The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2359DOCUMENT CONVERSION SERVICES PROVIDED BY IMAGING & MICROFILM ACCESS, INC. www.scanyourdocs.com 631- 589 -8100 41.14 -1 -37 & 41.14 -1 -38 BOX 20 02359 Lo ' I J' Ir 'Af ' f '7 JL 02359 Title of Action: SEQR COMMENTS ON.DRAFT EIS Project #FW16 /287 PRUDENCEGIUI Wetland Applic TM #16 -1 Description of Action: Filling of wetlands and proposal Location: construct one - family residence P� dJot S- 'V Roaring Brook Lake District Town ofPuteyY County, of�`Putnam .. COMMENTS Is the proposed construction of a single located in a wet an s ar�ge enough to be of the Co e of the Town of Putnam Va ev ?a �L V one family residence un er the jurisdiction The Code, under "Section 2. Definitions:, very clearly and distinctly states, "Freshwater Wetlands" means lands and waters of the Town covering 0.5 acres or.more - - - ". The property on TM #16 -1 -16 is less than 0.5 acres. One -half acre is 21,780 sq. ft. This property is 20,538 sq. ft., therefore, it does not fall under the jurisdiction of the.Putnam Valley Wetlands Ordinance. _ Is this property located in a critical environmen£a" In response to my question dated 12/19/90, "I would like to know if my property is located in a critical environmental area ", Mr. Crowder responded in his letter dated 1/11/91: "The reason that you are applying for a wetlands permit is precisely because your property is located in a critical environmental area In the draft EIS, it is stated: "Finally, the illegal filling of a critical environmental area as defined in Section 24C of the Code of the Town of Putnam Valley represents an irreversible adverse environ- mental impact with no mitigation measures short of restoring the wetlands destroyed In accordance with 6 NYCRR PART 617 .4 (2), "Notification that an area has been designated as a CEA (critical environmental area) must be filed with: (i) the commissioner; (ii) the appropriate regional office of the Department; (iii) any other agency regularly J involved in approving, undertaking or funding actions in the municipality in which the area has been designated. - .. bra? � #rng.s.- i�avA:,:b_e.en�smade- w :t- h:.r_Y►P_;;ap.B? Q:px3 t : agenc- ie- s:,- ..sth-e.refor:e:...b,:_: r.. this property is not located in a critical environmental area. In a letter addressed to the Commissioner, Department of Environmental Conservation, the following question was presented, "In your SEQR handbook it states, 'EIS is excluded if actions undertaken, funded or approved prior to implementation of SEQR.' Does this apply to New York State subdivision approvals and Health Department approvals received prior to the implementation of SEAR? P tMr. Jerome W. Jensen, Chief, Bureau of Environmental Analysis, gave he following response: /—"If the project in question has received all final approvals prior to either September 1, 1977 for Type I actions or November 1, 1978 for Unlisted actions, it would be excluded from SEQR in accordance with subdivision,6NYCRR 617.2(p). Approvals from a local municipal agency regarding the subdivi- sion of land and the approvals issued by a state, county or local health department would be covered by this provision if they were issued by the applicable date. Being excluded means no further action under SEQR is required, not even the prepara- tion of an environmental assessment form." The property in question was subdivided and filed in the Putnam County Clerk's Office on 7/28/45. Therefore, it does not require any action under the SEQR process. Since this property is not large enough to be under the jurisdiction of the Putnam Valley Wetlands Ordinance, and since it is not located in a critical environmental area, and since it does not require any action -under the- SEQR process, I hereby request that a., .Building Permit be issued to construct` "a- single one" family house.- PRUDENCE CHIULLI Copy to: Commissioner, DEC Environmental Notice Bulletin Appropriate Regional Office of the DEC P.C. Department of Health P.V. Environmental Commission P.V. Wetland. Inspector P.V. Building Inspector DEPARTMENT OF .HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 110 Old Route Six Center, Carmel, New York 10512 (914) 225 -0310 September 30, 1991 atthew A. Noviello, Esq. ttorney & Counselor at Law Dute 9D & Elvins Lane arrison, NV 10524 Re: Chiulli Property TM #16 -1 -157 16 -1 -16 (T) Putnam Valley ear Mr. Noviello: JOHN KARELL Jr., P.E., M.S. Public Health Director eceipt of your letter dated September 30, 1991 relative to the captioned project is hereby knowledged. Lease be advised as follows relative to this Department's approval: These lots appear on a NYS Dept. of Health approved map as lots 117 and 118 filed on July 28, 1945 as "Subdivision of Roaring Brook Lake ". Normally such State Health Department approved lots have vested approval rights and therefore maybe developed utilizing the approval requirements in effect at the time of the approval unless their approval will cause a public health hazard. Based upon inspection of deep test holes by representatives of this Department and review of the Engineer ' -s ,soi- l:.�percolation--test data, this project could not be approved based upon current .standards since: a) soil percolation tests were not conducted in the original soil, since groundwater was present b) Total fill depth proposed was 7 % feet, 3 % existing and 4 feet proposed - current maximum fill depths are 3 Pi feet. The applicants recourse was to request that the Board of Health grant a variance to the maximum fill requirement and the conduct of the soil percolation tests in the original soil. The applicant submitted a variance request to the Board of Health which was tabled by the Board, pending receipt of the local wetlands permit. (see letter March 19, 1991.) The Boards normal policies not to entertain applications for variances until all local approvals are obtained. is hoped that the above answers you questions. Ve tru yo s, John Karei1, Jr. , P. E. Public Health Director /jP MATTHEW A. NOVIELL.O, ESQ. - ATTORNEY & COUNSELLOR AT LAW MEMBER OF NY & Wr BARS ROUTE 9D S ELVINS LANE (914) 424 -3560 September 30, 1991 Mr. John Karell, Jr., P.E. Putnam County Board of Health Old Route 6 Carmel, NY 10512 Re: CHIULLI B.O.H.A. TM 16 -1 -15 & 16 -1 -16, TOWN OF PUTNAM VALLEY FILED MAP 308 Dear John: As you '.snow, I represent Prudence Chiulli, as attorney. The above captioned property. is in an old subdivision that has New York State Board of Health Approval. Mrs. Chiulli has applied for an individual lot Board of Health Approval. Except for the amount new and existing fill required above the original ground water, the proposed, individual plan complied with current stand- ards. It is my understanding that the New York State Subdivision Approval provides a vested right to an individual lot approval as long as the septic will not contaminate any wells and the well will not be con tami t naed by _ r othe septics.. It is my understanding from our conversations that Mrs. Chiulli`s Board of Health approval is, being held up pending receiving a Fresh Water Wetlands Permit from the Town of Putnam Valley. The Town of Putnam Valley has indicated that the Wet- lands Approval should not be issued because the lots are not eligible for Board of Health Approval.. Please confirm that Mrs. Chiulli is entitled to an individu- al lot approval for her lots in the New York State Board of Health Approved Subdivision. Very truly yours, IVA) &�A- Matthew A. Noviello DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 110 Old Route Six Center, Carmel, New York 10512 (914) 225-0310 March 19, 1991 Mr. and Mrs. Donald Chiulli 3609 Dane Street Shrub Oak, New York 10588 Re: Variance Request Chiulli Pudding Street TM 16-1-15, 16-1-16 (T) Putnam Valley JOHN KARELL Jr., RE, M.S. Public Health Director Dear Mr. and Mrs. Chiulli: Please be advised that the Board of Health at their meeting on March 18, .1991 resolved to table your variance request for the above-captioned property until such time as all local permits from the Town of Putnam Valley are obtained. If you I have any questjons, contact the writer at Ext. 324. VprA trulp yours., I ' ,r KgreTlv, SkY. v, NJ . E; lic Health Diractot JK: pt 0 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 110 Old Route Six Center, Carmel, New York 10512 (914) 225 -0310 September 30, 1991 Matthew A. Noviello, Esq. Attorney & Counselor at Law Route 9D & Elvins Lane Garrison, NY 10524 Re: Chiulli Property TM #16 -1 -15, 16 -1 -16 (T) Putnam Valley Dear Mr. Noviello: JOHN KARELL Jr., P.E., M.S. Public Health Director lu Receipt of your letter dated September 30, 1991 relative to the captioned project is hereby acknowledged. Please be advised as follows relative to this Department's approval: 1. These lots appear on a NYS Dept. of Health approved map as lots 117 and 118 filed on July 28, 1945 as "Subdivision of Roaring Brook Lake ". 2. Normally such State Health Department approved lots have vested approval rights and therefore maybe developed utilizing the approval requirements in effect at the time of the approval unless their approval will cause a public health hazard. 3. Based upon inspection of deep test holes by representatives of this Department and review of the Engineer's soil percolation test data, this project could not be approved based upon, current standards since: a) soil percolation tests were not conducted in the original soil, since groundwater was present b) Total fill depth proposed was 7 Ii feet, 3 ri existing and 4 feet proposed - current maximum fill depths are 3 1� feet. 4. The applicants recourse was to request that the Board of Health grant a variance to the maximum fill requirement and the conduct of the soil percolation tests in the original soil. 5. The applicant submitted a variance request to the Board of Health which was tabled by the Board, pending receipt of the local wetlands permit. (see letter March 19, 1991.) The Boards normal policies not to entertain applications for variances until all local approvals are obtained. It is hoped that the above answers you questions. Ve trul. yo s, Jahn Karell, Jr., P. E. Public Health Director JK /jp DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 110 Old Route Six Center, Carmel, New York 10512 (914) 225 -0310 September 30, 1991 +latthew A. Noviello, Esq. attorney & Counselor at Law Route 9D & Elvins Lane 3arrison, NY 10524 Re: Chiulli property TM #16 -1 -15, 16 -1 -16 (T) Putnam Valley )ear Mr. Noviello: JOHN KARELL Jr., P.E., M.S. Public Health Director Receipt of your letter dated September 30, 1991 relative to the captioned project is hereby acknowledged. )lease be advised as follows relative to this Department's approval: 1. These lots appear on a NYS Dept. of Health approved map as lots 117 and 118 filed on July 28, 1945 as "Subdivision of Roaring Brook Lake ". ?. Normally such State Health Department approved lots have vested approval rights and therefore maybe developed utilizing the approval requirements in effect at the time of the approval unless their approval will cause a public health hazard. i. Based upon inspection of deep test holes by representatives of this Department and review of the Engineer's soil percolation test data, this project could not be approved based a) soil percolation tests were not conducted in the original soil, since groundwater was present b) Total fill depth proposed was 7 ll� feet, 3 Y2 existing and 4 feet proposed - current maximum fill depths are 3 t feet. E. The applicants recourse was to request that the Board of Health grant a variance to the maximum fill requirement and the conduct of the soil percolation tests in the original soil. i. The applicant submitted a variance request to the Board of Health which was tabled by the Board, pending receipt of the local wetlands permit. (see letter March 19, 1991.) The Boards normal policies not to entertain applications for variances until all local approvals are obtained. t is hoped that the above answers you questions. Ve truix yo s, John Karell Jr.,, P. E. Public Health Director K/j P PETER C. ALEXANDERSON County Executive DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 110 Old Route Six Center, Carmel, New York 10512 (914) 225 -0310 September 13, 1990 Mr. John Romeo. P. E. 1 Northridge Road Peekskill. New York 10566 Re: Construction Permit Prudence Chiulli (T) Putnam Valley TH #16 -1-15 and 16 Dear Mr. Romeo: .1► JOHN KARELL Jr., P.E., M.S. Public