The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTR-12/15/2021 Glenn Goldsmith, President ��®� S®�fy® Town Hall Annex A. Nicholas Krupski,Vice President 54375 Route 25P.O. Box 1179 John M. Bredemeyer III Southold,New York 11971 Michael J. Domino Telephone(631) 765-1892 Greg Williams �® Fax(631) 765-6641 ffN BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES RECEIVE® TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ` AN 7 2022 (!8:y0pp1 Minutes % S Wednesday, December 15, 2021 5:30 PM Present Were: Glenn Goldsmith, President Michael J. Domino, Trustee John M. Bredemeyer, Trustee A. Nicholas Krupski, Trustee Greg Williams, Trustee Elizabeth Cantrell, Senior Clerk Typist Damon Hagan, Assistant Town Attorney CALL MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All right, good evening and welcome to our Wednesday, December 15, 2021, meeting. At this time I would like to call the meeting to order and ask that you please stand for the pledge of allegiance. (PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE). We'll start off by announcing the people on the dais. To my left we have Trustee Krupski. For the final time we have Trustee John Bredemeyer, Trustee Mike Domino and Trustee Greg Williams. To my right we have Assistant Town Attorney Damon Hagan and Senior Clerk Typist Elizabeth Cantrell. With us tonight we have Court Stenographer Wayne Galante, and the member of the from the Conservation Advisory Council is Carol Brown. So before we get into our regular agenda, tonight is a bittersweet night. It is the last meeting for three of our Trustees, two of which, Mike Domino and John Bredemeyer, have a combined over 30 years of service to the Town as Trustees, plus many more years protecting the environment in different other roles. So I would like to take a moment to acknowledge their service and thank them for all their dedication. Nick and I have always looked up to Mike and Jay, I'm not going to say as the older members, but as the more seasoned and experienced members of the Board. When we joined the Board six years ago, Mike and Jay took the time to take us under their Board of Trustees 2 December 15, 2021 wings and guide us on how to be good Trustees. That is something we hope to take forward and pay forward to the new members of the Board as they come on. To me, Mike and Jay are not only synonymous with each other, but as Trustees, they made a great team, Mike with his engineering background and Jay with his scientific background. They complemented each other-tremendously and were tremendous-assets to this Board. But I believe, to me, and probably to everybody in this room, it is their unwavering commitment to the environment and to the best interest of Southold Town that will stand up the most. So I would like to thank them for their leadership, for their integrity, for their commitment to the environment and the people of Southold Town. I know that this Board and this Town are better places because of them. So going forward, we have a couple of proclamations here. When we were doing this, it was interesting because Jay has served for parts of four decades in this town. Which is pretty unheard of. So we go through some old permits and everything from back in the 80s, who is this guy's signature, and it's Jay. So we have a proclamation here, and it reads as follows: After 22 years of service as a Trustee to the Town of Southold, John M. Bredemeyer III will retire on December 31st, 2021, and; whereas John M. Bredemeyer-II I has extensive historical knowledge,of the Trustees' function, as well as the Town, and; whereas John's background with the Suffolk County Health Department made him,an authority on water quality, water testing and the effects of nitrogen on the marine environment and; whereas John's extraordinary working knowledge of plant genus and species, including the Latin names, served as a walking encyclopedia to his fellow Trustees, and; whereas earning him the respect of his fellow Trustees, John rose to fulfill the role of Vice-President and President of the Board of Trustees for many years,'and; whereas'because of John's knowledge and experience he has helped preserve the wetlands within the Town of Southold; now, therefore be it resolved that the Southold Town Trustees express their most sincere gratitude and appreciation to John M. Bredemeyer III for 22 years of service to the Board of Trustees and the Town of Southold and; be it further resolved that this resolution be spread upon the Minutes of the Southold Town Board of Trustees and as such become part of the permanent record of the Town of Southold. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Thank you, very much. We'll save the words for later, I don't want to get accused of angering the Board or myself, but this is most gracious and very well written, but most appreciated of all. Just very quickly, in all my years as Trustee, I got to admit my two favorite leadership Trustees of all time are Glenn and Nick. This Board, for me, has been the most rewarding Board to have served on in all those occasional four decades on and off the Board. So I want to thank you two very much. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: We have another proclamation which reads as follows: After ten years of service as a Trustee for the Town of Southold, Michael J. Domino will retire on December 31st, 2021, and; whereas Michael J. Domino has a proven track record of environmental protection, including prior service as President of the North Fork Environmental Council and.Chairman of the Southold Town Tree Committee and; Board of Trustees 3 December 15, 2021 whereas Mike's background as an educator provided him with the skills to be a teacher to,both fellow Trustees and members of the public on applications and environmental protection, and; whereas Mike's engineering knowledge made him adept at reading and comprehending complex plans and project descriptions and; whereas Mike acted as de facto Lorax of Southold Town, protecting native trees against arbitrary removal by overzealous applicants, and; whereas earning the respect of fellow Trustees, Mike rose to fulfill the roles of Vice-President and President of the Board of Trustees for multiple years, and; whereas because of Mike's knowledge and experience he has helped preserve the wetlands within the Town of Southold, now therefore be it resolved that the Southold Town Trustees express their most sincere gratitude and appreciation to Michael J. Domino for ten years of service to the Board of Trustees and the Town of Southold, and; be it further resolved that this resolution be spread upon the Minutes of the Southold Town Board of Trustees and as such become part of the permanent record of the Town of Southold. TRUSTEE DOMINO: I'll make, maybe a sports analogy, I would just like to say that I feel as if I played with a bunch of hall-of-famers, and if I did any good, it's because of them. And going forward, I see good things for this Town. Thank you, very much. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: We have one other thing. We thought it was apropos to dedicate a tree to Mike and Jay, so a Green Pagoda will be planted somewhere here on the grounds of main Town Hall, and there is a plaque which will read as follows: In appreciation of John M. Bredemeyer III and Michael J. Domino for their commitment to the environment as Town Trustees. Congratulations. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Thank you, very much. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Thank you. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All right, down to business. Agendas for tonight's meeting are posted on the dais, and out,front as well as on the Town's website. We do have a number of postponements tonight. In the agenda, on page 12, numbers 4 and 5; on page 16, numbers 18 through 21; all of page 17, and all of page 18. They are listed as follows: Number 4, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of DEMETRA MAKRIS requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit to install 71 linear feet of rock revetment at toe of existing eroded bluff to replace existing temporary sand bags; install 15 cubic yards of clean-sand fill and Cape American beach ,grass on entire bluff: Located: 910 The Strand, East Marion. SCTM# 1000-30-2-81 Number 5, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of KONSTANTINOS ZOITAS requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit to install 67 linear feet of rock revetment at.toe of existing eroded bluff to-replace existing,temporary sand bags; install 15 cubic yards of clean sand fill and Cape American beach grass on entire bluff. Located: 980 The Strand, East Marion. SCTM# 1000-30-2-78 Number 18, Cole Environmental Services on behalf of SCOTT & LEA VITRANO requests a Wetland Permit to remove existing pier and float; 'construct a proposed 4'x14' landward ramp leading to a 4'x35' fixed pier with Thru-Flow decking a minimum of 4' above wetlands; a proposed 3'x12' metal ramp; and a 4'x20' floating dock situated in a "T" configuration and secured by two (2) 8" diameter piles. Board of Trustees 4 December 15, 2021 Located: 3875 Main-Bayview Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-78-2-15.1 Number 19, Cole Environmental Services on behalf of JUSTIN & ALLISON SCHWARTZ requests a Wetland Permit to construct a proposed 4'x165' fixed pier with open grate decking a minimum of 4' above tidal vegetative grade; a 3'x16' aluminum ramp; a 6'x20' floating dock situated in an "T" configuration; and to install a natural path leading from upland to fixed pier using permeable material. Located: 2793 Cox Neck Road, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-113-8-7.6 Number 20, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of ANTHONY & BEATRICE FALCONE requests a Wetland Permit to install a proposed 4'x6' cantilevered platform off of bulkhead; a 30" wide by 14' long aluminum ramp; and a 6'x20' floating dock supported with two (2) 10" diameter CCA piles and situated parallel to the bulkhead. Located: 405 Williamsberg Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-78-5-17 Number 21, Sea Tech, LLC on behalf of BARBARA BODKIN requests a Wetland Permit to reconstruct in place 125 linear feet of timber/concrete bulkhead with new Navy style vinyl bulkhead; construct two (2) 8' returns; remove and replace existing landward 4.5' wide wood boardwalk, 70 sq. ft. over-water wood platform, and retaining walls as required; and to install 30 cubic yards of clean fill from an approved upland source. Located: 610 Bayview Drive, East Marion. SCTM# 1000-37-5-2 Number 22, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of SADIK HALIT LEGACY TRUST requests a Wetland Permit for the as-built bluff stairs consisting of the following: 4'x4' at-grade top landing to an 8,2'x9.5' upper platform to 18'x4' steps down to an 8'x3.8' middle platform to 16'x4' steps down to a 19.4'x10' lower platform to 14.5'x4' steps down to beach; all decking on structure is of untreated lumber. Located: 2200 Sound Drive, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-33-1-16 Number 23, Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of FOUNDERS LANDING BOATYARD, LLC requests a Wetland Permit for a Ten (10) Year Maintenance Dredge Permit to dredge a 2,400 sq. ft. area to -7.0' below mean low water, removing approximately 240 cubic yards of spoil; dredge spoils to be trucked off site to an approved disposal site. Located: 2700 Hobart Road & 1000 Terry Lane, Southold; SCTM#s 1000-64-3-10 & 1000-64-3-11 Number 24, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of MIKHAIL RAKHMANINE & JENNIFER V. RAKHMANINE REVOCABLE TRUST requests a Wetland Permit to remove existing timber bulkhead and replace with 131 linear feet of new vinyl bulkhead in same general location and raise the height an additional 18" above existing top cap elevation; a total of 45 cubic yards of clean sand fill will be placed landward of the proposed bulkhead and utilized as fill due to raised height of bulkhead; construct a proposed 4' wide by 48' long fixed pier utilizing Thru-Flow decking over wetlands and non-treated timber decking on remainder which will lead to a 30" wide by 14' long aluminum ramp and a 6' wide by 20' long floating dock with un-treated decking, supported with two (2) 10" diameter CCA piles, situated in an "I" configuration; a 35'x24' dredging area surrounding the proposed floating dock will be dredged to a depth of 36" below mean low water removing a total of 65 cubic yards of spoils which will be removed from the site to an approved upland location; and for a