r. W a PS Form 3806, April 2015, PSN 753 For dtxlI V-V/n bo Vired Mail Kiat .. Copy 1 - Customer 9 0t (See Information on neverse) information, visit our website at www.tisps.Corri M 9 :W m°.MMEMENSIMMEMMMIMMMMMMMM r` w m .m m,. li'Z r(�`r �x�mr "(71�awrrm fM CerClCled Ma I Fea � � ' � c) 3.51CO $., dim M Bona Serwices 8, Fobs ,hackh"addfr fate El Return (hardcopy)Receipt (hardcopy) $ � )vim r-1 ❑ Return Receipt (electronic) $ C3 ❑ Certftd Mall Restricted Delivery $ 41 ❑ Adult Signature Required $ ❑ Adult Signature Restricted'D6vary $ a� C3 Postage VJ m 515 -' 0 C36M µ' Total Postage and Fees CO rtTo r� � Stroh C3 S1ra�adt. it1r:, ar""erze�c. r- 1,'10 Bmx 1409 0 ru ti r%-- 117 ru %--0- ru CO M a 0 0 0 0 Er 0 M ra 0 r- NY 11952 negisierea jI Date Stamp Postage .,.. g 6=� d a Extra Services Fees Zeceived TE)ctraPd i DDs El Confirmation o ~ rwuS(ortter MU"'s' beCIare a ,W rrOrnIId saI� T t.. t.,t.t nlCestY 0 Signature Confirmation Full Value �hc b 1... f'�?d-t 20 RestrictedDelivery ) 7 �� ,- � � �rStr9P'N1 R4'GkYI� '. w�i_..m�, .�. r. �k"" 2820), --� � d c It r m >�m mam M d c m d E d m E EL U la 0 (2r. W a PS Form 3806, April 2015, PSN 753 For dtxlI V-V/n bo Vired Mail Kiat .. Copy 1 - Customer 9 0t (See Information on neverse) information, visit our website at www.tisps.Corri M 9 :W m°.MMEMENSIMMEMMMIMMMMMMMM r` w m .m m,. li'Z r(�`r �x�mr "(71�awrrm fM CerClCled Ma I Fea � � ' � c) 3.51CO $., dim M Bona Serwices 8, Fobs ,hackh"addfr fate El Return (hardcopy)Receipt (hardcopy) $ � )vim r-1 ❑ Return Receipt (electronic) $ C3 ❑ Certftd Mall Restricted Delivery $ 41 ❑ Adult Signature Required $ ❑ Adult Signature Restricted'D6vary $ a� C3 Postage VJ m 515 -' 0 C36M µ' Total Postage and Fees CO rtTo r� � Stroh C3 S1ra�adt. it1r:, ar""erze�c. r- 1,'10 Bmx 1409 0 ru ti r%-- 117 ru %--0- ru CO M a 0 0 0 0 Er 0 M ra 0 r- NY 11952 U e�'za ae"� $ Postage .,.. g 6=� d a �n�q'r�ttr d Delivery $ Zeceived { o ~ rwuS(ortter MU"'s' beCIare by ,W rrOrnIId saI� T t.. t.,t.t w , Full Value �hc b 1... f'�?d-t 20 �tlaludadba,e�tr dedarad vaQwa. incl $Indemnity is imlted. M � {�J�J IP � I�I � �� {�,�; �cf� rs,�,�;„, fl J✓ (+ "M1rmixw 9r r,�l611�rr ---- � ~� E 'o ® 7 d - l , d c It r m >�m mam M d c m d E d m E EL U la 0 (2r. W a PS Form 3806, April 2015, PSN 753 For dtxlI V-V/n bo Vired Mail Kiat .. Copy 1 - Customer 9 0t (See Information on neverse) information, visit our website at www.tisps.Corri M 9 :W m°.MMEMENSIMMEMMMIMMMMMMMM r` w m .m m,. li'Z r(�`r �x�mr "(71�awrrm fM CerClCled Ma I Fea � � ' � c) 3.51CO $., dim M Bona Serwices 8, Fobs ,hackh"addfr fate El Return (hardcopy)Receipt (hardcopy) $ � )vim r-1 ❑ Return Receipt (electronic) $ C3 ❑ Certftd Mall Restricted Delivery $ 41 ❑ Adult Signature Required $ ❑ Adult Signature Restricted'D6vary $ a� C3 Postage VJ m 515 -' 0 C36M µ' Total Postage and Fees CO rtTo r� � Stroh C3 S1ra�adt. it1r:, ar""erze�c. r- 1,'10 Bmx 1409 0 ru ti r%-- 117 ru %--0- ru CO M a 0 0 0 0 Er 0 M ra 0 r- NY 11952 V rq Ln ru r. Er- ru CO M ED 0 0 O Ir d M CO ra 0 r` ( i �7) q certified Medd rag Ij g 7.r ra - ces °ees 1°c(aacktatx ,,$Id oe grgl r5tep ❑Rase Receipt (herdcoPY) $ } t ❑Return Recelpt(electronic) 1 []Certified Mefi ReftWeud Delivery $ --- []Adult —❑Adult Signature Raqulmd $— ❑ Adult Signature Remtrtrdud at9 Delivery I .Postage 0 $ 6 F t e awn d ee gl 1)csrn & Jennifer 1� Gunr 9ra1 �a nr fiat Ata.. ivl itsn Via." _ «« . f � � L� i ru , m a. M g h q" S ru .�,�� ru erti led xiB i a - ,. r ' qt.a IZJ C>`rtVle Ih.+%41! i=l3q ❑ Return Receipt (hardcopy) ra I, $IIIb _, MISE� ❑ Retum Receipt (electronic) Postmark A I ,. ❑ CerddPlod Mall Ra:kriekcad Dredllveryiq $1 {._.. ❑ Refurn Receipt (hardcopy) $ µ r3 N � C ❑ Relum Receipt (electronic) $ q �, Postage rl 0 ❑CertiCedMail ReshictedDelNery a .l �' Total filclstage and Poles ; M Adult Signature Required ��`— ❑$ Here ` ❑Acd"rtr Slgngtum Restricted Delivery $ rO �u h i I Po;ttssa $tppr.;k Posta e e Pepe _____ __. aIFCW'eric4 Ay G IWa., or" �`Y t Via. _. tee, s n r# mm Il � 13 �. d✓ co SVV(Ta p 1 ir- ��1 p�'�� !... V rq Ln ru r. Er- ru CO M ED 0 0 O Ir d M CO ra 0 r` ( i �7) q certified Medd rag Ij g 7.r ra - ces °ees 1°c(aacktatx ,,$Id oe grgl r5tep ❑Rase Receipt (herdcoPY) $ } t ❑Return Recelpt(electronic) 1 []Certified Mefi ReftWeud Delivery $ --- []Adult —❑Adult Signature Raqulmd $— ❑ Adult Signature Remtrtrdud at9 Delivery I .Postage 0 $ 6 F t e awn d ee gl 1)csrn & Jennifer 1� Gunr 9ra1 �a nr fiat Ata.. ivl itsn Via." _ «« . sick, NY 11952 Y L� i ru , m a. r`- g h q" S .�,�� ru erti led xiB i a - EO M r ' qt.a E -Ira s�rr 755 tchock WY j6,O Baa, ppropl nw ❑ Return Receipt (hardcopy) ra I, $IIIb _, `� ❑ Retum Receipt (electronic) Postmark O ❑ CerddPlod Mall Ra:kriekcad Dredllveryiq $1 {._.. Here µ r3 ❑Aclut S9gnatura. Required ti $ _ []Addy: S partura Raatrlcted tdalCmuiryrW$„ " Postage Er �_ 55 a .l �' Total filclstage and Poles ; M N rO 'e dr sr� xk D3n E3 _____ __. aIFCW'eric4 Ay G IWa., or" �`Y t Via. _. sick, NY 11952 Er gIR ["w NTM mfried Mail Fee CO 3 rn F:jjr-a"g-ervices U-689 (chock bay, Oddle—,,t FWtivfn Receipt Owdoopy) $ r -I❑ Return Receipt (electronic) $ O C3 E] Gertilied Mail Restricted Delivery $ C3 []Adult Signature Required $ El Adult Signature ROI;ro!ed Delivery $ C-3 Postage Er $ C3 rn IThOl Postage and Fees $ 1,F 6 CO Set Tia ,-3 Set & Dorothy? Diemai c3 ---------- IF, R11r) ni- tituck, NY 11952 a r%- US C3 m 09 CO 6 Z, Al I I �"11 ire m m Postmark C3 Here C3 CD C3 a Ltttituck, NY 11952 m [r WE1,11 T ImmOmMI111i 111'1!`�I' syr0 Il- �iy 1 C3 r4'11"J4 "p, m =13 r. miry Ess lk Fee�, approwatO ❑ Fie Receipt (hardcopy) r RR n, Receipt (electronic) $0. 0 C3 C3 El Certlned Mail Restricted Dol$4i . [:]Adult Signature Required $C� � �.g . ... . ......... . 1-3 [] Adurt Signature Restricted Delivery $ C3 postage' 11 Tr $ PCI,, 55 C3 "fid Fees m $ ED Sent To r -q Town of Southold C3 "SER ifidXicMd" UFF69a ffd. r- Pn, 1��Y 117q Here su Southold, NY 11971 aim rq 6 Z, Al I I �"11 ire m m Ue-r-556d —MaJi Fee 0 A.1 cc $ CD 0 ERira, i Cas & -ees (ofteck x, add f.00,eat a drtrid „Return Receipt (hardcopy) Er r -q El Return Receipt (electronic) p4stmak"I" Ln T, Here C3 C3 Er []Adult Siltratum Ra., . fricted Wivety $ Ppskac rn r=1 0% 4 CO C3 m Cenul MWI Fee rn e. CD S FrA adg I fo, 01 as $ El Return Receipt (eectronic) ark M EX tra 5 ery 0 Ges a ox, [I Return Receipt (hardcopy) $ 0 C3 r -=I []Return Receipt (electmnle) $ 5tmark E:3 E] Carfiff9d Mail Restricted Delivery $ Er. -Oera C-3Ej C3 Adult Signature Required $ Sjgnntum ROMWORd MRV OTY $ '{1'( US& slid Fees CA C-3Er Postage 55 r '0 sent T 0 r -I 61 E3 tal postae and Fors, Noi& WfidA,�Te WdWFU Yaj -f4j; ----------------- - -------------- W1. m0- $ :P 0 .D 5entro 'hy Demaula Dorot C3 .. ...... ...................................... airUIR iMNif PU#6n F Pp r- 800 nartIL_.,Dx .......... ------------- ................... ...... Ltttituck, NY 11952 m [r WE1,11 T ImmOmMI111i 111'1!`�I' syr0 Il- �iy 1 C3 r4'11"J4 "p, m =13 r. miry Ess lk Fee�, approwatO ❑ Fie Receipt (hardcopy) r RR n, Receipt (electronic) $0. 0 C3 C3 El Certlned Mail Restricted Dol$4i . [:]Adult Signature Required $C� � �.g . ... . ......... . 1-3 [] Adurt Signature Restricted Delivery $ C3 postage' 11 Tr $ PCI,, 55 C3 "fid Fees m $ ED Sent To r -q Town of Southold C3 "SER ifidXicMd" UFF69a ffd. r- Pn, 1��Y 117q Here su Southold, NY 11971 aim rq 6 Z, Al I I �"11 ire m m Ue-r-556d —MaJi Fee 0 A.1 cc $ 0 ERira, i Cas & -ees (ofteck x, add f.00,eat a drtrid „Return Receipt (hardcopy) Er r -q El Return Receipt (electronic) p4stmak"I" r_4 T, Here C3 C3 C-3 []Adult Siltratum Ra., . fricted Wivety $ Ppskac rn Qertffie Mail Fea CO Er C-3 4 rn eW xtre services a -Ba Return Receipt (ggdc.opy) 2 r'9 r3 $ El Return Receipt (eectronic) ark C3 El CertMed Mail Restricted Delivery $ , 7 0 C3 E]Adult Signature Required $ r_3 0 Adult SiLTIalum Restricted Delivery $ Postage Er. C3 rn '{1'( US& slid Fees 6. °.^ 5 r '0 sent T 0 r -I Dnna M. Boscola C3 Noi& WfidA,�Te WdWFU Yaj -f4j; ----------------- - -------------- ................. r%_ Dn -D-.. IZO� Ltttituck, NY 11952 m [r WE1,11 T ImmOmMI111i 111'1!`�I' syr0 Il- �iy 1 C3 r4'11"J4 "p, m =13 r. miry Ess lk Fee�, approwatO ❑ Fie Receipt (hardcopy) r RR n, Receipt (electronic) $0. 0 C3 C3 El Certlned Mail Restricted Dol$4i . [:]Adult Signature Required $C� � �.g . ... . ......... . 1-3 [] Adurt Signature Restricted Delivery $ C3 postage' 11 Tr $ PCI,, 55 C3 "fid Fees m $ ED Sent To r -q Town of Southold C3 "SER ifidXicMd" UFF69a ffd. r- Pn, 1��Y 117q Here su Southold, NY 11971 aim rq 6 Z, Al I I �"11 ire m Ue-r-556d —MaJi Fee 0 A.1 cc $ m ERira, i Cas & -ees (ofteck x, add f.00,eat a drtrid „Return Receipt (hardcopy) Fvc b r -q El Return Receipt (electronic) p4stmak"I" C3 El Cortiffed Mall Restricted Delivery $ Here C3 []Adult Signature Required $ C-3 []Adult Siltratum Ra., . fricted Wivety $ Ppskac Z 03.1 C-3 Er C-3 $ Total Posts rid Foss Ij jz J m cE3 Sent To RusselJ. & Denise Zellner .. ........... E3 - --------- Wit ii6 dAR.-M; - Vi VdF 96ZW� '----- Pn,; hini-i'll ))t luck, NY 11952 ru N U U N U j Q T=i°C E s o '0O '0v o" N to Ir to U Y ICK C3 I ll m ortutle� Man r e z; 5 5 L CO # u c •,r mr $ N'U 7 ++0. m aaa erv6ces ees (WrocR lion add too 0gyp Op�ala;Y n r tV N — ❑ Return Receipt (hardcopy) $jN JO .-. ❑ Return Receipt (electronic) P ❑ Certilled Mall Restricted Delivery $ p Ca U U o E:3 E3[:]Adult Signature Required 7s- 0 a JJ ,0 "•ri . — ❑ Adult Stl$rum Restricted Dattvenr $ell v fl. T t .�••r o kl,P r E C a•r cco o Ir C-3 I lZ., `forte Imaatage and Fees m 13' CO rq Saw TO David W. Cooper -------- „„„„-----.---- r- 7;)n P,� , I , //I/`IWMI girlr�la rw�t�1 I TO 9 Cis d� d F p 0 0 y y W22 us00 Q > g U O N m OI 2 N a`mErO o corn¢ ❑❑❑ ❑ ❑❑ ;r m Z` > 0 m m m CL Le ® Cr ¢ F m2c m mp°'0=— °` a)5>0w0a 0 0 Q < �v0 QU ai❑❑❑❑❑❑ m r- CO ra O MOD l -CO COR c m r M ri ® 0 Z O ®00yo ® 0) Q ti `C3 ® y IT LO G M C) m CO E rq ICV r - Er ED 0 m CO m ra O 0 O O E' O m CO 0 r - .I U a) E O p w tly CO m cZ3 a b rq B I.. �� F �� I ^�• � ��.t� SII I ar C3 � 6P, 0 m Cer(Ifled Mafl Fee � rr m EY.VaSUVICUS& FOOSNdaekbwadd^ao eSp�Pa) ❑ Return Receipt (hardcopy) r9 ❑ Return Receipt (electronic) $ II 1-3 ❑ Certified Mall Restricted Delivery $ I r„,�,,,,,,r,•r _ r. r-3❑ Adult Signature Required $ O E] Adult Signature Restricted Delivery $ Md Er E:3 total Pastaaandre UI r n m g r: r co Sant To, ra Leigh T'. & Lauren P------------------ r- i 1' 'a Fi ren v 511 APIA Here M O O 0 0 of 0 m rn n� C' a N { T r � Co Cf E LL { CO a NY 11201 1x mm% 'n I '�Nb+S1 tlf!�.IY+M �lurwr n�uaa 1. em N U U N U j Q T=i°C E s o '0O '0v o" N to to U Y a U CaCa I CO U L N'U 7 ++0. F+ n r tV N — - CD rn m a •— E E mm e a) pi —4 U Ca U U o O 7s- 0 a JJ ,0 "•ri v fl. T t .�••r Q En PP 4J E C a•r cco o m U N 0 Cd U d . Q 0 rd 0.1 Cis d� d F p 0 0 y y W22 us00 Q > g U O N m OI 2 N a`mErO o corn¢ ❑❑❑ ❑ ❑❑ ;r m Z` > 0 m m m CL Le ® Cr ¢ F m2c m mp°'0=— °` a)5>0w0a 0 0 Q < �v0 QU ai❑❑❑❑❑❑ m r- CO ra O MOD l -CO COR c m r M ri ® 0 Z O ®00yo ® 0) Q ti `C3 ® y IT LO G M C) m CO E rq ICV r - Er ED 0 m CO m ra O 0 O O E' O m CO 0 r - .I U a) E O p w tly CO m cZ3 a b rq B I.. �� F �� I ^�• � ��.t� SII I ar C3 � 6P, 0 m Cer(Ifled Mafl Fee � rr m EY.VaSUVICUS& FOOSNdaekbwadd^ao eSp�Pa) ❑ Return Receipt (hardcopy) r9 ❑ Return Receipt (electronic) $ II 1-3 ❑ Certified Mall Restricted Delivery $ I r„,�,,,,,,r,•r _ r. r-3❑ Adult Signature Required $ O E] Adult Signature Restricted Delivery $ Md Er E:3 total Pastaaandre UI r n m g r: r co Sant To, ra Leigh T'. & Lauren P------------------ r- i 1' 'a Fi ren v 511 APIA Here M O O 0 0 of 0 m rn n� C' a N { T r � Co Cf E LL { CO a NY 11201 1x mm% 'n I '�Nb+S1 tlf!�.IY+M �lurwr n�uaa 1. em VVlllt.11GlG I1G111J 1, L Glllu v. Agent ii Print your name and address on the reverse ❑Agent so that we can return the card to you. Addresser Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, B. a ai ped' by (Printed Name) C. t of Deliver) or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: D. Is delivery address different from item 1 T ❑ Yes CynthiaKaminsky i If YES, enter delivery address below: E] No 75 Woodcliff Dr. Mattituck, NY 11952 1. —Article' -A' ddressed to: 3. Service Type ❑ Priority Mail Expresso I I I Jill I I 111111111111111111111111 III I Jill 1111111111 ❑ Adult Signature ' ❑Registered Mail-' If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No ❑ Adult Signature Restricted Delivery ❑ Registered Mail Restrict 9590 9402 5407 9189 3109 57 ❑Certified Mail@ : Delivery ❑ Certified Mail Restricted Delivery ❑ Return Receipt for ❑ Collect on Delivery Merchandise 2 -Article Number {7raitsfea,from service label) ; El Collect on Delivery Restricted Delivery ❑ Signature Confirmation ❑ Signature Confirmation 70,18 3 90 0001 3830 1798 ricted Delivery Restricted Delivery PS" Form 3811, July 2015 PSN 7530-02-000-9053 "Domestic Return Receipt Complete items 1, 2, and 3. gent Print your name and address on the reverse X&NoJ _tddres,,50 so that we can return the card to you a. by led Name) C. ate of °t`ver ■ Attach this card to the back of the mallplece, pa-,--�%Idrre or on the front if space perm)ts a .... D `Isedifferent from it 1T Y 's 1. Article Addressed to: �1f YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ p mr4,11 Toin of .SOu*. y. PO "Box 11.79 Southold, `NY III I66i l I VIII I I VIII it I I I I II II I III 3. Service Type 0 PrioIii TvIail RaR l s 01 � W • Adult SignatureRI Rest rls ❑ Adult Signature Restrcted Delivery 0 R �rad M❑Certifed Mailo Delivery rya Retun Recep for 41 ❑ Certified Mall Restricted MeroaandsoX590 1C25407 91$9 3108 ❑ Collecton Delivery n SSinahg6Confirmalla — ❑ Collect on Delivery Restricted Delivery ulcnahuae Confirmntsy 2 n.t� io Nllmhar f'rB nsler.from serylce sbtr!)'. ... n In�.,lras nail - R,astrinted Dell,YWX 7 018 , 3090 0001 3830 1934 I Restricted Delivery p�Ftrren 38. .. tJN�y.D15.P.�530 02 000 9055 Domestic Return"Rece _ ,.... , ,. m. 1, w Complete items 1, 2, and 3. r ❑Agent Print your name and address on the reverse ❑Address so that we can return the card to you. Attach this card to the back of the maiipieC , _ _ Received by (Printed Name) C. Date of Delive or on the front if space permits. 1. —Article' -A' ddressed to: D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑ Yes North Fork Project LLC If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No c/o David J. Jannuzzi, Esq.' 13235 Main Road Mattituck, NY 11952 3. Service Type ❑ Priority Mail Expre ssoIII II I Jill li I IIII I 11111111111111 I Jill I ❑AdultSignature oRegistered MailT"liIII ❑At Signature Restricted Delivery ❑ Registered Mail Restri 9590 9402 5407 9189 3109 02 ❑Certified Mail@ ❑ Certified Mail Restricted Delivery Delivery ❑ Return R+scolpt for 2. Article Number (Transfer ransfer from service Prtbe,� — ❑ Collect on Delivery Collect on Delivery Restricted Delivery Mer ttanddse El Signature Confirmatioi El Signature Confirmatioi .7 018 3090 0001 8 3 18 66 stricted Delivery Restricted Delivery i PS Form 38T1, July 2015 PSN 7530-02-000-9053 Domestic Return Recei, Complete items 1, z, anu o. Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits, 1, Article t�d'dressed to: James B. Kaminsky 75 Woodcliff Dr. Mattituck, NY 11952 II �,�IIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 9590 9402 5407 9189 3109 40 �.. �.. f 2 �„�.„�,yd,.r,r,,,,��„,>r �Trancfar from service it4i;eii. 1 3830 PS Form 3811, July 2015 PSN 7531 lD 0-9053 D. is delivery If YES, enter deelivery address below: 3. Service Type I i Regi grad Malh A ❑ duVt Signature 0 Adult Signature Restricted 004 very f 1 Dehe� �taii Restricted ❑ Certified Mall r 0 Return Receipt 10f rj Cedi ied Mall ScstrGG� DOTIVM f0eichan&s'a CV Collect on Delivery 0 Siti ndatarce Confln-ns it�lon'l' ❑ Collect on Delivery Restricted Delivery 0 SignaturR Contwr1naV¢3n .� . _ ....._ RestA'lotedi�r,Nivarlr 18 0 4 lestricted Delivery 7 018 31 9 0 0 0 0 &�arnestwd Return Receipt 'w Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to�_...�..,.. Donald Leogrande Joseph#Leogrande Jr. 80 Wrdsor Ave. Mineola, NY 11501 A. �? i ature ❑ Agent B. Received by (Printed Name) C. D to of Del D. Is deliveryaddress different rent from item 1? Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No 9. Service Type ❑ Priority Mail Express® 'I I I I I I I I II ❑ Adult Signature ❑ Registered MaiITM' Regi II I I I III I I I II I I I IIII II II ❑ Adult Signature Restricted Delivery ❑ Registered Mail Restricted ❑ Certified Mal:0 Deis%'aryr 9590 9402 5407 9189 3108 72 ❑ Certified Mall Restricted Delivery ❑ Retom Receipt for Collect• on Delivery ❑ Collect on Delivery Restricted Delivery i'°terrha ndise ❑ Signature Confirmationn” to NtNRtr q lra!rashbr ir¢arra seri¢ Pebe �,,....�._�,. ❑ Signature Confirmation 7 018 3090 0001 3830 1897 Restricted Delivery Restricted Delivery OCi n -.tin P.tnrn Po .Pint Registered No. Date Stamp yy �Rea,.ived by dwlare,d liON(WWWO 20i Indemn4 isvalue IWW. (Sin Reverse) nFFICIAI ............. USE PS Form 3806, Regisie,rei April 2015, PSN 7530,02-000.y057 Bi Copy 2 - Post Office M 7018 31190 0001».,3829 7244 a) 01 01 0 mm a) 0 0 Ir gffi� - ,'Er -MMI E 0 w -22 OEM' OF F I C I A Li. E E3 a) 000 0 00 Certified Mail Fee M 2 00 Mxtra. Services& Fees (checkbox, add fee asappmpfi,(p)ti ❑Return Receipt (hardcopy) . ..... . r -q ❑ Return Receipt (e!ecironic) t Postmark a) Certified Mail Restricted Da6vory Here E] Adult Signature Required O []Adult Signatum Restricted Delivery19,07 M Postage o: Cdc co, Ir $ co a) ID C Total Postage and Fees CM M'Cb a) C/I Cz $ I co Smt To -1� x Cd Ci -06 . Er Mary, E. Guyton Irrev ocable �i ri a in a ( i -i i co -------- --------- . ...... ED Er .............................. CO *'Yo'Mo"13to, ON, Canada M6RIGI (D ED M P a) M C) (1) a CY) > co Cal M 0 E (D Q) 9 N 0 � -Q rq 9 .2 -.5 �> [:I (D Q, 0 co cl) -2 C14 ED I_ co0 LO CMM Z 00 123 a a) 6 �-4 ca 0 ) CL Co - - -C 0 0 C:) C:) 1 E E So m t :5 o (D -0 C-) L) 5 U) i It T-.: �4 0 0) :E a) v 0 cr) 0) z 0 LID 4) E CC: a) P4 E 0 0 �4 P '.0 0 V U) < 1.2 ■ S"11111, Atli, a M: AGRICULTURAL DATA STATEMENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD When to use this form: This form must be completed by the applicant for any special use permit, site plan approval, use variance or subdivision approval on property within an agricultural district OR within 500 feet of a farm operation located in an agricultural district. All applications requiring this form must be referred to the Suffolk County Planning Commission in accordance with Sections 239-m and 239-n of the General Municipal Law. Applicant Name: Strong's West Mill LLC Address: 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, NY 11952 Land Owner (if other than applicant): Land Owner Address: Description of Proposed Project: This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the Mil and R-80 Zoning Districts where there is 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. Property Location (road and tax map #): 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck, NY 11952; SCTM#1000-106-6-13.4 Is this parcel actively farmed? Yes No Names & addresses of any landowners within the agricultural district containing active farm operations located 500 feet of the boundary of the proposed project: SCTM#1000-106-9-2.3: David W. Cooper, P.O. Box 16, Mattituck, NY 11952 v/SCTM#1000-106-9-4.9: Denmelexnic Farms LLC, 1845 Central Drive, Mattituck, NY 11952 Attach a tax map or other map showing the site of the property where the project is proposed relative to the location of farm operations identified above. Applicant/Agent Signature Date OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY February 11, 2020 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www. southoldtownny. gov Re: SEQR Classification & Set Hearing - Strong's Storage Buildings 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck S CT M# 1000-106.-6-13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: The following resolutions were adopted at a meeting of the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, February 10, 2020: WHEREAS, this site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) 6 NYCRR, Part 617, has determined that the proposed action is a Type I action pursuant to 617.4(b)(10): Any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space„ including any site on the Register of National Natural. Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994 [see 617.171. The physical alteration of 3.74 acres exceeds 25% of the 10 acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6); be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board has determined that this proposed action is an Type I Action under SEQRA as described above; and be it further RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board sets Monday, March 9, 2020 at 6:02 p.m. for a Public Hearing regarding the Site Plan entitled "Strong's Yacht Center" prepared by Tom Wolpert, P.E. dated July 3, 2018 and last revised November 20, 2018. trop s Storage Buildings Page 2 February 11, 2020 The public hearing packet regarding the Town's notification procedure and the sign & post will need to be picked up at the Planning Board Office at the Southold Town Annex when you are contacted to do so. Please return the Affidavit of Posting,included in the packet.,along with the certified mailing receipts AND the signed -,,green return receipt cards before 12:00 noon on Friday, arch 6, 2020. The sign and the post need to be returned to the Planning Board Office after the public hearing is closed. If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this resolution, please contact the Planning Board Office. Respectfully, r Donald J. Wilcenski Chairman Encl. 116 - Notice to Adjacent Property Owners Strongs Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, NY SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 ,/1. 106.,-43 C a,/21 107.....1-1.2-- I�r �� ,/2. 07.....1-1.2-- ,/2. 106.-4®4 /3. x..06....4....5 M ,/4. 106.....4....6 v/5. 106.....6- x. -A\AJC -Docv-s,Ja i. -L -C A 106.-6..3 S . .. .. (NFPooSPc.6' /7. 1.06.-6-5 (-a.Si-c, 8. :1..0Q.......6....7..... L ''S ,/9. 106.....6....8 V� , L DJ V1.0. 10& V1.1. °1..06.-6....'1..3.7 9, \�1.2. 106.,-6 20.1.. .-T (yJ C61LA fv\n� e, ✓ 13. 106.....6....20..3 - 'rov A \/1.A 106.....6-23 - 7-_e&jCr 115. x..06.....6.....3&2 - p1 J�. 1�e M.(AuW- 3, N 416. 1.06. 6 38.3 -- (.-) , -TUSLX) V17.. 1,06. 9 4A.— ,\11& 106.....9....4.9 Z) A9. 106.-9-4.10 hO. 106.-9-4.11 ,/2L 1.07.....1....1.3 V\ o 22. 1.07. 1. 11.- ftf� F C Wev,TC�A4' Southold Town Planning Board Notice to Adiacent Property Owners You are hereby given notice: 1. That the undersigned has applied to the Planning Board of the Town of Southold for a Site Plan; 2. That the property which is the subject of the application is located adjacent to your property and is described as follows: SCTM#1000-106-6-13.4; 3. That the property which is the subject of this application is located in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts; 4. This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there is 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings.; 5. That the files pertaining to this application are open for your information during normal business days between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. in the Planning Department located in the Town Hall Annex on the corner of Youngs Ave. & NYS Rte. 25, Southold (2nd Fl., Former Capital One Bank). If you have any questions, you can call the Planning Board Office at (631)765-1938. Information can also be obtained via the internet: 1. Go to the Town of Southold website yrww.soutlioldtownnny.gov, 2. Click on Town Records Weblink/Laserfiche icon located on the home page; 3. Click on "Planning Dept." folder; 4. Click on "Applications", then "Site Plans", then "Pending"; 5. Click on the SCTM# (tax map #) of the application (found in #2 above). Or by sending an e-mail message to: Jessica M southoKJtcLwnny.gov; 6. That a public hearing will be held on the matter by the Planning Board on Monday March 9. 2020 at 6:02 p.m. in the Meeting Hall at Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold; that a notice of such hearing will be published at least five days prior to the date of such hearing in The Suffolk Times published in the Town of Southold; that you or your representative have the right to appear and be heard at such hearing. Petitioner/Owner Name: Strong's West Mill LLC Date: 2/14/20 Notice to Adjacent Property Owners Strongs Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, NY SCTM #1000-106.-6-13.4 1. 106.-4-3 23. 107.-1-12 2. 106.-4-4 3. 106.-4-5 4. 106.-4-6 5. 106.-6-1 6. 106.-6-3 7. 106.-6-5 8. 106.-6-7 9. 106.-6-8 10. 106.-6-13.1 11. 106.-6-13.7 12. 106.-6-20.1 13. 106.-6-20.3 14. 106.-6-23 15. 106.-6-38.2 16. 106.-6-38.3 17. 106.-9-4.1 18. 106.-9-4.9 19. 106.-9-4.10 20. 106.-9-4.11 21. 107.-1-1.3 22. 107.4-11 _� � _ _. _. u R _ — � 3 r LZ �0 R P- \ � 3 s `� �. O Ike i z, ,j 10, ota e � WTI Coe Cook 09 x DDD- \- -" , -, " \ e 3 1 oil \ '( _ r fif _ a 3 —( lk— i r F z :ys c9 souCOUNTYOFSUFFOLK cl E _ �" 106 �T 5 ceA en �v 03 YI Nc :1 T2, to 04 z7 -4t 'vi 02 ", Z, Al --K '--C 099 of 03 YI Nc :1 T2, to 04 z7 -4t 'vi 02 ", Z, Al --K '--C 099 � vas � T- f r 05 IN 41 13 MEN r� z _ Y s 3 _ _ r- z x t a: f X l t �. , y r �c..e { Pte° w _ v z_ AGRICULTURAL DATA STATEMENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD When to use this form: This form must be completed by the applicant for any special use permit, site plan approval, use variance or subdivision approval on property within an agricultural district OR within 500 feet of a farm operation located in an agricultural district. All applications requiring this form must be referred to the Suffolk County Planning Commission in accordance with Sections 239-m and 239-n of the General Municipal Law. Applicant Name: Strong's West Mill LLC Address: 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, NY 11952 Land Owner (if other than applicant): Land Owner Address: Description of Proposed Project: This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there is 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. Property Location (road and tax map #): 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck, NY 11952; SCTM#1000-106-6-13.4 Is this parcel actively farmed? Yes No Names & addresses of any landowners within the agricultural district containing active farm operations located 500 feet of the boundary of the proposed project: SCTM#1000-106-9-2.3: David W. Cooper, P.O. Box 16, Mattituck, NY 11952 SCTM#1000-106-9-4.9: Denmelexnic Farms LLC, 1845 Central Drive, Mattituck, NY 11952 Attach a tax map or other map showing the site of the property where the project is proposed relative to the location of farm operations identified above. Z�, Ji blti We �l7 ie3 � T-41 .y , = t- t s t i m •+ �. IS i C E SECTIONNO COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ---_ ProP dyTaxSA Real 106 .nar ,--, 11 ....,� -- >a ___ ---- • :..... .. - ck P2, 1 I W n, AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING This is to serve notice that I personally posted the property known as by placing the Town's official poster notice(s) within 10 feet of the front property line facing the streets) where it can be easily seen, and that I have checked to be sure the poster has remained in place for at least seven days prior to the date of the public hearing on I have sent notices by certified mail — return receipt, the receipts and green return receipt cards of which are attached, to the owners of record of every property which abuts and every property which is across on Your Name (print) Signature Address Date Notary Public PLEASE RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT, CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS & GREEN RETURN RECEIPT CARDS BY. 12:00 noon, Fri., 3/6/20 Re: Stronq's Storage Buildings SCTM#s: 1000- 106-6-13.4 Date of Public Hearing: IVlonday March 9, 2020, 6:02 p.m. From: Cummings, Brian A. '�I b %'A44) , rYr7'R( , Sent: Friday, February 14, 2020 2:44 PM To: Michaelis, Jessica Subject: FW: 5780 West Mill Rd. TM# 106.