Health Director I have reviewed the plans for the proposed construction of a two bedroom single family residence on the above mentioned parcel. On September 7, 1990 deep test holes were witnessed in the proposed sewage disposal area. Based on the results of these deep test holes, the construction of a sewage disposal system in this area can not be approved based on current standards. The original soil was found to be a black organic top soil consisting of a silty clay to a depth of 16 inches. Subsoil was a grey silty clay, typical of a saturated, wetland soil. Ground water was observed within 6 inches of original grade. - Current standards require` percolation fests"be 'conducted to a depth of'30 inches in original soil. High ground eater prevents this. Percolation rates must be better than 60 minutes per inches, in original soil. Found soil types indicate that the percolation rate of this soil can be expected to exceed 120 minutes per inch. Therefore, based on Article III of the Putnam County Sanitary Code and Part 75 of the New York State Health Department Rules and Regulations, this application is denied. If you have any questions please contact me at your convenience. Very truly yours, William Hedges - Sr. Public Health Sanitarian WH /jp cc: (B) (T) PV Zoning Board Joel Greenberg 3 - - - �P fl -- BILLY �3t04��L�ER Chairman GERTRUDE McKAY Secretary Town Planner JOEL GREENBERG (914) 628 -6613 PBC /1072 TOWN OF PUTNAM VALLEY PLANNING BOARD 265 OSCAWANA LAKE ROAD PUTNAM VALLEY. NEW YORK 10579 Members; ROBERT CANAVAN BRIAN DOYLE SALVATORE SANTA MORENA Adm. Assistant VITTORIA COLESANTI (914) 526 -3740 August 13, 1991 TO: Commissioner NYS D.E.C. Albany, NY 12233 Region III NYS D.E.C. New Paltz, NY 12561 P# C B d of He ~'� alth Dept. of Environmental Services Carmel, NY 10512 Supervisor Town of Putnam Valley, NY P.V. Environmental Commission Putnam Valley, NY Town Clerk Town of Putnam Valley, NY Wetland Inspector. _ Town'of"Putnam Valley, NY Building & Zoning Inspector Town of Putnam Valley, NY Mr. & Mrs. Donald Chiulli 3609 Dane Street Shrub Oak, NY 10588 Joel Greenberg, Town Planner Mahopac, NY 10541 A' Attached herewith are the Final Findings Statements and the final determination by the Planning Board with regard to the Wetland Permit Application # FW16/287 involving two lots in the. Roaring Brook Lake District totalling 0.934 acres. The decision of the Planning Board, as Lead Agency, to deny the requested permit concludes the SEQR review process as well as the wetland permit application process. M% �ne aLl� Billg Lee Crowder VC, Chairman _„ 14-14.10 (2Ja7)—ec 617.21 Appendix i - State Environmental Quality Review FINDINGS STATEMENT S ` Pursuant to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act -SEAR) of the• Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617, the PUTNAM GALLEY PLANNING BOARD as lead or Involved agency, makes the following findings. Name of Action: PRUDENCE & DONALD C11IULLI TMI116 -1 -15 and 16 -1 -16 (New TM4141.14 -1 -38 and 41.14 -1 -37) Description of Action: Wetland Permit Application to drill a well and construct a driveway within a Town regulated wetland and to construct a two - bedroom house and septic system within the wetlands controlled area. Location: (Include street address and the name of the municipality and.county.) Pudding Street Town of Putnam Valley - Putnam County Agency Judsdictlon(s): LEAD AGENCY Date Final EIS Filed: June 3, 1991 Facts and Conclusions in the EIS Relied Upon to Support the Decision: (Attach additional sheets, as necessary) See Attached Exhibits |r.ian(ihcaUon Nunnby' Namo of Action '^ CERTIFICATION OF FINDINGS TO '-.''_'~~.U.'_.-''__''''-.~~ ( Having ^ ~~'~'~~'~~ ^'~ ~'~'^=" .HU' E'S.Aiid-K.A'V"'o^°'="v/=u u/e preceding =°o�p^w°d^6..u°^ nonn|u»ionn ,c-,lied upon to meet the requirements of G NYCRR 617J9, this statement of Findings \ � | oe'UUnnihat ' | i ' |. Tl�.e requirements of6NYCRR Part 517 have been'mmt � 2. Consistent with thw'000ia|, economic and other essential considerations yrom.,ampng��h� � ! �oznonob|aa|tornadivnu(hg�do.thamnt|onapproved|non which minimizes or avoids i onvionnrnenta| effects ho the maximum extent pnanUcab|g||n%|ud|ng the eYYamtmd k�#hm` � rn"|nrnnn�n\n|im�mc�n�o1o,nent and � . ! 3. Consistent with social, economic and other essential considerations, to the maximum extent p'aohuab>o, adverse environmental ofhaotm revealed in. the environmental impact statement ` oroneno will be minimized or avoided by incorporating as conditions to the`dao|a|on those' . nnNgmhvn nnaasonen which were identified an practicable. u. (and, if applicable) Consistent with the applicable policies of Article 42 of the Executive Law, a:3 imPlemented by 19 NYCR,R 600.5, this action will achieve a balance between the protection ^ } o' the �,nvinrnrnent and the need to accommodate social 'and economic oona|de�thnn:� .. ' | � i --------'--- of Agency ------��'-Q)T - ^� '-----'---r -�-----�� ^"~=^ ~ OR _ / . ' CERTIFICATION OF FINDINGS TO DENY | ` Having conuiduned the Draft and Final EIS, and having considered the preceding written facts anc| �nno|Vsions r9|iod 000n to n�\�� V`e � ' regukenl��tn of 6 NTCRR 617/9, this Statement of Findings � ' ` ' | 1 Thn rrooi,,nnontsofG NYCRR Part S17 have not been met; CnaisisW with the oocia|, economic and other masmnda| uona|damd|onm from among the ' ' '�esnnah|n alternatives thereto, the action denied Is one which falls ho adequately minimize ' e'n"oid adverse environmental effects 10 the maximum extent practicable; -and/or.* | . . with ano\a|, economic and other essential conskderad|ons, to the maximum extent � n'acticwb|r, adverse environmental effects revealed in the environmental Impact statement � � p'occso cannot be adequately minimized or avoided by the mitigation measures identified � ' z3 orarticab|e. � | u. (znd, i/ apo|icnb|p) Connio|cot with the applicable policies of Article 42PYthe Executive Law, ' os implemented by 10 NYCRR 600.5, this action will not adequately achieve a balance between. | -:ho o'otoc!ion of the environment and the need toaccommodate social and economic cqn' � __-- � ��v ^ _ &�» BILLY LEE CR—M Name of Hesponsible Official - ' 265 Address -�Agency ^---'----- -----'-- ---- Afri,�ncies and the Applicant A MbT 12, 1991 uale < / ' June 28, 1991 TO: PUTNAM VALLEY PLANNING BOARD FROM: MICHAEL PRIANO, PUTNAM VALLEY WETLANDS INSPECTOR RE: HIS FINDINGS; WETLANDS APPLICATION OF CHIULLI I have recently reviewed the extensive file regarding this wetlands application originally filed in response to a Stop Work Order dated 6/10/67. The completed FEIS prepared by you appears accurate and thorough in describing the nature of the violation, the proposed action, its impacts and alternatives. Based upon my review of the details of history of this project, the Wetlands Inspector f Inds that: 1. the Chiulli application is now over four years old. 2. my memo to you dated 10/2/88, more than one year after the Stop Work Order was issued, indicated that the property had been regraded, most likely with unapproved new fill, and that the C&D placed in the wetland may have been simply covered over rather than removed as required. Therefore, I remain unconvinced that all inappropriate materials have been taken off -site. 3. granting a permit to construct a home, driveway, well , septic system in a wetland and former wetland now covered with fill will constitute a harmful precedent _..hat wijl hov_e.remJficptlons_fgr_ many other_. prcpertias_. in :Putnam_ Val Iey.._T.herefore, not... _..._...�:: only would the cumulative impact of such a precedent result in meaningful losses of wetlands but it would undoubtedly result in an increase of contamination of groundwater with septic effluents, particularly nitrates. Analysis of groundwater quality has shown that nitrate contamination has been recorded in Putnam Valley from approved septic systems that have failed to adequately protect groundwater resources. 4. granting the Chiulli application a permit would result in an irreplaceable loss of wetlands and the functions of the wetlands. These functions include, at a minimum, the detention of excess stormwater draining from upslope land, the removal of road salts, sand, silt and other pollutants associated with non -point sources from developed and undeveloped land, the provision of wildlife habitat and absorption of floodwaters during peak flows in a stream associated with the wetlands. Therefore, based upon the above stated details, the Wetlands Inspector recommends that the wetlands permit application of Mrs. Prudence Chiulli be denied, ' LEAD AGENCY FINDINGS STATEMENT OF THE WETLANDS PERMIT APPLICATION. OF PRUDENCE CHIULI_I AND DONALD CHIULLI IRE: Tax Map #16-1-15 and #16-1-16.) WHEREAS,, Prudence Chi ul l i (applicant) Is the owner of the_ property designated on the -Town of Putnam Valley tam assessment map as #k16--1 -16 and Donald Chiulli. (applicant) is the owner= of.; 5 -_ the property designated as #l:16 -1 -15, which properties are located' on Pudci i ng Street in Roaring Brook Lake in the Town of Putnam Valley, County of Putnam, and State of New York; and, WHEREAS, the property in 0.9934 acres in ales. a d is located. € wholly within the R- -B-L Zoning District of the "Town of , Putnam Valley; and, WHEREAS, a Notice of Violation-and Stop Work Order was issued tog Prudence: Chi ul l i for dumping and filling of wetlands on properties designated as 016 -1 -16 on the . Town of Putnam Valley :"N tax assessment maps on June 10, 1987; and, WHEREAS, the applicants are-sieking approval from the Planning & Board of the Town of Putnam Valley for a wetlands permit to construct a well and dr:i veway wi. thi n a Town regulated wetland and- the construction of a two bedroom house and septic system withi.nV the controlled area of the same wetland in an area which appears r,, to have been wetlands prior to having been filled at various times since 1972; and, WHEREAS, the applicants submitted a short Environmental Assessment- Form on June 25, 1987, and filed an aappl i cation foka '. wetlands permit on July 10, 1987; and WHEREAS, after several meetings with the Planning Board, the applicants were requested to submit a long Environmental ' Assessment Form on May 1, 1989; and WHEREAS, the applicants submitted the :long Environmental Assessment Form on April. 3, 1990; and WHEREAS,_the Planning Board became the lead agency on.November.59;: 1990, made a Positive Declaration of Enviromental Significance,,,';,' and required the applicant to submit a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) within 90 days; and, WHEREAS, the applicants were not able to respond within 90 days` ; ;: and the Planning Board accepted responsi bl i ty for submitting the DEIS; and, WHEREAS, the DEIS was submitted to the Planning Board on March 11, 1991; and; ' ` ' � WHEREAS, the Planning Board accepted the DEIS as complete- and � / adequate for public r ev i ew on March 11 , 1991; and" WHEREAS written comments received until May 6 i991'' ' , were rece ve un y , bVthe" lead agency; and, WHEREAS, on May 14, 1991, the Planning Board submitted a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) responding to all ` significant written comments; and, WHEREAS, the lead agency reviewed the FEIS and determined that the FEIS was prepared in conformance with the requirements of the' New York State Environmental Quality Review Act and subst=ntively and adequately responded to those matters raised of an environmental and planning nature; and, - �. WHEREAS, the Planning Board accepted the FEIS as being completeAr� on June 3, 1991; and, . WHEREAS, the Planning Board gave direction that caused a Notice� of Completion of the FEIS together with the Final Environmental'� Impact Statement itself to be filed and circulated as provided by law; and, ` WHEREAS, the Planning Board received written comments on the FEIS until June 17, 1991; and, ' WHEREAS, as required by Law, the Planning Board has thoroughly ' ��a�s��h�DEISrthe'FE�S.�and- d' 6'a^'�`.