-6-13.4 Strongs Storage Bldg. From: Baylinson, Lester Sent: Friday, February 14, 2020 2:29 PM To: Cummings, Brian A. Cc: Silleck, Mary Subject: 5780 West Mill Rd. TM# 106.-6-13.4 Strongs Storage Bldg. Hi Brian, no open violations at this time. OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD To: Lester Baylinson, Code Enforcement Officer "z Robert Fisher, Fire Marshal James Easton, Fire Marshal From: Brian Cummings, Planner Date: February 13, 2020 Re: Request for Review: Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www. southoldtownny. gov The Planning Board refers this application to you for your information, comments, review, and any violations on record, if applicable. This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,0300 sq, ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R- 80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. Thank you for your cooperation. Laserfiche: Planning, Applications, Site Plans, Pending, SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 *— io R S �`��`s �-►'1'�� `�Q OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www. southoldtownny. gov To: Elizabeth Thompson, Chairperson, Architectural Review Committee From: Brian Cummings, Planne� Date: February 13, 2020 Re: Request for Review: Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 The Planning Board refers this Site Plan Application to your committee for your review and comments. This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. Thank you. Encls: Site Plan Application Building Elevations Laserfiche: Planning, Applications, Site Plans, Pending, 1000-106.-6-13.4 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ti I li - A I I To: Michael J. Verity, Chief Building Inspector Amanda Nunemaker, Plans Examiner From: Brian Cummings, Planneg;,, MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www. sontholdt ownny. gov Date: February 13, 2020 Re: Request for Review: Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 The Planning Board refers this application to you for your information, comments, review, and certification, if applicable. This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq,. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. Thank you for your cooperation. Encls: Site Plan Application Site Plan OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD To: Lester Baylinson, Code Enforcement Officer Robert Fisher, Fire Marshal James Easton, Fire Marshal From: Brian Cummings, Planner Date: February 13, 2020 Re: Request for Review: Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www. southoldtownny. gov The Planning Board refers this application to you for your information, comments, review, and any violations on record, if applicable. This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R- 80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. Thank you for your cooperation. Laserfiche: Planning, Applications, Site Plans, Pending, SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www. southoldt ownny. gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD To: Michael Collins, Town Engineer From: Brian Cummings, Planne Date: February 13, 2020 Re: Proposed Site Plan for Strongs Storage Buildings Application Name: Strongs Storage Buildings Tax Map Number: 1000-106.-6-13.4 Location: 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck Type of Application: Sketch Subdivision Map Preliminary Subdivision Map Final Subdivision Map Road Profiles Grading and Drainage Plans Other ,l Site Plan Revised Site Plan Grading and Drainage Plans Other (AS BUILT) Dated: Dated: Dated: Dated: Dated: Dated: Dated: 713/18 rev. 11120/18 Dated: Dated: Dated: Proiect Descri tion: This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. Your comments are appreciated by March 13, 2020. Thank you for your cooperation. OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD To: Mark Terry, LWRP Coordinator From: Brian Cummings, Planner—lr— Date: February 13, 2020 Re: Request for Review: Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov The Planning Board refers this application to you for your information, comments, review, and certification, if applicable. The file is available at your convenience. This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R- 80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. Thank you for your cooperation. OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov To: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation From: Brian Cummings, PlanneC) Date: February 13, 2020 Re: Proposed Site Plan Application Review — • Request for Comments pursuant to Southold Town Code §280-131 • SEQR Lead Agency Request • Coordinated Review under SEQR The purpose of this request is to seek comments from your agency as part of the coordinated review under Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617. Please provide the following, as applicable: 1. Comments or requirements the Planning Board should take into consideration while reviewing the proposed project; 2. Issues of concern you believe should be evaluated; 3. Your jurisdiction in the action described below; 4. Your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead agency under SEQR. The lead agency will determine the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on this project. Within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter, please respond in writing whether or not you have an interest in being lead agency. The following page contains information pertaining to the project under review. For further information, please feel free to contact this office. Strongs Storage Buildings — Page 2 — February 13, 2020 Planning Board Position: (x) This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action. () This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency status for this action. () Other (see comments below) Comments: Project Name: Strongs Storage Buildings Address: 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck Tax Map #: 1000-106.-6-13.4 Requested Action: This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. SEQRA Classification: (X) Type I ( ) Type II ( ) Unlisted Contact Person; Brian Cummings, Planner (631) 765-1938 Enclosures: • Site Plan Application Form • Site Plan(s) • Environmental Assessment Form N OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM To: Suffolk County Department of Health Services From: Brian Cummings, PlanneE) Date: February 13, 2020 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www. southoldtownny. gov RE: Proposed Site Plan Application Review — • Request for Comments pursuant to Southold Town Code §280-131 • SEQR Lead Agency Request • Coordinated Review under SEQR The purpose of this request is to seek comments from your agency as part of the coordinated review under Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617. Please provide the following, as applicable: 1. Comments or requirements the Planning Board should take into consideration while reviewing the proposed project; 2. Issues of concern you believe should be evaluated; 3. Your jurisdiction in the action described below; 4. Your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead agency under SEQR. The lead agency will determine the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on this project. Within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter, please respond in writing whether or not you have an interest in being lead agency. The following page contains information pertaining to the project under review. For further information, please feel free to contact this office. Strongs Storage Buildings — Page 2 — February 13, 2020 Planning Board Position: (x) This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action. () This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency status for this action. () Other (see comments below) Comments: Project Name: Strongs Storage Buildings Address: 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck Tax Map #: 1000-106.-6-13.4 Requested Action: This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. SEQRA Classification: (X) Type I ( ) Type II ( ) Unlisted Contact Person: Brian Cummings, Planner (631) 765-1938 Enclosures: Site Plan Application Form Site Plan(s) Environmental Assessment Form 2 Appendix A - County Referral For Appendix A— Suffolk County Planning Commission Guidebook Municipality: Hamlet: Matfituck Local Case Number: District: JA0 Section: 106 Block: 6 Lot: 13.4 Local Meeting Date: Application/Action Name: Public Hearing: CE)No f Referral: SE QRA Action, Referring enc : Draft EIS Positive Declaration rannanq Board orCommissi New EAF Final EIS Negative Declaration Zoning board of Appeals Expansion Lead Agency Findings Town Board/ Village Board of Modification Draft Scope Trustees No N/A Brief description of application or proposed action This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings Type of Action Please check appropriate box below if action is located within the Suffolk County Pine Barrens Zone, within one mile of a nuclear power plant or airport or within 500 feet of., • Arrvicip l boundary, • The bourxk3y of any _sbrg or proposed c -M, state, Cr federal park or Ctha recreation area; • The nght-cfww of any eastirg or proposed Carty Cr state road; • Pn Oastirg or pgxosed oarty dam dgrei line; • The Mantic Cbeat Long Island Sound, any bay in Slffdk OmM or estuary of any of the foregoing bodies of vuder, • The barxt3y of party, state, or federally armed lard held or to be held for gvism vy21 use; • The barclay of afam Ionated in an agiaAL al dstrict Comprehensive Plan (Adoption or Amendment) Subdivision Zoning Ordinance or Map (Adoption or Amendment) Code Amendment Official Map Moratorium Use Variance Area Variance Special Use Permit/Exception/Conditional Use Site Plan 4 Note: The above represents a summary of the required actions subject to referral to the Suffolk County Planning Commission. The provisions of GML and Laws of Suffolk County must be used to verify which actions are subject to referral and the related procedural requirements. Additional Application Information - Action Previously Referred to Suffolk County Planning Commission Yes No 4 (If yes, Date ) • Adjacent Municipality Notified (see NYS GML 239 nn) Yes No N/A • Located Within Long Island Pine Barrens Zone Yes No • Workforce/Affordable Housing Yes No N/A • Energy Efficiency Yes No N/A • Zoning Board of Appeals Approval Yes No N/A • Suffolk County Department of Health Approval/Comments Yes No N/A • New York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation Approval/Comments Yes No N/A • New York State/ Suffolk County Dept. of Public Works Approval/Comments Yes No N/A • Suffolk County Sanitary Code Article 6, Groundwater Management Zone - I it III IV V VI VII VIII Contact Information Municipality Town of Southold Contact Name: Department/Agency: Plannina Department Brian Cummings Phone Number: 631-765-1938 Email Address: brian.cummin s town.southold.,n .us Applicant: Strongs Yacht Center Contact: Charles Cuddy Name: Applicant Address: 5780 west Mill road 631-369-8200 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM To: Suffolk County Planning Commission From: Brian Cummings, Planner Date: February 13, 2020 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov Re: Proposed Site Plan Application Review — • Request for Comments pursuant to Southold Town Code §280- 131 • SEQR Lead Agency Request • Coordinated Review under SEQR The purpose of this request is to seek comments from your agency as part of the coordinated review under Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617. Please provide the following, as applicable: 1. Comments or requirements the Planning Board should take into consideration while reviewing the proposed project; 2. Issues of concern you believe should be evaluated; 3. Your jurisdiction in the action described below; 4. Your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead agency under SEQR. The lead agency will determine the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on this project. Within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter, please respond in writing whether or not you have an interest in being lead agency. The following page contains information pertaining to the project under review. For further information, please feel free to contact this office. Strongs Storage Buildings Page 2 February 13, 2020 Planning Board Position: (x) This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action. () This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency status for this action. () Other (see comments below) Comments: Project Name: Strongs Storage Buildings Address: 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck Tax Map #: 1000-106.-6-13.4 Requested Action: This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. SEQRA Classification: (X) Type I ( ) Type II ( ) Unlisted Contact Person: Brian Cummings, Planner (631) 765-1938 Enclosures: Site Plan Application Form Site Plan(s) Environmental Assessment Form 2 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM To: Suffolk County Water Authority (SCWA) From: Brian Cummings, Planne,&�, Date: February 13, 2020 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov Re: Proposed Site Plan Application Review — • Request for Comments pursuant to Southold Town Code §280-131 • SEQR Lead Agency Request • Coordinated Review under SEQR The purpose of this request is to seek comments from your agency as part of the coordinated review under Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617. Please provide the following, as applicable: 1. Comments or requirements the Planning Board should take into consideration while reviewing the proposed project; 2. Issues of concern you believe should be evaluated; 3. Your jurisdiction in the action described below; 4. Your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead agency under SEQR. The lead agency will determine the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on this project. Within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter, please respond in writing whether or not you have an interest in being lead agency. The following page contains information pertaining to the project under review. For further information, please feel free to contact this office. Strongs Storage Buildings — Page 2 — February 13, 2020 Planning Board Position: (x) This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action. () This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency status for this action.. () Other (see comments below) Comments: Project Name: Strongs Storage Buildings Address: 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck Tax Map #: 1000-106.-6-13.4 Requested Action: This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. SEQRA Classification: (X) Type I ( ) Type II ( ) Unlisted Contact Person: Brian Cummings, Planner (631) 765-1938 Enclosures: Site Plan Application Form Site Plan(s) Environmental Assessment Form 2 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY February 13, 2020 Mr. John Harrison c/o Mattituck Fire District P.O. Box 666 Mattituck, NY 11952 s PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov Re: Request for Review: Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 Dear Mr. Harrison: The enclosed Site Plan Application is being referred to you for your comment on matters of interest to the fire department, including fire department equipment access, emergency services, and any other issue that may be of concern or relevance to this application. Please respond with your recommendations at your earliest convenience. This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R- 80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. Please contact me at (631)765-1938 if you have any questions. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, CS, Brian Cummings Planner Encls.: Site Plan Application Site Plan OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM To: Scott A. Russell, Supervisor Members of the Town Board Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk cc: Town Attorney From: Brian Cummings, Planner,- , --4f Date: February 13, 2020 Re: Request for Review: Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www. southoldtownny. gov The Planning Board refers this application to you for your information, comments, review, and a determination of jurisdiction, if applicable. This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. Thank you for your cooperation. Laserfiche: Planning, Applications, Site Plans, Pending, SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY February 12, 2020 Charles Cuddy Esq. P.O. Box 1547 , Riverhead, NY 11901 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www. southoldtownny. gov Re: Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Boatyard Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, ±600' s/e/o Naugles Drive & West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: I am writing as a follow-up to the Work Session held on February 10, 2020, where the Planning Board accepted the above -referenced Site Plan for review. The Planning Board, its Staff, Town Departments and relevant agencies will provide additional comments following full review. If you have any questions regarding this site plan or its process, please do not hesitate to call this office. Respectfully, 0`V1.._ S Brian Cummings Planner OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY February 11, 2020 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www. southoldtownny. gov Re: SEQR Classification & Set Hearing - Strong's Storage Buildings 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck S CT M# 1000-106.-6-13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: The following resolutions were adopted at a meeting of the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, February 10, 2020: WHEREAS, this site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) 6 NYCRR, Part 617, has determined that the proposed action is a Type I action pursuant to 617.4(b)(10): Any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space„ including any site on the Register of National Natural. Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994 [see 617.171. The physical alteration of 3.74 acres exceeds 25% of the 10 acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6); be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board has determined that this proposed action is an Type I Action under SEQRA as described above; and be it further RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board sets Monday, March 9, 2020 at 6:02 p.m. for a Public Hearing regarding the Site Plan entitled "Strong's Yacht Center" prepared by Tom Wolpert, P.E. dated July 3, 2018 and last revised November 20, 2018. trop s Storage Buildings Page 2 February 11, 2020 The public hearing packet regarding the Town's notification procedure and the sign & post will need to be picked up at the Planning Board Office at the Southold Town Annex when you are contacted to do so. Please return the Affidavit of Posting,included in the packet.,along with the certified mailing receipts AND the signed -,,green return receipt cards before 12:00 noon on Friday, arch 6, 2020. The sign and the post need to be returned to the Planning Board Office after the public hearing is closed. If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this resolution, please contact the Planning Board Office. Respectfully, r Donald J. Wilcenski Chairman Encl. Southold Town Planning Board Work Session — Februa[y 10, 2020 — Page 2 Project, Name, Location: Description Status: Action: Attachments Approval Extension StaffReport Attachments: � Staff Report Project Name'. Location Description Status New Application Action: .. .... ...... . . Completeness Attachments: Staff Report . . ..... .. . . . ..... ... .... . . . Project Name: Zupa & Paradise Point HOA SCTM#:' 1000-81-1-16.7 & Resubdivision 1000-81-3-29 Location: 580 Basin Road, Southold Description., This resubdivision proposes to transfer 5,240 sq. ft. from SCTM#1000- 81.-1-16.7, the residential parcel, to SCTM#1000-81.-3-29, the road parcel, in order to provide one contiguous common access to the docks owned by the Paradise Point Association. As a result of this resubdivision, SCTM#1 000-81.-1-16.7 will decrease from 75,533 sq. ft. to 70,293 sq. ft., and SCTM#1000-81.-3-29 will increase from 20,512 sq. ft. to 25,752 sq. ft. The Zoning Board of Appeals approved the undersized lot area in variance File: 7186. This parcel is located at 580 Basin Road, +/- 500 ft west of Paradise Point Road, in the R-80 Zoning District, Southold. Status* Pending Action: Completeness Attachments. Staff Report Southold Planning Department Staff Report Site Plan Application Work Session — Update Date Prepared By: I. Application Information Project Title: Applicant: Date of Submission Tax Map Number: Project Location: Hamlet: Zoning District: II. Description of Project Type of Site Plan: Acreage of Project Site Building Size February 10, 2020 Brian Cummings Strong's Boatyard Buildings Strongs Yacht Center July 20, 2018 106.-6-10 & 13.4 5780 West Mill Road Mattituck Split R — 80 / Marine II (M -II) Commercial ±33 acres (R80 @ 16.5ac + MII @ 16.5 ac) 101,500 sq. ft. This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R- 80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. III: Application Overview .................. ....................�......�____...... SPlan ...................................................m .1.e..e.n.ta.l....P.1.a.nsite �p..... �...............................�..... 1 of 7: General Layout Plan .......�.�.�................��t _..S4 Excavation Phasing Plan e and 2 of 7: Landsca ali p gnment plan Landscape Detail Plan . Sheet 1 & Sheet 2 Tree Removal Plan a i .....e......_ 3 of 7:�Gradinq & Draina e Plan 4 of 7: Utilit Plan / Documents ____,_Forms 5 of 7: Utility Plan NFull EAF revised 1/21/20; EAF attachment revised 12/2/19 itarV Details of 7: Water &San.. n... LWRP revised 12/2/19 .................................. 7 of 7: Photometric Plan & Details 1. Existing: commercial boatyard in MII zone with ±69,245 sq. ft. of existing buildings and vacant woodland in R-80 zone. There is a significant elevation change from the existing building area to the new area (±43 ft. grade change) a. R — 80: 718,474 sq. ft. (16.49 ac) b. M — II: 717,085 sq. ft. (16.46 ac) i. Wetlands area: 27,333 sq. ft. 1 ii. Buildable lands: 689,752 sq. ft. iii. Existing building area: 69,245 sq. ft. 2. Proposed: a. Boat Storage Building #1: 140' x 375' (52,500 sq. ft.) 1 — story b. Boat Storage Building #2: 140'x 350' (49,000 sq. ft.) 1 — story i. Proposed building area: 101,500 sq. ft. ii. Total area of disturbance: 171,929 sq. ft. (3.9 ac area of disturbance) iii. The current proposal is to bring the elevation of the higher area down to the lower level which would require 134,921 CY (cut) of earthwork / sand / soil removal. This is a major project in an environmentally sensitive area. c. Four (4) 2,000 gal. LP above ground tanks d. Water supply (765' public water extension from Mill Rd; 1,162 gpd); e. New sanitary system (standard sanitary system; 1,165 gpd); f. Grading and drainage i. 134,921 CY (cut) of earthwork proposed; cut into higher elevation and slope requiring sand & soil removal. ii. Proposed retaining walls along west and north sides of proposed build -out: 1. 124' long Naturally Vegetated section of wall a. (proposed to be filled with topsoil to allow for seeding by wildlife) 2. 80' long "Retaining Wall — West" landscaped section a. Plant with a mix of shrubs and groundcover 3. 370' long naturally vegetated section of wall a. (proposed to be filled with topsoil to allow for seeding by wildlife) B 4. 157' long "Retaining Wall — North" landscaped section of wall g. Landscaping and lighting 3. SEQRA: the action is classified as Type I under SEQRA, pursuant to: 617.4(b)(10) "any Unlisted action, that exceeds 25 percent of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space, including any site on the Register of National Natural Landmarks pursuant to 36 CFR Part 62, 1994 [see 617.17], or" The physical alteration of 3.9 acres exceeds 25% of the 10 acre threshold listed in 617.4(b)(6) below. 617.4(b)(6) "activities, other than the construction of residential facilities, that meet or exceed any of the following thresholds, or the expansion of existing non-residential facilities by more than 50 percent of any of the following thresholds: • A project or action that involves the physical alteration of 10 acres, 4. Code requirements / Bulk Schedule (MII): a. Lot Coverage i. Maximum: 30% ii. Existing: 10% iii. Proposed: 24.8% b. Landscaped Area: i. Minimum: 20% ii. Proposed: 37.2'`% 5. With reference to the Planning Board letter dated January 15 2020: Corrected Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) Page 2 of 13 B.i.iii The applicant responded yes to the project being located within the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area. This is incorrect. The project is not located within the area. I C.2.b. The parcel is located within the NYS Heritage Areas: Long Island Heritage Area. The response to the question is "Yes". Page 7 of 13 D.2.j The response to the question is incorrect. Construction traffic must be considered in addition to the traffic associated with the use of the buildings. "Yes" should be checked, and responses to i., ii., iii, v., vi., vii., and viii. must be provided. Page 11 of 13 E.2. h. iv. Move "Mattituck Creek" to line beginning with "Wetlands" and add the words "Tidal Wetlands, Federal Waters". h. v. The Answer is incorrect. Check Yes, and add the name of Mattituck Creek. The basis for listing it as impaired is due to pollutants and pathogens in Mattituck Creek. The answer is "No"., it is not in a designated Floodway. k. The answer is "Yes", it is in the 500 year floodplain. I. The name of the Sole Source Aquifer is Nassau -Suffolk SSA. Page 12 of 13 E.2. E.3. o. The answer is "Yes". Federally listed as threatened: Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) habitat. p. The answer is "Yes". State listed species: Southern sprite (from NYSDEC database) State -listed species of special concern Eastern Box Turtle (Terrapene caroling) likely to occur on site. E.3.h. The answer is "Yes". The publicly accessible local aesthetic resource is Mattituck Creek. Submitted: yes, as revised 1/12/2020 4 6. Next Steps a. Accept the application as complete, begin the coordinated review process and initial formal steps of SEQRA; b. Hold a Public Hearing (March 9'") which will coincide with the beginning of the substantive SEQRA review, identifying what further information is needed, IV: Planning Board items to consider: 1. Accept the above referenced site plan application as complete for review and commence the following actions: a. Classify the action under SEQRA as Type I at tonight's public meeting to begin the coordinated review process; b. Set the public hearing to be held on March 9, 2020 at tonight's public meeting; c. Refer the application to at least the following agencies: i. Town Board ii. Building Dept. iii. Office of the Town Engineer iv. Suffolk County Planning Commission (SCPC) v. Mattituck Fire District vi. Fire Marshall vii. Town Highway Department viii. Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) ix. Architectural Review Committee (ARC) x. NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) A. Southold Town Trustees xii. Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS) xiii. OPRHP (Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation) 5 From: Cummings, Brian A. Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2020 11:44 AM To: Michaelis, Jessica Subject: FW: Proposed Boat Storage Buildings-Strong's Yacht Center Attachments: D00012920-01292020103540.pdf From: Charles Cuddy[mailto:CharlesCuddy@Optonline.Net] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 12:05 PM To: Cummings, Brian A. Subject: Proposed Boat Storage Buildings-Strong's Yacht Center Brian, In response to your letter of January 15, 2020, which is attached, please find the following: 1. Long Environmental Assessment Form revised on January 21, 2020, 2. Attachment to Full Environmental Assessment Form dated December 2, 2019, 3. Attachment to LWRP Consistency Assessment Form dated December 2, 2019 Please proceed with review of this site plan application. Thank you, Charles R. Cuddy Attorney at Law 445 Griffing Avenue Riverhead, New York 11901 631-369-8200 631-369-9080 fax clean°lescuciclw )ppt,,t)rilitie.iiet ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. I OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY January 15, 2020 Charles. Cuddy Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www. southoldtownny. gov Re: Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Boatyard Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, ±600' s/e/o Naugles Drive & West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: am writing as a follow-up to the Work Session held on January 13, 2020 where the Planning Board discussed the above -referenced Site Plan Application.. Before the Board can commence its full review, it is necessary to provide a corrected Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) directly to this department. Please note that the information submitted in the FEAF must be consistent with the information provided in the FEAF Attachment submitted in December. Below are the corrections/additions for the FEAF. Page 2 of 13 B.i.iii The applicant responded yes to the project being i located within the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area. This is incorrect. The project is not located within the area. C.2.b. The parcel is located within the NYS Heritage Areas: Long Island Heritage Area. The response to the question is "Yes". Page 7 of 13 D.2.j The response to the question is incorrect. Construction traffic must be considered in addition to the traffic associated with the use of the buildings. "Yes"' should be cb cked„ and responses to i., ii., iii, v., vi., vii., and viii'. n1ust be provided. Strop 'sBoatart Buildin Page 2 January 14„ 2020 Page 11 of 13 E.2. h. iv. Move "Mattituck Creek" to line beginning with "Wetlands" and add the words "Tidal Wetlands, Federal Waters". h. v. The Answer is incorrect. Check Yes, and add the name of Mattituck Creek. The basis for listing it as impaired is due to pollutants and pathogens in Mattituck Creek. The answer is "No"., it is not in a designated Floodway. k. The answer is "Yes", it is in the 500 year floodplain. I. The name of the Sole Source Aquifer is Nassau -Suffolk SSA. Page 12 of 13 E.2. o. The answer is "Yes". Federally listed as threatened: Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) habitat. p. The answer is "Yes". State listed species: Southern sprite (from NYSDEC database) State -listed species of special concern Eastern Box Turtle (Terrapene carolina) likely to occur on site. E.3. E.3.h. The answer is "Yes". The publicly accessible local aesthetic resource is Mattituck Creek. If you have any questions regarding the FEAF form, this Site Plan or its process, please do not hesitate to call this office at 631-765-1938. Respectfully, Brian Cummings Planner Southold Town Planning Board Work Session — Janua 13 2020 — Page 2 Project Name: Tenedios Barn & Greenhouse ; SCTM#: 1000-19-1-1.4 Harold R. Reeve & Sons, Inc. SCTM#: 1000-140-1-6 mend ed _, Location Standard Subdivision 1 Location: 11 _ 11 , T his amended agricultural site plan is for the addition of a 60' )(24' (1,440.1 Wickham Avenue, Mattituck X605 W_ . _ .. _....� m. Desc n tion: p This proposal is for a Standard Subdivision of a 5.1 acre split -zoned parcel into 4 lots where Lots 1-3 equal 1 acre each in the R-40 Zoning } District and Lot 4 equals 1.8 acres located in both the R-40 and LB j acres have development rights intact (the greenhouse is located in the 52 Zoning Districts. Status ._ tonditional Preliminary Plat Approval Action: Approved Final Plat Completeness, Set Public Hearing Attachments: w Staff Report Project Name Location: Description: Status: Action Attachments: Stron 's Storage ,. g age Buildings SCTM#; 1000-106-6-13.4. 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there is 69,245 sa. ft. of existing boatvard buildings. Pendin Update and Completeness .. Staff Report m Peconic LandingDuplex Conversions (5) SCTM#;I 1000-35-1-25 1205 Route 25, Greenport _ This amended site plan is for the proposed conversion of five (5) existing 1 -story single family dwellings (units #19, 20, 60, 68, 74) to two family dwellings with no expansion of living area and no basement, 4 parking stalls on a Hamlet Density (HD) and R-80 split zoned parcel totaling 143 acres. New Application Completeness, Staff Report Project Name: Tenedios Barn & Greenhouse ; SCTM#: 1000-19-1-1.4 mend ed _, Location .. 8410 5Orient Route , i _ r Desc n tion: p , T his amended agricultural site plan is for the addition of a 60' )(24' (1,440.1 1 sq. ft.) greenhouse to a site where a one story 8,664 sq. ft. building to house livestock and store feed, supplies and farm equipment has conditional approval from the Planning Board, on a 34.5 acre farm, of l which 29.5 acres have development rights held by Southold Town and 5 j acres have development rights intact (the greenhouse is located in the 52 acre area and the barn is located in the 29.5 -acre area) in the R-200 Zoning District. Status: Approved Action Review for CO on the greenhouse - Attachments: Staff Report Southold Planning Department Staff Report Site Plan Application Work Session — Update Date Prepared By.- 1. y: I. Application Information Project Title: Applicant: Date of Submission Tax Map Number: Project Location: Hamlet: Zoning District: II. Description of Project Type of Site Plan: Acreage of Project Site Building Size January 13, 2020 Brian Cummings Strong's Boatyard Buildings Strongs Yacht Center July 20, 2018 106.-6-10 & 13.4 5780 West Mill Road Mattituck Split R — 80 / Marine II (M -II) Commercial ±33 acres (R80 @ 16.5ac + MII @ 16.5 ac) 101,500 sq. ft. This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R- 80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. III: Application Overview Site Plan Packet Supplemental Plans 1 of 7: Genera out PI �.. vation Phasing Plan Lay._ an Excavation __r._ .... 2 of 7: Landscape and alignment plan Landscape Detail Plan Sheet 1 & Sheet 2 Tree Removal Plan 3 of 7: Gradin & D ramage Plan Plan y Plan Forms / Documents 4 of 7: Unlit .. 5 of 7: Utility Plan Full EAF (plus attachment) .... nitary Details ...,LWRP. _Y.� W......,.... 6 of 7: Water & S.a..... L_7_of 7: Photometric Plan & Details The documents and information listed above have been submitted in the application and will be analyzed as part of the site plan application review process. 1. Existing: commercial boatyard in Mll zone with ±69,245 sq. ft. of existing buildings and vacant woodland in R-80 zone. There is a significant elevation change from the existing building area to the new area (±43 ft. grade change) a. R — 80: 718,474 sq. ft. (16.49 ac) b. M — II: 717,085 sq. ft. (16.46 ac) i. Wetlands area: 27,333 sq. ft. ii. Buildable lands: 689,752 sq. ft. iii. Existing building area: 69,245 sq. ft. 2. Proposed: a. Boat Storage Building #1: 140' x 375' (52,500 sq. ft.) 1 — story b. Boat Storage Building #2: 140'x 350' (49,000 sq. ft.) 1 — story i. Proposed building area: 101,500 sq. ft. ii. Total area of disturbance: 171,929 sq. ft. (3.94 ac area of disturbance) iii. The current proposal is to bring the elevation of the higher area down to the lower level which would require 134,921CY (cut) of earthwork / sand / soil removal. This is a major project in an environmentally sensitive area. c. Four (4) 2,000 gal. LP above ground tanks d. Water supply (765' public water extension from Mill Rd; 1,162 gpd); e. New sanitary system (standard sanitary system; 1,165 gpd); f. Grading and drainage i. Large amount of earthwork proposed; and the current proposal is to bring the elevation of the higher area down to the lower level which would require 134,921 CY (cut) of earthwork /sand /soil removal. This is a major project in an environmentally sensitive area. ii. Proposed retaining walls along west and north sides of proposed build -out: 1. 124' long Naturally Vegetated section of wall a. ("shall be filled with topsoil to allow for seeding by wildlife") 2. 80' long "Retaining Wall — West" landscaped section a. Plant with a mix of shrubs and groundcover 3. 370' long naturally vegetated section of wall a. ("shall be filled with topsoil to allow for seeding by wildlife") 4. 157' long "Retaining Wall — North" landscaped section of wall g. Landscaping and lighting 3. SEQRA: see "next steps" below 4. Code requirements / Bulk Schedule (MII): a. Lot Coverage i. Maximum: 30% ii. Existing: 10% iii. Proposed: 24.8% b. Landscaped Area: i. Minimum: 20% ii. Proposed: 37.2*% 5. With reference to the Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF): Mark Terry reviewed the Full Environmental Assessment Form submitted July 19, 2018 and the Attachment to Full Environmental Assessment Form prepared for Strong's Yacht Center dated December 2, 2019 (FEAF Attachment) and recommends the following amendments and additional information. Note that the information submitted in the FEAF and within the FEAF Attachment must coincide for the coordinated referral review: Page 2 of 13 B.i.iii The applicant responded yes to the project being located within the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area. This is incorrect. The project is not located within the area. C.2.b. The parcel is located within the NYS Heritage Areas: Long Island Heritage Area. The response to the question is "Yes". It is recommended that the applicant provide a discussion on how the proposed project would not adversely affect the Long Island Heritage Area. Q Page 7 of 13 D.2.j The response to the question is incorrect. The answer is "Yes". Responses to i., ii., iii, v., vi., vii., and viii. must be provided. Page 10 Of 13 E.1. H.iii. The response is "No". Page 11 of 13 E.2. H.iv, Wetlands: Tidal Wetlands, Federal Waters H.v. The Answer is incorrect. NYS water quality impaired waterbodies are present. Impairments include pollutants and pathogens in Mattituck Inlet and Creek Ki. The answer is "No". H.k. The answer is "Yes" H. 1. The name of the Sole Source Aquifer is Nassau -Suffolk SSA. Page 12 of 13 E.3. E.3.h. The answer is "Yes". The public accessible local aesthetic resource is Mattituck Creek. H.o. The answer is "Yes" the species is the piping plover. H.p. The answer is "Yes" the species is the southern sprite, 6. Other potential approvals: a. Board of Trustees permit or letter of non -jurisdiction b. NYSDEC permit(s) (wetlands, soil removal/sand mining) c. Town Board soil removal permit pursuant to Town Code §228 7. Next Steps a. Correct and complete the FEAF as detailed above and resubmit to the Planning Department for review in order to finalize Part II; b. When the application is accepted as complete, begin the coordinated review process and initial formal steps of SEQRA; 4 c. Hold the Public Hearing which will coincide with the beginning of the substantive SEQRA review, identifying what further information is needed; IV: Planning Board items to consider: Require the applicant to provide a revised FEAF consistent with the analysis detailed above. YOUNG & YOUNG 400 Ostrander Avenue Riverhead, New York 11901 HOWARD W. YOUNG, Land Surveyor THOMAS C. WOLPERT, Professional Engineer DOUGLAS ADAMS, Professional Enginner lgetalo int ROBERT C. TAST, Architect ROBERT STROMSKI, Architect December 4, 2019 ATTN: Mr. Brian Cummings, Planner Town of Southold Planning Department Town Hall Annex Building 54375 IRoute 25, P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 RE: Boat Storage Buildings STRONG'S YACHT CENTER at Mattituck, T/O Southold, NY (17-0165) SCTM No.: 1000-106-06-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cummings: Enclosed are the following items: 'Telephone (631) 727-2303 Facsimile (631) 727-0144 admin@youngengi . neeh . ng.com 1. one (1) copy — Attachment to Full Environmental Assessment (Form dated December 2, 2019, 2. one (1) copy — Attachment to LWRP Consistency Assessment Form dated December 2, 2019, and 3. six (6) prints — Excavation Phasing Plan (Sheet 1 of 1) dated October 23, 2019. We understand that submission of these supplemental documents enables the Planning Department to complete the environmental review of this site plan application. if you have any questions, please contact us. . ... .... .............. . . .......... Planniag Engineering Land Sul-vc.yuLv Page 2 of 2 December 4, 2019 Very truly yours, Thomas C. Wolpert TCW/cw Encl. cc. Strong's Yacht Center Attn: Mr. Jeff Strong + encl. + 1 print via email Mr. Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. + encl. + 1 print via email December 2, 2019 Attachment to Full Environmental Assessment Form prepared for STRONG'S YACHT CENTER at Mattituck, TJO Southold, NY Item C.2. Adopted Land Use Plans a. Do any municipally — adopted (city, town, village or county) comprehensive land use plan(s) include the site where the proposed action would be located? If yes, does the comprehensive plan include specific recommendations for the site where the proposed action would be located? Yes, the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (L'W'RP) includes specific recommendations for the site where the proposed action would be located. The specific recommendations for this site are described in greater detail in the Attachment to LWRP Consistency Assessment Form. Item D.2. Project Operation Item D.2.a.ii. How much material (including rock, earth, sediments, etc.) is proposed to be removed from the site? The estimated volume of material to be removed from the site is approximately 134,921 cubic yards. The duration of this aspect of the project is approximately 7 months. Item D.2.a.iii. Describe nature and characteristics of materials to be excavated or dredged, and plans to use, manage or dispose of them. Nature and Characteristics of Materials to be (Excavated The materials to be excavated are native sand and gravel. No dredging is proposed. Plans to Excavate Use Manage, and Dispose of Excavated Materials Excavation Plan 1. Construct a crushed concrete haul road from the proposed excavation area to IMill Road, as shown on the Excavation Phasing Plan (Sheet 1 of 1) dated October 23, 2019 prepared by Young & Young. 2. Topsoil will be stripped from the excavation area and stockpiled on the site for use during site restoration. Stockpiled topsoil will be stabilized with temporary vegetation to prevent dust and erosion. 3. Sand and gravel will be excavated using front end loaders or similar portable excavation equipment. 4. The bottom elevation of the proposed excavation will be 10 ft. S. Bank slopes will not exceed 1 on 2. Removal of Excess Materials from the Site 1. Sand and gravelly sand will loaded into dump trailers for removal from the site. 2. The proposed haul road will be stabilized to allow the passage of 22 wheel, 30 yard dump trailers. 3. The proposed haul road will be regraded periodically and water applied when necessary to reduce windblown sand and dust. Methods to Control Pollution Air Pollution Control 1. Techniques for controlling dust and airborne particles may include the application of "dust down" or spraying of water on active haulageways. 2. Inactive stockpiles will be either covered or vegetated as necessary to prevent the introduction of any significant quantity of dust into the atmosphere. 1. Excavation, loading, and removal operations will be limited to Monday through Saturday from 7:00 am to 4:00 pm. 2. All gasoline or diesel powered machinery will be equipped with adequate mufflers to reduce the impact of noise on the surrounding community. Water Pollution Control 1. Areas of disturbed and exposed soil will be kept to a minimum to reduce erosion. 2. Bank slopes will be no greater than 1 on 2. Screening or Visual Pollution Control 1. A 25 foot minimum buffer will be maintained around the perimeter of the proposed excavation area. 2. No materials, equipment or machinery will be operated or stored in the 25 foot buffer. 3. The excavation area is setback a minimum of 970 feet from Mill Road. Truck Traffic The projected truck trips will be 27 entering trucks and 27 exiting trucks per day. Entering trucks will be empty. Each exiting truck will carry approximately 30 cubic yards of excavated material. Phase 1 Approximately 103,000 cubic yards of material will be excavated and removed during Phase 1. Based on the projected truck trips of 27 exiting trucks per day, Phase 1 will be completed in approximately 5 months. Phase 2 Approximately 32,000 cubic yards of material will be excavated and removed during Phase 2. Based on the projected truck trips of 27 exiting trucks per day, Phase 2 will be completed in approximately 2 months. Items D.2.a.iv. Will there be onsite dewatering or processing of excavated materials? There will be no onsite dewatering of excavated materials or processing of excavated materials. Item D.2.a.v. What is the total area to be dredged or excavated? No dredging is proposed. The total area to be excavated is approximately 3.9 acres. Item D.2.a.vi, What is the maximum area to be worked at any one time? The maximum area to be worked at any one time is 0.5 acre. Item D.2.a.vii. What would be the maximum depth of excavation or dredging? No dredging is proposed. The elevated sand area will be removed to an elevation of 10 ft. Item D.2.a.viii. Will the excavation require blasting? The proposed excavation will not require blasting. December 2, 2019 Attachment to LWRP Consistency Assessment Form prepared for STRONG'S YACHT CENTER at Mattituck, T/O Southold, NY The Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) includes specific recommendations for the site where the proposed action would be located. In particular, the subject property, formerly known as the Mattituck Inlet Marina and Shipyard, is identified in Section IIV — Harbor Management of the Town of Southold LWRP. A summary of the key elements of the plan that apply to the subject property is outlined as follows. IV.2. Purpose of Harbor Management The purpose of harbor management, as defined in the LWRP, is to balance the need for (public access to the water with the need to (protect the resource from irreparable damage. IV.3. Waterside Boundaries The tidal wetland area of Mattituck Creek adjacent to the subject property is described within the wetland boundaries contained in this section. The primary goals and objectives, as outlined in this section of the LWRP, include the following: 1. To protect the surface water quality from degradation; and to enhance or improve the surface water quality where it has been degraded. 2. To maximize public access to the waterfront and the surface waters within the capability of the marine resource to sustain it. 3. To develop clear, easily understandable guidelines for management of the harbors that can be used by government officials and private individuals as a basis for their decisions. IV.5. Priority Harbors The Town of Southold has identified twelve (12) creeks and harbors that are experiencing problems with water quality and/or public access. One of the twelve creeks and harbors identified is Mattituck Inlet and Creek. IV.6 Imolementation IV.6.11. The Draft Harbor Management Plan This section identifies a general list of goals and objectives for the Town of Southold Harbor Management Plan as well as an identification of some more specific regional maritime issues including "protecting and encouraging water - dependent commercial, industrial, and recreational uses in Long Island Sound's 12 Maritime Centers — one of which is Mattituck Inlet — and avoiding actions that would interfere with existing water dependent uses" and "shortening the regulatory process for water dependent uses, particularly in Maritime Centers" IV.16.1i. Draft Mattituck Creek Harbor Management Plan The NYS Department of State issued the Draft Long Island Sound Coastal Management Program (LISCMP) Report in March, 1994. 'This detailed study contains twelve policies that reflect the issues and conditions related to the Sound including a proposal for Special Management Areas, one of which is Maritime Centers. The LISCMP Report identified (Mattituck Inlet as one of twelve Maritime Centers on the Long island Sound. Mattituck Inlet is the only Maritime Center on the Long Island Sound in the Town of Southold. Maritime Centers are fundamentally the most suitable locations for new or expanded water -dependent commercial and industrial uses. This section of the LWRP provides an overall description of the Mattituck Inlet Marina and Shipyard, now known as Strong's Yacht Center. Summa and Conclusion Strong's Yacht Center plans to maintain the existing full service boat maintenance and repair marina, provide boat slips for seasonal rental and some transient use, outdoor winter storage, and wet storage. Upon completion of construction of the two proposed boat storage buildings, the marina will also provide additional indoor boat storage. Strong's Yacht Center presently provides docking for six (6) commercial fishing boats and intends to continue this commitment upon construction of the expanded facilities. Strong's Yacht Center also presently partners with the Cornell Cooperative Extension Marine Program in conjunction with The Long Island Shellfish Restoration Project by hosting twelve (12) Floating Upwelling Systems (FLUPYs). The FLUPSYs are floating nurseries used to grow clams to the optimal size for planting in sanctuary sites. Each FLUPSY occupies approximately 175 sf in the marina. The 12 FLUPSYs occupy approximately 2,100 sf in the marina. Strong's Yacht Center intends to continue this commitment upon construction of the expanded facilities. Strong's Yacht Center estimates that at least 15 new jobs will be created as a result of construction of the new and expanded facilities. In conclusion, the proposed continuation of the former marina operations and construction and operation of the new and expanded facilities are consistent with the goals and objectives of the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP). Southold Town Planning Board Work Session — July 8 2019__— Page 2 Project Name Location; Description Status: Action: Attachments. Strong's Storage Buildings SCTM#: 1000-106-6-13.4 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck This site plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boe storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there is 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings � Pendin Update _...... ....... . _ . ....... Staff Report ProjectName: 1The Heritage ritage at C tcho ue 2015 Harvest SCTM#:, 1000-102-1-33.3 Pointe Location: 75 Schoolhouse Road, on the n/w corner of Griffing Street and School House Lane Description: This Residential 1,079 feet n/o the Main Road, in Cutchogue. i p ntial Site Plan is for development of 124 detached and attached dwelling, with a 6,188 sq. ft. community center, an outdoor swimming pool, one tennis court, and various other associated site improvements, on a vacant 46.17 -acre parcel in the Hamlet Density (HD) 1 Zoning District. _ m.. Action Sett u inspection fo Conditions roved with Con Ap _- p p r buffer in Phase 2 clearing area. Attachments,... ....... . None e. ... Project name 1 Colton Acres Standard Subdivision SCTM# 1000-38 1.-1.8 . Locat n: 275'west of llette e, East Descry tion. This st dards bld "division proposes sub p � p p o subdivide 4.24 acres into three I, r 1.2 -acre lots in the R-40 Zoning District. This parcel is located +/- 275' west of Gillette Drive in East Marion. a _ �w .. _ Status: Conditional Sketch Plan Action. Prelimina Plat Completeness Attachments Staff Report _. Project name: ; 260 Hortons Lane Resubdivision ( SCTM#-: 1000-61,-1-3.1 P Location 260 Hortons Lane,Southold __........ s Description. 1 This resubdivision proposes to transfer 0.07 acres (3,240 sq. ft.) from SCTM#1000-61.-1-9.3 to SCTM#1000-61.-1-3.1. As a result of this resubdivision, Lot 9.3 will decrease in size from 2.53 acres to 2.46 acres and Lot 3.1 will increase in size from 0.48 acres to 0.55 acres in the HB Zoning District. Status. 'Pending Action: ' Review for Final Determination Attachments: Staff Report Southold Planning Department Staff Report Site Plan Application Work Session — Completeness Date Prepared By: I. Application Information Project Title: Applicant: Date of Submission Tax Map Number: Project Location: Hamlet: Zoning District: II. Description of Project Type of Site Plan: Acreage of Project Site Building Size July 8, 2019 Brian Cummings Strong's Boatyard Buildings Strongs Yacht Center July 20, 2018 106.-6-10 & 13.4 5780 West Mill Road Mattituck Split R — 80 / Marine II (M -1I) Commercial ±33 acres (R80 @ 16.5ac + MII @ 16.5 ac) 101,500 sq. ft. This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R- 80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. III: Completeness Review 1 of 7: General Layout Plan 2 of 7. Landscape and alignment plan Sheet 1 & Sheet 2 3 of 7: Grading & Drainage Plan 4 of 7: Utility Plan 5 of 7: Utility Plan 6 of 7: Water & Sanitary Details 7 of 7: Photometric Plan & Details 1. Existing: commercial boatyard in MII zone with ±69,245sf of existing buildings and vacant woodland in R-80 zone. There is a significant elevation change from the existing building area to the new area (±43 ft. grade change) a. R — 80: 718,474sf (16.49ac) b. M — II: 717,085 (16.46ac) i. Wetlands area: 27,333sf ii. Buildable lands: 689,752sf iii. Existing building area: 69,245sf 2. Proposed: a. Boat Storage Building #1: 140' x 375' (52,500sf) 1 — story b. Boat Storage Building #2: 140' x 350' (49,000sf) 1 — story i. Proposed building area: 101,500sf ii. Total area of disturbance: 171,929sf (3.94ac area of disturbance) iii. The current proposal is to bring the elevation of the higher area down to the lower level which would require 134,921 CY (cut) of earthwork / sand / soil removal. This is a major project in an environmentally sensitive area. c. Four (4) 2,000gal. LP above ground tanks d. Water supply (765' public water extension from Mill Rd; 1,162gpd); e. New sanitary system (standard sanitary system; 1,165gpd); f. Grading and drainage i. Large amount of earthwork proposed; and the current proposal is to bring the elevation of the higher area down to the lower level which would require 134,921 CY (cut) of earthwork / sand / soil removal. This is a major project in an environmentally sensitive area. ii. Proposed retaining walls along west and north sides of proposed build -out: 1. 