�� considered all oral an written.comments received in connection'' ':� therewith, including (but not limited to) the following: 1) SEQR Comments on Draft EIS submitted to the Planning by Prudence Chiulli on May 6, 1991 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Board as lead, agency hereby declares that the requirements of Article 8 of the� New York State Environmental Conservation Law (State Environmental Quality Review Act) and the regulations promulgated thereunder and 6NYCRR Part 617 have been met; and, ' 1. Consistent with social and economic and other essential considerations from among the reasonable alternatives ' thereto, the action to be approved is one in which there are unmitigable adverse environmental effects as disclosed in. / the DEIS and the FEIS; and, 2. Consistent with the social, econonic and other essential ~' considerations, to the maximum extent practicable, the adverse environmental impacts revealed in the Environmental Impact process, and in the DEIS and FEIS, will not be //`: minimized or avoided by any practicable mitigative measures;' and, � '. 3. In making its decisions and determinations under SEORP,the �- Planning Board has relied upon the environmental, social, �� ' economic and other factors and standards set forth below,�� and in the FEIS, and the facts and conclusions'in the FEIS as set forth below, all of which have formed the basis of!-. � the Planning Board's decision: A. PREVIOUS PROCEEDINGS� ��`�� ` 1. The DEIS was prepared by the Planning Board.of� the Town/ � ' .' , � i Putnam Valley. The DEIS was submitted to the lead agency�/� on March 11, 1991 and accepted as complete on March 11, ' 1991. Given-the scope of the project, the Planning`Boardj� �" � made a determination that a public hearing on the DEI was-: not required. A Notice of Completion of the !DEI�� : wasQd l* prepared on March 11, 1991. Written comments on' the DEIS�,'. were received by the Planning Board until May 6,` 1991 . 2. An FEIS was subsequently prepared by the Planning Boardyqq submitted for review on May 14, 1991. The FEIS was accepted by the Planning Board as complete on June 3, 1991. Written comments on the FEIS were received by the Planning Board until July 3, 1991. 3. The violation for illegal dumping of fill in a wetlands (Chapter 24C, Code of the Town of Putnam Valley) was resolved --,' -�-^ - --''—'— ----'~ PROVI D- ED t' t hgap`pl~cant plant trees acr --� ~ - ~q fron�' _&R-proper y to 'preven t `access-f or iIl egal d mp ing, � ''- The Planning Board accepted that option at the meeting May 6, 1991. ' ' . . B. pROJECT DESCRIpTION. ' ` ` Prudence Chiulli is seeking a wetlands permit for the construction of a single family residence, well, and septic system on lots with the Tax Mao Designations 016-1-15 and #16-1-16. � ` C. POTENTIAL �.� 1. The Planning Board finds that this project will have _! negligible impact on air resources, trans .oration,� visuql �^ / ^ considerations, communityi services, cultural resources, . !' and noise. 2. The Planning Board finds that this project will have ` � significant impact on wetlands - wetlands have been lost as a result of previous filling ope/ations (in vioiation of ' Town Code) and the construction of a hquse and septic systems would require substantial amounts of additional, fill. ` ' 3. The Planning Board finds that it agrees with the conclusions presented by the Wetlands Inspector of the Town of Putnam ' Valley relative to the impact of the proposed project upon the wetlands and that it disagrees with the conclusions of the applicants" consultant, Bruce M. Donohue. 4. The Planning Board finds that construction of a house, well and septic system substantially within a former wetlands and completely within the controlled area will have significant adverse impact on the wetlands. 5" The Planning Board finds that the provisions and intent of Chapter 24C of the Code of the-Town of Putnam Valley would be subverted by the precedent established by a favorable decision on the wetlands permit application being sought and that the cumulative effect of this precedent would result in a severe environmental impact; namely, the loss of substantial amounts of wetlands. ALTERNATIVESL 1. During the DEIS and FEIS process, a series of alternatives ` were reviewed. The Planning Board finds that the proposed plan is not consistent with the spirit end intent of the New York State Environmental Quality ReQiew law and that both alternatives reviewed in the process offer � substantially higher compliance with the spirit and intent ' of the law, all factors considered. --'�-2- _:. The-Planning. Board finds'� -he. althr hit |veWhi^ch'~--�� requires removal of illegally placed fill to be potentially. risky in that further damage to the wetlands environment might result and that the economic cost to the applicant would be prohibitive. 3. The Planning Board finds that the "no action" alternative which requires that no further fill be allowed to be placed on the site and that trees be planted to prevent access to the site for future dumping of fill is the alternative that offers the best compliance with the spirit and intent of the New York State Environmental Quality Review law. SEQR Notice of Completion of Draft EIS Lead Agency: , P,V, PLANNING BOARD Projett # (if any) F'W16 1287 ..Address: 265 Oscawana Lake Road Putnam Valley, NY 10579 Date: MARCH 11, 1991 This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 (and local law # 3 -1987 if any) of the imple- menting regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State, Environmental Quality Review) of the Environ- mental Conservation Law. A Draft Environmental Impact Statement has been completed and accepted for the proposed action described below. Comments on the Draft EIS are requested and will be accepted by the con- tact person until May 6. 1991 Title of Action: PRUDENCE CHIULLI — Wetland Application TM 416 -1 -16, 16 -1 -15 Description, of Action: Filling of wetlands and proposal to construct one- family residence Location: (Include the name of the county and town.) Pudding Street - Roaring Brook Lake District Town'of Putnam Valley County of Putnam C -16 1- - SEQR Notice of Completion of Draft EIS Potential Environmental Impacts: SEE ATTACHED D.E.I.S. Copies of the Draft EIS may be obtained from: Contact .Person: Vittoria M. Colesanti, Town Hall Address: 265 Oscawana Lake Road, Putnam Valley, NY 10579 Phone No.: (914) 526 -3740 Page 2 Copies of this Notice Sent to: "Commissioner- Department of Environmental Conservation, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233.0001 Environmental Notice Bulletin- DEC,50 Wolf Road, Room 509, Albany, New York 12233 -0001 1' *Appropriate Regional Office of the Department of Environmental Conservation 'Office of the Chief Executive Officer of the political subdivision in which the action will be princi- pally located 'All Other;lnvolved Agencies (if any)* ' State and Regional Clearinghouses _Persons Requesting Draft.EiS * * P.C. Department of Health Division of Environmental Health Services 110 Old Route Six Center Carmel, NY.10512 P.V. Environmental Commission P.V. Wetland Inspector, Michael Priano P.V. Building Inspector, Marvin O'Dell- P.V. Highway Department * * with attachments ' 1 copy of the Draft EIS must also be included (see 617.10(e)) C -17 INTRODUCTION: This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) has been prepared in compliance liance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act of 1975 and its rules and regulations. The Town of Putnam Valley has required that alterations to wetlands be permitted only after approval by the Planning Board since 1972 (Section 66-79 Codeof the Town of Putnam Valley). The regulations governing this type of action were further refined in Section 24C "Putnam Valley Freshwater Wetlands and Watercourse Ordinance" passed in 1987. The location of the proposed project is on Pudding Street in Roaring Brook Lake. The proposed project requires a wetland permit in order to construct a driveway and well within aTown wetland (Section 24C, Code of the Town of Putnam Valley) and the construction of a home and septic system within the controlled area of the same wetland. Much of the controlled area appears to be former wetlands which have been filled at various times since 1972. IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: ~'- --' ------~- ' l��i�''p o' s e d d eye l opmen t i s f or th e cons t ruc ti on of a single one family residence in a wetlands large enough to be under the jurisdiction of the Code of the Town of Putnam Valley. The only significant environmental issues to be addressed under SEQRA are those which pertain to the environmental impact of this project upon wetlands. Other potential environmental impacts of this single one family residence proposal are deemed to be insignificant. The major impact of the proposed development is that approval for (illegal) filling of wetlands protected initially by 66-79 of the Code of the Town of Putnam Valley and more recently by 24C would constitute a precedent established by the Planning Board which would, in the cumulative effect produced, have a severie adverse environmental impact and which would circumvent the intent of Section 24C of the Code of the Town of Putnam Valley. The applicant was issued a Notice of Violation and Stop Work Order on June 10, 1987 for violating the provisions of that section of the Code. There are no mitigation procedures for the cumulative adverse impact which would be produced by a precedent setting approval by the Planning Board. Based upon field inspections by the Wetlands Inspector, the Planning Board, and the Putnam County Department of Health, the resulting filled area is notsuitable for the construction of a sewage disposal system. The adverse environmental effect of the proposed development cannot be mitigated within the constraints imposed by Article III of the Putnam County Sanitary Code and Part 75 of the New York State Health Deparment Rules and Regulations. In addition, the size of the "dry" area is very marginal for theconstruction of a single family residence unless even more extensive filling of wetlands occurs with additional adverse environmental impacts with no mitigation. Finally, the illegal filling of a critical environmental area as defined by Section 24C of the Code of the Town of Putnam Valley represents an irreversible adverse environmental impact with no mitigation measures short of restoring the wetlands destroyed. Alternatives: There are two alternatives to be considered in evaluating the enviromental impact of this project: (1) No action This alternative avoids the severe environmental impact associated with the cumulative effect of a precedent setting approval^by the Planning Board aswell- as the adverse � - eWikbhmehtaI- i A QTHe MstTATiA --' -'--'- ~— single family residence on filled soil which is not suitable for the construction of a sewage disposal system and which does not provide adequate space for usa bl e rear an d side yards. (2) Removal of Fill Illegally Placed This alternative avoids the environmental impacts mitigated by option (1) and offers the potential of recovering the loss of valuable critical environmental areas PROVIDED the removal can be accomplished with minimal adverse environmental impact. ATTACHMENTS: (1) Notice of Violation - dumping and filling of wetland June 10, 1987 (2) Letter to Ms. Prudence Chiulli from Michael Priano, Sept. 14, 1987 (3) Memo to Marvin O,Dell from Michael Priano, Oct. 2, 1988 (4) Letter to Ms. Prudence Chiulli from Michael Priano, Dec. 23, 1988 (5) Notice of Complete-Application, Putnam Valley Freshwater Wetlands and Watercourse Ordinance, to Ms. Prudence Chiulli from Michael Priano, Feb. 2, 1989 (6) Letter to Mr. John Romeo from William Hedges, Putnam County Board of Health re: Construction Permit, Prudence Chiulli, Putnam Valley, TM #16-1-15 and 16 dated Sept; 13, 1990 ---~_-- ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENT INFORMATION - GENERAL C.P.L. 100.15 F ORid NO. 2S.6 WILLIAM34N lwN eGUA CO- "004STLE, n.r. 14606 STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF _. PUTNAM JUSTICE COURT TOWN OF— PUTNAM VALLEY .11F propIr of tllr J ►Iatr of New vorlt apains!'�j PRUDENCE CHIULLI - ►��1�r1C�tt�I11�t ^_ Marvin O'Dell _ , residing at Wiccopee Road - Putnam Valley by this informations ulaVes written accusation an follows: That Prudence Chiulli _ ^._ , , o►► the 10th day of June , 19 87 ,.at TM #16 -1 -16 - Roari.Qk.:_I.akE.._.______ .._.__._ l .ul,uu J In tine Town of Putnam Valley County of . Putnam ._, New York, did commit the offense of DUMPING AND FILLING OF WETLAND _ ._ -,a (i§NXN.M) (violation) in violation of Section 4.1 -B ;X of the Wetland Ord inanceLow of the State of New York, irr that (u)he did, at tlw afora:nuid ttmu and place Local law 0, 1987 Count One: The facts upon which this information is based ara as follows: 1. - 6/9/87 - Observed Wetland being filled. 2. 6/10/87 - Notice of Violation and Stop Work Order issued. 3. - 6/29/87 - Application to alter. Wetland received by Town. 4. - 8/14/87 - Michael Priano (Wetland Insp.) issued report. Requirements for additional information to be submitted by 12/14/87 (Copy.attached). 5. - 10/30/87 - Discussed above with owner whom pleaded the need for additional time to comply. 6. - 3/27/88 - Received report of Mr. Priano recommending action (copy). 7. - 3/28/88 - Discussed again with owner by phone given two (2) weeks for compliance. 6/1/88 - No compliance. September 14, 1987 Ms. Prudence Chiulli 3603 Dane Street Shr-ub Oak, NY 10566. Dear Ms. Chiulli; On June 25, 1987 you completed a wetland application form requesting the filling of a property you own on Pudding Street, Putnam Valley, tax map #16 -1 -16. On the 2nd o7 Jul? I visited the property and identified the wetland bounory with orange ribbon arid, subsequently, mailed you a site report form indicating that this work: haC •bee done. F'1 ease note that the tilling that has tar ::en place or ttii =_ slta na= not been permitted by the Town and is in violation o;. our local wetlands law. If you wish to have the Town review your applicaticn, you must provide the following specific information: 1. a map of the property at an appropriate :talc (I suggest 1 ' ' -3U ') with all- pr-oposec improvements shown; _.the .l. QCa-t i or:. on yeL:r .- -r^.ap oY the. :le.tl ands- -as f i el marE._ed by me; _. e::isting and proposed topography at the 2' interval; N. the amount, location, and type of fill proposed; and 5. effective erosion control measures during and post construction. You shall have three months from the date of this report (12/14/B7) to complete your application with the Town. After - this: time your application under Local Law #?- 1987-shall be considered null and void. In addition, = ince.there exists a notice of violation for unpermitted filling on this property, if you do not complete your application as described above, it w111 be necessary to recommend that the violation be put-sued in Justice Court. Thank: you for .following through with this matter-. Sincerely yours; Michael Priano Wetland Inspector 10/2/88 Marvin; On Saturday, I stopped by the Redman Estate as you suggested. Both old well houses were actively spilling water and the area below the rock wall near the house on lot 1 is wetland which extends to both sides of the stream. The well location on this lot seems unnecessary and would certainly be a regulated action, as is the driveway crossing on lot 4. Please pass along these comments to the,Nicki. I also stopped b Chuilli d I think you might as well. The property has been filled and regraded and I'm not sure if any materials ever came owthe site as Mrs. Chuilli agreed. As I understood it, deep test holes would be dug but no new fill was to be brought in. This not what happened and considering the length of this violation /permit review, I a bit annoyed! New material is now spread further into wet areas and the deep hole, which was dug at the high point of the lot, has water at 4.5 feet. I apologize for the note rather than a call, but I thought I'd miss you otherwise. - - Mike . P C-3. TOWN OF PUTNAM VALLEY 265 OSCAWANA LAKE ROAD PUTNAM VALLEY, NY 10579 December 23, 1988 Ms. Prudence Chiulli TAX MAP sr 16 -1 -16 3609 Dane Street Shrub Oak, NY 10588 Dear Ms. Chiulll; Your letter of 12/19/88 to Mr. O'Dell has been fowarded to me. Considering all that has transpired during the past 18 months, I am quite suprised by the omission of the wetland boundry on the site plan. As you will recall, you were issued a Stop Work Order and Notice of Violation on 6/10/87 for illegally filling a wetland on your property. The attached correspondence from Mr. O'Dell and me demonstrate the slow development of the project. It should be noted that subsequent to my letter to you on September 2, 1988, the unauthorized fi 11 was not.removed off -site and /or new fill was placed and spread. Deep test holes were also dug as shown on the site plan. .P_rjor_to.furth&- site alteration;. ;you .will need to obtain -a wetland permit from: the. Town.:. :10.' order to review your proposal, your site plan will have to include, at a minimum, the information requested in my letter of September 14, 1987. Sincerely; Michael Priano wetlands Inspector Town of Putnam Valley cc: PV Building Inspector Putnam County Health Dept NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION PUTNAM VALLEY FRESHWATER WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSE ORDINANCE APPLICANT: Prudence Chiulli DATE 2 /2/89 ADDRESS: 3609 Dane Street Shrub Oak) NY 10588 TAX MAP # 16 -1 -16 PROJECT LOCATION and DESCRIPTION: Pudding Street; Roaring Brook Lake. Proposed project requires a wetland permit in order to construct a driveway and well within a Town wetland and the construction of a home and septic system within the controlled area of the same wetland. TO THE APPLICANT: 1. THIS IS NOT A PERMIT _. .2. Tnis is to.inform you that your application is complete and a review has begun. Additicnal information may be requested from you at a future date, if deemed necessary, in order to reach a aecision on your appplication. 3. Details regarding the type, volume, and location of fill needed to construct all proposed improvements are required. ,4. Detai Is of erosion control during construction are required. S. Contact the Planning Board Clerk as soon as possible in order to arrange for public notification. 1 Michael Priano Wetlands Inspector PETER C. ALEXANDERSON County Executive DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 110 Old Route Six Center, Carmel, New York 10512 (914) 225 -0310 September 13, 1990 Mr. John Romeo, P. E. 1 Northridge Road Peekskill, New York 10566 Re: Construction Permit' Prudence Chiulli (T) Putnam Valley TH #16 -1 -15 and 16 Dear Mr. Romeo: I have reviewed the plans for the proposed construction of a two bedroom single family residence on the above mentioned parcel. On September 7, 1990 deep test holes were witnessed in the proposed senage disposal area. Based on the results of these deep test holes, the construction of a sewage disposal system in this area can not be approved. based on current standards. The original soil was found to be a blgck organic top soil consisting of a silty clay to a depth of 16 inches. Subsoil nas a grey silty clay, typical of a saturated, vetland soil. Ground water was observed within 6 inches of original grade. Current standards require percolation tests be conducted to a depth of 30 inches in original soil. High ground water prevents this. Percolation rates must be better than 60 minutes per inches, in original soil. Found soil types indicate that the percolation rate of this soil can be expected to exceed 120 minutes per inch. Therefore, based on Article III of the Putnam County Sanitary Code and Part 75 of the New York State Health Department Rules and Regulations, this application is denied. If you have any questions please contact me at your convenience. Very truly yours, William Hedges Sr. Public Health Sanitarian WH /jp cc: (B) (T) PV Zoning Board Joel Greenberg M.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 110 Old Route Six Center, Carmel, New York 10512 (914) 225 -0310 March 19, 1991 Mr. and Mrs. Donald Chiulli 3609 Dane Street Shrub Oak, New York 10588 Re: Variance Request Chiulli Pudding Street TM 16 -1 -15, 16 -1 -16 (T) Putnam Valley JOHN KAFELL Jr., P.E., M.S. Public Health Director Dear Mr. and Mrs. Chiulli: Please be advised that the Board of Health at their meeting on March 18, 1991 resolved to table your variance request for the above - captioned property until such time as all local permits from the Town of Putnam Valley are obtained. i €- ou hay a -ari • quest ons, coatsct the = writer at Est. 32 .... ._. . _ ....._ I'VprA y y q. _... -_ . _ . ... . trulp yours is Health Dir ctor JR:pt a "�y�`s< �,'� d� �...- ._.... _ _.._.. -_.__. —.__ _ 1 L .�_.w__....._..._...__..._.J.,. �...._.,.._._.._ r �. ___.._ __._._,�..�.____- _-- ___._______ , _v.. 4 t�� .:� _.____.___.�___ _.___._____ d___�______.__ _� __.____.__.________r.__ ____:��.___._____� _. ______ __ _____ a._ t �� -- __ - __- , _.___ � �_ - -- - ____- -__. -� ___ -�. 4 _.. _ �_____�— __ __..�.�___._--. -- --- --' -- - -- ..�_�._e._ � -- — - ---- — - ---.w_ __..._..__ � �__.�. ._._....�.._�._.._ - --- ' - --�— s r t _... _... �- t —, - _ ,. i� ___.__.. �._..._..___......_-___. ....._..�.---..._�...--- ..._.._ __ .. i � '� V _ . {: `t' i ' _._.._�.�_____�_.___.___ __._.__._— _______.T._..__. „ - -. V__. � __..— _.�__�..�.__��.__._-____ —_ _._.. _. _----- �-- _.____�___.._.____ i ..:�' .. -<. I.- `_..._�... .. 7', i ... .._ _. w. -� f' _ .. .. _..._ -- - Z,5 J .G� . �..� ' ✓ ✓� - -� Ge^ ^ f� .° G si �/ �� — ice•- � --c- /� _— % 7 77- f� Y- •tip•.'. •.�` Step. 4. Inform Agencies (Coordinate Review) �. TYPEI FULL PEI N ACTION EAF ) a. Type I Actions- review, required for all Type I Actions. The involved agency that INFORM initially receives an application for approval circulates the completed Part i of the AGENCIES AND erorelrllTEr SELECT full EAF and any other information supplied by the applicant to the other involved KM — '"1,71r LEAD agencies. The involved agencies should be identified by the applicant in the full EAF I (Part 1.B, question 25). Proceed to Step 5. SNORT EAF UNLISTED (Full ' ACTION EAF b. Unlisted Actions r Opllou.q • • An agency has theee options to consider in the review of an Unlisted Action: 3up�.el � SEORt Uncoordinated Review Option I CSMDIilOrEO rEtAl11E • � _ e�aluulrror rrrror Coordinated review is not required for Unlisted actions that are non - significant. Each involved agency has the option to make its own determination of non - s significance (Negative; Declaration) without contacting the other involved agencies or establishing a lead; agency. Using this approach each involved agency acts as a lead agency and prepares its negative declaration. if all involved agencies separately TM 11. No determine that there will be no significant impact, the action may go forward when uts" It Furth# Elltuet. the applicant has received the necessary approvals. If one of the involved agencies �Iar subsequently determines that the action may have a significant impact and issues a positive declaratiori;,the negative declarations issued by the other involved agencies are superseded and a coordinated review, as required for a Type I Action, must be ` completed (proceed to Step 4a). if your agency does not choose to coordinate review proceed to Step 6. ' 4 z 5 PETER C. ALEXANDERSON County Executive DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 110 Old Route Six Center, Carmel, New York 10512 (914) 225 -0310 April 6, 1990 John Romeo i Northridge Road Peekskill, Nev York 10566 JOHN KARELL Jr., P.E., M.S. Public Health Director Re: Construction Permit sa _ Prudence Chiulli Pudding Street (T) Putnam Valley TM #16 -1 -15 & 16 Dear Hr. Romeo: I have received and reviewed the plans for the proposed construction of a single family, two bedroom residence on the above mentioned parcel. The following information must be supplied. A letter from the building inspector must be submitted, stating that the lot a d is considered a buildi ' ng lot .by land use and legal subdivision (copy enclosed.) 2.) The house, driveway, well and sewage disposal._system are located within a -.To n.- regulated wet-1and or- 100'. buff er, °area. :Therefore, Town °-aRWovai. from_, the Environmental Conservation"Roard must be enclosed. . The profile indicates 10 feet of fill at the basement elevation. Gravity flow appears difficult, if not impossible, maintaining the maximum depth of trench at 18 inches. �5P Plans must be designed.for fill section only. All details are lacking, i.e. septic tank, well, trenches, etc. Test hole data indicates run of bank which is not a typical soil type .in. this area, indicating the area has beerr filled. :;Deep test holes must include original soil types and description. Therefore, new deep test holes will be required. _ 8. Road drainage must be diverted from the sewage disposal area. 9.- All sewage disposal. systems within 200 feet of the proposed well must be noted. 