124' long Naturally Vegetated section of wall a. ("shall be filled with topsoil to allow for seeding by wildlife") 2. 80' long "Retaining Wall — West" landscaped section a. Plant with a mix of shrubs and groundcover 3. 370' long naturally vegetated section of wall a. ("shall be filled with topsoil to allow for seeding by wildlife") 4. 157' long "Retaining Wall — North" landscaped section of wall g. Landscaping and lighting 3. SEQRA: see "items to consider" below 4. Code requirements / Bulk Schedule (MII): a. Lot Coverage i. Maximum: 30% ii. Existing: 10% iii. Proposed: 24.8% b. Landscaped Area: i. Minimum: 20% ii. Proposed: 37.2*% 5. With reference to the Planning Board letter dated May 10 2019: 1. Provide an existing conditions plan with the following: The location of existing natural features, including but not limited to natural drainage swales, watercourses, wooded areas and wetlands, as defined by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the Board of Trustees of Southold Town, marshes, ponds, dunes, bluffs, beaches, kettleholes, escarpments, wildlife habitats, flood hazard areas, erosion -prone areas; ii. Specifically for the proposed area of disturbance, provide the location, size & species of existing trees of six inches in diameter at a point three feet above the trunk base. Submitted: yes, Tree Removal plan and Existing Conditions plan submitted on June 21, 2019. 493 trees at 6" diameter or greater are proposed to be removed from the site. 6. Other approvals: a. Town Board soil removal permit pursuant to Town Code §228 b. Board of Trustees permit or letter of non -jurisdiction c. NYSDEC permit(s) (wetlands, soil removal/sand mining) IV: Planning Board items to consider: Due to the size and scope of the proposed application, hire a consultant for full SEQRA review, first to determine if the Planning Board has all information it needs to find the application complete (sufficient EAF, etc.) A" TORNII::N AI'LAW 44 s GR I>E^FIN� z A VENEJE' RI ER.HEA,.D,NIE',,W YORK Lr O. Box :)l547 RverIlicaA, NY 11901 Brian Cummings, Town Planner Southold Town Planning Department PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 June 17, 2019 Re: Strong's Yacht Center -Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, NY Dear Mr. Cummings: T ]E, ,: (631) : )9.8 x) A..: mail: G.liarlQ 3G:l.:iQ:p.4.'A.Sr@opEofCY�➢.ICAQ.'..IC'0.et 1W RECEIVEIP JUN 2 1 2V9 Sr) utl�a 2 "t0W_6 Parining Board We are enclosing eleven (11) prints of the Existing Conditions Map dated May 22, 2019, and eleven (11) prints of the Tree Removal Plan. Please advise it any additional information is required in order to proceed with this application. Very truly yours, Charles R. Cuddy CRC:ik Enclosures OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY May 10, 2019 Mr. Charles Cuddy 445 Griffing Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www. southoldtownny. gov Re: Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Boatyard Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, ±600' s/e/o Naugles Drive & West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: am writing as a follow-up to the Work Session held on May 6, 2019 where the Planning Board found the above -referenced Site Plan Application incomplete for review. Before the Board can commence its full review, it is necessary to provide the following directly to this department: 1. Provide an existing conditions plan with the following: The location of existing natural features, including but not limited to natural drainage swales, watercourses, wooded areas and wetlands, as defined by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the Board of Trustees of Southold Town, marshes, ponds, dunes, bluffs, beaches, kettleholes, escarpments, wildlife habitats, flood hazard areas, erosion -prone areas; ii. Specifically for the proposed area of disturbance, provide the location, size & species of existing trees of six inches in diameter at a point three feet above the trunk base. If you have any questions regarding this Site Plan or its process, please do not hesitate to call this office at 631-765-1938. Respectfully, _._ . Brian Cummings Planner WORK SESSION AGENDA SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD Monday, May 6, 2019 4:00 p.m. Southold Town Meeting Hall 3:30 p.m. Executive Session — Advice from Town Attorney 4:00 p.m. Applications _. ..Project ... _ .... w . _ Bing,, Conservation Subdivision SCTM# J 1000_951,-1177.2 83 Locaton 6795 & 7755 reg on Road Cutcho ue w Description: This proposal is for a 75/75 split clustered Conservation Subdivision of 84.72 acres, currently existing as two adjacent parcels, SCTM 1000-95- 1-8.3 (54.24 acres) and SCTM 1000-95-1-7.2 (30.49 acres), into 8 residential lots ranging in size from 2.1 to 3.9 acres, a right of way of 2.2 acres, and 2 agricultural lots totaling 60+/- acres from which development rights are proposed to be sold to Suffolk County, in the AC and R-80 zoning districts Status Conditional Sketch Plan .._ _.... _ Action:: ®. _ Review for Conditional Final Determination Attachments'. Staff Report Proect Name. S tron ' g_s Storage Buildings SCTM# 1000-106-6-13.4 Location: 3430 Mill Road, Ma_ _tituck d_ . Description:.m.. This Site Plan isforthe proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there is 69,245 sq ft. of existing boatyard,buildings. Status:Pending Action _ Completeness _ Attachments m. , . ; Staff Report Southold Planning Department Staff Report Site Plan Application Work Session — Completeness Date Prepared By: I. Application Information Project Title: Applicant: Date of Submission Tax Map Number: Project Location: Hamlet: Zoning District: II. Description of Project Type of Site Plan: Acreage of Project Site Building Size May 6, 2019 Brian Cummings Strong's Boatyard Buildings Strongs Yacht Center July 20, 2018 106.-6-10 & 13.4 5780 West Mill Road Mattituck Split R — 80 / Marine II (M -II) Commercial ±33 acres (R80 @ 16.5ac + MII @ 16.5 ac) 101,500 sq. ft. This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R- 80 Zoning Districts where there are 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. III: Completeness Review 1 of 7: General Layout Plan 2 of 7: Landscape and alignment plan . Sheet 1 & Sheet 2 3 of 7: Grading & Drainage Plan 4 of 7: Utility Plan 5 of 7: Utility Plan 6 of 7: Water & Sanitary Details 7 of 7: Photometric Plan & Details 1. Existing: commercial boatyard in MII zone with ±69,245sf of existing buildings and vacant woodland in R-80 zone. There is a significant elevation change from the existing building area to the new area (±43 ft. grade change) a. R — 80: 718,474sf (16.49ac) b. M — II: 717,085 (16.46ac) i. Wetlands area: 27,333sf ii. Buildable lands: 689,752sf iii. Existing building area: 69,245sf 2. Proposed: a. Boat Storage Building #1: 140'x 375' (52,500sf) 1 — story b. Boat Storage Building #2: 140'x 350' (49,000sf) 1 — story i. Proposed building area: 101,500sf ii. Total area of disturbance: 171,929sf (3.94ac area of disturbance) ((elaborate a bit on this - grading of the slopes after excavation?)))) iii. The current proposal is to bring the elevation of the higher area down to the lower level which would require 134,921 CY (cut) of earthwork / sand / soil removal. This is a major project in an environmentally sensitive area. c. Four (4) 2,000gal. LP above ground tanks d. Water supply (765' public water extension from Mill Rd; 1,162gpd); e. New sanitary system (standard sanitary system; 1,165gpd); f. Grading and drainage i. Large amount of earthwork proposed; and the current proposal is to bring the elevation of the higher area down to the lower level which would require 134,921 CY (cut) of earthwork / sand / soil removal. This is a major project in an environmentally sensitive area. ii. Proposed retaining walls along west and north sides of proposed build -out: 1. 124' long Naturally Vegetated section of wall a. ("shall be filled with topsoil to allow for seeding by wildlife") 2. 80' long "Retaining Wall — West" landscaped section a. Plant with a mix of shrubs and groundcover 3. 370' long naturally vegetated section of wall a. ("shall be filled with topsoil to allow for seeding by wildlife") N 4. 157' long "Retaining Wall — North" landscaped section of wall g. Landscaping and lighting 3. SEQRA: classification to be determined at a later date when application is made complete; 4. Code requirements / Bulk Schedule (MII): a. Lot Coverage i. Maximum: 30% ii, Existing: 10% iii. Proposed: 24.8% b. Landscaped Area: i. Minimum: 20% ii. Proposed: 37.2*% 5. With reference to the Planning Board letter dated November 5 2018: A. Provide a separate key map with: o The locations, names and widths of all rights-of-way within 500 feet of property lines. If none exist within 500 feet of the subject property, indicate the distance to the nearest intersection with a public street. o The location and owners of all adjoining lands within 500 feet, as shown on the latest tax records, at a scale of one inch equals 100 feet. o The location and use of all buildings and structures, including curb cuts, within 200 feet of the boundary of the subject property. Submitted: yes; B. Provide the following for existing conditions: o The location of existing natural features, including but not limited to natural drainage swales, watercourses, wooded areas and wetlands, as defined by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the Board of Trustees of Southold Town, marshes, ponds, dunes, bluffs, beaches, kettleholes, escarpments, wildlife habitats, flood hazard areas, erosion -prone areas and trees of six inches in diameter at a point three feet above the trunk base. Submitted: no; C. Provide the following on at least nine (9) prints of a revised site plan: o Parking calculations: (provided on page 4 of 7; utility plan): Single family detached residence = 2 Office (1 per 100sf) = 2,702/100 = 27 Marina (1 per boat slip) = 40 x 1 = 40 Storage (1 per 1000sf) = 167,617 / 1000 = 168 25 employees (1 per employee) = 25 x 1 = 25 Total Required = 262 Total Provided = 57 (including 6 ADA) o Cut and fill calculations, including the total volume of materials to be removed from the site. o Landscaping details for proposed retaining wall areas: i. Provide landscape planting details for existing vegetation proposed to remain and proposed plantings, including type, quantity, planting details and location. Submitted: yes; D. Provide exterior signage information and renderings pursuant to §280-80; Submitted: yes; E. Provide building elevations and floor plans of all proposed buildings. Submitted: yes; 6. Exterior lighting: photometric plan provided on page 6 of 7 which includes foot candle measurements, lumens and fifty-six (56) total fixtures; 7. Other approvals: a. Town Board soil removal permit pursuant to Town Code §228 b. Board of Trustees permit or letter of non -jurisdiction c. NYSDEC permit(s) (wetlands, soil removal/sand mining) IV: Planning Board items to consider: 1. Find the above referenced site plan application incomplete and require the following be submitted before it is processed any further: N a. Provide an existing conditions plan to include the following; The location of existing natural features, including but not"limited to natural drainage swales, watercourses, wooded areas and wetlands, as defined by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the Board of Trustees of Southold Town, marshes, ponds, dunes, bluffs, beaches, kettleholes, escarpments, wildlife habitats, flood hazard areas, erosion -prone areas; ii. Specifically for the proposed area of disturbance, provide the location of existing trees of six inches in diameter at a point three feet above the trunk base. 9 • Lincoln Riverhead, New York• 631-208-8850 Licensed Professional Engineer April 17, 2019 Mr. Brian Cummings Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 g RE: ,Strop s„Marine — 4780 West Mill Road (SCTM: 1000-106-6-10 & 13.4) Dear Mr. Cummings, Enclosed please find 8 sets of the following: 1. Perspective 2. Landscape Plan 3. Building Elevations Please call if you should have any additional concerns or questions. Sincerely, t r.ssa C. Butler CHARLES R. CUDDY ATTORNEY AT LAW 445 GRIFFING AVENUE RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Brian Cummings, Town Planner Southold Town Planning Department PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 December 10, 2018 Re: Strong's Yacht Center -Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, NY Dear Mr. Cummings: n .wuurax�miourrvrosxw�ov�n M4214 �..�*^"°'^"�'"'""'"°" 'J FAX: (�631) 369-9080 E-mail: charlescuddy@optonline.net In connection with the buildings to be erected at Strong's Yacht Center at Mill Rd., Mattituck, we are enclosing eleven (11) prints of the radius map dated November 20, 2018, and eleven (11) prints of the site plan last dated November 20, 2018. These are forwarded to you for further review and upon that review we ask that you schedule further conference with the applicant and the applicant's consultants. It is our understanding that the landscape planting details for the proposed Evergreen retaining wall together with the floor plans, building elevations will be provided by Jeffrey Butler, P.E. Very truly yours, Charles R. Cuddy CRC:ik Enclosures OFFTC E LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY November 5, 2018 Mr. Charles Cuddy 445 Griffing Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www. s outholdtownny. gov Re: Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Boatyard Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, ±600' s/e/o Naugles Drive & West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: I am writing as a follow-up to the Work Session held on October 15, 2018 where the Planning Board found the above -referenced Site Plan Application incomplete for review. Before the Board can commence its full review, it is necessary to provide the following directly to this department: 1. Provide a separate key map with: o The locations, names and widths of all rights-of-way within 500 feet of property lines. If none exist within 500 feet of the subject property, indicate the distance to the nearest intersection with a public street. o The location and owners of all adjoining lands within 500 feet, as shown on the latest tax records, at a scale of one inch equals 100 feet. o The location and use of all buildings and structures, including curb cuts, within 200 feet of the boundary of the subject property. 2. Provide the following for existing conditions: o The location of existing natural features, including but not limited to natural drainage swales, watercourses, wooded areas and wetlands, as defined by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and r r, PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www. s outholdtownny. gov Re: Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Boatyard Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, ±600' s/e/o Naugles Drive & West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-10 & 13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: I am writing as a follow-up to the Work Session held on October 15, 2018 where the Planning Board found the above -referenced Site Plan Application incomplete for review. Before the Board can commence its full review, it is necessary to provide the following directly to this department: 1. Provide a separate key map with: o The locations, names and widths of all rights-of-way within 500 feet of property lines. If none exist within 500 feet of the subject property, indicate the distance to the nearest intersection with a public street. o The location and owners of all adjoining lands within 500 feet, as shown on the latest tax records, at a scale of one inch equals 100 feet. o The location and use of all buildings and structures, including curb cuts, within 200 feet of the boundary of the subject property. 2. Provide the following for existing conditions: o The location of existing natural features, including but not limited to natural drainage swales, watercourses, wooded areas and wetlands, as defined by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and Stron 's Boatyard Buildin s Page 2 November 5 2018 the Board of Trustees of Southold Town, marshes, ponds, dunes, bluffs, beaches, kettleholes, escarpments, wildlife habitats, flood hazard areas, erosion -prone areas and trees of six inches in diameter at a point three feet above the trunk base. 3. Provide the following on at least nine (9) prints of a revised site plan: o Parking calculations. o Cut and fill calculations, including the total volume of materials to be removed from the site. o Landscaping details for proposed retaining wall areas: i. Provide landscape planting details for existing vegetation proposed to remain and proposed plantings, including type, quantity, planting details and location. 4. Provide exterior signage information and renderings pursuant to §280-80; 5. Provide a complete Site Plan Application form; 6. Provide building elevations and floor plans of all proposed buildings. If you have any questions regarding this Site Plan or its process, please do not hesitate to call this office at 631-765-1938. Respectfully, Brian Cummings Planner WORK SESSION AGENDA SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD Monday, October 15, 2018 4:00 p.m. Southold Town Meeting Hall 2:30 p.m. Executive Session — Advice from Town Attorney 4:00 p.m. Applications Project Name: J Soundside Landscape, Inc. SCTM#: 1000-52-5-58.3 p Location: 67575 Route 25, ±275' s/w/o Albertson Lane & NYS Rt. 25, Greenport ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Description: This Site Plan Application is for the proposed construction of an 80 x 40' (3,200 sq. ft.) commercial building for a landscape contractor's yard on ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 0.93 acres in the Light Industrial Zoning District. Status: ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ Approved Action: Review Proposed Sign ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ Attachments -Staff .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Report Project Name: Strong's Storage Buildings SCTM#:: 1000-106-6-13.4 Location: 3430 Mill Road, Mattituck ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Description: This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the MII and R-80 Zoning Districts where there is 69,245 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. Status: ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... New Application Action: Completeness ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ Attachments -Staff ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Report Project Name: J ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ Man ieri Resubdivision SCTM#: 1000-125-3-2.3 g Location: 2050 Route 25, Laurel ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ Description: This re -subdivision proposes to transfer 9.56 acres from SCTM#1000- 125.-3-2.3 to SCTM#1000-125.-3-18 in the AC Zoning District, Laurel. Lot 2.3 will decrease from 11.57 acres to 2.01 acres (proposed Lot 1). ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ Lot 18 will increase from 0.44 acres to 10 acres (proposed Lot 2). Status: Pending Action: Completeness ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Attachments: Staff Report Southold Planning Department Staff Report Site Plan Application Work Session — Completeness Date Prepared By: I. Application Information Project Title- Applicant- Date itle: Applicant:Date of Submission Tax Map Number: Project Location- Hamlet- Zoning ocation:Hamlet:Zoning District: II. Description of Project Type of Site Plan: Acreage of Project Site Building Size October 15, 2018 Brian Cummings Strong's Boatyard Buildings Strongs Yacht Center July 20, 2018 106.-6-10 & 13.4 5780 West Mill Road Mattituck Split R — 80 / Marine II (M -II) Commercial ±33 acres (R80 @ 16.5ac + M I I @ 16.5 ac) 101,500 sq. ft. This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of two (2) buildings for boat storage, one at 52,500 sq. ft. and the other at 49,000 sq. ft., located on 32.6 acres in the M I I and R- 80 Zoning Districts where there is 69,245 sq. ft. of existing boatyard buildings. III: Completeness Review See attached checklist for Site Plan Requirements. 1 of 6: General Layout Plan 2 of 6: Landscape and alignment plan 3 of 6: Grading & Drainage Plan 4 of 6: Utility Plan 5 of 6: Utility Plan 6 of 6: Photometric Plan & Details IV: Analysis 1. Existing: commercial boatyard in MII zone with ±69,245sf of existing buildings and vacant woodland in R-80; There is a significant elevation change from the existing building area to the new area and the current proposal is to bring the elevation of the higher area down to the lower level (±43 ft. grade change) which would require a substantial amount of earthwork / sand / soil removal. This is a major project in a sensitive area. a. R — 80: 718,474sf (16.49ac) b. M — 11: 717,085 (16.46ac) i. Wetlands area: 27,333sf ii. Buildable lands: 689,752sf iii. Existing building area: 69,245sf 2. Proposed: a. Boat Storage Building #1: 140'x 375' (52,500sf) 1 — story b. Boat Storage Building #2: 140'x 350' (49,000sf) 1 — story i. Proposed building area: 101,500sf ii. Total Building area: 171,929sf (3.94ac) iii. Woods to remain: 6.1 acres c. Four (4) 2,000gal. LP above ground tanks d. Water supply (public water from Mill Rd); e. New sanitary system; f. Grading and drainage i. Large amount of earthwork proposed, cut and fill totals not provided; ii. Numerous retaining walls g. Landscaping and lighting 3. SEQRA: classification to be determined at a later date when application is made complete; 4. Code requirements / Bulk Schedule (MII): a. Lot Coverage i. Maximum: 30% ii. Existing: 10% iii. Proposed: 24.8% b. Landscaped Area: i. Minimum: 20% ii. Proposed: 37.2*% * 6.1ac woods to remain on MII + 16.4ac R80 iii. Landscape Requirements 1. §280-93B: Marine I and II Districts, a. Front yard landscaped strip shall be 15 feet deep along and contiguous to the front lot line of the property. 2 Staff: not applicable; b. There shall also be a landscaped area five feet wide abutting the front of the building in all nonresidential districts, including the Hamlet Business District. Staff: required, not provided 2. 94: Transition Buffer (R-80 to west; R-40 to south) a. Marine I and II Districts: min 20 feet The buffer area shall be of evergreen planting of such type, height, spacing and arrangement as, in the judgment of the Planning Board, will effectively screen the activity on the lot from the neighboring residential area. As a minimum, the planting shall consist of a double row of trees six feet in height planted at intervals of 10 feet on center. Nonevergreen planting may be included to supplement evergreen planting, but not to take its place. ii. A landscaped earthen berm, wall or fence of a location, height, design and materials approved by the Planning Board may be accepted for any portion of the required planting and/or buffer area. iii. Where the existing topography and/or landscaping provides adequate screening, the Planning Board may accept the existing planting and/or buffer area as the required planting. Staff: required, not provided 3. 95): § 280-95 Landscaped parking area. a. In addition to the front landscaped area and buffer area requirements, parking areas shall comply with the following minimum standards: b. All uses required to provide 20 or more off-street parking spaces shall have at least 10 square feet of interior landscaping within the paved portion of the parking area for each parking space and at least one tree with a two-inch caliper for every 10 parking spaces or fraction thereof. Each separate landscaped area shall contain a minimum of 100 square feet, shall have a minimum dimension of at least eight feet, shall be planted with grass or shrubs and shall include at least one tree of not less than two-inch caliper. c. A landscaped area shall be provided along the perimeter of any parking area except that portion of the parking area which provides access to a street or parking facility on an adjacent lot. Accessways to adjacent lots shall not exceed 24 feet in width and shall not exceed two in number for each purpose. The landscaped area shall have a minimum dimension of four feet, shall be planted with grass or shrubs and shall include at least one tree of not less than two- inch caliper for every 40 feet along the perimeter of the parking area. In cases where the parking area adjoins a public sidewalk, the required landscaped area shall be extended to the edge of the sidewalk. d. Trees used in parking lots shall include honey locust, pine, oak or other similar fast-growing, hardy varieties or existing trees where appropriately located. Staff: required, not provided 4. §280-96 Properties located adjacent to creeks. The rear yards of properties located adjacent to creeks shall include natural vegetation and/or shall contain suitable planted vegetation to a minimum of 20 feet inland from the mean high -water -line elevation or wetland boundary to prevent erosion of the shoreline. Vegetation within the buffer strip shall not be fertilized or chemically treated. Staff: to be clarified c. Parking (not provided on plan): Warehouse or Storage building = 1 per 1000 square feet of gross floor area Building 1: 52,500 / 1000 = 52.5 or 53 required Building 2: 49,000 / 1000 = 49 required 11 TOTAL = 99 required; d. Exterior lighting: photometric plan provided on page 6 of 6 which includes foot candle measurements, lumens and fifty-six (56) total fixtures; e. Exterior Signage: unknown, information / location(s) not provided; 5. Other approvals: a. Town Board soil removal permit pursuant to Town Code §228 b. Board of Trustees permit or letter of non -jurisdiction c. NYSDEC permit(s) (wetlands, soil removal/sand mining) V: Staff Recommendations It is recommended that the above referenced site plan application be found incomplete and to require the following be submitted before it is processed any further: a. Provide a separate key map with: The locations, names and widths of all rights-of-way within 500 feet (show radius on plan) of property lines. If none exist within 500 feet of the subject property, indicate the distance to the nearest intersection with a public street. Location and owners of all adjoining lands within 500 feet, as shown on the latest tax records, at a scale of one inch equals 100 feet. iii. The location and use of all buildings and structures, including curb cuts, within 200 feet (show radius on plan) of the boundary of the subject property; b. Provide a complete Site Plan Application form; c. Provide the following for existing conditions: The location of existing natural features, including but not limited to natural drainage swales, watercourses, wooded areas and wetlands, as defined by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the Board of Trustees of Southold Town, marshes, ponds, dunes, bluffs, beaches, kettleholes, escarpments, wildlife habitats, flood hazard areas, erosion -prone areas and trees of six inches in diameter at a point three feet above the trunk base; d. Provide the following for the proposed development: i. Building elevations and floor plans of all buildings; ii. Provide the following on a revised site plan: 1. Parking calculations; 2. Cut and fill calculations, including the total volume of materials to be removed from the site; 3. Landscaping details for proposed retaining wall areas. iii. Exterior signage information including dimensions and rendering. Southold Planning Department Checklist for Site Plan Application Completeness - Section 280-133 Project Name: Strong's Storage Buildings Completed by: Brian Cummings Date: October 15, 2018 Checklist for Site Plan Application Completeness Received Comment A. Submission of a complete site plan application shall consist of: (1) A completed site plan application form. X (2) The site plan review fee, as specified in Subsection B below. Editor's Note: See now § 280-138, Fee schedule for site plan applications. (3) A completed environmental assessment form. Full (4) Nine copies of the site plan. (5) Four copies of a property survey, certified by a licensed land surveyor. B. Standards. Site plan design shall include the following items: (1) Technical data: (a) The lot, block and section number of the property, taken from the latest tax records. (b) The name and address of the landowner on record: [1] The names and addresses of adjoining landowners. [2] The name and address of the applicant, if not the same as the landowner. (c) The name and address of the person, firm or organization preparing the map, sealed with the applicable New York State license seal and signature. (d) Date, graphic scale and North point, whether true or magnetic; if magnetic, show the date of reading. (e) A survey prepared by a licensed surveyor or civil engineer. The site plan may reference a land surveyor's map or base reference map. All distances shall be in feet and hundredths of a foot. All angles shall be given to the nearest 10 seconds or closer. The error of closure shall not exceed one in 10,000. (f) The locations, names and widths of all rights-of-way within 500 feet of property lines. If none exist within 500 X feet of the subject property, indicate the distance to the nearest intersection with a public street. (g) A separate key map showing location and owners of all adjoining lands within 500 feet, as shown on the latest X tax records, at a scale of one inch equals 100 feet. (h) The location, width and purpose of all existing and proposed easements, setbacks, reservations and areas X dedicated to public use within or adjoining the property. Checklist for Site Plan Application Completeness Checklist for Site Plan Application Completeness Southold Planning Department (i) A complete outline of other existing easements, deed restrictions or covenants applying to the property. (j) Existing zoning, including zone lines and dimensions. (k) Site plans drawn at the scale of one inch equals 20 feet. If all required information cannot be shown clearly on one plan, the information should be separated as follows- ollows:[1] [1]Alignment and schedule plan. [2] Grading and drainage [3] Landscaping. [4] Other, e.g., site utilities. (2) Natural features. Received Comment (a) Existing contours with intervals of two feet or less, referred to mean sea level as per United States Geological Survey datum. (b) Boundaries of any areas subject to flooding or stormwater overflows, tidal bays, saltwater marshes beaches and all freshwater bodies, including wetlands and intermittent streams, perimeter boundaries of shoreline bluffs, dunes and beaches. (c) The location of existing natural features, including but not limited to natural drainage swales, watercourses wooded areas and wetlands, as defined by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the Board of Trustees of Southold Town, marshes ponds, dunes, bluffs, beaches, kettleholes, X escarpments, wildlife habitats, flood hazard areas erosion -prone areas and trees of six inches in diameter at a point three feet above the trunk base. (d) The location of any existing cultural and historical features within 500 feet of the property boundaries. N/A (3) Existing building structures and utilities: (a) The locations, dimensions and outlines of all buildings, as defined in § 280-4 of this chapter, and all uses of the site. (b) Paved areas, including parking areas, sidewalks and vehicular access between the site and public streets. (c) The locations, dimensions, grades and flow directions of any existing culverts, waterlines or sewage disposal systems, as well as other underground and aboveground utility poles and utility lines within and adjacent to the property. (d) The location and use of all buildings and structures, including curbcuts, within 200 feet of the boundary of the X subject property. Checklist for Site Plan Application Completeness Site Plan Application elements waivers: § 280-133 C. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Planning Board shall have the discretion to waive any or all of the requirements of this § 280-133 by resolution at a duly noticed public meeting, for those applications involving modifications to existing structures with no substantial change to the existing footprint, where the Planning Board determines that such modifications or any change in use will not require significant changes to existing major site design features, as well as applications involving uses strictly related to agriculture (but excepting retail winery operations), if it determines such requirements are not necessary to protect and maintain the public health, safety, or welfare and to further the objectives set forth in § 280-129. Checklist for Site Plan Application Completeness Southold Planning Department (4) Proposed construction: Received Comment (a) The location of proposed buildings or structural improvements, indicating setbacks from all property lines and horizontal distances from existing structures. (b) The location and design of all uses not requiring structures, such as off-street parking and loading areas X and pedestrian circulation. (c) The location, direction, power level and time of use for any proposed outdoor lighting or public address systems. (d) The location and plans for any outdoor signs must be in accordance with applicable sign regulations. X (e) The location and details of aprons, curbs, sidewalks, fencing (type and location), and grading, including existing and proposed topography with two -foot contours (on site and 200 feet beyond the property line) and spot elevations for buildings and all structures drainage calculations, details of drainage structures and watershed areas, where applicable. (f) Grading and drainage plans shall be based upon site stormwater retention, in conformance with Chapter 161 Highway Specifications. (g) The location and listing of landscaping, buffering and street tree plans, including type, material, size, quantity X and location. (h) The location of water and sewer mains, electrical service, cablevision and telephone installations, ground transformers, fire wells and fire hydrants and/or any alternate means of water supply and sewage disposal and treatment. (i) Building elevations for all facades and floor plans showing the proposed use of floor area. X Notes: N/A = Not Applicable Site Plan Application elements waivers: § 280-133 C. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Planning Board shall have the discretion to waive any or all of the requirements of this § 280-133 by resolution at a duly noticed public meeting, for those applications involving modifications to existing structures with no substantial change to the existing footprint, where the Planning Board determines that such modifications or any change in use will not require significant changes to existing major site design features, as well as applications involving uses strictly related to agriculture (but excepting retail winery operations), if it determines such requirements are not necessary to protect and maintain the public health, safety, or welfare and to further the objectives set forth in § 280-129. Checklist for Site Plan Application Completeness FORM NO. 3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT SOUTHOLD. N.Y. NOTT V nV DI.qAPPROVAI DATE: September 18, 2018 TO: Charles Cuddy (Strong's Yacht Club) PO Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Please take notice that your application dated August 30, 2018: For permit to construct two boat storage buildings at: Location of property: 3430 Mill Road. Mattituck, NY County Tax Map No. 1000 — Section 106 Block 6 Lot 13.4 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: Pursuant to Article XXIII, Section 280-127, the proposed use reQUIressite plan approval f"roin the Southold Town Planning Board. You may now, jpply to this agency directly, FEW Note to Applicant: Any change or deviation to the above referenced application, may require further review by the Southold Town Building Department. CC: file, Planning Board P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Building Department Southold Town PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 CHARLES R. CUDDY ATTORNEY AT LAW 445. GRIFFING AVENUE RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK August 27, 2018 Re: Strong's Yacht Center -Proposed Boat Storage Buildings 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, NY Dear Sir/Madam: Pursuant to Section 280-130A of the Southold Town Code, enclosed is an application by Strong's Yacht Center, LLC to erect two boats storage buildings at its marina site along the Mattituck Inlet. Please proceed to refer this matter to the Planning Board for site plan approval. Very truly yours, Charles R. Cuddy CRC:ik Enclosures TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION CHECKLIST BUILDING DEPARTMENT Do you have or meed the following, before applying? TOWN HALT, Board of 1lcalth m SOUTHOLD, NY 11971 4 sets of Building Plans -_.......... �_ TEL: (631) 765-1802 Planning Board approval—_--- FAX: (631) 765-9502 Survey _ - . Southoldtownny.gov PERMIT NO. _ Check-- ... ...... ......... Septic hwul -.- - ..... N.Y.S.D.E.C.. - --------- C.O. Flood Permit 20.. Single & scparat Truss Identification Form Storm -Water Assessment Form Contact: 20 ........m.. Mail Disapproved a/c ,__ ad NY 11901 PO Box 1547, Riverhead, Phone: 631736978200 Expiration______-_ _ 20_________ Building Inspector Date --At ( _� ...... 20 18 INSTRUCTIONS a. This application MUST be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the Building Inspector with 4 sets of plans, accurate plot plan to scale. Fee according to schedule. b. Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public streets or areas, and waterways. c. The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit. d. Upon approval of this application, the Building Inspector will issue a Building Permit to the applicant. Such a permit shall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout the work. e. No building shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose what so ever until the Building Inspector issues a Certificate of Occupancy. f. Every building permit shall expire if the work authorized has not commenced within 12 months after the date of issuance or has not been completed within 18 months from such date. If no zoning amendments or other regulations affecting the property have been enacted in the interim, the Building Inspector may authorize, in writing, the extension of the permit for an addition six months. Thereafter, a new permit shall be required. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or Regulations, for the construction of buildings, additions, or alterations or for removal or demolition as herein described. The applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, building code, housing code, and regulations, and to admit authorized inspectors on premises and in building for necessary inspections. Stronq's Yacht Center LLC of a or name, if a (Signature licant pp ' corporation) 5780 West Mill Rd, Mattituck, NY 11952 (Mailing address of applicant) State whether applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general contractor, electrician, plumber or builder Aoolicant is lesee of owner Name of owner of premises Strong's West Mill LLC (As on the tax roll or latest deed) If applicant is corpot ati.otl sigtP.1 trc of dt iy authorized officer (Name and title of corpt.)rt� fftcco Builders License No, Plumbers License No, Electricians License No. Other Trade's License No. 1. Location of land on which proposed work will be done: 5780 West Mill Road Mattituck House Number Street Hamlet County Tax Map No. 1000 Section 106 llltr � .6�_.m Lot 0 and ) � � Subdivision N/A Filed Map No. 2. State existing use and occupancy of premises and intended use and occupancy of proposed construction: a. Existing use and occupancy _.„Marina b. Intended use and occupancy_E�oat storade.at marina 3. Nature ofworlc (check which applicable): New Building_ _XAddition _,_AIteration__._ Repair. Officr Work________ , (Description) 4. Estimated Cost in excess of $100,000 Fee (To be paid on filing this application) 5. If dwelling, number of dwelling units N/A -Number of dwelling units on each floor.—,, If garage, number of cars 6. If business, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type of use. 7. Dimensions of existing structures, if any: Front. Rear l iepth Height --Number of Stories -. .......... Dimensions of same structure with alterations or additions: Front Rear Depth Height Number of Stories Dimensions of entire new construction: Front ear_.._Dcp[h Height umber of 9. Size of lot: Front 32.5 acres Rear— rDePth 10. Date of Purchase .-Selptember 27, 2016 Name ofFormer Owner MIMS Holding LLC 11. Zone or use district in which: premises are situat6d Marine II R-80 (upland), 12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation?, YES— NO X 13. Will lot be re -graded? YES X NOWillexcess fill be removed from premises? YES X NO - 14. Names of Owner of premises MPI _LLCAddregs 5780 West Mill Rd. Phone No. 631-298-448 Name of Architect Address MatfitUck, NY 11 952_11hone No Nameof Contractor Address Phone No. _. 15 a. Is this property withirl 100 fcct of a tidal wetla, ' iidora.fi'esliw,tter%vetliiid'? $YES X NO * IF YES, SOUTHOLD'roWN TRUSTEES &D,LC. PERMITS MAY 13E REQWIRED.. b. Is this property within 300 feet of a tidal welhid? * YES X . N'(,)— * IF YES, D1,C, PFRMITS MAY 13111JTQ1IJREJ). 16. Provide survey, to scale, with accurate foundation plan and distances to property lines. 17. If elevation at any point on property is at 10 feet or below, must provide topographical data on survey, 18. Are there any covenants and restrictions with respect to this property? * YES— NO * IF YES, PROVIDE A COPY. 1%11113511•, • C SS: COUNTY !being duly sworn, deposes and says that (s)he is the applicant (Name of individual signing cnrit;!above named, 'tl /1) -, (S)He is the fi (Cbntractor, Agent; C,orpora(Q, Off! er, etc) of said owner or owners, and is duly to perflorm or have performed the said work and to make and 01c this application; that all s4amnents contained in this application are true k) the best of” Ws knowledge and belief-, and that the work will be performed in the manner set forth in the application filed therewith. sw�rrn 't, -_j - 20 day of . ....... -, "I W — IWONAKO Loa .VQtary Pubfic, State of New YoTk ULL_ No, 01K0G0883,afi_._____ . ..... . '01-alhfiecl in Suffolk Count Signature of A ppficant Notary Public 4/ Commission Expires March Y 20 611 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY August 22, 2018 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq, P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Re: Proposed Site Plan for Strong's Yacht Center 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-106.-6-13.4 Dear Mr. Cuddy: MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www. s outh of dt ownny. gov The Planning Department is in receipt of the Site Plan Application regarding the above -referenced project. Pursuant to §280-130A and our standard application review procedures, a Building Permit Application and subsequent Notice of Disapproval from the Building Department is required before any further steps can be taken on the matter by this department. If you have any questions regarding this Site Plan or its process, please do not hesitate to ccontact this office. Respectfully, Brian Cummings g Planner Milifing Baha a•ess:s: P0. Bax 154 R�VC�IIIUIKI, NY � 1901 HAND DELIVERED Southold Town Planning Board 54375 Route 25 Southold, New York 11971 .II ..II.. ...III."®„.L .lf....III."i„ . CI..X .DD,.III.. July 19, 2018 rfN.I, (631):369-8200 FAK: (631)369 9080 riaa:i.l.r, cliar)esck.Ldcly !opLonlirie.iric:. Re: Site Plan of Strong's Yacht Center - 2 Boat Storage Buildings Dear Board Members: On behalf of Strong's Yacht Center we are submitting the site plan application as follows: 1. Application for site plan approval 2. LWRP Consistency Assessment Form 3. Full Environmental .Assessment Form 4. Applicant Transactional Disclosure Form 5. Applicants Affidavit 6. Agent Authorization Letter 7. Check in the sum of $18,150.00 8. 9 sets of site plan Please advise when this matter will appear on your calendar. Thank you. Very truly yours, Charles R. Cuddy CRC:ms Enclosures SOUTHOLD PLANNING BOARD SITE PLAN APPLICATION FORM Site flan Nam and Location Site Plan Name: 5+ronZ'5 Yach—tCenfer Application Date: 0 x..1 11 119 /000-106— 06 —10 Suffolk County Tax Map #1000- 106 - 00 - /:5.4 Other SCTM #s Street Address: 57 8 Qvvess+ HPOCkol Hamlet: Haffictt Distance to nearest intersection: 0 tes Ro Type of Site Plan: V" New Amended Residential Zoning District _jZ4e!5L;cfenj .fle owners/Agent Contact Information Denslf� A (R- 80) Please list name, mailing aeleiress, andpht)ne number fiorthe �j/e below: Property Owner Sft LLC Street 5760 m Road City qpffi-hgcfc State MY zip—L!-9152- 6-.31 Home Telephone Other Applicant__5 Street 6760 _Wtmf Hill-ROad IT City_ M ct #jjv�c State Y ..._Zip .I.,. 6-4t- 4+ 90 Home Telephone-.... Othermm Applicant's Agent or Representative: Contact Person(s)*__--C Street V City_ v -hif ad State rrdl zip 1901 _j &2-00 Office Telephone—,, -,,----,,—.,..—Other,--- *Unless otherwise requested, correspondeTICe will be sent only to the contact person noted here. Site Plan Application Form 211 812 01 0 Site Data Proposed construction type: New Modification of Existing Structure Property total acreage or square footage: ]3.2 • 59 ac./sq,..A. /01 j 600 Site Plan build -out acreage or square footage: a&./sq. ft. Is there an e .. xisting or proposed Sale of Development Rights on the property? Yes If yes, explain: _Agricultural Change of use Nom Does the parcel(s) meet the Lot Recognition standard in Town Code §280-9 Lot Recognition? Y_N_ If "yes", explain (and attach any necessary documentation – title report, subdivision approval, etc.) Building Department Notice of Disapproval Date: Is an application to the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals required? Yes No If yes, have you subnnitted an application to the ZBA? Yes No If yes, attach a copy of the application packet. Show all uses proposed and existing. Indicate which building will have which use. If more then one use is proposed per building, indicate square footage of floor area per use. property t .� c —w List all existinguses.„ List all proposed property uses:_ Re -sl at c`. ,! " lqt Other accessory uses: Existing lot coverage: , n Proposed lot coverage �M Gross floor area of existing structure(s): 69�-145 sq. ft. Gross floor area of proposed structure(s): /O_/ 4500 SP Parking Space Data: # of existing spaces _ # of proposed spaces Landscaping Details: Existing landscape coverage: % pro fT Wetlands: Is this property within 500' of a wetland area? Yes ✓ No I, the undersigned, certify that all the above information is true. Loading Berth: Yes No sed landscape coverage: , Zw% be Signature ofPreparer ate: i i 2 APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK _-being duly sworn, deposes and says that he resides at in the State of New York, and that he is the owner of property located at 1 1c` - 6 to SCT _ �.......... or that he is the of the (Title)(Specify whether Partnership or Corp.) and said Corporation is the owner of the above property, which is hereby making a Site Plan application; that there are not existing structures or improvements on the land which are not shown on the Site Plan; that the title to the entire parcel, including all rights-of-way, has been clearly established and is shown on said Plan; that no part of the Plan infringes upon any duly filed plan which has not been abandoned both as to lots and as to roads; that he has examined all rules and regulations adopted by the Planning Board for the filing of Site Plans and will comply with same; that the plans submitted, as approved, will not be alter or changed in any manner without the approval of the Planning Board; and that the actual physical improvements will be installed in strict accordance with the o ip as approved by the Planning Board. Signed S igned_...._-,,�. Partner or Corporate ( rp to Officer and Title) Sworn to me this '-day o Notary Public State of Now York OISA6051325 Suffolk nrniwMon Expires Nov. 20, Southold a ni a arte t Applicant Transactional Disclosure Form The Town of Southold's Code of Ethics prohibits conflicts of interest on the part of town officers and employees. The purpose of this form is to provide information which can alert the town of possible conflicts of interest and allow it to take whatever action is necessary to avoid same. Your Name: a5tSx..Sfr_0f) initia runless you are applying in the name of`soeone else or other entity, such as a company. Ifso, indicate the otherperson's or company's name. Nature of Application: (Check all that apply) Subdivision or Re -subdivision Site Plan Other (Please name other activity) Do you personally (or through your company, spouse, sibling, parent or child) have a relationship with any officer or employee of the Town of Southold? "Relationship includes by blood, marriage or business interest. "Business interest" means a business, including a partnership, in which the town officer or employee has even a partial ownership of (or employment by) a corporation in which the town officer or employee owns more than 5% of the shares. Yes No ✓ If you answered "Yes" complete the balance of this form and date and sign where indicated. Name of the person employed by the Town of Southold Title or position of that person Describe the relationship between yourself (the applicant) and the town officer or employee. Either check the appropriate line A through D and/or describe in the space provided. The town officer or employee or his or her spouse, sibling, parent or child is (check all that apply): A. the owner of greater than 5% of the shares of the corporate stock of the applicant (when the applicant is a corporation); B. the legal or beneficial owner of any interest in a noncorporate entity (when the applicant is not a corporation); C. an officer, director, partner or employee of the applicant; or _... D. the actual applicant Description of Relationship: Submitted this I f Aday oi& 2014 ✓� Signature � P Print Name ` 011 Disclosure Form Strong's Yacht Center 5780 West Mill Road Mattituck, NY 11952 I, Jeffrey Strong, Member of Strong's Yacht Center, LLC.,, hereby authorize Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. to act as my agent and handle all necessary work involved with the site plan application process for properties at 5780 West Mill Road, Mattituck, New York SCTM #1000-106-06-10 and 1000-106-06-13.4, with the Southold Town Planning Board . Strong's Yacht Center BY;01. _... Jelly f ffong, M I ober Sworn to before me this J Q1ay of ,I j .201 otary,P tibI.ib Mary LoUiSO SOS r Notary Public, No. OISA6051325 94iffalk Coufft� Commission ExpiresNrw, , �1 Town of Southold 1,WRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM A. INSTRUCTIONS All applicants for permits* including Town of Southold agencies, shall coinplete this, CCAI' for proposed actions that are subject to the Town of Southold Waterfront Consistency 'Review Law, This assessment is intended to supplement other information used by a 'rown, ofSouthold agency in making a determination of consistency. *accy.?l ininor exen7j)l actions including Building Penrlits and other ministerial permits not located within the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area. 2. Before answering the questions in Section C, the preparer of this firm should review the exempt minor action list, policies and explanations of each policy contained in the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. A 1210,—osed ..4,c--flonwil —beeyAuLted as tci-jt"snifilc—ant ben fi�jal an0,,ALversq.9ft0A!P�LT1 which includes Ali Ix 0 e ! f �SoLjm If any question in Section C on this form is answered "yes" or "no", then the proposed action will affect the achievement of the LYM policy standards and conditions contained in the consistency review law. Thus, eachanswermyst be explained in detail, fistingboth supporting and 0011 - supporting facts, If an action cannot be certified as consistent with the, t,WRP policy standards and conditions, it shall jiL - Qt kgiidertako. A copy of the LVY'RP is available in the following places: online at the Town of Southold's website (southoldtown. northfork. net), the Board of Trustees Office, the Planning Department, all local libraries and the Town Clerk's office. B. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSED ACTION SCTM# _Z900 - -P5.4- oce Voroge Ic PROJECT NAME .�! 9 The Application has been submitted to (check appropriate response): Town Board D Planning Board Z Building Dept. El Board of Trustees Category of Town of Southold agency action (check appropriate response) : (a) Action undertaken directly by Town agency (e.g. capital construction, planning activity, agency regulation, land transaction) (b) Financial assistance (e.g. grant, loan, subsidy) (c) Permit, approval, license, certification; 1, �1 Lodi 5M Po i o • /► w Location of • ,g raw ,, p► NY Site acreage: µ� '9 www.... ._ _.. _.. Present land use. ...... Present zoning classification: mmqri — � ... 1Ee5wa *Ort 2. If an application for the proposed action has been filed with the Town of Southold agency, the following information shall be provided: (a) Name of applicant: (b) Mailing address: _ . 1 ... - ..... (c) Telephone number: Area Code ( (d) Application number, if any: Will the action be directly undertaken, require funding, or approval by a state or federal agency? Yes © No ❑ If yes, which state or federal agency? _ _ _ i aer t W4* cmd S Perrnif- cr Letter- of jVV J'urtsc;lic%*On C. Evaluate the project to the following policies by analyzing how the project will further support or not support the policies. Provide all proposed Best Management Practices that will further each policy. Incomplete answers will require that the form be returned for completion. DEVELOPED COAST POLICY Policy 1. Foster a pattern of development in the Town of Southold that enhances community character, preserves open space, makes efficient use of infrastructure, makes beneficial use of a coastal location, and minimizes adverse effects of development. See LWRP Section III — Policies; Page 2 for evaluation criteria. VPc F-1 No ❑ Not Annlicahle Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 2. Protect and preserve historic and archaeological resources of the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III — Policies Pages 3 through 6 for evaluation criteria le Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Applicable mm C, Attach additional sheets if necessary q !4 Policy 3. Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III — Policies Pages 6 through 7 for evaluation criteria 5� Yes n No F-1 Not Avolicable A NATURAL COAST POLICIES Policy 4. Minimize loss of life, structures, and natural resources from flooding and erosion. See LWRP Section III — Policies Pages 8 through 16 for evaluation criteria QYes E No 1..0 is vw,4 Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 5. Protect and improve water quality and supply in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III — Policies Pages 16 through 21 for evaluation criteria Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 6. Protect and restore the quality and function of the Town of Southold ecosystems including Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats and wetlands. See LWRP Section III — Policies; Pages 22 through 32 for evaluation criteria. 0 Yes F] No F] Not Applicable 5 Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 7. Protect and improve air quality in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III — Policies Pages 32 through 34 for evaluation criteria. ✓❑ Yes E, No ❑ Not Applicable m Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 8. Minimize environmental degradation in Town of Southold from solid waste and hazardous substances and wastes. See LWRP Section III — Policies; Pages 34 through 38 for evaluation criteria. PUBLIC COAST POLICIES Policy 9. Provide for public access to, and recreational use of, coastal waters, public lands, and public resources of the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III — Policies; Pages 38 through 46 for evaluation criteria. V" V Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary WORKING COAST POLICIES Policy 10. Protect Southold's water -dependent uses and promote siting of new water -dependent uses in suitable locations. See LWRP Section III — Policies; Pages 47 through 56 for evaluation criteria. ❑✓ Yes No cable :.: pi _ _.....m Not Applicable .....—. Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 11. Promote sustainable use of living marine resources in Long Island Sound, the Peconic Estuary and Town waters. See LWRP Section III — Policies; Pages 57 through 62 for evaluation criteria. ❑ Yes ❑ No © Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 12. Protect agricultural lands in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III — Policies; Pages 62 through 65 for evaluation criteria. LJ Yes No Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 13. Promote appropriate use and development of energy and mineral resources. See LWRP Section III — Policies; Pages 65 through 68 for evaluation criteria. Yes ❑ No 0 Not Applicable PREPARED BY C . /p DATE 7- Th OM Q V �� rll?f' Amended on 811105 December 2, 2019 Attachment to LWRP Consistency Assessment Form prepared for STRONG'S YACHT CENTER at Mattituck, T/O Southold, NY Introduction The Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) includes specific recommendations for the site where the proposed action would be located. In particular, the subject property, formerly known as the Mattituck Inlet Marina and Shipyard, is identified in Section IV — Harbor Management of the Town of Southold LWRP. A summary of the key elements of the plan that apply to the subject property is outlined as follows. IV.2. Pur ose of Harbor Mana ement The purpose of harbor management, as defined in the LWRP, is to balance the need for public access to the water with the need to protect the resource from irreparable damage. The tidal wetland area of Mattituck Creek adjacent to the subject property is described within the wetland boundaries contained in this section. j The primary goals and objectives, as outlined in this section of the LWRP, include the following: 1. To protect the surface water quality from degradation; and to enhance or improve the surface water quality where it has been degraded. 2. To maximize public access to the waterfront and the surface waters within the capability of the marine resource to sustain it. 3. To develop clear, easily understandable guidelines for management of the harbors that can be used by government officials and private individuals as a basis for their decisions. The Town of Southold has identified twelve (12) creeks and harbors that are experiencing problems with water quality and/or public access. One of the twelve creeks and harbors identified is Mattituck Inlet and Creek. r �. This section identifies a general list of goals and objectives for the Town of Southold Harbor Management Plan as well as an identification of some more specific regional maritime issues including "protecting and encouraging water - dependent commercial, industrial, and recreational uses in Long Island Sound's 12 Maritime Centers — one of which is Mattituck Inlet — and avoiding actions that would interfere with existing water dependent uses" and "shortening the regulatory process for water dependent uses, particularly in Maritime Centers". I . ,li. Draft Mattituck Creek Harbor Mana en1gq Plan The NYS Department of State issued the Draft Long Island Sound Coastal Management Program (LISCMP) Report in March, 1994. This detailed study contains twelve policies that reflect the issues and conditions related to the Sound including a proposal for Special Management Areas, one of which is Maritime Centers. The LISCMP Report identified Mattituck Inlet as one of twelve Maritime Centers on the Long Island Sound. Mattituck Inlet is the only Maritime Center on the Long Island Sound in the Town of Southold. Maritime Centers are fundamentally the most suitable locations for new or expanded water -dependent commercial and industrial uses. This section of the LWRP provides an overall description of the Mattituck Inlet Marina and Shipyard, now known as Strong's Yacht Center. 114MIUMM Strong's Yacht Center plans to maintain the existing full service boat maintenance and repair marina, provide boat slips for seasonal rental and some transient use, outdoor winter storage, and wet storage. Upon completion of construction of the two proposed boat storage buildings, the marina will also provide additional indoor boat storage. Strong's Yacht Center presently provides docking for six (6) commercial fishing boats and intends to continue this commitment upon construction of the expanded facilities. Strong's Yacht Center also presently partners with the Cornell Cooperative Extension Marine Program in conjunction with The Long Island Shellfish Restoration Project by hosting twelve (12) Floating Upwelling Systems (FLUPYs). The FLUPSYs are floating nurseries used to grow clams to the optimal size for planting in sanctuary sites. Each FLUPSY occupies approximately 175 sf in the marina. The 12 FLUPSYs occupy approximately 2,100 sf in the marina. Strong's Yacht Center intends to continue this commitment upon construction of the expanded facilities. Strong's Yacht Center estimates that at least 15 new jobs will be created as a result of construction of the new and expanded facilities. in conclusion, the proposed continuation of the former marina operations and construction and operation of the new and expanded facilities are consistent with the goals and objectives of the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP). Full Environmental Assessment Form Part I - Project and Setting Instructions for Completing Part 1 Part 1 is to be completed by the applicant or project sponsor. Responses become part of the application for approval or funding, are subject to public review, and may be subject to further verification. Complete Part 1 based on information currently available. If additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item, please answer as thoroughly as possible based on current information; indicate whether missing information does not exist, or is not reasonably available to the sponsor; and, when possible, generally describe work or studies which would be necessary to update or fully develop that information. Applicants/sponsors must complete all items in Sections A & B. In Sections C, D & E, most items contain an initial question that must be answered either "Yes" or "No". If the answer to the initial question is "Yes", complete the sub -questions that follow, If the answer to the initial question is "No", proceed to the next question. Section F allows the project sponsor to identify and attach any additional information. Section G requires the name and signature of the project sponsor to verify that the information contained in Part 1 is accurate and complete. A. Project and Sponsor Information. _. ......... .......... Name of Action or Project: Strong's Yacht Center - Boat Storage Buildings Project Location (describe, and attach a general location map): South side of Mill Road approx. 100' east of Naugles Road at Mattituck, T/O Southold, NY (Refer to Key Map) Brief Description of Proposed Action (include purpose or need): Construct one (1) 52,500 sf boat storage building and one (1) 49,000 sf boat storage building, together with the associated site improvements including water supply, sewage disposal, grading, drainage, landscaping & lighting. Name of Applicant/Sponsor: Telephone: 631-727-2303 Young & Young Attn: Thomas C. Wolpert, P.E. ••.... E -Mail: tcw@youngengineering.com Address: 400 Ostrander Avenue City/PO: Riverhead State: New York Zip Code: 11901 Project Contact (if not same as sponsor; give name and title/role). Telephone: 631-369-8200 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq., Attorney for Applicant E -Mail: charlescuddy@optonline.net .. ........... .. ......... . Address: 445 Griffing Avenue . ....... _ ....._ .......... City/PO: State: Zip Code: Riverhead New York 11901 _. ___ _ ....... Property Owner (if not same as sponsor): Telephone: 631-298-4480 Strong's West Mill LLC E -Mail: jeff@strongsmarine.com Address: 5780 West Mill Road City/PO: Mattituck State: New York Zip Co e de:11952 Page 1 of 13 B. Government Approvals B. Government Approvals, Funding, or Sponsorship. ("Funding" includes grants, loans, tax relief, and any other forms of financial assistance.) Government Entity If Yes: Identify Agency and Approval(s) Application Date Required (Actual or projected) a. City Council, Town Board, ❑YesONo b. Is the site of the proposed action within any local or regional special planning district (for example: Greenway or Village Board of Trustees Brownfield Opportunity Area (BOA); designated State or Federal heritage area; watershed management plan; b. City, Town or Village OYes❑No Town of Southold Planning Board - July, 2018 Planning Board or Commission Site Plan Approval ❑YesONo c. City Council, Town or ❑YesONo If Yes, identify the plan(s): Village Zoning Board of Appeals d. Other local agencies OYes❑No Town of Southold Board of Trustees - July, 2018 Wetland Permit e. County agencies OYes❑No SCDHS Office of Wastewater Management - July, 2018 Water Supply & Sewage Disposal f. Regional agencies ❑YesONo g. State agencies OYes❑No NYSDEC - Tidal Wetland Permit or July, 2018 Letter of No Jurisdiction h. Federal agencies ❑YesONo .. _ _..._ .........__.. i. Coastal Resources. i. Is the project site within a Coastal Area, or the waterfront area of a Designated Inland Waterway? OYes ❑No ii. Is the project site located in a community with an approved Local Waterfront Revitalization Program? O Yes❑No iii. Is the project site within a Coastal Erosion Hazard Area? O Yes❑No C. Planning and Zoning C.1. Planning and zoning actions. Will administrative or legislative adoption, or amendment of a plan, local law, ordinance, rule or regulation be the only approval(s) which must be granted to enable the proposed action to proceed? w If Yes, complete sections C, F and G. If No, proceed to question C.2 and complete all remaining sections and questions in Part 1 C.2. Adopted land use plans. ❑YesONo a. Do any municipally- adopted (city, town, village or county) comprehensive land use plan(s) include the site OYes❑No where the proposed action would be located? If Yes, does the comprehensive plan include specific recommendations for the site where the proposed action OYes❑No would be located? b. Is the site of the proposed action within any local or regional special planning district (for example: Greenway ❑YesONo Brownfield Opportunity Area (BOA); designated State or Federal heritage area; watershed management plan; or other?) If Yes, identify the plan(s): c. Is the proposed action located wholly or partially within an area listed in an adopted municipal open space plan, ❑YesONo or an adopted municipal farmland protection plan? If Yes, identify the plan(s): Page 2 of 13 C.3. Zoning a. Is the site of the proposed action located in a municipality with an adopted zoning law or ordinance. OYes❑No If Yes, what is the zoning classification(s) including any applicable overlay district? Marine II (M -II) & Residential Low Density A (R-80) b. Is the use permitted or allowed by a special or conditional use permit? OYes❑No c. Is a zoning change requested as part of the proposed action? ❑ YesONo If Yes, i. What is the proposed new zoning for the site? CA. Existing community services. a. In what school district is the project site located? Mattituck-Cutchogue b. What police or other public protection forces serve the project site? Southold c. Which fire protection and emergency medical services serve the project site? Mattituck - Cutchogue d. What parks serve the project site? Mattituck - Cutchogue D. Project Details D.1. Proposed and Potential Development a. What is the general nature of the proposed action (e.g., residential, industrial, commercial, recreational; if mixed, include all components)? Commercial (Boat Storage) b. a. Total acreage of the site of the proposed action?...32.9559 acres b. Total acreage to be physically disturbed? _ .................................. _—---------- _ 3.9 acres c. Total acreage (project site and any contiguous properties) owned or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? 32.9559 acres c. Is the proposed action an expansion of an existing project or use? O Yes❑ No i. If Yes, what is the approximate percentage of the proposed expansion and identify the units (e.g., acres, miles, housing units, square feet)? % 146.6 Units: N.A. d. Is the proposed action a subdivision, or does it include a subdivision? ❑Yes bio If Yes, i. Purpose or type of subdivision? (e.g., residential, industrial, commercial; if mixed, specify types) ..._... v__.... .......... ii. Is a cluster/conservation layout proposed? ❑Yes ❑No iii. Number of lots proposed? iv. Minimum and maximum proposed lot sizes? Minimum _ Maximum e. Will proposed action be constructed in multiple phases? ❑YesONo i. If No, anticipated period of construction: 12 months ii. If Yes: o Total number of phases anticipated 0 Anticipated commencement date of phase 1 (including demolition) month year • Anticipated completion date of final phase month year • Generally describe connections or relationships among phases, including any contingencies where progress of one phase may determine timing or duration of future phases: Page 3 of 13 f. Does the project include new residential uses? If Yes, show numbers of units proposed. One Family Two Family Three Family Initial Phase At completion of all phases Clog Family four or more esONo g. Does the proposed action include new non-residential construction (including expansions)? ❑Yes❑No If Yes, i. Total number of structures 2 ii. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure: 30 height; 140 width; and 375 length iii. Approximate extent of building space to be heated or cooled: square feet h. Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that will result in the impoundment of any ❑Yes ONo liquids, such as creation of a water supply, reservoir, pond, lake, waste lagoon or other storage? If Yes, i. Purpose of the impoundment: ii. If a water impoundment, the principal source of the water: El Ground water ❑ Surface water streams ❑Other specify: iii. If other than water, identify the type of impounded/contained liquids and their source. iv. Approximate size of the proposed impoundment. Volume„ million gallons; surface area: v. Dimensions of the proposed dam or impounding structure: height; length vi. Construction method/materials for the proposed dam or impounding structure (e.g., earth fill, rock, wood, concrete): D.2. Project Operations a. Does the proposed action include any excavation, mining, or dredging, during construction, operations, or both? klYes (Not including general site preparation, grading or installation of utilities or foundations where all excavated materials will remain onsite) If Yes: i . What is the purpose of the excavation or dredging? General Site Preparation ii. How much material (including rock, earth, sediments, etc.) is proposed to be removed from the site? • Volume (specify tons or cubic yards): 130,000 cy • Over what duration of time? 3 months iii. Describe nature and characteristics of materials to be excavated or dredged, and plans to use, manage or dispose of them. Approximately 130,000 cy of soil will be excavated and removed from the site to prepare the site for construction acres iv. Will there be onsite dewatering or processing of excavated materials? _EfV_esRJNo If yes, describe. v. What is the total area to be dredged or excavated? 3.9 acres vi. What is the maximum area to be worked at any one time? 0.5 acres vii. What would be the maximum depth of excavation or dredging? 40 feet viii. Will the excavation require blasting? ❑YesONo ix. Summarize site reclamation goals and plan: The site will be reclaimed for the construction of the two (2) proposed boat storage buildings following the excavation & removal of soils. b. Would the proposed action cause or result in alteration of, increase or decrease in size of, or encroachment VYesE/ No into any existing wetland, waterbody, shoreline, beach or adjacent area? If Yes: i. Identify the wetland or waterbody which would be affected (by name, water index number, wetland map number or geographic description): Page 4 of 13 H. Describe how the proposed action would affect that waterbody or wetland, e.g. excavation, fill, placement of structures, or alteration of channels, banks and shorelines. Indicate extent of activities, alterations and additions in square feet or acres: The proposed action will not affect the adjacent waterbody or wetland. ........._ ._...�..�........ iii. Will proposed action cause or result in disturbance to bottom sediments? [-]YesONo If Yes, describe: iv. Will proposed action cause or result in the destruction or removal of aquatic vegetation? ❑ YesONo If Yes: • acres of aquatic vegetation proposed to be removed: _.._. • expected acreage of aquatic vegetation remaining after project completion:_ • purpose of proposed removal (e.g. beach clearing, invasive species control, boat access): • proposed method of plant removal • if chemical/herbicide treatment will be used, specify product(s): .._www_ v. Describe any proposed reclamation/mitigation following disturbance: c. Will the proposed action use, or create a new demand for water? OYes []No If Yes: i. Total anticipated water usage/demand per day: 1,162 gallons/day H. Will the proposed action obtain water from an existing public water supply? OYes ❑No If Yes: • Name of district or service area: Suffolk County Water Authority ............... • Does the existing public water supply have capacity to serve the proposal? O Yes[:] No • Is the project site in the existing district? O Yes❑ No • Is expansion of the district needed? ❑ YesO No • Do existing lines serve the project site? ❑ YesO No iii. Will line extension within an existing district be necessary to supply the project? OYes ONo If Yes: • Describe extensions or capacity expansions proposed to serve this project: �.. A water main extension of approximately 765 ft. will be required to serve this project. • Source(s) of supply for the district: Suffolk County Water Authority iv. Is a new water supply district or service area proposed to be formed to serve the project site? ❑ YesONo If, Yes: • Applicant/sponsor for new district: • Date application submitted or anticipated: • Proposed source(s) of supply for new district: v. If a public water supply will not be used, describe plans to provide water supply for the project: w._._ ..... ........ vi. If water supply will be from wells (public or private), maximum pumping capacity: gallons/minute. �. d. Will the proposed action generate liquid wastes? OYes❑No If Yes: i. Total anticipated liquid waste generation per day: 1,165 gallons/day ii. Nature of liquid wastes to be generated (e.g., sanitary wastewater, industrial; if combination, describe all components and approx imate volumes or proportions of each): Sanitary iii. "' Will the proposed action use any existing public wastewater treatment facilities? ❑Yes ONo If Yes: • Name of wastewater treatment plant to be used: ..................... • Name of district: • Does the existing wastewater treatment plant have capacity to serve the project? ❑Yes❑No • Is the project site in the existing district? ❑Yes❑No • Is expansion of the district needed? ❑Yes❑No Page 5 of 13 • Do existing sewer lines serve the project site? ❑YesONo • Will line extension within an existing district be necessary to serve the project? ❑YesONo If Yes: • Describe extensions or capacity expansions proposed to serve this project: iv. Will a new wastewater (sewage) treatment district be formed to serve the project site? ❑YesONo If Yes: • Applicant/sponsor for new district: • Date application submitted or anticipated ...., • What is the receiving water for the wastewater discharge? .....� v. If public facilities will not be used, describe plans to provide wastewater treatment for the project, including specifying proposed receiving water (name and classification if surface discharge, or describe subsurface disposal plans): Conventional subsurface sewage disposal systems are proposed. ............ ......... vi. Describe any plans or designs to capture, recycle or reuse liquid waste: An on-site drainage system is proposed to capture and recharge stormwater runoff. e. Will the proposed action disturb more than one acre and create stormwater runoff, either from new point OYes❑No sources (i.e. ditches, pipes, swales, curbs, gutters or other concentrated flows of stormwater) or non-point source (i.e. sheet flow) during construction or post construction? If Yes: L How much impervious surface will the project create in relation to total size of project parcel? Square feet or 2.333 acres (impervious surface) Square feet or 32.96 acres(pparcel size) to ii. Describe types of new point sources The(2) proposed buildings (101,500 sf) iii. Where will the stormwater runoff be directed (i.e. on-site stormwater management facility/structures, adjacent properties, groundwater, on-site surface water or off-site surface waters)? On-site stormwater management structures. ....... ................... ....... ........ • If to surface waters, identify receiving water bodies or wetlands: • Will stormwater runoff flow to adjacent properties? ❑YesONo iv. Does proposed plan minimize impervious surfaces, use pervious materials or collect and re-use stormwater? OYes❑No f. Does the proposed action include, or will it use on-site, one or more sources of air emissions, including fuel ❑Yes ONo combustion, waste incineration, or other processes or operations? If Yes, identify: i. Mobile sources during project operations (e.g., heavy equipment, fleet or delivery vehicles) �.____ ......... ii. Stationary sources during construction (e.g., power generation, structural heating, batch plant, crushers) ......... ___ ._.... iii. Stationary sources during operations (e.g., process emissions, large boilers, electric generation) g. Will any air emission sources named in D.2.f (above), require a NY State Air Registration, Air Facility Permit, ❑YesONo or Federal Clean Air Act Title IV or Title V Permit? If Yes: L Is the project site located in an Air quality non-attainment area? (Area routinely or periodically fails to meet ❑Yes❑No ambient air quality standards for all or some parts of the year) ii. In addition to emissions as calculated in the application, the project will generate: • _..................... "I"ons/year (short tons) of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) • on0year (short tons) of Nitrous Oxide (N20) • Tons/yeas (short tons) of Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) • Tons/year (short tons) of Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) • 'TIons/year (short tons) of Carbon Dioxide equivalent of Hydroflourocarbons (HFCs) • �Toras/year (short tons) of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPS) Page 6 of 13 h. Will the proposed action generate or emit methane (including, but not limited to, sewage treatment plants, ❑Yes®No landfills, composting facilities)? If Yes: i. Estimate methane generation in tons/year (metric): ii. Describe an methane capture, control or elimination measures included in project design e y p p g ( g., combustion to generate heat or electricity, flaring): i. Will the proposed action result in the release of air pollutants from open-air operations or processes, such as ❑Yes®No quarry or landfill operations? If Yes: Describe operations and nature of emissions (e.g., diesel exhaust, rock particulates/dust): j. Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels or generate substantial ❑YesONo new demand for transportation facilities or services? If Yes: i. When is the peak traffic expected (Check all that apply): ❑ Morning ❑ Evening ❑Weekend ❑ Randomly between hours of to ii. For commercial activities only, projected number of semi-trailer truck trips/day: iii. Parking spaces: Existing Proposed �mmmm .. Net increase/decrease iv. Does the proposed action include any shared use parking? ❑Yes❑No v. If the proposed action includes any modification of existing roads, creation of new roads or change in existing access, describe: vi. Are public/private transportation service(s) or facilities available within V2 mile of the proposed site? []Yes[] No vii Will the proposed action include access to public transportation or accommodations for use of hybrid, electric []Yes[] No or other alternative fueled vehicles? viii. Will the proposed action include plans for pedestrian or bicycle accommodations for connections to existing ❑Yes❑ No pedestrian or bicycle routes? k. Will the proposed action (for commercial or industrial projects only) generate new or additional demand ®Yes❑No for energy? If Yes: L Estimate annual electricity demand during operation of the proposed action: Minimal - site lighting. U. ._..... __... _. " Anticipated sources/suppliers of electricity for the project (e.g., on-site combustion, on-site renewable, via grid/local utility, or other): PSEG ........ ....... ...... iii. Will the proposed action require a new, or an upgrade to, an existingsubstation? ❑ Yes No 1. Hours of operation. Answer all items which apply, i. During Construction: ii. During Operations: • Monday - Friday: 7am-5pm • Monday - Friday: 7am-5pm • Saturday: �ww 7am-5pm • Saturday: 7am-5pm • Sunday:, • Sunday: 7am-5pm • Holidays: • Holidays: 7am-5pm Page 7 of 13 m. Will the proposed action produce noise that will exceed existing ambient noise levels during construction, ❑ Yes ONo operation, or both? If yes: L Provide details including sources, time of day and duration: ii. Will proposed action remove existing natural barriers that could act as a noise barrier or screen? []Yes[]No Describe: n.. Will the proposed action have outdoor lighting? OYes ❑No If yes: i. Describe source(s), location(s), height of fixture(s), direction/aim, and proximity to nearest occupied structures: Building mounted lighting fixtures (Refer to Site Plan) ..............