10. Percolation test must be'witnessed by this Department. The entire parcel is within a regulated vetland or the 100 feet control area and therefore approval by this Department will not be possible without prior approval, or coordinated review by the Putnam Valley Environmental Conservation Board. Once the above mentioned information is submitted, review will continue. Very truly yours, William Hedges Sr. Public Sanitarian WH /jp cc: Putnam Valley Environmental Conservation Board Putnam Valley Building Inspector r 3609 Dane ST Shrub Oak, NY 10588 February 4, 1990 MR. JOHN KARRELL, Public Health Director Putnam County Department of Health Division of Environmental Health Services 110 Old Route Six Center . Carmel, NY 10512 Re:. Variance Request for Section 16, Block 1, Lots 15 & 16, Pudding Street, Roaring Brook Lake, Town of Putnam Valley Dear Mr. Karrell: Pursuant to our telephone conversation of February 1, 1991, I would like to request a variance from the following provisions of the Putnam County Health Department: 1. Lot size inadequate to meet present well and septic requirements, 2. Presently 3z' of fill allowed; property requires 7' of fill. -... _.._,...._.. _.�1`a-se- be--a- dvks7e-d -o t'lTe, -fo336wilng l"at iV e'- i-o�t-he" above ifems:_...._�_ ._ -. _.. 1. I will consolidate lot #15 with lot 416 in order to meet septic and well requirements if all approvals sought are received. Enclosed is a letter from Marvin O'Dell, Putnam Valley Building, Zoning and Sanitary Department stating Lots #117 & 118 are approved Map #308 -B filed on July 28, 1945, Subdivision of Roaring Brook Lake ". 2. There presently exists 3' of bankrun in the proposed septic area. This bankrun has been placed on the property over the years since the purchase date of June 1, 1971. Under filed map #308H entitled "Typical Installations of Water Supply and Sewage Disposal Systemd approved by the N.Y. State Department _ of Health pursuant to section 89 of the Public Health Law the following is stated; "No lots shall be sold .or developed in areas where the ground water table is at any time 1'ess than 4" below ground level unless provision is made t-o.:fill in -or build up:the disposal area with porous material to obtain the required 4' depth or unless provision is made for the disposal of sewage in a central sewage treatment plant approved by the N.Y. State Department of Health ". -2- Since the 4' _.of -por-ous materi'a 'regi r - '0d" by t-he N.Y. State Department of Health was not put in place prior to the sale of these lots, and there presently exists 32` of fill, I would like your permission to put an additional 3Z' of fill on this property in order to meet present requirements. I have owned my lot for almost 20 years and have paid taxes on it as a buildable lot. This property was approved'by the N.Y. State Department of Health. If I do not receive approval under present day standards., the property is worthless. The Town of Putnam Valley is considering a wetlands problem associated with these lots and they will not act on it without the Putnam County Health Department's approval. This is evidenced by my 9/7/90 letter from Joel Greenberg wherein he states "'Since the Health Department will not issue a construction permit, the application will have to be denied ". - Further information relating to this matter can be found in my engineer's (Mr. Romeo) letter to you dated October 2, 1990 and my letter to you dated November 8, 1990. Since this variance request was initiated some time ago, I would appreciate it if you could apprise the Board of this request at the February 11, 1991 meeting. Should you require any further information, please feel free to communicate with me at (914) 245 -6299. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.. Very truly yours, PRUDENCE CHIULLI Enc. YMARVIN O'DELL Inspector TOWN OF PUTNAM VALLEY BUILDING, ZONING, AND SANITARY DEPARTMENT Mrs. Prudence Chiulli 3609 Dane Street Shrub Oak, N.Y. 10588 May 10, 1990 7 TOWN HALL PUTNAM - VALLEY, N.Y. (914) 526 2377 Re: Property Status TM #16 -1 -15 & 16 Dear Mrs. Chiulli: Pursuant to your request regarding the status of your property in Roaring Brook, please be advised of the following: Lots #117 & 118 are shown on approved Map #308 -B filed on July 28, 1945 "Subdivision of Roaring Brook Lake ". s Please contact this office should you need further . explanation regarding above. MO'D:es Very truly yours, MARVIN 0 DEL Buildign & � oning Inspector _.CROWDER... . _ .... Chairman GERTRUDE McKAY Secretary �0--/ — Members: ROBERT CANAVAN . BRIAN DOYLE SALVATORE SANTAMORENA Town Planner TOWN OF PUTNAM VALLEY Adm. Assistant JOEL GREENBERG (914) 628 -6613 PLANNING BOARD VITTORIA COLESANTI (914) 526 -3740 265 OSCAWANA LAKE ROAD PUTNAM VALLEY, NEW YORK 10579 PBC /1024 February 8, 1991 Mr. & Mrs. Donald Chiulli 3609 Dane Street Shrub Oak, NY 10588 Re: Wetland Permit Application. TM #16 -1 -15 and 16 -1 -16 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Chiulli: Your letter to the Board dated January 28, 1991 was reviewed at the February 4, 1991 meeting. The Planning Board will prepare the Draft Environmental Impact Statement as Lead Agency in.the above noted application. Furthermore, in view of the limited scope of the D.E.I.S., the required r ..._ _...- fee, will be waived..-._....... Sincerely yours, qq_� Billy 1. Crowder / Chairman BLC /vc cc: Town Board Town Attorney - Herman Taub Town Planner - Joel Greenberg: Wetland Inspector - Michael Priano Building Inspector - O'Dell P.C. Health Department N.Y.S. D E C - Region III P.V. Environmental Commission SOAKS H W -:I 'ANA �jNnOO VTdNlna a3AI90� I' .> a PETER C. ALEXANDERSON County Executive DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 110 Old Route Six Center, Carmel, New York 10512 (914) 225 -0310 April 6, 1990 John Romeo 1 Northridge Road Peekskill, New York 10566 Re: Construction Permit Prudence Chiulli Pudding Street (T) Putnam Valley l TM X16 -1 -15 & 16 r/� Dear Mr. Romeo: JOHN KARELL Jr., P.E., M.S. Public Health Director I have received and reviewed the plans for the proposed construction of a single family, two bedroom residence on the above mentioned parcel. The following information must be supplied. A letter from the building inspector must be submitted, stating that the lot is considered a building lot by land use and legal subdivision (copy enclosed.) The- house, 'driveway, yell _and' sewage disposal systei6 are located within a Town regulate etland or 100' buffer area. Therefore, Town approval fr..om... the Environmental Conservation Board must_ be _enclosed._ r'� The profile indicates 10 feet of fill at the basement elevation. t�4 Gravity flow appears difficult if not impossible, maintaining the maximum depth of trench at 18 inches. Plans must be designed for fill section only. All details are lacking, i.e. septic tank, well, trenches, etc. Test hole data indicates run of bank which is not a typical soil type in this area, indicating the area has beenr filled. Deep test holes must include original soil types and description. Therefore, new deep test holes will be required. 8. Road drainage must be diverted from the sewage disposal area. 9. All sewage - disposal systems within 200 feet of the proposed well must be noted. 10. Percolation test must be witnessed by this Department. 4•M O The entire parcel is within a regulated wetland or the 100 feet control area and therefore approval by this Department will not be possible pithout prior approval, or coordinated review by the Putnam Valley Environmental Conservation Board. Once the above mentioned information is submitted, review will continue. Very truly yours, William Hedges Sr. Public Sanitarian WH /jp cc: Putnam Valley Environmental Conservation Board Putnam Valley Building Inspector BILLY CROWDER µ Chairman GERTRUDE McKAY Secretary Town Planner JOEL GREENBERG (914) 628 -6613 PBC /1004 December 11, 1990 TOWN OF PUTNAM VALLEY PLANNING BOARD 265 OSCAW ANA LAKE ROAD PUTNAM VALLEY. NEW YORK 10579 Mr. & Mrs. Donald Chiulli 3609 Dane Street Shrub Oak, NY 10588 Re: Wetland Permit Application Pudding Street - TM# 16 -1 -15 and 16 -1 -16 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Chiulli: ROBERT CANAVAN BRIAN DOYLE SALVATORE SANTAMORENA Adm. Assistant VITTORIA COLESANTI (914) 526-3740 . Your request for an extension of the 90 -day limit for submitting the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the above - mentioned property is denied. - - You° continue - to ignore a- very. important .fact..- ,there has been substantial. filling of wetlands on a portion of the property (TM# 16 -1 -16) ILLEGALLY" which has resulted in significant environmental damage. You were issued a violation on recent activities. On -site inspections revealed that substantial filling of the wetlands had occurred on that property which predated the recent activities, but were also in violation of the Town Code, which has required a permit for activities in wetlands since 1972. In addition, the Planning Board has determined that the activities you are requesting in your Wetland Permit Application are likely to result in further damage to the environment. The Planning Board has very serious reservations about the viability of this project - and they have been expressed to you and your engineer, Mr. John S. Romeo, on many occasions. To date, the Planning Board has received no indication from you or your engineer as to what. you could do to mitigate the environmental impacts associated with this proposed project. These concerns should be addressed now. l l'BC /1004 Page 2 Finally, the Planning Board is not likely to respond to the illegal filling in of wetlands by approving an application which results in additional damage to the environment - irrespective of any action taken by the Putnam County Board of Health in variance hearings. For the record, the negative decision by the Putnam County Health Department supports the Planning. Board in its contention that the proposal is environmentally unsound. We believe that your project would result in additional damage to the environment and we have given you 90 days to prove us wrong. Sincerely yours, BILLY L. CROWDER Chairman BLC /vmc cc: Joel Greenberg, Town Planner Commissioner, Dept. of Environmental Conservation Region III, Department of Environmental Conservation Sara Koshofer, Supervisor, and Members of the P. V. Town Board Marvin O'Dell., Building & Zoning Inspector P.V. Environmental Commission Michael Priano, Wetland Inspector -..- - Patricia Pettersen, Town Clerk CC p r ttn of He&lth John S:'Romeo, P.E: �� =ice �d f,- BILLY CROWDER, Chairman Planning Board Town of Putnam Valley. 265 Oscawanna Lake Road Putnam Valley, NY 10579 Re: Wetland Pudding Roaring Dear Mr. Crowder: 3609 Dane Street Shrub Oak, NY 10588 December 19, 1990 Permit Application Street - TM #16 -1 -15 & 16 Brook Lake Since my correspondence to you dated 12/5/90 and your response dated 12/11/90, I have received information from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation relating to the State Environmental Quality Review Act. The following facts have been noted: 1. The SEQR Flowchart & Timeframes states "no time frame" for preparing a DEIS. Enclosed is a copy of this for your perusal. under SCOPJNG ,.:of_ ttiQ: ::SEQR:,b "o-okl:e:t - ,. states "scoping may occur at the request of the applicant." - - - "a written scope of issues to be addressed in the draft EIS must be provided by the lead agency to the applicant and all involved agencies, within 30 calendar days following the filing of the positive declaration ----- Scoping may be accomplished through meeting(s), exchanges of written material, or other methods that will allow the lead agencies to agree upon a written scope of issues in a timely manner. In.view of the above - mentioned New York State laws, I would appre- ciate it if you would address the following questions: 1. Why have you imposed a 90 day time limit on filing a DEIS for my property? 