__..0 H. Will proposed action remove existing natural barriers that could act as a light barrier or screen? . ............ ❑Yes ONo Describe: o. Does the proposed action have the potential to produce odors for more than one hour per day? ❑ Yes ONo If Yes, describe possible sources, potential frequency and duration of odor emissions, and proximity to nearest occupied structures: ..._........................... ._ p. Will the proposed action include any bulk storage of petroleum (combined capacity of over 1,100 gallons) ❑ Yes ONo or chemical products 185 gallons in above ground storage or any amount in underground storage? If Yes: i. Product(s) to be stored ii. Volume(s) per unit time ITmITIT., .... (e.g., month, year) iii. Generally describe proposed storage facilities: q. Will the proposed action (commercial, industrial and recreational projects only) use pesticides (i.e., herbicides, O Yes []No insecticides) during construction or operation? If Yes: i. Describe proposed treatnient(s): Routine maintenance of lawn and landscape areas. ...... . ............ .... .... _. H. Will the pr2posed action use Integrated Pest Management Practices? 0 Yes ONo r. Will the proposed action (commercial or industrial projects only) involve or require the management or disposal O Yes []No of solid waste (excluding hazardous materials)? If Yes: L Describe any solid waste(s) to be generated during construction or operation of the facility: • Construction: N.A. tons per (unit of time) • Operation : 1.o tons per month (unit of time) ii. Describe any proposals for on-site minimization, recycling or reuse of materials to avoid disposal as solid waste: o Construction: N.A. • Operation: N.A. �_...W.�.... ..... iii. Proposed disposal methods/facilities for solid waste generated on-site: • Construction: Private carters • Operation: Private carters Page 8 of 13 s. Does the proposed action include construction or modification of a solid waste management facility? ❑ Yes 0 No If Yes: i. Type of management or handling of waste proposed for the site (e.g., recycling or transfer station, composting, landfill, or other disposal activities): H. Anticipated rate of disposal/processing: • Tons/month, if transfer or other non-combustion/thermal treatment, or • Tons/hour, if combustion or thermal treatment iii. If landfill, anticipated site life: years t. Will proposed action at the site involve the commercial generation, treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous ❑Yes waste? If Yes: i. Name(s) of all hazardous wastes or constituents to be generated, handled or managed at facility: ii. Generally describe processes or activities involving hazardous wastes or constituents: iii. Specify amount to be handled or generated tons/month iv. Describe any proposals for on-site minimization, recycling or reuse of hazardous constituents. ...... _........ v. Will any hazardous wastes be disposed at an existing offsite hazardous waste facility? ❑Yes No If Yes: provide name and location of facility: If No: describe proposed management of any hazardous wastes which will not be sent to a hazardous waste facility: E. Site and Setting of Proposed Action E.I. Land uses on and surrounding the project site a. Existing land uses. i. Check all uses that occur on, adjoining and near the project site. ❑ Urban ❑ Industrial 0 Commercial 0 Residential (suburban) ❑ Rural (non-farm) ❑ Forest ❑ Agriculture 0 Aquatic ❑ Other (specify): ii. If mix of uses, generally describe: b. Land uses and covertypes on the project site. Land use or Current Acreage After Change Covertype Acreage Project Completion (Acres +/-) « Roads, buildings, and other paved or impervious 1.59 3.95 +2.36 surfaces -......._ ........_ • Forested �.....-.�...�.... _ .......... 26.49 22.59 -3.90 • Meadows, grasslands or brushlands (non- 4.05 4.05 0 agricultural, including abandoned agricultural) Agricultural 0 0 0 (includes active orchards, field, greenhouse etc.) Surface water features 0 0 0 (lakes, ponds, streams, rivers, etc.) + Wetlands (freshwater or tidal) 0.63 0.63 0 ............... __......... • Non -vegetated (bare rock, earth or fill) .... .__......... -........................ . w Other ........... Describe: Lawn & landscaping 0.20 1.74 +1.54 Page 9 of 13 c. Is the project site presently used by members of the community for public recreation? ❑YesONo L If Yes: explain: d. Are there any facilities serving children, the elderly, people with disabilities (e.g., schools, hospitals, licensed ❑YesONo day care centers, or group homes) within 1500 feet of the project site? If Yes, i. Identify Facilities: �... . ..._.. ....... _.._ e. Does the project site contain an existing dam? ❑YesONo If Yes: i. Dimensions of the dam and impoundment: • Dam height: feet .............. __ • Dam length: feet • Surface area:acres ..... • Volume impounded: gallons OR acre-feet ii. Dam's existing hazard classification: W. Provide date and summarize results of Tast inspection: ........... f. Has the project site ever been used as a municipal commercial or industrial solid waste management facility, ...ww.... ❑YesONo or does the project site adjoin property which is now, or was at one time, used as a solid waste management facility? If Yes: L Has the facility been formally closed? []Yes[] No • If yes, cite sources/documentation: ii. Describe the location of the project site relative to the boundaries of the solid waste management facility: ............ ._.. W. Describe any development constraints due to the prior solid waste activities: g. Have hazardous wastes been generated, treated and/or disposed of at the site, or does the project site adjoin ❑YesONo property which is now or was at one time used to commercially treat, store and/or dispose of hazardous waste? If Yes: i. Describe waste(s) handled and waste management activities, including approximate time when activities occurred: h. Potential contamination history. Has there been a reported spill at the proposed project site, or have any ❑YesO No remedial actions been conducted at or adjacent to the proposed site? If Yes: i. Is any portion of the site listed on the NYSDEC Spills Incidents database or Environmental Site ❑Yes❑No Remediation database? Check all that apply: ❑ Yes — Spills Incidents database Provide DEC ID number(s): ❑ Yes — Environmental Site Remediation database Provide DEC ID number(s):_, ❑ Neither database ii. If site has been subject of RCRA corrective activities, describe control mea-sures:. .. ..... .... W. Is the project within 2000 feet of any site in the NYSDEC Environmental Site Remediation database? ❑Yes❑No If yes, provide DEC ID number(s): iv. If yes to (i), (ii) or (iii) above, describe current status of site(s): Page 10 of 13 ........................................ .......__ V. Is the project site subject to an institutional control limiting property uses? ❑YesONo • If yes, DEC site ID number: • Describe the type of institutional control (e.g., deed restriction or easement): Describe any use limitations: Describe any engineering controls: Will the project affect the institutional or engineering controls in place? ❑Yes❑No Explain: .......- E.2. Natural Resources On or Near Project Site - --- ....... _...._.� a. What is the average depth to bedrock on the project site? N.A. feet _. ... �....___. _ . .......... .. b. Are there bedrock outcroppings on the project site? _.... . ........ ❑Yes®No If Yes, what proportion of the site is comprised of bedrock outcroppings? % c. Predominant soil type(s) present on project site: CpE - Carver & Plymouth sands 43% RdB - Riverhead sandy loam 18 PIC - Plymouth loamy sand 39-% d. What is the average depth to the water table on the project site? Average: 0-49 feet e. Drainage status of project site soils:0 Well Drained: 90 % of site O Moderately Well Drained: 5 % of site ® Poorly Drained 5 % of site f. Approximate proportion of proposed action site with slopes: ® 0-10%: 18-% of site ® 10-15%: 39mm% of site ® 15% or greater: 43 % of site .. ...... g. Are there any unique geologic features on the project site? ❑Yes®No If Yes, describe: h. Surface water features. i. Does any portion of the project site contain wetlands or other waterbodies (including streams, rivers, ®Yes❑No ponds or lakes)? ii. Do any wetlands or other waterbodies adjoin the project site? ®Yes❑No If Yes to either i or ii, continue. If No, skip to E.21 iii. Are any of the wetlands or waterbodies within or adjoining the project site regulated by any federal, ®Yes ❑No state or local agency? iv. For each identified regulated wetland and waterbody on the project site, provide the following information: Streams: Name Mattituck Creek Classification Lakes or Ponds: Name Classification • Wetlands: Name .__._ ....... Approximate Size • Wetland No. (if regulated by DEC) . v. Are any of the above water bodies listed in the most recent compilation of NYS water quality-impaired ❑Yes 0,To waterbodies? If yes, name of impaired water body/bodies and basis for listing as impaired: ._.... _ ®....... i. Is the project site in a designated Floodway? ®Yes ❑No ........ j. Is the project site in the 100 year Floodplain? OYes❑No ......_ ..........._._ k. Is the project site in the 500 year Floodplain? _ ❑Yes ONo _. 1. Is the project site located over, or immediately adjoining, a primary, principal or sole source aquifer? _ ....... ®Yes❑No If Yes: i. Name of aquifer:Upper Glacial Aquifer Page 11 of 13 in. Identify the predominant wildlife species that occupy or use the project site: Small birds & mammals n. Does the project site contain a designated significant natural community? ❑Yes®No If Yes: i. Describe the habitat/community (composition, function, and basis for designation): �._ ii. Source(s) of description or evaluation: W. Extent of community/habitat: • Currently: acres • Following completion of project as proposed:IT w .„ acres m Gain or loss (indicate + or -): acres ....... ..... o. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal that is listed by the federal government or NYS as .... ❑ Yes®No endangered or threatened, or does it contain any areas identified as habitat for an endangered or threatened species? p. Does the project site contain any species of plant or animal that is listed by NYS as rare, or as a species of Yes®No special concern? ........ q. Is the project site or adjoining area currently used for hunting, trapping, fishing or shell fishing? ®Yes❑No If yes, give a brief description of how the proposed action may affect that use: The proposed action will not have a negative impact on fishing .......... E.3. Designated Public Resources On or Near Project Site ... ..... ............... __ a. Is the project site, or any portion of it, located in a designated agricultural district certified pursuant to ......�... ❑Yes®No Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? If Yes, provide county plus district name/number: b. Are agricultural lands consisting of highly productive soils present? ❑Yes®No i. If Yes: acreage(s) on project site? .................. ii. Source(s) of soil rating(s): c. Does the project site contain all or part of, or is it substantially contiguous to, a registered National ❑YesoNo Natural Landmark? If Yes: i. Nature of the natural landmark: ❑ Biological Community ❑ Geological Feature ii. Provide brief description of landmark, including values behind designation and approximate size/extent: d. Is the project site located in or does it adjoin a state listed Critical Environmental Area? ❑Yes®No If Yes: i. CEA name: H. Basis for designation: ................... W. Designating agency and date: Page 12 of 13 ....... _ e. Does the project site contain, or is it substantially contiguous to, a building, archaeological site, or district ... ❑ YesO No which is listed on, or has been nominated by the NYS Board of Historic Preservation for inclusion on, the State or National Register of Historic Places? If Yes: i. Nature of historic/archaeological resource: ❑Archaeological Site ❑Historic Building or District ii. Name: .... _www... _. _ _. ....... iii. Brief description of attributes on which listing is based: f. Is the project site, or any portion of it, located in or adjacent to an area designated as sensitive for ❑Yes ONo archaeological sites on the NY State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) archaeological site inventory? ......... .......... g. Have additional archaeological or historic site(s) or resources been identified on the project site? ❑Yes ONo If Yes: i. Describe possible resource(s):IT ii. Basis for identification: �IT_ . _............ h. Is the project site within fives miles of any officially designated and publicly accessible federal, state, or local ❑Yes ONo scenic or aesthetic resource? If Yes: i. Identify resource: ii. Nature of, or basis for, designation (e.g., established highway overlook, state or local park, state historic trail or scenic byway, etc.) iii. Distance between project and resource: miles _... L Is the project site located within a designated river corridor under the Wild, Scenic and Recreational Rivers ❑YesONo Program 6 NYCRR 666? If Yes: i. Identify the name of the river and its designation: ii. Is the activity consistent with development restrictions contained in 6NYCRR Part 666? []Yes ❑No F. Additional Information Attach any additional information which may be needed to clarify your project. If you have identified any adverse impacts which could be associated with your proposal, please describe those impacts plus any measures which you propose to avoid or minimize them. G. Verification I certify that the information provided is true to the best of my knowledge. Applicant/Sponsor Name young 8 "young Attn: Thomas C. Wolpert, P.E. Date July 17, 2018 Signaturc�^"-'.oil Title Agent for Applicant PRINT FORM I Page 13 of 13 Full Environmental Assessment Form Part I - Project and Setting Instructions for Completing Part 1 Part l is to be completed by the applicant or project sponsor. Responses become part of the application for approval or funding, are subject Its public revicw, and may be subject to further verification, Complete Part l based on infor ation currently available. If additional rcwarcb or investigation would be accdcd to fully respond to any item, please answer as thoroughly as possible based on cuaTent information; bdicatc whether missing information does not exist, or is not reasonably available to the sponsor„ and, when possible, generally describe work or studies which would be necessary to update or fully, develop that inforntation. Applicants/sponsors must complete all items in Sections A & B. In Sections C, A & P" most items contain an initial question. that most be answered either -Yes" or "No". if the answer to the initial question is `''Yes'", complete the scab -questions that follow, if the answer to the initial question is -No", proceed to the next question, Sectim F allows the project sponsor to identify and attach any additional infotnaation_ Section G requires the name and signature of the project sponsor to verify that the information contained in Part 'l is accurate and complete. A. Project and Sponsor Information. Marne of Action or Project: Strong's Yacht Center - @oat Storage Buildings ) Project l..oc+a�tion (ilescril)e, and attach a gen,�er..._al._location._ _.xaa� __apj: - �..._._..... _ _ South side of Mill Road appror. 100' east of Naugles Road at Mattituck, T10 Southold, NY (Refer to Key Map) Brief escription of Proposed Action (include purpose, or necd)„ Cortslruct one (1,) 6.2.600 5'f boat storage budding and one (1) 49,000 Lf, boat storage building, together with the associated site improvements including water supply„ sewage disposal, grading, drainage. landscaping & lighting. Name of Applicant/ Sponsor: Young & Young Af n. Thomas C. Wolpert P.E. 400 Ostrander Avenue Rlverhead Project Contact (if not same as sponsor; give name and titlelrole): Charles R. Cuddy, Esq., Attorney for Applicant Address: 44.6 Grifr"m,g Avenue City/PO: Riverhead Property Yacht Cerate {'f ti p of same as Strongs r Address: 5780 West Mill Road CitylPo: Mattihack Page 1 of 13 681-727-2303 tcW@yo ungennaadneeting-com Stage': New York _Tzip Code: 119o1 Telephone 631-369-82oo P-Mail:chadeseuddy@optonline.net btate: �_.m�90 Code: Newyorkelephonea: 631-298-4480 11 _— E -Mail: ,leaf@strorrrgsmarbe.,com State: New York I Zip Code: 11952 B. Government Approvals B. Government Approvals, Funding, ("Funding" rants, low pp ding, or Sponsorship. (°"Fu � g' g loans, tax relief, and any other forms of assistance.) Government EntityIf Yes. IdentifyRequ c ...,... Agency and Approval(s) Application Date Required I (Actual or projected) a. City Council, Town Board, ❑YesONo 0Ycs0No ®Yes❑No b. Is the site of the proposed action within an local or regional special planning district (for example: Greenway p po, Y >� or Village Board of Trustees Brownfield Opportunity Area (BOA); designated State or Federal heritage area; watershed management plan; b. City, Town or Village pry + eS❑NO Town of Southold Planning Board - July, 2018 Planning Board or Commission Site Plan Approval c. City Council, Town or ❑Yes®No MYesO'l*lo or an adopted municipal farmland protection plan? Village Zoning Board of Appeals If Yes, identify the plan(s): _ d. Other local agenciesc-9 1No T/0 Southold Board of Trustees - July, 2018 Wetland Permit e. County agencies ®Yes❑No SCDHS Office of Wastewater Management - July, 2018 Water Su && Sewage Disposal f. Regional agencies ❑Yes®No g. State agencies OYesoNo NYSDEC - Tidal Wetland Pennitor July. 2018 Letter of No Jurisdiction h. Federal agencies []Yesolo i. Coastal Resources. i. Is the project site within a Coastal Area, p j or the waterfront area of a Designated Inland Waterway? ®Yes❑t\To ii. is the project site located in a community with an approved Local Waterfront Revitalization Program? ®YesONo W. is the project site within a Coastal Erosion Hazard Area? ❑Yes®No C. Planning and Zoning C.I. Planning and zoning', actions. _ %Vil"l administrative or legislative adoption, or amendment of a plan, local law, ordinance, rule or regulation be the OYesz No only approval(s) which must be granted to enable the proposed action to proceed? If Yes, complete sections C, F and G. If No, proceed to question C.2 and complete all remaining sections and questions in Part 1 C.2. Adopted land use plans. a. Do any municipally- adopted. (city, town, village or county) comprehensive land use plao(s) include the site where the proposed action would be located? If Yes, docs the comprehensive plan include specific recommendations for the site where the proposed action would bc located? 0Ycs0No ®Yes❑No b. Is the site of the proposed action within an local or regional special planning district (for example: Greenway p po, Y >� OYes[3M Brownfield Opportunity Area (BOA); designated State or Federal heritage area; watershed management plan; or other?) If Yes, identify the plan(s): c. Is thero osed action located wholly or artrall within an area listed in an adopted municipal open space plan, proposed y partially MYesO'l*lo or an adopted municipal farmland protection plan? If Yes, identify the plan(s): Page 2 of 13 C.3. Zoning a. Is the site of the proposed action located in a municipality with an ad �g ty opted zoning law or ordinance. OYes)]No If Yes, what is the zoning classification(s) including any applicable overlay district? Marine it (WI) & Resldenttat Low Density A (R-80) b. Is the use permitted or allowed by a special or conditional use permit? OYes❑No c. Is a �.._._�_... zoning change requested as part of the proposed action? E ycsNaa If Yes, i. What is the proposed new zoning for the site? CA. Existing community ser -%ices. a. In what school district is the project site located? b. What police or other public protection forces serve die project site? Southold c. Which fire.....�_s protection and emergency medsMeal services serve the project site? Mattituck - Cutchogue d_ What parks serve the project site? Mattitudc - Cutchogue D. Project Details D.I. Proposed and Potential Development a. What is the general nature of the proposed action (e.g., residential, industrial, eon= rcial, recreational, if mixed, include all'�� components)? Commercial (float Storage) b. a. Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? 32955'9 g P Fo acres b. Total acreage to be physically disturbed? 3.9 acres c. Total acreage (project site and any contiguous properties) owned or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? 32.9559 acres c. Is the pro,poscd action an expansion of an existing projecl or use? O Yes❑INo i. If Yes, what is the approximate percentage of the proposed expansion and identify the units (e.g., acres, miles, housing units, square feet)? % 146.6 Units: N.A. d. Is the proposed; action a subdivision, or does it include a subdivision? Oyesmo If Yes, 4 Purpose or type of subdivision? (e.g., residential, industrial, commercial; if mixed, specify types) cluster/conservation layout proposed? ii. Is a clustcrJco ❑Yes ❑1Vb iii, Number of lois proposed? iv. Minimum and maximum proposed lot sizes? Minimum Maximum e. Will proposed action be constructed in multiple phases? ❑ YesONo i. If No, anticipated period of construction: 12 months ii_ If Yes: • Total number of phases anticipated • Anticipated commencement date of phase 1 (including demolition) month year • Anticipated completion date of final phase month _wear • Generally describe connections or relationships among phases, including any contingencies where progress of one phase may determine timing or duration of future phases: Page 3 of 13 –T—Does the project include new residential uses? i esNo If Yes, show numbers of units proposed. One Familv Two Fami Three Family Multiple FamilyfL or more Initial Phase At completion of all phases g. Does the proposed action include new non-residential construction (including expansions)? []Yes[]No If Yes, i. Total number of structures 2 H. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure: 30 height; 140width; and 3751ength iii. Approximate extent of building space to be heated or cooled: square feet h. Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that will result in the impoundment of any [ 1'"cs No liquids, such as creation of a water supply, reservoir, pond, Iake, waste lagoon or other storage? If Yes, fl. P a water impoundment, nt, the principal , _.,._., _ _m.. �._ ....._._ �. i. Purpose of the impoundment: imp p pal source of the water: Ground water [� 5urfam water streams t f er spil`y; ur_ "' If other than water, identify the type of impounded contained liquids and their source. to size of the proposed im o .............. iv. Approximate p p p =dment. Volume: million gallons; surface area acres v_ Dimensions of the proposed dam or impounding structure: height; length W. Construction methodlmalcrials for the proposed dam or impounding structure (e.g., earth fill, rock, wood, concrete): D2. Project Operations a. Does the proposed action include any excavation, mining, or dredging, during construction, operations, or both? Yes[JNo (Not including general site preparation, grading or installation of utilities or foundations where all excavated materials will remain onsite) If Yes: f . What is the purpose of the excavation or dredging? General site Preparation U. Flow much material (including rock, earth, sediments, etc.) is proposed to be removed from the site? • Volume (specify tons or cubic 130,000 cy • Over what duration of time? 3 months X. Describe nature and characteristics of materials to be excavated or dredged, and plazas to use, manage or dispose of them. a�pprookmately 130,ODD oy of soil will be excavated and removed Imm the sate to prepare tha site for construction iv. g processing _..e ...�..�� ' Will there be onsite dcwaterm or rocessm of excavated materials? i es No If yes, describe, v What is the total area to be dredged or excavated?_ 3.9 acres vi. What is the maximum area to be worked at any one time? o.s acres vii. What would be the maximum depth f excavation or dredging? _ _._ 40 feet vifi. Will the excavation require blasting. []YesONo ir. Summarize site reclamation goals and plan: The site will be reclaimed for the construction ofthe two t l proposed treat at+arage bullditals following the excavabon g removal sof was. b. Wouldthe proposed action cause or result in alteration o f, increase or d crease in size of, or encroachment Yes leo into any existing well acrd, waterbody, shoreline, beach or adjacent area? If Yes: L Identify the wetland or waterbody which would be affected (by name, water index number, wetland map number or geographic description): Page 4 of 13 M. Describe how the proposed action would affect that waterbody or wedan ,e.g_. excavation, fill, placement of structures, or alteration of channels, banks and shorelines. Indicate extent of activities, alterations and additions in square feet or acres: The proposed action will not affect the adjacent waterbody or wetland. iii. Will proposed action cause or result in disturbance to bottom sediments? ❑Yes®No If Yes, describe: re iv. Will proposed action cause or result in the destruction or removal of aquaticJ vegetation? rcM��m� [J YesONo_ If Yes: • acres of aquatic vegetation proposed to be removed: • expected acreage of aquatic vegetation remaining after project completion. • purpose of proposed removal (e.g. beach clearing, invasive species control, boat access): • proposed method of plant removal • if chemical/herbicide treatment will be used, specify produci(s): u __ v. Describe any proposed reclan tationhuiitigation following disturbance: mm c. Will the proposed action use, or create a new d=and for water? OYes Flo If Yes: i. Total anticipated water usage%dom and per day: 1,162 gallons/day U. Will the proposed action obtain water from an existing public water supply? Oyes nio If Yes: • Name of district or service area: Suffolk County Water Authority • Does the existing public water supply have capacity to serve the proposal? OYes❑No • Is the project site in the existing district? ®Yes❑No • Is expansion of the district needed? ❑YesONo • Do existing lines serve the project site? ❑ YesO No M. Will line extension within an existing district be necessary to supply the project? OYes Elo If Yes: • Describe extensions or capacity expansions proposed to serve this project:.....__ _.. A water maln extension of approximately 765 ft. will be required to serve this proleel. • Source(s) of supply for the district _ Authority mm Suffolk Counry Water �.�._..._ „� .� iv. Is a new water supply district or service area proposed to be formed to serve the project site? ....� ❑ YesONo If, Yes: • Applicant/sponsor for new district: • Daft application submitted or anticipated: • Proposed source(s) of supply for new district: v. If a public water supply will not be used, describe plans to provide water supply for the project: vi. If water SPP1 will be from wells atcor ,maximum pumping caPacit9, gallons/minute. d. Will the proposed action generate liquid wastes? OYCSONo If Yes: L Total anticipated liquid waste generation per day: 1,165 gallons/day ff. Nature of liquid wastes to be generated (e.g., sanitary wastewater, industrial; if combination, describe all components and aaap oxitate volumes or proportions of each): id- Will the proposed action use anY_ existing public P u bIt;c w_astewater treatment facilities? OyesoNo If Yes: • Name of wastewater treatment plant to be used: • Name of district: • Does the existing wastewater treatment plant have capacity to serve the project? ❑Yes ❑No • Is the project site in the existing district? ❑Yes❑No • Is expansion of the district needed? ❑Yes❑No Page 5 of 13 • Do existing sewer 1'incs serve the project site? ❑YesONo • Will line extension within an existing district be necessary to serve the project? ❑YesONo If Yes: • Describe extensions or capacity expansions proposed to serve this project: iv. Will a new wastewater (sewage) treatment district be o..