2. Since the requested building permit is for a single family house only, and not for a large development, I asked Mr. Greenberg if the entire EIS had to be completed. His response to my question was, "All r' -2- questions have to be answered; some would require less information. Your engineer would know what to do." Why didn't Mr. Greenberg suggest a scoping session at this time? Also, in your letter of 12/11/90, you state, "there has been.sub- stantial filling of wetlands on a portion of the property which has resulted in significant environmental damage." I am not aware of any environmental damage. In fact, if you read my Environmental Engineer's (Bruce Donohue's) report, you will note that he states, "the condition of these wetlands is good ", - -- "The potential for adverse impacts of this proposed construction would be minimal with the appropriate precautions during construction. The fill area would not be substantially increased. The existing filling has been taking place over the past 20 years, as you indicated. The adjacent wetlands do not appear to have been adversely affected. There are no.standing dead trees which might indicate smothering or other changes due to altered ground water conditions. There has been no significant amount of siltation of the adjacent wet- lands by material washed from the fill. No areas of bare sand spreading out from the base of the fill were seen, despite the very heavy recent rains." - --"In summary, I believe that it is possible to develop your land as proposed by Mr. Romeo's plan without having significant adverse impacts on the adjacent wetlands." Since neither myself nor Mr. Donohue is aware of any environmental damage, will you let me know what damage has resulted to the environ- ment as a result of filing this wetland? I would like to know if my property is located in a critical environ- _ __ me_nt.a_l..ar.e .a.:..and . if..- thP...stream on _ the . pr,operty., is located. in 'a state regulated wetlands? Since there is no time limit under New York State law for filing a DEIS, I am requesting that you rescind the 90 day time limit you have imposed on me. I am using this letter.as a means of formally requesting a scoping session. May I receive a response to this letter at your earliest convenience? Thank you for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, Enc. PRUDENCE CHIULLI Copy to: Commissioner, DEC Region III, DEC Sara Koshofer, Supervisor Marvin O'Dell, Bldg. & Zoning Insp. P.V. Environmental Cmsn. I Priano, Wetland Inspector Pettersen Town Clerk :C. Health kept. J.S. Romeo, PE. :b BILLY CROWDER Chairman GERTRUDE McKAY Secretary Town Planner JOEL GREENBERG (914) 628 -6613 PBC /1013 January 11, 1991 r TOWN OF PUTNAM VALLEY PLANNING BOARD 265 OSCAWANA LAKE ROAD PUTNAM VALLEY, NEW YORK 10579 Mr. & Mrs. Donald Chiulli 3609 Dane Street Shrub Oak, NY 10588 Re: Your letter of December 19, 1990 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Chiulli: !" Members: V J ROBERT CANAVAN BRIAN DOYLE SALVATORE SANTA MORENA Adm. Assistant VITTORIA COLESANTI (914) 526 -3740 The Planning Board is aware of the SEQR time frames. We are also aware that the primary purpose of the SEAR process is to address environmental issues associated with development in a timely manner and EARLY in the approval process..- We interpret "no time frame ". to mean NO STATE MANDATED__ -- -- ine iratrie; -- -partkeuiarly `- in" view of °the- tact that the responsibility for preparation of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement.resides with the lead agency (in this case, the Planning Board) which can either prepare, or have prepared,. a Draft EIS. We have given you 90 days to prepare the document, if you so choose. If you do not submit a Draft EIS within 90 days, the Planning Board will prepare the document. The statute which gives us this authority is part of the State Environmental Quality Review Act, SEQRA,. Section 8 -0113, Part 617.8 "Environmental impact statement procedures ". Paragraph a), "The applicant or the lead agency, at the applicant's option, shall prepare the draft EIS. If the applicant does not exercise-the option to prepare the draft EIS, the lead agency shall prepare it, cause it to be prepared, or terminate its review of the action. A fee may be charged by' the lead agency for preparation or review of an EIS pursuant to section 617.17 ". e PBC /1013 Page 2 Your wetland permit application was submitted on July 10, 1987 AFTER a notice of violation and Stop Work Order was issued on June 10, 1987 for the dumping and filling of a wetland. For your information, destroying a wetland . by dumping and filling is considered an adverse environmental impact. Wetlands have been protected in Putnam Valley since 1972. The quotation from Donohue referenced in your letter "The existing filling has been taking place over the past 20 years, as you indicated. The adjacent wetlands do not appear to have been adversely affected" indicates that you were aware of the fact that fill had been placed into what had been - existing wetlands during a period in which such actions required approval by the Planning Board (and prior to Local Law #3, 1987, by the Town Board as well). This information contradicts your statements to the Planning Board that the fill had been placed on the property without your knowledge. On -site inspections by the Planning Board, the Building and Zoning Inspector and the Wetlands Inspector have indicated that wetlands were filled. These facts were introduced repeatedly during several continuations of the public hearing on your wetlands permit application. You and your engineer have consistently ignored the environmental implications of these facts which resulted in a motion requiring the submission of a completed Long Environmental Assessment Form (May 1989) so that the environmental issues associated with filling of the wetlands could be addressed. Part 1 of that form was not prepared by your engineer until March 27, 1990. The amount of information he provided required no more than 30 minutes of time AND critical information was simply incorrect. In addition, in spite of the knowledge that the Planning Board was concerned with what mitigation procedures could be taken to reduce the environmental impact, additional information required by Part 1, Section D of the Environmental Assessment Form was not provided. Given that almost 11 months passed, the Planning Board has the perception that you and /or your- en ineer are _not serious about; tbe:.:. iaviro mental .impacts -.of both. -the- -- illegal action taken in filling protected wetlands and the implications of further development in this sensitive area. Additional evidence that the area in which critical improvements such as the sewage disposal system are proposed was in fact filled wetlands comes from the report from William Hedges, Department of Health, to your engineer John. Romeo on September 13, 1990. Mr. Hedges states "The original soil was found to be black organic top soil consisting of a silty clay to a depth of 16 inches. Subsoil was a grey silty clay, typical of a saturated, wetland soil "... "Ground water was observed within 6 inches of original grade ". The facts are at odds with information provided by Mr. Romeo on the EAF where he indicates that the area in question is "moderately well .drained" and that the water table is 4 feet in depth. Mr. Hedges concludes that, based on results of deep test holes, the construction of a sewage disposal system on your property cannot be approved based on current standards and your application was denied. V PBC /1013 Page 3 Scoping is an optional process whereby the major issues are identified specifically so that the bulk of the draft EIS can be focused on those major issues. In this case, in which you are before.the Planning Board for a wetland permit it is'-clear that the major issue is mitigation of adverse impacts created by filling of what had been wetlands as well as the potential for additional adverse impacts if the proposed development were completed. The Planning Board members have clearly indicated to you and your engineer that these are in fact the major issues and this has occurred several times since the initial public hearing on your wetlands permit application. Witn that factual background, I now turn to your questions: 1. "Why have you imposed a 90 day time limit on filing a DEIS for my property ?" You have not been responsive to repeated requests from the Planning Board for mitigation procedures either for the damage generated by the illegal filling of wetlands OR for the adverse impact that the additional development would impose. Since the Planning Board can prepare the Draft EIS as lead agency, we. are going to exercise this option if you do not prepare the necessary document, as requested, in accordance with NYCRR Part 617, Section 8 -0113 (617.8 "a "). 2. "Why didn't Mr. Greenberg suggest a scoping session at this time? "(11/5/1990). This is a very small project AND the substantive issue has been discussed with you and your engineer on several occasions. Mr. Greenberg's response was correct - in preparing a draft environmental impact statement, all potential.._, issues... must ...be .addressed for completeness -- and_most „questions T....:... ".: - require -oily `brief answers: " "`ltie planning Board has clearly. indicated to you and Mr. Romeo on several occasions what the substantive issues are. As a practicing engineer, Mr. Romeo certainly should understand the requirements of the SEQR process. The reason that you are applying for a wetlands permit is precisely because your property is located in a critical environmental area, which includes the stream as well as the wetlands. To the best of our knowledge, the stream is not located-in a state regulated wetlands. The Planning Board will not rescind the time limit for filing the DEIS. You have not been responsive to-direct requests from the Planning Board - in particular dating from the May 1, 1989 meeting. PBC /1013 Page 4 As you stated in your letter, the. requested building permit is for a single - family house only, so that a draft EIS dealing with the major issues .associated with mitigating the illegal filling of previously existing wetlands AND the potential for additional damage to the current wetlands because of the unsuitability of the filled area for improvements such as a sewage disposal system based on current standards should not be a difficult task if you and your engineer are serious about discussing the environmental issues. The Planning Board has determined that the issues are severe and that mitigation is difficult, if not impossible (April 3, 1989, November 5, 1990).. At the November 5, 1990 meeting, we could have, as lead agency, decided to prepare the Draft EIS. We have given you another opportunity to present your plans for mitigation (if any), but with a 90 -day time limit. In accordance with E!hrp_-617e$ ,Section:. 8- 01T,3,,, the Planning Board will take appropriate action if you have not exercised your option to prepare the environmental impact statement. Your request for a "formal scoping session" is denied on the basis that the project is small AND the scope has been repeatedly emphasized by the Planning Board. You were informed of the critical issues in very specific terms dating as far back as the 8/14/87 report from Mr. Priano, the Wetlands Inspector, and his report of 3/27/1988. The Planning Board expects compliance with the 90 -day time limit.. The Planning Board has substantial technical information dealing with the critical issues associated with this project. If you do not present an adequate Draft EIS within the specified.90.days, the Planning Board will . .prepare the necessary document (our right as Lead Agency), complete the SEQR process and render a decision on your pending Wetlands Permit Application in accordance with the SEQR time frame. - - - -Sincerely, yours; P. V. PLANNING BOARD Billy L. Crowder Chairman BC /vc cc: Town Board Town Attorney Town Planner Building Inspector Wetlands Inspector PC Health Department": NYS D E C - Region III PV Environmental Commission BILLY CROWDER Chairman GERTRUDE McKAY Secretary Town Planner JOEL GREENBERG (914) 628 -6613 PBC /1004 December 11, 1990 PUTNAM VAHET TOWN OF PUTNAM VALLEY PLANNING BOARD 265 OSCAWANA LAKE ROAD PUTNAM VALLEY. NEW YORK 10579 Mr. & Mrs. Donald Chiulli 3609 Dane Street Shrub Oak, NY 10588 Re: Wetland Permit Application Pudding Street - TM# 16 -1 -15 and 16 -1 -16 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Chiulli: Members: ROBERT CANAVAN BRIAN DOYLE SALVATORE SANTAMORENA Adm. Assistant VITTORIA COLESANTI (914) 526 -3740 Your request for an extension of the 90 -day limit for submitting the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the above - mentioned property is denied. a- � , ini or }eTit fact- - fl:c�e Y:as• been .�uhstan*_ia = You..- continue � to - ignorc eery . g filling of wetlands on a portion of the property (TM# 16 -1 -16) ILLEGALLY which has resulted in significant environmental damage. You were issued a violation on recent activities. On -site inspections revealed that substantial filling of the wetlands had occurred on that property which predated the recent activities, but were also in violation of the Town Code, which has required a permit for activities in wetlands since 1972. In addition, the Planning Board has determined that the activities you are requesting in your Wetland Permit Application are likely to result in further damage to the environment. The Planning Board has very serious reservations about the viability of this project - and they have been expressed to you and your engineer, Mr. John S. Romeo, on many occasions. To date, the Planning Board has received no indication from you or your engineer as to what you could do to mitigate the environmental impacts associated with this proposed project. These concerns should be addressed now. ffi r i /ib04 Page 2 Finally, the Planning Board is not likely to respond to the illegal filling in of wetlands by approving an application which results in additional damage to the environment - irrespective.of any action taken by the Putnam County Board of Health in variance hearings. For the record, the negative decision by the-Putnam County Health Department supports the Planning Board in its contention that the proposal is environmentally. unsound. We believe that your project would result in additional damage to the environment and we have given you 90 days to prove us wrong. Sincerely yours, BILLY L. CROWDER Chairman BLC /vmc cc: Joel Greenberg, Town Planner Commissioner, Dept. of Environmental Conservation Region III, Department of Environmental Conservation Sara Koshofer, Supervisor, and Members of the P. V. Town Board Marvin O'Dell, Building & Zoning Inspector P.V. Environmental Commission Michael Priano Wetland_ Inspecrcar Patricia Pettersen, Town Clerk P.C. Department of Health John S. Romeo, F.E. PETER C. ALEXANDERSON County Executive DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 110 Old Route Six Center, Carmel, New York 10512 (914) 225 -0310 November 28, 1990 Mr. John Romeo, P. E. 1 Northridge Road Peekskill, NY 10566 Re: Variance procedure Chiulli (T) Putnam Valley 16 -1 -15 & 16 Dear Mr. Romeo: JOHN KARELL Jr., P.E., M.S. Public Health Director Enclosed please find a copy of the procedure for applying for a variance thru the Board of Health on the above mentioned lot. If you have any questions please contact me at your convenience. Very truly,.yours, William Hedges Sr. Public Sanitarian WH /jp cc: Mrs. P. Chuilli Dane Street, Shrub Oak, NY 10588 3609 Dane Street Shrub Oak, NY 10588 November 8, 1990 Mr. John Karell, Director Putnam County Department of Health Division of Environmental Health Services 110 Old Route 6 Ctr. - Bldg. 3 Carmel, NY 10512 Re: Prudence Chiulli - Proposed SSDS Pudding Street, Roaring Brook Lake Town of Putnam Valley Sec. 16, Block 1, Lots 15 & 16 Dear Mr. Karell: Attached is Mr. Romeo's letter dated October 2, 1990 to your attention relating to my property in Roaring Brook Lake. I am applying for a wetlands building permit and will combine my lot #16 and my husband's lot #15 in order to be able to do this. Under. _present: building .codes we,, are : not allowed _to,..,bave the minimum requirement of 7 feet of permeable material in the septic - area. May I call to your attention the fact that there presently exists 3 feet of bankrun. Also, in accordance with Map #308H, under subdivision X63, enacted in 1947, the following is stated. "No lots shall be sold or developed in areas where the ground water table is at any time less than 4 feet below ground level unless provision is made to fill in or build up the disposal area with porous material to obtain the required 4 foot depth or unless provision is made for the disposal of sewage in a central sewage treatment plant approved by the New York State Department of Health (See Sk. 1) I am requesting your permission to place additional fill.ion this property since the required amount of fill was not placed on the property prior to the lot.being sold or developed. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Very truly yours, fA Prudence Chiulli 245 -6299 BOARD OF HEALTH Procedure for Variance Request Pursuant to the provisions of Article III Section 2, (b) an application for the installation of an individual sewage disposal system that has been denied by the Director may be reviewed by the Putnam County Board of Health who may reverse the decision based upon proof of hardship and with concurrence of the Director that the proposed sewage disposal system will not create a health hazard by its use. Individuals wishing to make application to the Board of Health for a variance must submit a letter to the Board President, Sara McGlinchy, Putnam County Department of Health, 110 Old Route'6, Carmel, New York 10512, which application must include: 1. In a letter (14 copies) a) Formally request a variance b) Fully describe the variance requested c) Discuss the hardship that will be experienced should the variance not be granted 2. Provide 14 sets of plans 3. Submit a letter from the local question is a legal building 1 variance requests for property Zoning standpoint... Town Building Department that the property in Dt. The Board of Health will not consider that is not a legal building lot from a Town John Karell,Jr., P.E. Public Health Director A S- JK: pt 9/90 Bruce M. Donohue Landscape Architect BLA, MLA, MS Ecology r k 9 May 12, . 1989 Mr. and Mrs. Donald Chi U1.1 ..'; 3609 Dane Street Shrub Oak, N.Y. 10588-,- Dear Mr. -and Mrs. Chiul.l'i:" I enjoyed meeting with'you last Thursday at your Pudding Street property and discussing your situation. Since then. I have spoken with Mr. Romeo and Mr. Zutt. The following comments and recommendations are based upon the observa- tions made.,and these subsequent conversations. The en,t.ire property is :coi.npl,e-ely within the regulated area of the wetland laws of. :the Town. Mr.rPr.ano'.of the wetlands conservation, office has flagged the limit of the wetlands::; - T his °is essentially the base of the fill material along the SW and SE'sides of�the'property. The remainder of the land is within .100 ft. of this wetland'limit line, so it is also regulated. Conse- quently,. any alternative:for:`Fconstruction on this site requires a wetland per - mit. _�, •• . -- T.he,.remaining are assoc�at,ed wi.th..the..stC.eam _which _r_uns. across the _.. .._._ _.... .wetlands, �reae'of :jour'vroorty and wit t. the--- dra "inage •d-itch "carryi-ng - wat'er-- MM- .-ti)e- -ro -ad ...- °- culvert tndee. ';Pudding Street tc� the stream.' : These' wetlands are part of a sys- tem .which-presently;.extends approximately 2.500 ft., :,up stream from.,,your prop- erty; ° At one !t,ime this' may a "l so have been associated with. the much >larger wetland'system which was'fl'ooed.when Roaring Brook Lake was formed, fformed The condition of these wetlands,1s good. They are ,typical_.of hardwood swamps. in a relatively sandy so.i1;: Red Maple, Ash,. Pin'.Oak_;and Sweet birch !'. .. ;.: °dominate the�,.canopy, Spicebush, Specl<3ed Ai der aTld; W�nterberry form the, un= . ! , derstory. Ground leve ]!'Kplants`9nc'ltide 'a mixture of typt Cal' wetland species J r ., ,. such a Jewelweed. Skunk'Ca .Age, Horsetail and Cows,41 +'and moist.up -and species, such.. as Trout UT1y a d Mustard Garl is �f 6` The site plan proposed by ° °Arj; ,,_Romeo; PE, `-dated 1]. -c "8 8 nand 1ast`revised ' 1-29 -89 is very compact .an remains :`esser.ti.ally ; n�the exist ng filled area. We discussed possible means of :improving the design. to'.de rease the potential for adverse impacts on the wet.iand 'S:' The.' ncluded :,nt6v nq-the deive'to the north side of the septic fiel.ds'and altering the depth!uf.:fi1.l,' Unfortu- nately, Putnam Co. Health,, Depar.tineht�.has several restrlc,t.idns..'such as 10 ft. separation of drives from tale fields, and maximum ept'h- of. new "fil l ' septic i fields which effectively, a aerations to his plan. £`ven.the reduction of the house size to a single bedroom home. unpractical and unrealistic as it would be, would not make a significant difference in the Health Department's requirements. - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS O LANDSCAPE DESIGNED SITE PLANNING 13 PROMISED ROAD, WESTPORT, CONNECTICUT 06880 (203) 226 -0386 The only feasible changes would be the elimination of the driveway and rerout- ing of the water line from the well. Eliminating the driveway as shown would allow a reduction of the fill required for the septic area. Off-street park- ing could be provided in the front 10 ft. of the site. The water line could be rerouted parallel to the front of the property so that the line could be buried using a machine based on the road. This option would have to be care- fully examined as it may actually result in increased disruption. especially if there are any existing trees that would be affected along the edge of the road. The potential for adverse impacts of this proposed construction would be mini- mal with the appropriate precautions during construction. The fill area would not be substantially increased. The existing filling has been taking place over the past 20 years. as you indicated. The adjacent wetlands do not appear to have been adversely affected. There are no standing dead trees which might indicate smothering or other changes due to altered ground water conditions. There has been no significant amount of siltation of the adjacent wetlands by material washed from the fill. No areas of bare sand spreading out from the base of the fill were seen, despite the very heavy recent rains. (Prevention of this type of damage could easily be provided by the use of .a properly installed filter fabric silt fence. I prefer these over hay bales for the ease and assurance of removal after construction is finished and the ground stabilized. Hay bales are very difficult to manage after they become waterlogged. partially filled with trapped sediment and and have begun to de- compose. They require either extensive hand labor to remove or a backhoe. l'The most short term damage to the wetland that would result from this con- struction would be caused by the laying of the water line. This is a one time di stu_x.banr,.e.;w.ha.ch :may be able to be decreased.in several- ways- .... -.. zn,s- tal- .l.,ation.. �• . w. maybe po "ssid7e- `using a "smAVY, 866cat'tiype. baWnoe or eJen` better, a °smal'1-`ro` " tracked excavator. Either of these would disturbea narrower swath through the swamp. Most of the woody wetland vegetation in this area consists of rapidly spreading species such a Silky Dogwood and Rose. These will quickly reclaim the disturbed area. To assure that this disturbance need never be repeated in the unlikely event of a'burst or clogged water line, the pipe could be laid in 14" O/C conduit. Further mitigation to limit potential future disruption of the adjacent wet- lands would be a strong delineation of the fill area. This could be as light as a rail fence or as substantial as a masonry wall. This would clearly de- fine the area of the yard and make any future expansion both more obvious and more problematic. In summary, I believe that it is possible to develop your land as proposed by Mr. Romeo's plan without having significant adverse impacts on the adjacent wetlands. Proper erosion and sedimentation control measures will protect the wetlands. Limiting the regrading and earthwork activities to the dry summer months would also help avoid deposition of material in the wetlands. Topsoil - ing and seeding should be done immediately upon the prompt completion of the exterior work. Long term'dis'turbance to-the_ wet &nd-- cou- Id. -be -- deterred -by -a- perimeter-fence -or wali.