�..... to_. ..�_..._� e formed serve the project site? ❑YesONo H Yes: • Applicant/sponsor for new district: J. .....,_. „_.,......,,�,.,,...,,.. ®. _._,.. ._._....�, ..... • Date application submitted or anticipated: • What is the receiving water for the wastewater discharge? v. If public facilities will not be used, describe plans to provide wastewater treatment for the project, including specifying proposed receiving water (name and classification if surface discharge, or describe subsurface disposal plans): Conventional subsurface sewage disposal systems are proposed. vi DOS to capture, recycle or reuse liquidwaste: An on-sita drainage sy+stern is proposed to capture and reolaarga stormwater runoff. e. Will the proposed action disturb more than one acre and create stormwatur runoff; either from new point OYes'❑No sources (i.e. ditches, pipes, swales, curbs, gutters or other concentrated flows of storrowater) or non-point source (i.e. sheet flow) during construction or post construction? If Yes: L How much impervious surface will the project create in relation to total size of project parcel? Square feet or 2.333 acres (impervious surface) acrese fed or 32.96, srhe ar eal U. Describe types ofnnew point sources. (2) pmilosed buildings (101,500 sf) rn. Where will the stormwater nmoff be directed (i.e. on-site stormwater management facility/structures, �IT m� N- - aures, adjacentproperlies, groundwater, on-site surface water or off-site surface waters)? On-site stormwat r management structures. • If to surface waters, identify receiving water bodies or wetlands: Will stormwater mnoff flow to adjacent properties? iv. Does proposed plan minimize impervious surfaces, use pervious materials or collect and re-use storru water? OYes❑ No f, Does the proposed action include, or will it use on-site, one or more sources of air emissions, including fuel ❑YesONo combustion, waste incineration, or other processes or operations? If Yes, identify: i. Mobile sources during project operations (e.g., heavy equipment, fleet or delivery vehicles) ii. Stationary sources duringeonstrtution(.g., power generation, structural heating, batch plant crushers) id. Stationary sources dining operations (e.g., process emissions, large boilers, electric generation) _. g. Will any air emission sources named in D.2.f (above), require a NY State Air Registration, Air Facility Permit, ❑Yes ONo or Federal Clean Air Act Title IV or Title V Permit? If Yes: i, is the project site located in an Air quality non-attainment areal (Area routinely orperiodically fails to meet ❑Yes❑No ambient air quality standards for all or some parts of the year) fi. In addition to emissions as calculated in the application, the project will generate: • Tons/year (short tons) of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) • Tons/year (short tons) of Nitrous Oxide (NZO) • `� Tons/year (short tons) of l'erflitoroearbons (PFCs) • Tonsle,�ar, (short tons) of Sulfur Hexafluoride (SFs) • Tons/year (short tons) of Carbon Dioxide equivalent of Hydroflourocarbons (HFCs) -ro&Vyear (short tons) of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) Page 6 of 13 h. Will the proposed action generate or emit methane (including, but not limited to, sewage treatment plants, Yes'' No landfills, composting facilities)? If Yes: i, Estimate methane generation in ar (metric): U. Describe any capture, controlor elimination measures included in project design (e.g., combustion to generate heat or Y P � P J electricity, flaring):-_--_-- _._-... proposed _..�. e release of air 1.—_�. i. Will the action result in the pollutants from open-air operations or processes, such as )°a O"O l0 quarry or landfill operations? If Yes: Describe operations and nature of emissions (e.g., diesel exhaust, rock particulates/dust): j. Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels or generate substantial OYes❑ No new demand for transportation facilities or services? If Yes: i. When is the peak traffic expected (Check all that apply): ❑ Morning ❑ Evening ❑Weekend ® Randomly between hours of 7:oaam to 4.QOT9 'm _„_. ii. For commercial activities only, projected number of semi -trailer truck trips/day: 7 truck trrps±d rturora a cora t iii. Parking spaces: Existing _ Proposed __ s7 Net increase/decrease _,-_ _ _+ 4 __---§L3— iv. Does the proposed action include any sb as ed use parking? ❑Yes❑No v. If the proposed action includes any modification of existing roads, creation of new roads or chanle in existing access, describe: '.d'14th..;t9IT7pti7&�'al��r�xcr�clfra7 li�wi�^illt. mad' II as nru�N'raarra�t1 �'6nr �,45[rNrnw�r>[:�'Cn�rdttafw�r"v�+"�t�"'n1�_,..._ _. construct on aetlwfies. or F of the proposed site. vi. Are within /z mile posed OYcs❑No action elude aces to public transportation ions foruse ofmmXm bred, electric P P p transportation or accommodations h vii Will theft ro Ycs� No or other alternative fueled vehicles? viii. Will the proposed action include plans for pedestrian or bicycle accommodations for connections to existing ❑Yes®No pedestrian or bicycle routes? k. Will the proposed action (for commercial or industrital projects only) generate new or additional demand 0yes0rin for energy? If Yes: i. Estimate annual electricity demand during operation ofthe proposed - if. Amici ated sources/suppliers pliers of electt-tcii, mm for the project (e.g., on-site combustion, on-site renewable via P pl y p -a grid/local utility, or other): in. Will the proposed action require a new, or an upgrade to, an existing substation? Teso No __.... ..._..�_._.._. all items which apply. L. flours of operation. Answer7am L Drum Contraction: u. During IT •Operations! Friday-_ _ m Monday Friday: 7 mi -' 5pnt - 5 MondayFy 7am -5�m • Saturday: T_ 5pm----- • Saturday:r _ _ 7am • Sunday. --._._ • Sunday:5 . pm �_.... Holidays: _ ..... • Holidays: __. .. Pam pm Page 7 of 13 d action produce noise that will exceed existing ambient noise levels during construction, EY'es ONo M. ��a� oopos If yes: i. Provide details including sources, time of day and duration: r. Will sed action r.- s. of a -" -proposed � remove existrng natural barriers that could act as a Dotes r barrie or screen? l�lua Describe• n_ Will the proposed action have outdoor lighting? OYCSEI No If yes: i. Describe source(s), location(s), height offrtxture(s), direction/aim, and proximity to nearest occupied structures: BuIldhig makiated lighting ttr ores eferto Site Phan) U. Will proposed action remove exis in natural _ that.�.� . � � - p p g .... barriers that could act as a light barrier or screen? - Yes ONo Describe.• o. Does the proposed action have the potential to prodncc odors for more than one hour per day? [3Yes No If Yes, describe possible sources, potential frequency and duration of odor emissions, and proximity to nearest occupied structures: p. Will the proposed action include any bulk storage of petroleum (combined capacity of over 1,1 DO gallons;) ® Yes PINo or cbemical products 185 gallons in above ground storage or any amount in underground storage? If Yes: L Products to be stored () lr Volnrne(s) per rrtrtt p tarns (e.g., month, year) iii Generally dcscribeproposed storage facilities' q. Wall the purposed action (commercial, indtastrial and recreational projects only) use pesticides (i.e., herbicides, Yes ONo insecticides) during construction or operation? If Yes: i. Describe proposed treatment(s): Routine maintenance of lawn and landscape areas. ri. W171-f thero�erl action use Inte ated Pest Management Practices? 0 Yes ONo r. Will the proposed action (cosarnercial or industrial projects only) involve or rcquirc the management or disposal O Yes ®No of solid waste (excluding hazardous materials)? If Yes: i. Describe any solid waste(s) to be generated during construction or operation of the facility: • Construction: N.A. tons per (unit of time) • Operation: 1.4 tons per m anth (unit of time) H. Describe an proposals for on-site ` `nation, recycling y propo or reuse of materials to avoid disposal as solid waste: Constructiorx. NA • _ Operation: '�- Via._-._. ___ _ ,.�. ,.m.�._...... _...._�.. �...._., W. Proposed disposal methods/facilities for solid waste generated on-site: • Construction: Pdvate carters • Operation: Page 8 of 13 s. Does the proposed action include construction or modification of a solid waste management facility? ❑ Yes 0 No If Yes: i. Type of management or handling of waste proposed for the site (e.g., recycling or transfer station, composting, landfill, or other disposal activities): ff. Anticipated rate of disposal/processing: • Tons/month, if transfer or other non-cornbustion/thermal treatment, or • Tons/hour, if combustion or thermal treatment iii rflanrlfill antir. mtPd cite lifP• yore Page 9 of 13 t. Will proposed action at the site involve the commercial generation, treatment, storage, or disposal of i a dour Q yesONo waste? If Yes: i. Names of all hazardous wastes or constituents to be gerretated, handled or managed at facili !f. Generally describe processes or activities involving hazardous rtes or constituents. was iii. Specify amount to be handled or generated tons/month iv. Describe any proposals for on-site minimization, recycling or reuse of hazardous constituents: v. Will __. any hazardous wastes be disposed at an existing o$site hazardous waste facility? nkesNo If Yes: provide name and location offacility- IfNo: describeproposedmanagement ofany hazardous wages which will not be sent to a lazaydous waste facility. w_ E. Site and Setting of Proposed Action E.1. Land uses on and surrounding the project site a. Existing land uses. i. Chea all uses '(bat occur on, Aoining and near the project site. ❑ Urban [ Industrial 0 Con nlercial 0 Residential (suburban) ❑ Rural (non-farm) ❑ Forest ❑ Agriculture 0 Aquatic ❑ Other (specify): fl. Ifmixof uses, generally describe; b. Land uses and covertypes on the project site. Land use or Current Acreage After Change Coveitype Acreage a Project Completion tll (Acres 4/-) • Roads, buildings, and other paved or impervious surfaces _.._...�.. _ 1.59 �__.._.� 3.95 +2.35 • Forested 26.49 22.66_.- • Meadows, grasslands or brushlands (non- 4.05 405 0 agricultural, including abandoned agricultural) • Agricultural 0 0 0 (includes active orchards, field, greenhouse etc.) • Surface water features (lakes, ponds, streams, rivets, etc.) 0 • Wetlands (freshwater or tidal) 0.63 0.63 0 • Non -vegetated (bare rock, earth or fill) Other Describe: Lawn & landscaping 020 1.74 +1.54 v Page 9 of 13 c.i P j p ..�� _..._...�..... community _. Yes. project presently used b members of the commune for public tecreattoit7 ...._.. If — d. Are hesoities serving s thea people with disabilities (e_ ., schools, hospitals, licensed O5esO_bo !` day centerr;uP)within 1500feet of the project IfYes, t. Identify Facilities: e.Does the project site contain an existing dam? YesNo If Yes: d k' i. Dimensions of the dam and impoundment , • Dam height ...._. feet � ........� • Dam length: feet • Surface area: acres Volume impounded: —_.... gallons OR acre-feet •m ir. Da s existing hazard classification: W. Provide date and summarize results of last inspecion:t - v .—. :... .. l f. Has the project site ever been used as a municipal, comtnerctal or industrial solid waste management facility, _ No .._ . O"esOhio or does the pro*t site adjoin ro which is now, or was at one time, used as a solid waste maua cment facility? P lsi J property g If Yes: L Has the facility been formally closed? ❑Yes[] No • If yes, cite sources/documentation: ii. Describe the location of the project site relative to the boundaries of the solid waste managementmmi —facility: iii. Describe any d __ �. eveloprment consttaiaits dine to the prior solid waste activities: � . . , - P j --�— �._a.—...n g � � g. Have us wastes been enerat treated and/or did osed of at the site or does the ro ect site ed'om I�'i�es�N property ro which is now or was at one time used to commercial) trea store and/or dispose of hazardous waste? Y If Yes: L Describe waste(s) handled and waste management activities, including approximate time when activities occurred h. Potential contamination history. Has there been a reported spill at the proposed project site, or have any 0 YesO No remedial actions been conducted at or adjacent to the proposed site? If Yes: L Is any portion of the site listed on the NYSDEC Spills Incidents database or Environmental Site ❑Yes[]No Remediation database? Check all that apply: ❑ Yes — Spills incidents database Provide DEC ID number(s): Yes — Environmental Site Remediation database Provide DEC ID number(s): ❑ Neither database U. If site has been subject of RCRA corrective activities, describe control measures: W. Is the project within2000 fect of any site in the NYSDEC Envirootnental Site Remediation database? []Yesn ti If yes, provide DEC ID number(s): iv. If yes to (i), (ii) or (iii) above, describe current status of site(s): y Page 10 of 13 ' j _ o an control limiting-_..... �.._.m_. .�.m.. ...,� _..� _..." " v Is the project site subject t� instil . . property uses? ......_.._.._. _�._. .....- ❑ycs X30 • Ifyes, DEC site ED number: _....._.. ..__ ....- _,....__.__....__ • Describe the type of institutional control (e.g., deed restriction or easement) • Describe any use limitations: • Describe anengineering controls: - Y Sm g • Will the project affect the institutional or engineering controls m P j gr g place? FI Yes o On or Near Project Site E,2, Natural Resources _ -_ _...._a "`ltat is the avers a de th to bedrock on tlr tu? tai... feet � project si � A feet Are there bedrock outcroppings on the project site? P 1 _ Y—S If Yes, what proportion of the site is comprised of bedrock outcroppings? % a _ __..�..-.�._�rArar'�N rnnzrttp sands .__— .... ._ ._. ..�...___ c. Predominant soil e_.-- tYP (s) Present on prcrlect situ. t;p -Carver ....m . B - Rrverhead sandy loam 16% PIC Plymouth Inarny sand 39% _._..._._.. � -___ ..-�..,. ._,., ..",_m ..,. .._..__.-,.._ _ ............_ _a... What is the average depth th to o the water table on the project site? Average feet .... "., rt __ 1 site e. Drainage status of project site soi 5.® Well Drained- so. /o of s ® Moderately Well Drained: 5 /o of site ® Poorly Drained 5 % of site �.... '_, . _.._..._.......�......._._. _._ fAPprorrate'P"z Portion of proposed action site. with slopes: 01t°: 18.% of site ® 0-15%. _ 39 % of site m43 ® 15% or greater: % of site g. Are there any unique geologic features on the project site? Yes�;No If Yes, dcscnbe: h. Surface water features. pr j other waterbodies (including streams, rivers, i. Does any portion of the project site contain wetlands or ®Yes❑No ponds or lakes)? ii Do any wetlands or other waterbodies adjoin the project site? ®Yes❑No If Yes to either 1 or ii, continue. If No, skip to E.21 X. Are any of the wetlands or waterbodies within or adjoining the project site regulated by any federal, ®Yes❑No state or local agency? iv. For each identified regulated wetland and waterbody on the project situ, provide the following information: • Streams: Name ...�...,_. �- ... __ Classification—--—, • Lakes or Ponds: Name Classification _ Wetlands: Name_--,. _.EC) _tee Tidal'yWellands"N ederaf Waters Approximate Size • Wetland No. (if regulated by D v. Are any of the above water bodies listed in the most recent compilation of NYS water quality-impai red ®Yes❑Nc waterbodies? If yes, name of impaired water body/bodies and basis for listing as impaired:__,___ . aMuck Creek The basis for Hind is due to pollutants and pathogens in Mattituck Greeko Ma ' i. Is the project site in a designated Floodway? ❑YesNo �._-._.. the 100 year Floodplain? -._m._ �.. __._.._.. �-...".. Is the project site m -." j• P J �Yos�ti1...�. o k. Is the project site m the ._.. _,. ' 500 year Floodplain? ®Y -ONO �j immediately adjoining, a primary, principal or sole source aquifer? L Is the ect site located over, or esEJNo If Yes: Nassau - Suffolk Sole Source Aquifemm.. ._. _.. t. Name of aquifer-. tdasar ._ _-- �. Page 11 of 13 m. Identify the predominant wildlife species that occupy or use the project site: Small birds and mammals n. Does the project site contain a dcsiignated significant natural community? if Yes: L Describe the habitat/community (composition, function, and basis for designation): . ..... ii.ource(s)ofdescripfion or evaluation---,-- W. Extent of community/habitat: • Currently: acres Following completion of project as proposed: acres 0 Gain or loss (indicate + or acres . .......... o. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal that is listed by the federal government or NYS as 2 YesE]No endangered or threatened, or does it contain any areas identified as habitat for an endangered or threatened species? Federally listed as threatened. Northem long-eared bat (Myots septenirionalis) habitat. P• Does the project site contain any species ofp1ant or animal that is listed by NYS as rare, or as a spocies of special concern? State listed species: Saulhemsprtte (fivm NYSDEC database). State IkAscl species of special concern: 'Eastern Box Turtle (Terrapene carolina) is likely to occur on the site. q. Is the project site or adjoining area currently used for hunting, trapping, fishing or shell fishing? JZ]YesoNo If yes, give a brief description of how the proposed action may affect that use:__ E.3. Designated Public Resources On or Near Froject Site a. Is the project site, or any portion o it, ocatcd in a designated agricultural district certified pursuant to on of 1� Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? If Yes, provide county plus district narnelnumber: b. Are arpiculiural -1anKconsisting of highly productive soils present?' i. If Yes: acreage(s) on project site? U. Source(s) ofsoil rating(s): ...... _.m ...... c. Does the project site contain all or paTt of, or is it substantially contiguous to, a registered Nation. at oycsoNo Natural Landmark? If Yes: i. Nature of the natural landmark: ❑ Biological Community ❑ Geological Feature U. Provide brief description of landmark, including values behind designation and approximate sizelextent: ......... .. ... d. Is the project site located in or does it adjoin a state listed Critical Environmental Area? If Yes: i. CEA name: .. . . . ......... ii. Basis for designation. W. Designating agency and date. Page 12 of 13 e, Does the project site contain, oris it substantially contiguous to, a building, archaeological site, or district which is listed on, . or has been nominated by the NYS Board of Historic Preservation for inclusion on, the State or National Register of Historic Places? If Yes: i. Nature of historic/archaeological resource: El Archaeological Site ElHistoxic Building or District U. Name: ❑ YesZ No W. Brief description of attributes on which listing is based: f. Is the project site, or any portion of it, located in or adjacent to an area designated as Sensitive ❑for []YesoNo archaeological sites on the NY Stat te Historic Preservation Office (SH110) archaeological site inventory? g. Have additional archaeological or historic site(s) or resources been identified on the project site? ❑E3YesoNo If Yes: i, Describe possible resource(s): ........ .... ...... . . . ................. U. Basis for identification: . ............. ... ...... ... h. Is the project site within fives miles of any officially designated and publicly accessible federal, state, or local OYes[]No scenic or aesthetic resource? IFYes: L Identify resource: The vublidy qq�Rs�qAqjqcpl aestheft resource is Matfituck Cteek. U. Nature of, or basis for, designation (e.g., established highway overlook, state or local park, state historic trail or scenic byway, etc.): M. Distance between project and resource: miles. i. Is the project site located within a designated river corridor under the Wild, Scenic and Recreational RMTS Program 6 NYCRR 666? If Yes: L Identify the name of the, river and its designation; IT -]No ii. Is the activity consistent with development restrictions contained in 6NYCRR Part 6667 []Yes[ F. Additional Information Attach any additional information which maybe needed to clarify your project. If you have identified any adverse, impacts which could be associated with your proposal, please describe those imparts plus any measures which you propose, to avoid or rumimize them. G. Verification I certify that the information provided is true to the best of my knowledge. Applicant/Sponsor Name D ate._ July 17 2018, Revised January 21, 2020 Title Signat'Lu AppE EPRINT FORM� Page 13 of 13 December 2, 2019 Attachment to Full Environmental Assessment Form prepared for STRONG'S YACHT CENTER at Mattituck, TJO Southold, NY item C.2. Adopted land Use Plans a. Do any municipally — adopted (city, town, village or county) comprehensive land use plan(s) include the site where the proposed action would be located? If yes, does the comprehensive plan include specific recommendations for the site where the proposed action would be located? Yes, the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) includes specific recommendations for the site where the proposed action would be located. The specific recommendations for this site are described in greater detail in the Attachment to LWRP Consistency Assessment Form. Item D.2.a.ii. How much material (including rock, earth, sediments, etc.) is proposed to be removed from the site? The estimated volume of material to be removed from the site is approximately 134,921 cubic yards. The duration of this aspect of the project is approximately 7 months. Item D.2.a.iii. Describe nature and characteristics of materials to be excavated or dredged, and plans to use, manage or dispose of them. Nature and Characteristics of Materials to be Excavated The materials to be excavated are native sand and gravel. No dredging is proposed. Plans to Excavate UJ e l ana a and Ibis os+ _of_gxcavated Materials Excavation Plan 1. Construct a crushed concrete haul road from the proposed excavation area to Mill Road, as shown on the Excavation Phasing Plan (Sheet 1 of 1) dated October 23, 2019 prepared by Young & Young. 2. Topsoil will be stripped from the excavation area and stockpiled on the site for use during site restoration. Stockpiled topsoil will be stabilized with temporary vegetation to prevent dust and erosion. 3. Sand and gravel will be excavated using front end loaders or similar portable excavation equipment. 4. The bottom elevation of the proposed excavation will be 10 ft. 5. Bank slopes will not exceed 1 on 2. 1. Sand and gravelly sand will loaded into dump trailers for removal from the site. 2. The proposed haul road will be stabilized to allow the passage of 22 wheel, 30 yard dump trailers. 3. The proposed haul road will be regraded periodically and water applied when necessary to reduce windblown sand and dust. Air Pollution Control I. Techniques for controlling dust and airborne particles may include the application of "dust down" or spraying of water on active haulageways. 2. inactive stockpiles will be either covered or vegetated as necessary to prevent the introduction of any significant quantity of dust into the atmosphere. 1. Excavation, loading, and removal operations will be limited to Monday through Saturday from 7:00 am to 4:00 pm. 2. All'gasoline or diesel powered machinery will be equipped with adequate mufflers to reduce the impact of noise on the surrounding community. Water Pollution Control 1. Areas of disturbed and exposed soil will be kept to a minimum to reduce erosion. 2. Bank slopes will be no greater than 1 on 2. It 0 $1 1 0, 1. A 25 foot minimum buffer will be maintained around the perimeter of the proposed excavation area. 2. No materials, equipment or machinery will be operated or stored in the 25 foot buffer. 3. The excavation area is setback a minimum of 970 feet from Mill Road. Truck Traffic The projected truck trips will be 27 entering trucks and 27 exiting trucks per day. Entering trucks will be empty. Each exiting truck will carry approximately 30 cubic yards of excavated material. Phase 1 Approximately 103,000 cubic yards of material will be excavated and removed during Phase 1. Based on the projected truck trips of 27 exiting trucks per day, Phase 1 will be completed in approximately 5 months. Phase 2 - Approximately Approximately 32,000 cubic yards of material will be excavated and removed during Phase 2. Based on the projected truck trips of 27 exiting trucks per day, Phase 2 will be completed in approximately 2 months. Items D.2.a.iv. Will there be onsite dewatering or processing of excavated materials? There will be no onsite dewatering of excavated materials or processing of excavated materials. item D.2.a.v. What is the total area to be dredged or excavated? No dredging is proposed. The total area to be excavated is approximately 3.9 acres. Item D.2_a.vi. What is the maximum area to be worked at any one time? The maximum area to be worked at any one time is 0.5 acre. Item D.2.a.vii. What would be the maximum depth of excavation or dredging? No dredging is proposed. The elevated sand area will be removed to an elevation of 10 ft. Item D.2.a.vii. Will the excavation require blasting? The proposed excavation will not require blasting. OFFICE LOCATION: MAILING ADDRESS Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 ^`` P.O. Box 1179 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) r06?< Southold,NY 11971 Southold,Youngs Telephone: 631-765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM To: Accounting From:.. Planning Department Date: July 12, 2024 Re: Check The attached check is a Consultant Reimbursement for the project review listed below. Please deposit into B.2115.30 Thank you. Applicant/Pro'ect ..T.................... ...... ......._ . ... ... ax Map' . Amo. u n t Check Date/No ... Name & Type ..............................._..........ww_....... .............................M...... .... ........_. ........_..vw....._..v 1861 —7/11/24 Strong's Storage Building 106.-6-10 $85,465.00 Charles R Cuddy FEIS Consultant Review & 13.4 Attorney Trust �- Account IOLA 1A, 01861 �II CHARLES R CUDDY I ATTORNEY TRUST ACCOUNT IOLA � , 445 GRIFFING AVE RIVERHEAD,NY 11901 50-666/214 DATE.� .... PAY TO HE " s �- .. —. .__�,. 1 �� . ROE ... _ .. el� 441 ._. _._. . gg (r DOLLARS co 1 a oE FOR,.... ,...... � �. .,.��.�.,... .. .__... .. -. r....� �.._.. �� F� i OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY 1 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD To: Accounting From: Planning Department Date: July 20, 2018 Re: Check MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov Please deposit the attached check into 8691: Deferred Revenue. Fee is for a Site Plan Application not yet accepted by the Planning Board. A licant/Pro'ect N .........w _. Applicant/Project � ame &Type Tax Map # Amount Check Date/No.. _._................... ........ _..... _ .. Strong's Yacht Center Site Plan 106-6-10 & $18,150.00 7/19/18 106-6-13.4 JAM E WEST MILL w e SUFFOLK COUNTY NATIONAL ^ L BANK 0147 STRONG'S MARINE LLC 10900 MAIN ROAD MATTITUCK, 5780 MILL ROAD, MATTITUCK, NY 11952 (631) 298-4480 50-5461214 qtjft yL*l el uk(� rEd �%Cllj 0� I I 0-� DATE AMOUNT �11e((I'9 PAY Towl() 0�c auk,40 ORDER a_ T OF THE 110000147111' 1:02140S4641:S01 00023811" P