- k The only other suggestions I can make are that you collect letters from your neighbors stating the length of time you have been filling the site, and to offer to meet with Mr. Priano or the Planning Board. This would be most ef- fective if it could be done on the site. Here we could show the lack of harm done by the existing fill and demonstrate the compactness of the proposed use of the site. Bill might also attend such a meeting. if he could do so. pre- pared to offer the Town the choice.of permitting your present proposal, or a court fight for two homes instead of one. I hope that my suggestions will be of assistance in acquiring the necessary building permits. It may be that a site visit with Mr. Priano or the Planning` - Board to discuss possible additional mitigation would further your cause. If I can be of further assistance. please feel free to contact me. Sincerely. Bruce M. Donohue BMD/ rn,d cc: elm. Zutt PMW COUNTY HEALTH- DEPARTMENT DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES John, K. Simwns, M.D. Deputy Commissioner of Health FIELD ACTIVITY REPORT - Sheet/ of. INSPECTION NAME Orig. Routine Orig. Ccmplain ADDRESS -rte, 'Orig. Request. No. Street Town TK No, Canpliance Canplaint Carip MAILING ADDRESS Final P.O. Box Post Office Zip Code Group illness .Construction "HONE l/ /� �' Reinspection PERSON IN CHARGE Fieldf Sampling Only i Conference OR IINTERVIEWED F did" f Name-4nd Title Other DATE TYPE FACILITY TIME TIME LEFT z Explain z 1,:rlkl -7 /4-/-'�-, dl FINDINGS: '/0--;1 77-71'e "o -Y TT Z INSPECTOR: Signat6re aM Title PERSON IN CHARGE OR INTERVIEWED: I acknowledge this Field Activity Report. SIGNATURE: 6/86 TITLE: TELEPHONE: 114, 't xlta Z INSPECTOR: Signat6re aM Title PERSON IN CHARGE OR INTERVIEWED: I acknowledge this Field Activity Report. SIGNATURE: 6/86 TITLE: TELEPHONE: _ P(JTNAM COUNTY HEALTH PE W-Nr.. - DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES John M. Simmons, M.D. Deputy Commissioner of Health - FIELD ACTIVITY REPORT - Sheet :2— of 2-- / INSPECTION NAME ,�ij �1 �� i Orig . Routine n ADDRESS ��j c3/ a a ! �G -� '/ Orig. Request M MAILING ADDRESS /`� -�,• `� ��"' "/ P.O. Sox P69 Office Zip Code *I' • M , . N A."M 10WHIaTA a DID Name and Title /_ 1 5 _?"I DATE i� %� TYPE FACILITY TIME ARRIVED ��% TIME LEFT Compliance Complaint Carp Final Group Illness Construction Reinspection. Field, Sampling Only Field Conference Other FINDINGS: I _ t _ Explain _...: :�.._._ • .....'..rf_ 4�J - - r V O ,c Iffy -� INSPECTOR: Ti PERSON IN CHARGE OR INTERVIEWED: I acknowledge this Field Activity Report. SIGNATURE: 6/86 TITLE: TELEPHONE: J. S. ROMEO, PE. L3 JOHN S. ROMEO, P.C. 9 ... ....... .. ... _0ONSUL`TINQ -' NGINt ERS 8i T.XNt Si71T2VEYUFtS " a _ _ _ r.. a: 1 NORTHRIDGE ROAD PEEKSKILL, NEW YORK 10588 914-797 -1058 October 2, 1990 Putnam County Department of Health Division of Environmental Health Services 110 Old Route 6 Ctr. - Bldg 3 Carmel, N.Y. 10512 ATTENTION:_John Karell - Director Re: Prudence Chiulli - Proposed SSDS - Pudding Street - Roaring Brook Town of Putnam Valley - Sec 16 - .Block l - lots 15S 16 Dear Mr. Karell: I represent Mrs. Chiulli in the above application for a 2 bedroom house to be constructed on 2 lots shown on the subdivision of Roaring Brook. The two lots were purchased by the Chiullis during 1969 and 1970. These-lots were shown on a filed subdivision map on which many other property owners h -ad filled the property and constructed homes and septic systems. At the time of purchase, the owners did not have sufficient funds to fill the property., and thus filled the property as funds became available. Over the ....... years they._, have.. f_i,.l.l ed .a portion of one lot :and - _fel t -__- proceed_ .t - for -an appl-i-cation-, for 'asi- ng-l-e-bu 1-din -g° per'm'it: Over the years, the rules.changed and thus we now have wet land regulations, which were not applied to any of her neighbors. Tests were made in the filled area,nek' the road portion of the filled property. The upper portion of the fill indicates that percolation is available above the water table. I had proposed placing additional R.O.B. Fill to have a minimum of 7 feet of permeable material in the septic area. The material below the original fill shows one hole having some permiable material although below the water, and the other hole being non- permeable. Thus the application was not approved by Mr. William Hedges, one of your assistants. On behalf of the Chiulli's I am appealing the above decision. Since they have owned the property for over 20 years, and would have obtained at least one.permit and possibibly 2 permits if filled at the time of purchase, I request that they PA"mitted to construct a, 2 bedroom - 1 famiIiIy home withe proviso that thge merged as'i, and that no expansion on home be permitted in thee? s Very truly ours 4 fM C- •r n S. Romeo P.E. & P.L.S. 2isah BILLY'CROWDER Chairman GERTRUDE McKAY Secretary Town Planner JOEL GREENBERG (914) .628-6613 PBC/991 October 18, 1990 TOWN OF PUTNAM VALLEY PLANNING BOARD 265 OSCAWANA LAKE ROAD PUTNAM VALLEY, NEW YORK 10579 Mr. William Hedges Sr. Public Health Sanitarian Department of Health 110 Old Route 6 Center Carmel, N.Y. 10512 Re: Prudence Chiulli Application - TM#16-1-15 and 16 Dear Mr. Hedges: 6k . ...... -rs: )t 1. z_._MjffmbL ROBERT CANAVAN BRIAN DOYLE SALVATORE SANTA MORENA . Adm. Assistant VITTORIA COLESANTI (914) 526-3740 We have received copy of your letter to Mr. John Romeo dated September 13, .1990 .regqrding. ..the... above mentioned two parcels located-on Pudding-- Street --,in the-"Tow ff-of "Putnam Valley: The Board wishes to thank you for your directness in addressing this matter and•your promptness in reaching and forwarding your decision. We look forward to working with you in future projects. Sincerely, Billy IU Crowder BC/vc PETER C. ALEXANDERSON County Executive DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 110 Old Route Six Center, Carmel, New York 10512 (914) 225 -0310 January 30, 1990 Mr. John Romeo, P.E. 1 Northridge Road Peekskill, NY 10566 Re: Application for Chiulli Street: Pudding Street Town: Putnam Valley Dear Mr. Romeo: ENID L. CARRUTH. M.P.H. Public Health Director JOHN SIMMONS. M.D. Deputy Commissioner JOHN KARELL Jr., P.E. Director This department is in receipt of the above referenced project. A review of your application will not be made until this office -- receives the required -- fee (See attached fee achedulel. ery ru yours., John Karell Jr., P.E. Director, Environmental Health Services JK:cj Receipt is acknowledged of $100.00. An additional $50.00 is due to complete your application. APPENDIX B PUTNAM COUNTY DEPA M-22U OF HEALTH - DIVISION OF ENVIRONMWML HEALTH SERVICES INDIVIDUAL ?aTER SUPPLY & SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS REVIEKED . ° - REVIEW SHEET - CONSTRUCTION PERMIT (Name of Owner) COMMENTS ee^aw-p' --rer uirad -- d-- -60 ft. max. ,�--- Parellel to .-- 100% exp. _ contours FILL SYST -U4S claybarrier 10 ft. fill notes _ new spec. depth gauges 100 yr. flood elev. 200 ft. reservoir, etc. 150 ft. trigall /gall. DATE BY: (Street Location) YES NO DOCLMENTS Permit Application Corporate Resolution Plans - Three sets Engineers Authorization Design Data Sheet (DDS) Deep Hole Log Consistent Perc Results Perc Hole Depth s/s SUBDIVISION Perc (3) Fill cd Plans - Two sets le permit; P7Z letter lance Request GENERAL Legal Subdivision Subdivision Approval Checked Ex- approval SSDS Adj. Lots Checked Wetland (Town /DEC Permit R & D) Data On DDS Plans & Permit Same REQUIRED DETAILS ON PLANS Sewage System Plan - (north arrow) Sewage System Hydraulic Profile - Gravity Flow Fill Profile & Dimensions - Volume D or J Box;Trench /Gallery; Pm p pit details Septic Tank - Size, Detail Well Detail, Service Line if over Construction_ Notes . _ (grinder r=at7 - Design Data: Perc and deep results Two -Foot Contours Existing & Proposed Driveway & Slopes Cut Footing/Gutter,Curtain Drains (discharge OK) Perc & Deep Holes Located Representative of primary and expansion Expansion Area;shorvn;gravity flow,suff. size If Pwped Pit & D Box Shawn & Detailed House - No. of Bedroans Wells & SSDS's w /in 200 ft. of Proposed Systems Property Metes & Bounds House Setback Necessary (Tight lot) House Sewer - 1 /4 " /ft. 4 "0; Type pipe No Bends; Max. Bends 450 w /cleanout SEPARATION DISTANCES SPECIFIED ON PLAN Fields 10' to P.L., Driveway, Large Trees,Top of fill 20' to Foundation Walls 100' to Well; 200' in D.L.O.D, 150' pits 100' to Stream, Watercourse, Lake Une. expan) 15' to Drains—Curtain, Leader, Footing 351to catch basin,storrdrain,piped watercourse' 10' to Water Line (pits -201) 50' intermittent drainage course Septic Tanks 10' from Foundation; 50' to well 15' Well to PL 9 PUTNAM COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF DIVISION I OF.'ENVIRONMENTAL: HEALTH SERVICES DESIGN DATA SHEET- SUBSUFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTER FILE NO. Owner Prudence Chiulli Address 3609 Dane Street Shrub Oak, NY 10588 Located at (Street) Pudding Street Sec. 16 Block 1 Lot 15 & 16 (indicate nearest cross street) Putnam Palley Municipality j Watershed •■ Date of Pre- Soakinge-- f DE ST DATA RBQUII c 4. :1989. Peekskill TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATIONS Of Percolation Test Dec 5, 1989 HOLE NUMMBM CLOCK TIME PERCOLATION PERCOLATION Run gse `' (Depth to Water Frain Water Level No. ,,a DgPF 4 C� Ground Surface In Inches Soil Rate Staft -Stop Min: OF y�� art Inches Inches Min /In Drop (3) 1 10:28 io:53 17.25 20.25 3.00 . 8.33 2 10:54 11:21 27 17 .,5 20.25 3.00 9.00 3 11:22 11:49 27 17.25 20.25 3.00 9.00.. 4 5 () 1 10:32 11:00 28 18.00 21.00 3.00 9.33 -, 29. ^2_ ... .18 :.00 .:_ ..v ._..2i : o.o.._._, .--'----3 •moo o - . 6 3 11:33,12:02 29 18.00 21.00 3.00 9.67 4 5 1 2 3 5 . NOTES: 1. Tests to be repeated:at same depth until approximately equal soil rates are obtained at-each percolation. test hole. A11 data.tip -be s�tpd..: for review. 2. Depth measurements to be made from top of hole. rev. 9/85 TEST BE SUBMITTID WITH DESCRIPTION OF SOILS ENCOUNTERFA IN TEST HOLES Perc Perc IME.F eeP DEPTH HOLE N0. (3) Hole (4) HOLE No. l HOLE. NO. 2 G.L. ROB Gray. ROB Grav ROB G avel ROB Gravel 1° 2° 3° 4° 5° 6° 7' 8° 9' 10° 11' 12° 13' 14° INDICATE LEVEL AT WHICH GROUNDWATER IS ENCOUNTERED • 5' f e e E° _e l o w INDICATE LEVEL TO WHICH WATER LEVEL RISES AFTER BEING ENCOUNTERED 4.25 feet below DEEP HOLE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY: John S. Romeo DATE: 12/5/89 8 -10 DESIGN SF + Soil Rate Used Min/I" Drop: S.D. Usable Area Provided No. of Bedrooms 2 Septic ' Tank Capacity 1000 gals. Type Ma s o nr y Absorption Area Provided By 240 L.F. x 24" width trench '20 ® m Name Signature S. ROmeo Signature �p� tigt iF o ° 1 Northridge Road U78 Address SEAL Peekskill, NY 10566 ° Or - THIS SPACE FOR USE BY HEALTH DEPARDEM ONLY: Soil Rate Approved sq.ft /gale Checked by Date - -��— I a F 2 � .✓, .� c!o iL LUUL I I � I II I� � ( � I I :, l � L `:. '.' .•t -. IPozcHI F 4 'o02 1= 2 7� M I N 3 PAS -2.x4. o•_(� S� oP 4-- -� i -R A14�+�,1N $., ScALA I— _- ,;�. .� DIAGONAL SNE TUING , ®UIL�ING PA ER g % ! -UU�L. p 5 Z' � "" x 4 ='0 0. 5. 2' -14. x 3' Io" c 5 2 '� 4'�.. • 3/ G�2 �. p LJ1 U. 12 LT S. cf. 71U.I2-1 _1S �� Z •-T_` ::'Ill i�l �• 1 � i �l � Z '4-6 _ 9 S; i. � d � e Fz.. � � � A 1--1 ' P A� . I I _ �� C QNER . P gEo R- o oM m e. 099- 4CI7C H E, Ni DINING P-00 2ab6 I c�or/ ' I ova S3' � I 44o I 3 — - z x4 wG. ?osT. c._o.. x�._o.. p'LAS. icN �• 5 m' -o xn' a\ (A I 1114' LAG 5.CREWS 4 r R Uh d 9 r F0 P— C N �k LIV_lN G 2bO M DIA. METAL G6LUMAl - Pi4'- x 4.. w 0. p o s T I� F- .� E C-) 1Y r62.. L.ATT IGE Q I ••- —_ O _ V rte_ g- ,_� ='j�_� i ti: � •� 3.. - - -- , yr � _ ^� _ o : -- `, r5, ° CoNC ov E u• _ aa,�'' {{{ccc u SwSn sc..'i O 5 A' - t ' . ¢' �o G,u.I (-- Y _. �1oe snsN o.S _o xa' ALTS. - -�'- L - - -- 3/1:4" SCAC 1 .I:.0 ��I�. FLOOfL co�JU tin ��Y:� cl --per_ ,�. •'- -£ 1p En, VZ P p 5 T a PUTNAM COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH January 15, 1990 Date Re: Property of Prudence Chiulli Located at Pudding Street Putnam. Valley 16 1 15 & 16 (T) Section Block Lot Roaring Brook Subdivision ,of o Subdv. Lot # %.117',: &1:118 Filed Map # 308B . Date- Gentlemen: This. letter is to authorize John S. Romeo a duly licensed professional .engineer or3X$X i (Indicate to apply for a Construction Permit for a separate sewage system, to serve the above noted property in accordance with the standards, rules or regulations as_.promulagated by the Commissioner of the Putnam County Department of Health, and to sign all necessary papers on my behalf in :- t6a-- tter- -and - +o.. orr .0f--sTa�ct: _- - system or systems in conformity with the provisions of Article 145 or 147, Education Law, the Public Health Law, and the Putnam County Sani- tary Code. Very truly yours, Signed Countersigned: 0 er of Property P.E. , I Xl . , # r27846 ood..•�.... 36 ©� 0can e ST: /N�•t, Address 1 Northridge Road ; °q� �� s' ��FO �� S�ru b On. A (0syd Address Town Peekskill, N.Y. 10566.. {: 9) y ayes _ aq 737 -1056 ®� 27$46 o ° Tel hone Telephone ® ®e0000�° ° .4 T. MI N16': WA_,LL.:- nt ----- --- --- i4 ;CTI?_J:r_AM I_PIJ PC- A -gT.- W. 14L 3 &VE 4eApx",N tA/, .19 :IM 0 -Z, 222, ... ....... . 0i N Mi yp" Mi. TOWW-0 M'_ V A" fX45;'Y'. 7�N 4- t4 71