proposed 10' wide non-turf'buffer to be installed and perpetually maintained Board of Trustees 5 December 15, 2021 along the landward edge of the proposed bulkhead-and consist of beach sand, mulch or pea gravel. Located: 685 Bungalow Lane, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-123-3-9 Number 25, Michael Kimack on behalf of TIMOTHY J. & GINAMARIE STUMP requests a Wetland Permit to construct approximately 315 linear feet of hybrid low sill bulkhead; backfill with approximately 100 cubic yards of course clean sand just below lowered sheathings; maintain approximately 2 '/2 to 1 slope from top of sloughed bank and then flat to bulkhead; install approximately 3,200 sq. ft. of filter fabric over disturbed area and fasten with 8" galvanized pins; plant Spartina alterniflora to high water mark and then Spartina patens to undisturbed line @ one (1) foot on-center (±3,200 plants). Located: 2200 Minnehaha Boulevard, Southold. SCTM# 1000-87-3-61 Number 26, Michael Kimack on behalf of JANICE HILLMAN SITYLES a/k/a JANICE HILLMAN REVOCABLE TRUST requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4'x18' walkway with a staircase consisting of three (3) treads and four (4) risers with Thru-Flow decking (72 sq. ft.), connected to a 4'x24' fixed dock with Thru-Flow decking (96 sq. ft.), 168 sq. ft. total; and to install 14 - 8" diameter pilings. Located: 8340 Main Bayview Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-87-5-23.2 Number 27, Michael Kimack on behalf of MARIA H. PILE requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 36.0'x34.7' (1,249.2 sq. ft.) two-story dwelling on foundation in accordance with FEMA standards for a AE zone; and a pervious driveway. Located: 420 Lake Drive, Southold. SCTM# 1000-59-1-21.2 TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Town Code 275-8(c), files were officially closed seven days ago. Submission of any paperwork after that date may result in a delay of the processing of the application. II. NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: At this time I'll make a motion to hold our next field inspection, Tuesday, January 11th, 2022, at 8:00 AM. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). III. NEXT TRUSTEE MEETING: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I'll make a motion to hold our next Trustee meeting Wednesday, January 19th, 2022 at 5:30 PM at the Town Hall Main Meeting Hall. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH:'All in favor? (ALL AYES). IV. ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I'll make a motion to hold our organizational meeting Wednesday, January 5th, 2022 at 5:15 PM at the Town Hall Board of Trustees 6 December 15, 2021 Annex 2nd floor Executive Board Room. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). V. WORK SESSIONS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I'll make a motion to hold our next work sessions Thursday, January 13th, 2022 at 5:OOPM at the Town Hall Annex 2nd floor Executive Board Room; and on Wednesday, January 19th, 2022 at 5:OOPM in the Town Hall Main Meeting Hall and via Zoom online platform. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH_ : All in favor? (ALL AYES). VI. MINUTES: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion to approve the Minutes of our November 17th, 2021 meeting. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). VII. MONTHLY REPORT: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: The Trustees monthly report for November 2021, A check for $14,958.53 was forwarded to the Supervisor's Office for the General Fund. VIII. PUBLIC NOTICES: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Public Notices are posted on the Town Clerk's Bulletin Board for review. IX. RESOLUTIONS - OTHER: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Roman numeral IX, Resolutions - Other, I make a motion to approve as a group items 1 through 3. They are listed as follows: Number 1, RESOLVED, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, hereby declare itself Lead Agency in regards to the application of ROBINS ISLAND HOLDINGS, LLC, c/o BELVEDERE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT; Located: Robins Island, Peconic Bay, New Suffolk. SCTM# 1000-134-3-5 Board of Trustees 7 December 15, 2021 Number 2, RESOLVED, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, hereby declare itself Lead Agency in regards to the application of MARC TURKEL & NEENA BEBER; Located: 2221 Indian Neck Lane, Peconic. SCTM# 1000-86-5-11.2 Number 3, RESOLVED,, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, hereby declare itself Lead Agency in regards to the application of JOSEPH & MARY ELLEN LOGIUDICE; Located: 10995 North Bayview Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-79-5-20.14 TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). X. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEWS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold hereby finds that the following applications more fully described in Section XIII Public Hearings Section of the Trustee agenda dated Wednesday, December 15, 2021, are classified as Type II Actions pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations, and are not subject to further review under SEQRA. As written, so moved. 13350 New Suffolk, LLC SCTM# 1000-116-6-20.2 Southold Sunsets, LLC SCTM# 1000-54-4-3 Sheena Acharya & Adrian Sapollnik 'SCTM# 1000-83-1-7 Paul & Christina Cutrone SCTM# 1000-115-3-17 Richard Liebowitz & Consuelo Prol SCTM# 1000-70-10-59 J. Whatmough 2018 Revocable Living Trust, c/o Jeanne Whatmough SCTM# 1000-122-3-38 Albert & Frances Trotter SCTM# 1000-97-2-9.1 Branco & Margaret Peros SCTM# 1000-31-17-18 Frank Marsilio SCTM# 1000-115-12-15 Scott Rosen & Lori Goeders Rosen SCTM# 1000-115-11-16 1055 Soundview Road, LLC, c/o Elias & Jeannine Kassapidis SCTM# 1000-15-3-13 TRUSTEE DOMINO: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold hereby finds that the following applications more fully described in Section XIII Public Hearings Section of the Trustee agenda dated Wednesday, December 15, 2021, are classified as Unlisted Actions pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations. As written, so moved. Board of Trustees 8 December 15, 2021 Marc Turkel & Neena Beber— SCTM# 1000-86-5-11.2 Robins Island Holdings, LLC, c/o Belvedere Property Management — SCTM# 1000-134-3-5 Joseph & May Ellen Logiudice — SCTM# 1000-79-5-20.14 TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). XI. ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE PURSUANT TO NEW YORK STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT NYCCR PART 617: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Roman numeral XI, DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Costello Marine Contracting Corp. On behalf of ROBINS ISLAND HOLDINGS, LLC, c/o BELVEDERE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT requests a Wetland Permit to construct 45' of splashboard on the main dock; remove existing 15'x30' seaplane float and construct a new 8'x24' floating dock in-place. Located: Robins Island, Peconic Bay, New Suffolk. SCTM# 1000-134-3-5 S.E.Q.R.A. NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE: WHEREAS, the Southold Town Board of Trustees are familiar with this project having visited the site on December 13, 2021, and having considered the survey of property by Barrett, Bonacci & VanWeele, P.C. dated September 1, 2005, and having considered the plans for this proposed project submitted by Costello Marine Contracting Corp. Dated September 2, 2021 at the Trustee's December 13, 2021 work session; and WHEREAS, on December 15, 2021 the Southold Town Board of Trustees declared itself Lead Agency pursuant to S.E.Q.R.A.; and WHEREAS, on December 15, 2021 the Southold Town Board of Trustees classified the application as an unlisted action under S.E.Q.R.A.; and WHEREAS, in reviewing project plans submitted by Costello Marine Contracting Corp. Dated September 2, 2021 it has been determined by the Board of Trustees that all potentially significant environmental concerns have been addressed as noted herein: Navigation: The proposed dock meets standards and does not extend beyond 1/3 across the water body. Depths for the dock terminus are within Town Trustees, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and United States Army Corps. of Engineers guidelines and there is no recognized Federal/New York State/Town navigation channel in the immediate vicinity of the proposed structure. Scope: The proposed dock is comparable to docks on Board of Trustees 9 December 15, 2021 neighboring properties in an area where docks historically are used for commercial and recreational purposes. Scope in relation to the riparian rights of shell fishers: The plan allows a standard fixed catwalk to float design that will not impede access for those seeking shellfish and crustacea in season. Environmental upkeep: The dock design projects a usual lifespan of 30 years with limited pile replacement so as to minimize disturbance of the bottom. THEREFORE, according to the foregoing, the Southold Town Board of Trustees Approve and Authorize the preparation of a Notice of Negative Declaration pursuant to SEQRA for the aforementioned project. So moved. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 2, DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: En-Consultants on behalf of MARC TURKEL & NEENA BEBER requests a Wetland Permit to construct a fixed timber dock with water and electricity to extend seaward from existing boat-house walkway, consisting of a 4'x54' fixed timber catwalk using open grate decking; a 3'x12' hinged ramp; and a 6'x20' floating dock situated in an "L" configuration and secured by two 8"-10" diameter pilings. Located: 2221 Indian Neck Lane, Peconic. SCTM# 1000-86-5-11.2 S.E.Q.R.A. NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE: WHEREAS, the Southold Town Board of Trustees are familiar with this project having visited the site on December 8, 2021, and having considered the survey of property by Kenneth M. Woychuk Land Surveying, PLLC last dated July 16, 2021, and having considered the plans for this proposed project submitted by En Consultants dated November 1, 2021 at the Trustee's December 13, 2021 work session; and WHEREAS, on December 15, 2021 the Southold Town Board of Trustees declared itself Lead Agency pursuant to S.E.Q.R.A.; and WHEREAS, on December 15, 2021 the Southold Town Board of Trustees classified the application as an unlisted action under S.E.Q.R.A.; and WHEREAS, in reviewing project plans submitted by En Consultants dated November 1, 2021 it has been determined by the Board of Trustees that all potentially significant environmental concerns have been addressed as noted herein: Board of Trustees 10 December 15, 2021 Navigation: The proposed dock meets standards and does not extend beyond 1/3 across the water body. Depths for the dock terminus are within Town Trustees, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and United States Army Corps. Of Engineers guidelines and there is no recognized Federal/New York State/Town navigation channel in the immediate vicinity of the proposed structure. Scope: The proposed dock is comparable to docks on neighboring properties in an area where docks historically are used for commercial and recreational purposes. Scope in relation to the riparian rights of shell fishers: The plan allows a standard fixed catwalk to float design that will not impede access for those seeking shellfish and crustacea in season. Environmental upkeep: The dock design projects a usual lifespan of 30 years with limited pile replacement so as to minimize disturbance of the bottom. THEREFORE, according to the foregoing, the Southold Town Board of Trustees Approve and Authorize the preparation of a Notice of Negative Declaration pursuant to SEQRA for the aforementioned project. So moved. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 3, DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of JOSEPH & MARY ELLEN LOGIUDICE request a Wetland Permit to construct a 4'x40' landward ramp onto a 4'x110' fixed dock with a 4'x40' "L" section at seaward end; construct a 4'x40' lower platform with a 5'x4' access platform and a 4'x16' ramp; install three (3) two-pile dolphins; and proved water and electrical service to dock. Located: 10995 North Bayview Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-79-5-20.14 S.E.Q.R.A. POSITIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE: WHEREAS, the Southold Town Board of Trustees are familiar with this project having visited the site on October 13, 2021, and having considered the survey of property by Kenneth M. Woychuk Land Surveying, PLLC dated December 5, 2005, and having considered the plans for this proposed project submitted by Costello Marine Contracting Corp. Dated April 13, 2021 at the Trustee's December 13, 2021 work session; and WHEREAS, on December 15, 2021 the Southold Town Board of Board of Trustees 11 December 15, 2021 Trustees declared itself Lead Agency pursuant to S.E.Q.R.A.; and WHEREAS, on December 15, 2021 the Southold Town Board of Trustees classified the application as an unlisted action under S.E.Q.R.A.; and WHEREAS, in reviewing project plans submitted by Costello Marine Contracting Corp. Dated April 13, 2021 it has been determined by the Board of Trustees that the proposed dock could have potentially cumulative, significant environmental adverse impacts: Impact on Community Character The proposed dock would jut out into Southold Bay interrupting open space of the water body and adversely impact visual quality. The proposed dock would be the first and longest dock along this stretch of shoreline following the adoption of the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP). Approval of this dock would set precedent for this type of structure. Impact on Plants and Animals The proposed dock is located within a within a New York State Department of State Significant Fish and Wildlife Habitat Area, New York State Critical Environmental Area and a Peconic Estuary Critical Natural Resource Area. The proposed dock will cause habitat degradation and physical loss of marine habitat equal to, but not limited to the surface area of the dock. Policy 6 of the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program addresses adverse changes...to the Peconic Bay ecosystems that would result.from impairment of ecological quality as indicated by: 1. Physical loss of ecological components Physical loss is often the most obvious natural resource impairment to identify. It usually results from discrete actions, such as"filling or excavating a wetland or clearing an upland,forest community prior to development. The adverse physical loss of marine habitat equal to the area of dock piles and through the placement of a structure where none occur is expected. 2. Degradation of ecological components Degradation occurs as an adverse change in'ecological quality, either as a direct loss originating within the resource area or as an indirect loss originating from nearby activities. Degradation usually occurs over a more extended period of time than physical loss and may be indicated by increased siltation, changes in community composition, or evidence of pollution. Board of Trustees 12 December 15, 2021 Degradation of water quality is expected to occur over time due to operation of vessels in shallow water conditions causing siltation and turbidity. The introduction of'pesticides (CCA) treated materials use in the construction of a dock and chemicals used in the maintenance of a vessel is expected to be introduced into the marine habitat resulting in degradation of water quality over time. Impact on Open Space and Recreation The proposed dock will extend into public waters and will result in adverse impacts to recreational and commercial user groups of such waters. Docks that extend into public waters interrupt and hinder use by the general public equal to the surface and surrounding areas of the dock; including people engaging in commercial fisheries and recreational boating activities. Further docks that jut out into navigable waterbodies pose a hazard to boaters during low visibility conditions. Collision of a vessel with these structures is-possible and threatens injury or death to persons or damage to property. Consistency with Community Plans The proposed dock is inconsistent with the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan (2020): Chapter 6: Natural Resources & Environment I Water Resources Section; Goal 5: Protect Freshwater and Marine Habitat Objective 5.2 Protect tidal and freshwater wetland habitats. A. Continue to achieve a "no net loss" policy of tidal and freshwater wetlands. Objective 5.4. Promote sustainable use of marine habitats and resources in Southold Town. The proposed dock is inconsistent with Policies 1, 3, 5, 6, 8 and 9 of the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. Consistency with Community Character The proposed dock is located along an underdeveloped coastal landscape historically absent of dock structures since the adoption of the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. The absence of dock structures in public waters preserves the public access and use of such waters. THEREFORE, according to the foregoing, the Southold Town Board of Trustees Approve and Authorize the preparation of a Notice of a Positive Declaration pursuant to SEQRA for the aforementioned project. So moved. Board of Trustees 13 December 15, 2021 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). XI. RESOLUTIONS - ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Roman numeral XI, Resolutions - Administrative Permits. I'll make a motion to approve number 1, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of ALAN CARD INALE ,requests an Administrative Permit to conduct construction activity outside the 100' edge of wetlands for the construction of a single-family, two-story dwelling with porch and in-ground swimming pool measuring 18'x36' on waterside which is outside of the Trustee's jurisdiction; installation of the pool plumbing lines and pool fence; install gutters and leaders to drywells on the dwelling to contain runoff; to install a gravel driveway; to allow for ground disturbance caused by activity outside of the f Trustee's jurisdiction; and for the 15' wide non-turf buffer along the landward edge of top of bluff that is to be established and perpetually maintained, as per Wetland Permit #9591. Located: 6025 Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-111-13-7 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). XII. APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS/TRANSFERS/ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENTS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Applications for Extensions, Transfers, Administrative Amendments, I'll make a motion to approve as a group items 2 and 3, and 5 through 7. They are listed as follows: Number 2, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of ALAN CARDINALE requests a One (1) Year Extension to Wetland Permit#9591, as, issued on December 3, 2019. Located: 6025 Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-111-13-7 Number 3, LAWRENCE I. SCAVELLI & IRENE V. SCAVELLI request to Transfer Wetland Permit #2166 from Donald Brehm to Lawrence I. Scavelli & Irene V. Scavelli, as issued on July 31, 1986 and Amended on March 23, 1989. Located: 1010 Maple,Lane, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-35-5-27 Number 5, MICHAEL D. MORICI, SR. & BARBARA MORICI request to Transfer Wetland Permit #4395 from Adrian Sapollnik and Sheena Acharya to Michael D. Morici Sr. & Barbara Morici, as issued on December 22, 1994. Located: 225 Lakeside Drive South, Southold. SCTM# 1000-90-3-11 Board of Trustees 14 December 15, 2021 Number 6, En-Consultants on behalf of JOSEPH SBARRA requests an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit#8288 for the as-built dimensions of the stairway and dock structure, where such dimensions vary from approved dimensions, specifically a 4' x48' stairway with handrails and wood treads, including 4' x 8.3', 4' x 8' and 4' x 6' platforms, leading to a 4' x 55' fixed catwalk. Located: 3200 Cox Neck Road, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-113-8-5 Number 7, Patricia C. Moore on behalf of DANNY FISHER, BARBARA KENT, JACK FISHER & DIANA SEDENQUIST requests an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit#9904 for the relocation of the previously approved 1,000 gallon propane tank from south side of house to front yard next to existing buried propane tank, and set the previously approved Kohler generator on a 2'6"x7'2" concrete platform in lieu of the 3'6"x8' elevated wood platform. Located:,1652 Bridge Lane, Cutch'ogue. SCTM# 1000-118-1-4.1 TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I'll recuse myself from item number 1. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Number 1,, GOLDSMITHS BOAT SHOP requests a One (1) Year Extension to Wetland Permit#9630, as issued on January 15, 2020. Located: 64150 Route 25, Southold. SCTM# 1000-56-7-1 After reviewing this application, there has been no change from when we originally approved it, therefore, I make a motion to approve this application. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Second. TRUSTEE,GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 4, LAWRENCE I. SCAVELLI & IRENE V. SCAVELLI request to Transfer Wetland Permit #6416 from Donald & Joan Brehm to Lawrence I. Scavelli & Irene V. Scavelli, as issued on July 19, 2006.- Located: 1010 Maple Lane, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-35-5-27 will make a motion to approve this application with the condition that the additional jet ski float be removed. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). XII. RESOLUTIONS -OTHER: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Roman numeral XII, Resolutions - Other, WHEREAS, there has been presented to the Town Board of Trustees Board of Trustees 15 December 15, 2021 of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 17th day of November, 202,1, a desire to close certain waters within Mill Creek in the Hamlet of Southold. Now, therefore, be it RESOLVED that the Town Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid resolution at Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, on the 15th day of December, 2021 at 5:01 p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold as follows: I. Purpose The purpose of this proposed closure is to preserve our natural recourses and shell fisheries to allow for replenishment and growth. II. Amendment RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Board of Trustees in an effort to preserve our natural recourses and shell fisheries hereby designates the following waters a restricted area pursuant to Chapter 219-16 (Shellfish) of the Code of the Town of Southold where shell fishing shall not be permitted for the years 2022 and 2023: The waters of Mill Creek in the Hamlet of Southold located within the following boundary,: West of an imaginary line commencing from a point at a painted yellow 4"x4" stake located at 410 57" North 72"24' 48" West running northward to a point at a painted yellow 4"x4" stake at the foot of Beverly Rd. Located at 410 5' 18" North 72° 24' 45" West; and North of an 'imaginary line commencing at a painted yellow 4"x4" stake at the foot of Meadow Lane at a point located at 41' 4' 58.62" North 720 24' 55.37" West running westward to a painted yellow 4"x4" stake in front of a large rock at a point located at 41° 4' 58.9" North 720 24' 46.00" West. 'III. SEVERABILITY If,an"y clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this resolution shall be adjudged by any,codrt of competent jurisdiction to be invalid,-the judgment shall.not affect the validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid. V. EFFECTIVE DATE This shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Town Clerk as provided by law. So moved. Is there anybody that wishes to speak regarding this proposed closure? (Negative response). Comments from the Board? Board of Trustees 16 December 15, 2021 (Negative response) Hearing none, I make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion to approve this resolution. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: At this time I'll make a motion to go off our regular agenda and enter Public Hearings. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So moved. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). XIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: This is a public hearing in the matter of the following applications for permits under the Wetlands Ordinance of the Town of Southold. I have an affidavit of publication from the Suffolk Times. Pertinent correspondence may be read prior to asking for comments from the public. Please keep your comments organized and brief, five minutes or less if possible. AMENDMENTS: TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Number 1, under Amendments, En-Consultants on behalf of 13350 NEW SUFFOLK, LLC requests an Amendment to Wetland Permit#9712 to re-grade with approximately 344 cubic yards (in lieu of 116 Cubic yards) of clean sandy fill to be trucked in from an approved upland source, resulting in an approximately two (2) foot higher revegetated grade over approved I/A sanitary system (to be equipped with a Fuji-Clean OWTS in place of Hydro-Action OWTS); relocate pervious gravel driveway/parking area from north to east side of property, resulting in an additional 2,677 sq. ft. of site disturbance and revegetation of±305 sq. ft. (In lieu of±618 sq. ft.) portion of temporarily cleared area on east side of property; replace four (4) cedar trees with same caliper cedars to east of relocated driveway; revegetate with native plantings an additional ±3,253 sq. ft. area of clearing to northwest of dwelling and ±1,313 sq. ft. area of temporary clearing south of pool patio (previously proposed to be permanently cleared), thus reducing area of new permanent clearing from 6,191 sq. ft. to 5,622 sq. ft.; Board of Trustees 17 December 15, 2021 construct 2,379 sq. ft. (in lieu of 2,355 sq. ft.) raised masonry patio/steps; construct 815 sq. ft. (In lieu of 580 sq. ft.) on-grade paver courtyard; and install 56sq.ft. Generator platform with 3.5'x11' stairs. Located: 13350 New Suffolk Avenue, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-116-6-20.2 The Trustees most recently visited the property on the 8th of December, noted that it was straightforward, minor changes, and that they would like to see revegetation of the beach grass area, which points out the area on the eastern-most side of the property that may or may not have been covered by dredging activities. I am in receipt of new plans dated stamped received December 15th, 2021, that show that activity. The LWRP coordinator found this to be consistent. And the Conservation Advisory Council resolved not to support the application based on the September 9th 2020 findings. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application? MR. HERRMANN: Yes. Rob Herrmann, En-Consultants, on behalf of the applicant. As we discussed and as submitted to the Board, the two primary changes are the relocation and reconfiguration of the driveway, which had some impact on the proposed clearing. The net result of which will be a decrease in permanent clearing and an increase in the areas to be revegetated. And also an increase in the grade over the proposed sanitary system. The end condition will be the same as originally approved in terms of the native plantings over that area. That was just necessitated by finding a higher groundwater elevation, and a couple of other minor changes that are included in the description. And also with respect to the Board's request about the revegetation of that beach area, it sounds like you already received the updated plans from Jeff Butler that depicted the proposed revegetation of that area. If you have any other questions or comments, I'm happy to respond to them. Otherwise, that's all I have. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Is there anyone else here that wishes to speak regarding this application? (Negative response). Any-additional comments from the members of the Board? (Negative response). Hearing none, I make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). I make a motion to approve this application, stamped received December 15th, 2021, in the office. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor? (ALL AYES). Board of Trustees 18 December 15, 2021 WETLAND & COASTAL EROSION PERMITS: TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: The next application, under Wetland & Coastal Erosion Permits, number 1, Michael Kimack on behalf of JOHN & CARRIE MULLINS requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit for the disturbance seaward of the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area Line (CEHA) of an area of 2,124 sq. ft. from the CEHA line to the silt fence; the disturbed area is to accommodate construction activities for the proposed dwelling and to provide an area for the placement of in-ground sewage disposal pools (in-ground structures), made necessary to meet the Department of Health's required 150 ft. separation from the well; upon completion, the disturbed area will be revegetated and the existing path to beach narrowed from eight (8) feet to four (4) feet in width; construction of a proposed 2,328 sq. ft. single-family two-story dwelling; construct an approximately 115 linear foot long retaining wall; install an I/A OWTS septic system,; install gutters to leaders to drywells to contain roof runoff; and to install an approximately 1,430 sq. ft. pervious driveway and parking area. Located: 905 Stephenson Road, Orient. SCTM# 1000-17-1-2.2 This hearing is reopened after a reinspection by the Board of Town Trustees. The Board inspected the site with the applicant on December 9th and we reviewed the staking of the property, and we are in receipt of a new set of plans which reduced the size of the innovative alternative sanitary system which has been reduced so that this is less than 200-square feet. The Board made a determination during field inspection that the system is not within 100 feet of unconsolidated beach material and is not on a dune. The Conservation Advisory Council voted to support this application. The project, initial determination of the LWRP dated November 9th indicated that the project was inconsistent at that time, allowing for an onsite wastewater treatment system, an IA system, for a five-bedroom home, which has been subsequently modified. Since the last public hearing we have received an additional three letters to the file. Is there anyone who wishes to speak to this application? MR. KIMACK: Michael Kimack on behalf of the applicant. Jay, I think you basically summarized most of the original points that were raised at the previous meeting. I did have a chance to go over some of the letters that the adjoining homeowners had concerning the storm water management, Board of Trustees 19 December'15, 2021 obviously we'are required to be able to contain on our own property, which will be done. There was another concern raised about perhaps an obstruction of the easement but I think there was a misunderstanding, because the location of the transformer is not on the property. It's on the adjoining property owner's, and they will share that transformer between two homes. But the actual easement line, if you look at that property, starts just westerly --just easterly and cuts into the property and has nothing to do with the transformer itself. And the historic picture, I'm not quite sure, I think if you go back in 2005, original permit, you'll find that the CERA line was moved at one time. There was no indication there that the slope was ever, that there was ever a bank that might,have been created over there. I think that the growth that you see on the site is too mature to have occurred literally only about 15 years ago, so. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Thank you. Also to correct the record, field inspection, were December 8th. I said the 9th. I mis-spoke. Inspections were on the 8th. MR. KIMACK: In summary, I think the clients have gone a long way to try to do a house that well fits that particular piece of property, given the restrictions both potential and code-wise. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: And to clarify, I think it was discussed at the last public hearing, it is not a five-bedroom home. MR. KIMACK: It's four-bedroom home. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak to this application? (Negative response). Seeing and hearing ,none, I make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I make motion to approve this application'in 'accordance with the set of plans received stamped in the Trustee- office December 9th, noting that the reduction of the underground coverage of the IA system will address the inconsistency of the LWRP coordinator. Move to approve is my motion. = TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number 2, Michael Kimack on behalf of SOUTHOLD SUNSETS, LLC requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit for the as-built above ground 500 gallon propane tank, (30"x8'x20sq.ft.); as-built raised platform for A/C units (3'x9'x27sq.ft.); as-built on-grade dry laid slate patio and Board of Trustees 20 December 15, 2021 walkways (877 sq. ft.); as-built concrete walkway with added dry laid slate walkway/landing (±100 sq. ft.); as-built Belgian block gravel drive surround (±140 linear feet); as-built gravel driveway (±635 sq. ft.); as-built fire pit (28.2 sq. ft.); existing 8'x12.2' (97.6 sq. ft.) Shed has been removed from the property; and the American Beach grass planting area to be in conjunction with as-built plantings in the secondary dune area. Located: 4200 Kenneys Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-54-4-3 The Trustees most recent field inspection at this site was on December 8th, at 8:50 in the morning. The notes are, no mulch, no irrigation, revegetate the dune, and questions the size of the patio. The LWRP coordinator found this to be inconsistent. The inconsistency is quite long. I'll read part of it. The as-built conditions don't appear to fully comply with permit 9752. The as-built structures and features were constructed without obtaining a wetland permit and coastal erosion hazard permit. C, the parcel was` over-cleared to what was represented in the file. D, the agent for the applicant states the area where the patio, slate patio, is located was pre-disturbed. That is incorrect. Aerial photographs show that the area seaward_ of the house as vegetated from 2015 to 2020. Additionally, the Conservation Advisory Council resolved not to support the activity in the secondary dune and requests all existing damage be rectified. And one further point, we have a letter from a Richard Berg, a transmission received December 13th, 2021. And in general, it's a letter that does not support this application, but it summarizes in fact the disturbed areas need to be restored with native plantings, the areas where blue Lyme grass was used should be removed. Lyme grass has very bad habit of spreading and choking out native beach grass. There is also included a short video, which I can't present here. And in regard to the hardened area of the patio, this unprotected area compromises the dune and provides an area that will erode, become windblown and covered with unprotected sand in a very short time. Measures should be in place to also plant and restore the dune area with native beach grass, restore it back to its natural state. When the old house was there, the dune was completely intact. It would be beneficial to see that again. Is there anyone here to speak to this application? MR. KIMACK: Mike Kimack on behalf of the applicant. This is'a project that has been going on for some time. Originally, you are correct, in terms that the original dune itself had been grassed over. And that particular area had been disturbed simply because the disposal pools and the leaching Board of Trustees 21 December 15, 2021 galleys essentially like that went in there. Based upon the original approval, you can take a look at the new plan that I put there, the original approval to put American beach grass on there, which had been approved, really only covered about half of the area. That had been the secondary, the secondary dune, I'm not quite sure if you are dealing with primary, but on the secondary dune that is the situation. We have corrected it where that whole area will be doubled in terms of American beach grass that will be planted and it will basically tie into the non-disturbance buffer where the beach grass actually exists at the present time. The area westerly of that, primarily where it's one-story frame building, that has already been a disturbance area. There was a shed there, concrete walkway, beach walkway, essentially, like that, that area was never really part of the secondary dune situation. And we stayed away from that. The secondary dune actually had been raised up probably an extra foot to 18 inches over what had been primarily there built up. Primarily because of the placement of the IA system, in order to have enough coverage on the top of it. So it was completely re-sanded. And it's, we have not as yet planted the American beach grass because the weather turned against us, but it is to be planted in the springtime. But if you look at the drawing, I red lined it all the way around. I also, you'll see I dash lined wherever the original approval was in terms of where the American beach grass was going to go. So I think one of the concerns you have is you wanted to basically see this dune basically have continuity with the planting of the American beach grass tying back into the non-disturbance area, which is set forth in this particular set of drawings. The patio, slate patio, essentially like that are all on dry, no concrete, essentially like that, in the sense they are somewhat pervious in nature. TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Is there a reason half of this is yellow? TRUSTEE DOMINO: Any questions or comments from the Board? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So, I think for, you know, for starters, when we first went through this application with you and your client, this is a very contentious application that the Board worked, we put a lot of time, a lot of inspections into making this house happen and bring it into consistency for getting it closer to Chapter 111 requirements. And essentially, it is a house that granted was existed, but that was being fully rebuilt within a dunal area. You know, the Minutes of the original hearing will speak for themselves. The Board is allowing a house there, I can understand putting in a driveway that was not on the original application because you need a driveway, you know, we don't want you parking in town right-of-way, obviously whenever somebody is Board of Trustees 22 December 15, 2021 . there, but aside from that, any are patios and unplanted beach grass area really is not appropriate and I think historically if you look back you'll see that in the Minutes. This lot should be American beach grass with a house, with more American beach grass, with a small driveway, and then that should really be the project in its entirety. TRUSTEE DOMINO: I would like to address two points, if I may. As Trustee Krupski pointed out, this is a little larger process. We respected the fact there was a dwelling on there, there was a lot of push back from the neighborhood. Having said that, the plans submitted on August 4th, 2020, show the area seaward of the home, or the proposed home. As undisturbed. We understand that an IA system going in is going to cause some disturbance and we were generous in our regard to that. The area of concern to me is, and I believe most of my other fellow Trustees, is the patio seaward of the dwelling which was in no way permitted, and a large walkway. We generally allow a four-foot path to access the beach. And in the last point, I'm look can at a photograph here provided by LWRP coordinator, of the conditions that exist in 2015, and it shows a healthy stand of American beach grass on the secondary dune both west and north of the dwelling. So in summary, I'm very concerned about the amount of disturbance that occurred after what I think was a very generous permit that is -- MR. KIMACK: Well, ,at this particular time, I think in moving forward all we can basically do is we are committed to putting the American beach grass back, it will happen in the springtime, regardless. As it's scheduled for that, primarily, for the planting season. And it covers literally with the non-disturbance area, probably about 60% of the lot overall, with patens and American beach grass plantings all the way through there. As opposed to what the original plant was. The original plan that was approved back then had a shed, which was taken off, had concrete walkways which were replaced with slate stone walkways. Granted the slate patio in the front was larger because it originally had a wood deck on it, but there was a wood deck on the side also that was taken off. So we replaced the wood deckWith the slate. But I think the essential point that you have been making is you really want to make sure that the secondary dune is replanted. And basically this plan basically addresses that concern. More so than it would have been on the original approval. The original approval, if you look at that plan and you look at the dash line and go back to it, there was only a small amount of area that had been drawn for American beach grass. It did not basically have continuity Board of Trustees 23 December 15, 2021 with the non-disturbance area. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think if we start looking at the original plans and start looking at aerials, you'll see there was continuity of the American beach grass throughout the entire project, and I think it was very clear, only in 2020, a year ago, how the Board wanted this project to go. And beach grass can't grow through, regardless of how a patio is laid down, beach grass can't grow through that, and 60% is a nice number but not the number this Board is looking for; or myself, personally, is looking for. MR. KIMACK: Well, we are focusing on that area which the secondary dune. That's not where the house is, that's not where the patio is. The secondary dune area is the one easterly of that. That we raised up primarily in order to gain height in order to get the IA system in there. Probably at that particular time is where the disturbance of the area occurred. That's why the replanting needed to be done in order to put the American beach grass back. Irrespective it's going to be replanted with American beach grass. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Is there gone else here wishing to speak regarding this application? MS. ,BROWN: Carol Brown, from the Conservation Advisory Council. We did not support this several years ago when it came in and we are very upset at the contentiousness of the, of what has happened at that site. The one thing that you did do was put the propane tank above ground, which is something that we had asked for, but going there now, going there two weeks ago, looking at the cut through the dune, it is an abomination to our environmental laws and to our looking to the future. We said in our statement that we would like this to be rectified, which means that not only do we want the dune rebuilt, because is there a cut through from the dune, from the house to the beach, through the dune, but we want to see the patio removed. It was never approved, it should not be there, and we feel very strongly about rectifying all the misdeeds as built that have been done on this property. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: There is somebody online as well. MS. CANTRELL:.We have a person named Lynn. If you can state and spell your name for the record after you un-mute yourself. MS. NORMANDIA: Lynn Normandia', I live on Leeton Drive, and want the on add that the community planted the beach grass on January 1st in 2003, and it grew, as you see at Kenny's Beach, tremendously. So we do not need to wait for the growing season of the spring to replace that Lyme grass with real beach grass. So it will continue our work there. Thank you, for watching out Board of Trustees 24' December 15, 2021 for us up there. Thank you. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Any other questions or comments from the Board? (Negative response). Is there anyone else who wishes to speak to this application? MR. KIMACK: A quick point, the sandy walkway to the beach is in the same location it has always been. It has never moved. Throughout non-disturbance buffer. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Thank you, for that. Hearing no further comments, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE DOMINO: I make a motion to deny this application. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Number 3, SHEENA ACHARYA & ADRIAN SAPOLLNIK request a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Hazard Permit to raise the approximately 100 linear foot long top retaining wall by 12 inches using two six (6) inch railroad ties; remove and replace existing timber railing with 36 inch high cable and wood railing above the proposed raised top retaining wall; new proposed railing will consist of 86' of railing and a 4' wide, 48" high gate followed by 10' of railing; remove and replace existing east side returns along eastern property line and extend to approximately 40' with railroad ties keeping the line with the proposed raised top retaining wall; remove one dead tree from eastern side of property; install a dry laid gravel pathway from the front of the property to the existing back patio on the eastern side of property; remove existing asphalt semi-circular driveway; install a proposed 24' wide driveway from the existing shed to the roadside and line using pavers; install a 4' wide masonry walkway at grade level from the proposed driveway to front entrance to dwelling; install a 5'x10' front masonry patio at grade level in front of the west side sliding doors; install dry-laid stepping stones from the proposed front patio to the proposed southwest corner patio and existing back patio; install a 5'x8' masonry patio at grade level on the southwest corner of the dwelling; remove and replace existing 62'x28' wave shaped masonry back patio at grade level with rectangular shaped patio using similar type of material and at grade level; remove and replace existing 75' side returns along the west side of property line using railroad ties keeping in line with the proposed raised top retaining wall. Located: 645 Glen Court, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-83-1-7 The Trustees have visited the site most recently on 12/8/2021. And field notes, we would like to see a non-turf buffer of ten feet. The LWRP found this proposed action to be consistent. And the Conservation Advisory Council does not support the application. Is there anybody here that wishes to speak to this application? MS. BROWN: Carol Brown, Conservation Advisory Council. We don't Board of Trustees 25 December 15, 2021 support the application. The majority of the proposed work has already been completed, and as many other of the applications that we saw this month and last month, they are already as built. "As built" means that people did not care about our laws. And there is a lot of us, as the Conservation Advisory Council, we have to abide by the laws that exist. We also question the permeability of the large patio and the walkway; and drywells should be installed to contain any runoff from the non-permeable areas. TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Thank you. Is there anybody else here who wishes to,speak to this application? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do we have new plans on this showing any sort of buffer or anything like that? MS. CANTRELL: Yes, she did submit it, I think Friday. TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: I have plans received December 13th. Here we go. It's kind of a very, I don't know if this plan is going to be sufficient. It's apparently a survey with pencil drawn in on it, and a bunch of callouts on different sheets as proposed. Ten foot non-turf buffer. This is what was submitted. MR. HAGAN: (Perusing). If you have a line that gets labeled from the survey, I don't have an issue with that. But when you start drawing your own lines. (Board reviewing drawings). MS. CANTRELL: Ms. Acharya, if you want to speak, please un-mute yourself. MS. ACHARYA: Yes, I would like to say that we do respect the laws of the land, but we were a little ignorant thinking that patios that were less than eight feet high above ground did not require approval. And during the process, speaking to Elizabeth, I realized that a lot of, some of the things that we have done required approval and therefore put an application in. So, um, I would say that none of the items that we are doing will cause any future erosion, and we have a top retaining wall that will hold back whatever erosion, with any water that would runoff on the back patio, which is actually an existing patio, it's not something we built in the back. All I'm asking to do is just square it off. TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Thank you. The Board would need to see an updated survey showing the non-turf buffer. Unfortunately we can't accept what was submitted with hand drawings and call outs on a different sheet. Is that something that you would be able to supply for us? MS. ACHARYA: So you just want a surveyor to replicate what put on a hand-drawn site plan? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Or non-hand drawn plans. You can submit a set of plans that are not just penciled in. -And one sheet. Board of Trustees 26 December 15, 2021 TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Yes, you know, the issue we have is with the call outs on the separate sheet. It should all be labeled on the same sheet. So what you might want to do is ask for us to table the application so can you update that and resubmit. MS. ACHARYA: Okay. So if I were to resubmit the application with a surveyor site plan -- TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: You don't need to resubmit the entire application. You need to give us a current survey with the non-turf buffer, anything that you hand drew in with call outs, that would need to be on what you, and again, the office, if you have questions after that you can call into the office and they'll further explain, but we would need to see an updated plan with all the call outs and the non-turf buffer on one sheet. MS. ACHARYA: All right. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And it doesn't have to be a survey -- TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Doesn't-are to be a licensed surveyor. MS. ACHARYA: Okay. TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: All right, any further questions, Miss? MS. ACHARYA: So at this time you are not denying the proposal. TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Correct. We are not denying, well, at this point in time, we are not denying it. At this point in time we are simply asking for more detailed information to support the application. So you can make a request to table to give you time to submit those documents, what we are asking for, and then you would be heard at next month's hearing. MS. ACHARYA: All right. Thank you. TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: So would you like to table the application? MS. ACHARYA: At this time, yes. TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Thank you. I make a motion to table the application at the applicant's request. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). WETLAND PERMITS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Wetland Permits, Number 1, En-Consultants on behalf of MARC TURKEL & NEENA BEBER requests a Wetland Permit to construct a fixed timber dock with water and electricity to extend seaward from existing boathouse walkway, consisting of a 4'x54' fixed timber catwalk using open grate decking; a 3'x12' hinged ramp; and a 6'x20' floating dock situated in an,"L" configuration and secured by two FAT diameter pilings. Located: 2221 Indian Neck Lane, Peconic. SCTM# 1000-86-5-11.2 The LWRP found this to be inconsistent. The inconsistencies Board of Trustees 27 December 15, 2021 are Richmond Creek has shallow water. The Town of Southold offers numerous public locations with waterfront access points for launching vessels. The proposed action is located within the New York State critical environmental area. And this is a net loss in public use of waterways is expected as result of the dock near public waterways. Construction as proposed of a private residential dock structure on public lands and waters results in a net loss of public recreational use of such waters. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this application With the condition the lighting is Dark Skies compliant. The Trustees conducted a field inspection December 8th, 2021, noting that the dock was basically straightforward. Review the depths at work session. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application? MR. HERRMANN: Rob Herrmann of En-Consultants on behalf of the applicants. It is a fairly straightforward dock application, as we discussed at field inspections, that the Board had looked at potential location for the dock previously and had suggested it extend out from the existing catwalk adjacent to the boathouse, which was previously permitted by the Board. And we followed that guidance and design. The float would sit in 30 inches of water at mean low tide based on a hydrographic survey that was prepared by Kenneth Woychuck, and the dock otherwise conforms to all of the construction operation standards under 275 for dock location and design. If the Board has any further comments or questions I'm happy to try and respond. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Anyone else here wishing on to speak regarding this application? (Negative response). Any questions or comments from the Board? (Negative, response). Hearing no further comments, I'll make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion to approve this application as submitted, noting that the dock length is the minimal allowable to reach adequate water depth. There is no pier line, so it's within the pier line. It's not more than one-third way across the waterbody, which will bring it all into consistency with the LWRP. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). Board of Trustees 28 December 15, 2021 TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Before we go to the next application, I was remiss to acknowledge Trustee Greg Williams and thank him for his four years of service to the Town as a Trustee. I know he's getting ready to depart here because he has a prior family engagement. But I felt bad and wanted to make sure that we thanked Greg and acknowledge his services as well. would like to take a five-minute recess. (After a five-minute recess, these proceedings continue as follows). (These hearings continue with four remaining Trustees. Trustee Greg Williams has left for the evening). MR. HAGAN: Mr. President, with the departure of Trustee Williams you still have a quorum. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Under Wetland Permit number 2, En-Consultants on behalf of PAUL & CHRISTINA CUTRONE requests a Wetland Permit to remove a 377sq.ft. Masonry patio and maple tree; construct a 16'x40' swimming pool and 1,160 sq. ft. masonry pool patio; and to establish and perpetually maintain a 20' wide (max.), approximately 1,414 sq. ft of non-turf buffer area between the wetland boundary and the existing wood and wire fence. Located: 940 Marratooka Lane, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-115-3-17 The Trustees most recently visited the property on the 8th- of December and noted they would like to see removal of the seaward fence, vegetated non-turf buffer seaward of deer fence, and a ten-foot non-turf buffer landward of the fence. The LWRP coordinator found this to be consistent. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support the application with the condition the pool is relocated 100 feet landward of the wetland boundary, the pavers are permeable, and efforts are made to keep the Maple tree. Is there anyone here that wishes to speak regarding this application? MR. HERRMANN: Rob Herrmann of En-Consultants, on behalf of the applicant. So this is a straightforward application. There is a proposed pool and patio which are located 95 and 91 feet respectively from the freshwater wetland boundary associated with the lake. So both structures are located almost outside Chapter 275 jurisdiction, and only small portions of those structures are actually situated within the hundred-foot setback. We had contemplated the possibility originally of moving entire structures outside the hundred-foot setback but moving everything back the ten or so feet that would be necessary to accomplish that would cause removal of a garden area that is Board of Trustees 29 December 15,2021 important to the applicant and more significantly would begin to encroach uncomfortably on the existing driveway area. So given that the structures are left just inside the regulated area, we had proposed as mitigation a 20-foot wide non-turf buffer that you would actually be a vegetated buffer that is 1,414 square'feet that would positioned between the existing deer fence which was previously permitted by the Board,, and the lake. At field inspections the Board, as you just mentioned, had raised the prospect of adding an additional ten feet of non-turf buffer, essentially an area that would become un-mowed, on the landward side of the fence. I had gone back to the applicant and discussed that. Because the family does use the flattish area down at the bottom of the slope for recreation, bringing boats in and out of the lake, et cetera, they felt that the ten feet basically sort of unkempt high grass area would be burdensome to that use. So what I would like to suggest to the Board as alternative is that we have a five foot buffer on the landward side of the deer fence but one that would be actively planted with native vegetation, same as the vegetated buffer on the seaward side of the fence. And as a result there you would end up with a 25-foot wide vegetated buffer, permanent buffer, adjacent to the wetland boundary, and you would, which would give you 1,900 square feet of new plantings in that area, which is actually more than the 1,800 square foot total structure of the pool and patio. Again, only a very small portion of which would be located within your jurisdiction. It would also, I think, provide the advantage of creating a more permanent delineation between the, you know, mowed lawn area and the buffer as opposed to just an un-mowed area which could easily start being mowed again at some other point, whereas the planted buffer on the landward side of the fence would be easily observable, easily enforceable by the Board and also really would give an opportunity for the applicants to invest in how that ends up looking and providing potentially more beneficial habitat vegetation for that area. The alternative of just moving everything outside of the hundred feet and then ending up losing, you know, you're losing the ability to impose any buffer at all, I don't think is a desirable result. I think it would be better outcome for everyone if the pool and patio was permitted where it is, with what amounts to a 25-foot vegetated buffer. And if I can convince you to go along with that, I actually have revised site plans here, if you can take a look at the change itself. You'll have to share it a little bit. Oh, and the condition that the metal fence be removed is acceptable. That is also shown on this revised plan. Board of Trustees 30 December 15, 2021 TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: What's the width on that path that leads to the lake? MR. HERRMANN: Four-foot wide, maximum. And I think we have that noted. Yes. Proposed four-foot wide maximum. And that path would then of course extend through the two fenced gates and out to the landward limits of the vegetated buffer on the landward side of the fence. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Normally we would only allow for one four-foot wide access path on a property. I guess the Board could consider in this case, you know, it has been mowed lawn up to this point, so it's not as if it's through a wetland or a wooded area or a dune. MR. HERRMANN: And I would argue, generally, Nick, that I think the outcome is an improvement, substantial improvement relative to, you know, if six months ago the applicant just decided to build a pool outside your jurisdiction and just never come here. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It is a substantial improvement. It's a small existing lawn area. It's quite substantial. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone else that wishes to speak regarding this application? MS. BROWN: Carol Brown, Conservation Advisory Council. We measured it out, and the law says 100 feet. It doesn't say 90 or 91 feet. The garden that is there is a small, fairly newish garden that could easily be moved. We feel strongly that we would not only save that Maple tree that is there but it would also then make it in compliance with Town law. MR. HERRMANN: With respect to the speaker, the Wetlands Code requires a 50-foot setback to swimming pools and related structures, so we are almost double the required the setback with this proposal. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Is that a Copper Beech there? I think it's a beech tree, isn't it. I don't know the scientific name of that one. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All right, is there anyone else here that wishes to speak regarding this application, or any additional comments from the members of the Board? (No response). Hearing none, I'll make a motion to close the hearing in this application. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And I make a motion to approve this application based off the plan stamped received in the office December 15, 2021. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you. MR. HERRMANN: Chairman, could I beg for just an extra minute. I Board of Trustees 31 December 15, 2021 just wanted to say something unrelated to the applications. I was hoping to say this privately to you guys later but it's my wife's birthday so I'm not going to stick around to the end of the meeting. I have been working with Jay and Mike for ten years, and I just wanted to wish you guys well, and let you know it really has been an honor and a pleasure working with this whole Board. started doing this almost 30 years ago and Jay was on the Board back then as well. So it's been a long time. They have both been very straight-shooting gentlemen with every application, as are you guys. And it didn't always, wasn't always what my clients wanted to hear, but I think we always worked very cooperatively together to come up to a reasonable solution on the edge of upland development and wetland resources that we want to protect, and it really is a difficult balancing act. And you can't just be all for development or all for preservation or you end up in a bad spot. You have to have a balance. And you guys have done a remarkable job doing that. And I just wanted to thank you and let you know that. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Thank you, very much. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Thank you, very much. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It's been a pleasure working with you all these years. MR. HERRMANN: Thank you. Merry Christmas. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Merry Christmas, to you, too. The next application, number 3, Michael Kimack on behalf of RICHARD LIEBOWITZ & CONSUELO PROL requests a Wetland Permit for a Ten (10) Year Maintenance Permit to trim the phragmites within a 1,550 sq. ft. area to no lower,than 12" from ground for the first cutting; phragmites then cut to a maximum of twice per year with subsequent cuts no shorter than 18" from ground; all non-native species within the 1,550 sq. ft. cutting area to be removed; all cutting of the'phragmites and'non-native species will be by hand and the cut vegetation removed from the project site and disposed of at an approved site. Located: 1000 Beachwood Lane, Southold. SCTM# 1000-70-10-59 This project has been deemed to be consistent with the Town's LWRP. The Conservation Advisory Council has voted to support this application. I believe they had comments. I have them here. They commended the application for consulting with an environmental specialist. There is a detailed plant list of the non-native species. There is also a narrative on the project plan stamped received December 9th in the Trustee office, which includes a requested ten-foot non-turf buffer. Board of Trustees 32 December 15, 2021 And the Trustees met in the field indicating that the buffer was requested on field inspection on December 8th. Is there anyone who wishes to speak to this application? MR. KIMACK: Michael Kimack, on behalf of the applicant. I think that you pretty much covered all the salient points. It was broken into two parts. You had originally approved some removal under the permit that you gave for the dock, and had noted when we were on site that they had not complied with the non-turf buffer. So the new plans that I put in included a ten-foot non-turf buffer. And you are right about the planting that we have, Cole Environmental went through it all and laid it all out in the new plans. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It is straightforward. The Board had an additional discussion at work session Monday night concerning there be no new lawn or turf areas put in where the invasives are removed. So that would be something the Board would consider on stipulation. Also, as a point of clarification, I believe the Board is in agreement that it's suitable for a ten-year maintenance. I didn't hear lessening it. It appears there might be a scrivener's error on your plan. It shows a five-year cut and maintenance plan. MR. KIMACK: Scrivener's error. Ten years. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I just wanted to clarify. MR. KIMACK: I'll raise you another five. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Unless I heard five on the dais up here, just wanted that clarification. Very good. Anyone else wish to speak though application? (Negative response). Seeing and hearing none, I'll make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I'll make a motion to approve this application for ten-year maintenance and removal of invasives consistent and according to plan detailed in the Trustees office December 9th, 2021, with stipulation no lawn or turf areas will be installed where the invasive species are removed. That's my motion. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). MR. KIMACK: Thank you. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number four, Michael Kimack on behalf of J. WHATMOUGH 2018 REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST, c/o JEANNE WHATMOUGH requests a Wetland Permit for the existing 1,227.6 sq. ft. 1-1/2 story dwelling and to Board of Trustees 33 December 15, 2021 demolish existing 84.0 sq. ft. seaward side porch and construct a 9'0"x28'8'/2" addition (258.3 sq. ft.) and a new 9'x6' (54 sq. ft.) porch with crawl space foundation onto seaward side of dwelling; and install gutters to leaders to drywell. Located: 180 North Riley Avenue, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-122-3-38 The Trustees most recent field inspection at the site was on December 8th. The notes read non-disturbance buffer requested seaward of the split-rail fence. The LWRP coordinator found this application to be consistent. And the Conservation Advisory Council on December 8th resolved to support the application. Is there anyone here to speak to this application? MR. KIMACK: Michael Kimack, on behalf of the applicant. At your request, and I apologize for not being onsite with you the last time, you had requested me to provide you a map showing the exact location of the existing split-rail fence. And it's in your possession right now. The split-rail fence is actually right on the property line. Or within a foot of it. And I quite frankly didn't know that until I measured it off quite specifically. So the land seaward of that is not what under this ownership. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Thank you, for that. It is noted on the new plans that you submitted. MR. KIMACK: I tried to put as much information on that as I could. TRUSTEE DOMINO: On October 26th, 2021. Is there anyone else here to speak to this application? (Negative response). Hearing no further comments, I make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE DOMINO: I make a motion to approve this application as submitted and in accordance with the plans of MCH Design Services plans dated October 25th, 2021, and stamped received October 26th, 2021. MR. HAGAN: There should be a newer set of plans on that. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Sorry. Am I looking at the wrong one? MR. HAGAN: It was a December received plan. TRUSTEE DOMINO: I had them before. Here they are. December 15th, 2021. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). MR. KIMACK: May I have a moment. I'm not going to take much time. Jay and Mike, from my years with you, it's always been a pleasure. You have always conducted yourselves with professionalism and with- concern for the environment, with dedication to the code. And as has it been said by a prior speaker, it has not always been easy on my clients, but it always has been fair and objective, and that's all you can ask of anyone in your position. Which is a tough one. And I look forward to seeing you later on. Board of Trustees 34 December 15, 2021 Thank you, very much. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Thank you. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Thank you. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 5, John D. Rosebery, Architect on behalf of ANDREA COURT PROPERTY HOLDINGS, LLC, c/o JOHN ZENK requests a Wetland Permit to demolish existing one-story dwelling; construct new two-story (60'x45' irregular shape) dwelling with a 20'x54' deck to rear with a 10'x30', 4' depth swimming pool within; proposed dwelling is a total of a 3,567 sq. ft. footprint with four (4) bedrooms; and to abandon existing sanitary system and install a new IA/OWTS sanitary system. Located: 280 Cedar Point Drive E., Southold. SCTM# 1000-90.-2-14.1 The LWRP found this to be inconsistent and consistent. The inconsistency is the proposed larger dwelling and pool are entirely located within the FEMA X and AE elevation six-foot flood zones. Increasing structures within those areas are unsupported due to the probability of damage and loss over time during storms including hurricanes. Maximum setbacks practicable should be applied to mitigate storm impact. Installation of an IA system is consistent. The Conservation Advisory Council supports the application and recommended every effort to made to build all proposed structures in accordance with FEMA standards. The Trustees most recently did an inspection on December 8th, 2021. We reviewed the new plans and the new plans show the ten-foot buffer as requested from the previous meeting. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application? (No response). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Any questions or comments from the Board? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The new plans seem to make this project more appropriate. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Hearing no further comments, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion to approve this application with the new plans stamped received November 19th, 2021, that shows a ten-foot buffer and noting that the proposed new structure is further setback than the original, bringing it into consistency with the LWRP. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 6, Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of JOSEPH & MARY ELLEN LOGIUDICE request a Wetland Board of Trustees 35 December 15, 2021 Permit to construct a 4'x40' landward ramp onto a 4'x110' fixed dock with a 4'x40' "L" section at seaward end; construct a 4'x40' lower platform with a 5'x4' access platform and a 4'x16' ramp; install three (3) two-pile dolphins; and proved water and electrical service to dock. Located: 10995 North Bayview Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-79-5-20.14 The LWRP found this to be inconsistent. It has like ten pages of inconsistencies here. So that's in the file for the public record. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved not to support the application because there is a concern with public lateral access, proximity of the adjacent shellfishery and concern with the overall size of the dock facility and bottom coverage. The Trustees most recently did a field inspection December 8th, 2021, where we reviewed that we received the lead agency response from the DEC, and reviewed the plans as work session. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application? MS. CANTRELL: We have Jack Costello Zooming in. Jack, if you want to un-mute yourself and speak to the Board, feel free. MR. COSTELLO: Good evening, Board, how are you doing. This is Jack Costello, on behalf of the applicant. read into record at the last hearing my thoughts about this application but I can just, I'll be quick about it. I know you have a long night. But I feel this application is similar to the four recently-approved applications between the next vista which is to the southeast between Cedar Beach and Paradise Point, it was Notias, DaVito, Starino and Sanford. These open-pile docks along with the other three docks that are previously existing, have no negative effect to the stability of the beach. This vista between Paradise Point and Reydon Shores has a large fish_trap and several large jetties at the entrance of Paradise Point Association and Reydon Shores. These structures, there is also one dock. While I was staking this dock I also noticed there were several kayakers that went by and they stayed seaward of the dock line that I had staked. And it did not impede navigation. This is an open-bay dock that, you know, there is open water where it will not impede navigation at all. And this dock is very similar to the other four docks that was approved by I would say the majority of this exact Board. I don't want to say everybody was on every single vote, but this is very similar to the other docks, you know, in between Paradise Point and Cedar Beach Point. And this has nothing really to do with you guys, but over in Shelter Island, I was recently approved by DEC for docks very,similar in nature to this, so I don't, you know, I feel you guys are the lead agency on this and I feel it's fitting considering there are so many docks in that area, and basically this dock is laid out in a Board of Trustees 36 December 15, 2021 mirror image of those four docks that have been recently approved by the majority of this Board, and I'm here to answer any questions. Thank you. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you. Anybody else here wishing to speak regarding this application? (Negative response). Any questions or comments from the Board? (Negative response). Hearing no further comments, I'll make a motion to table this application based on the positive SEQRA declaration to give the applicant an opportunity to complete a Draft Environmental Impact Study as well as address the past application that was denied by the prior Board. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Number 7, Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of ROBINS ISLAND HOLDINGS, LLC, c/o BELVEDERE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT requests a Wetland Permit to construct 45' of splashboard on the main dock; remove existing 15'x30' seaplane float and construct a new 8'x24' floating dock in-place. Located: Robins Island, Peconic Bay, New Suffolk. SCTM# 1000-134-3-5 The Trustees most recently reviewed this application on the 13th of December and noted it was a straightforward, minor change. The LWRP coordinator found this to be consistent. And the Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this application. Is there anyone here that wishes to speak regarding the application? MS. CANTRELL: Jack Costello, if you want to un-mute yourself and speak to the Board, feel free. MR. COSTELLO: Okay, this is very simple. I just want to make myself available to answer any questions there may be. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Is there anyone else here that wishes to speak regarding this application? (Negative response). Hearing no additional comment I make a motion to close the hearing on the application. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Motion to approve the application as submitted. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Second TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). Board of Trustees 37 December 15, 2021 TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Number 8, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of KEVIN & ELIZABETH HUDSON requests a Wetland Permit to remove the existing 45' long x 4' wide fixed pier, ramp and float and construct approximately 2' to the north of existing a proposed 52' long x 4' wide fixed pier with Thru-Flow decking and supported with 8" diameter CCA piles; a proposed 30" wide x 16' long aluminum ramp; and a proposed 6' wide x 20' long floating dock with un-treated timber decking situated in an "L" configuration and supported by two (2) 10" diameter CCA piles. Located: 680 Deep Hole Drive, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-115-12-9 This application deemed to be consistent under Town's LWRP. The Conservation Advisory Council has voted to support this application. The Board inspected the site on December 8th, and it was at that time and at Monday night's work session reviewed plans stamped in the Trustee office November 29th of this year. The field inspection log notes that the dock must stay within the pier line of adjacent docks, and that there was concern about protecting, creating a non-disturbance area to protect the wetlands adjacent to the fence. Also on the discussion during the course of the work session, because of prior clearing of trees on the property, the Board considered that the offer of three trees on the plans would be insufficient, and at a minimum I believe we were headed toward requesting a total of six trees. Is there anyone who wishes to speak to this application? MS. CANTRELL: We have Jeff Patanjo on Zoom. MR. PATANJO: Good evening. Jeff Patanjo, on behalf of the applicant. This application was a carryover from last month's November hearing. And I believe we had come to an agreement regarding a couple of items with the proposed plan. As you see on the proposed plan, the pier line is adhered to. It does meet that requirement that was just mentioned. Originally, during our hearing, it was a requested by the Board to install, and agreed to plant, three native trees, two-inches in caliper (audio glitch) along the southerly property line behind the shed up to the waterfront land area. We also had modified the application to remove the lower, the issues of wire fabric from the bottom of the existing fence of the westerly property line, that runs long the water's edge. And that was at the request of the Trustees, to limit any disruption in vegetation crossing underneath that existing wire fence. One of the other things that we did at the request of the Trustees, as addressed during the last public hearing, was to install ten-foot wide non-turf buffer landward of the existing Board of Trustees 38?,`' December 15, 2021 coastal fence location. So all of the considerations that were recommended by the Trustees at the last public hearing have been identified on the revised plans which are dated 11/21/21. 'TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Thank you. Yes, the plans do reflect that ten-foot non-turf buffer. The Board at work session was discussing that since the existing fence, which has a non-turf area landward of it, the Board is considering requesting that the area seaward become a non-disturbance area and, on advice of counsel, the existing plans properly delineate the fence and the ten-foot non-turf buffer that, if you are agreeable, the Board could consider stipulating that seaward of the fence would be a non-disturbance area with a four-foot, allowable four-foot wide path obviously to the dock. MR. PATANJO: Okay. When you say that, that means they couldn't do any trimming of non-native plants? There is some non-native vegetation there. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I would have to defer to the Board to get their concerns. There had been quite a bit of cutting on the property. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You would need a permit to do any cutting regardless, but essentially they would have to let that area naturalize. If they were non-natives you just submit a letter and they can apply for a tree letter. It's like a one to two-week process. MR. PATANJO: Right. So they would .be able to maintain a four-foot wide pathway up to the dock for the purposes of that, okay. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's correct. MR. PATANJO: All right. I don't know if they are on this one. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I saw that, yes. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Mr. Patanjo is it possible we can get three more trees, unspecified location,, but can we get three more trees so we can bump it up to the six that the Board had discussed at work session. MR. PATANJO: Three more trees of the size about two inches caliper? TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Yes. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Along the northern border. MR. PATANJO: I don't believe that should be a problem. The homeowner, I believe he is'on Zoom now, and I just wanted to get his agreeance to that. He should be on. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Okay. Trustee Domino just indicated it might be advisable to balance it, to have three additional trees, if the homeowner is'agreeable, on the northern border of the property line. I don't know if that is -- MR. PATANJO: Right. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Do you have anyone else to speak to the Board of Trustees 39 December 15, 2021 application? MS. CANTRELL: Mr. Hudson started waiving his hand, the owner. So Jeff, I'll mute you right now. And, Mr. Hudson if you want to un-mute yourself and speak to the Board. MR HUDSON: Certainly. Thank you. Just a clarification on the seaward area. I understand, you know, we need a tree permit if there was anything that was non-native that Was a problem. Does that preclude us from in the future coming to you guys and applying to put more stuff there that you want, like native beach grasses and stuff to make it look nicely and obviously serve its purpose better? You know, as far as, some of it right now is barren and we would like to put some form of whatever is acceptable there in the future. We realize that is a separate application. You know, I can't just go down there and plant whatever, you know, beach grass that I want. It has to be whatever is supposed to be there. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Mr. Hudson, that normally is occasioned by a permit-required activity. The same as additional tree removal in that area. But depending if it's a minor activity or you have a proactive restoration in that area where you specify the plants, the Board can take it under consideration as a proactive restoration, and that would be up to their discretionary approval to even waive the permit, but you have to contact, in any instance, you have to contact the Board with activities,in that area. Normally when the Board specifies a non-disturbance area we want it naturalized. But there are practical considerations because there is so many invasive species now that want to take advantage of such a place. So the Board is flexible. I think it's a matter of communicating with the Board in the future on that. So at this time basically we would be just asking to establish a non-disturbance area seaward of the fence and addition of three-trees that might be planted on the same caliper on the north side. MR HUDSON: Sure. That's fine. And just to speak to that, you know, we knew from the get go, the replanting of the trees, we just, you know, we had not gotten to it yet for sure. But it's from three to six I'm not quite sure how we'll lay it out but we'll figure it out.,On I'm amenable to that. That's fine. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER:'Thank you, very much. Is there anyone else wishing to speak to this application? MS. CANTRELL: Yes. We have Patricia Garvey raised her hand. MS. GARVEY: Hi, this is Patricia Garvey, 600 Deep Hole Drive. I would like to ask the Trustees what was their determination with regard to the non-permitted fence? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We have not made a determination yet. Board of Trustees 40 December 15, 2021 TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: We are still holding the public hearing at this time. MS. GARVEY: So after the last meeting in November, they were instructed to move the fence back ten more feet, I believe? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: There was no instruction, it was something that was discussed for the application. We went out into the field and measurements were taken. And we also decided to go forward with the non-disturbance area, which is a very environmentally friendly alternative and buffer. So, you know, things have a tendency to change after being looked at in the field and be aware of the options. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: The fence as installed meets the Board's policy of being set off from the wetlands by a sufficient distance. So that was taken into consideration when the Board made field measurements on the inspection we performed on December 8th. MS. GARVEY: So can you tell me what is the distance? TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Typically it's 25 feet. MS. GARVEY: Thank you:My next question, you reviewed the paperwork with regard to this permit, and we have concerns about the environmental assessment. Question 20. Question 20 is about at the site of the proposed action or adjoining property been the subject of remediation for hazardous waste. And the response was yes. With no description. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: The document speaks for itself. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: The document does speak for itself. Do you have any additional questions? MS. GARVEY: No, that's it. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All right. Thank you, very much. Anyone else wish to speak to this application? (No response). At this time I'll make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Motion to approve this application with the stipulation that the area seaward of the fence will be a non-disturbance area with any additional activities in the future require a permit or the approval of the Trustees. And that an additional three trees be planted on the property on the north property line, for a total of six trees. This will ameliorate the conditions the Board found on field inspection. That's my motion. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). Board of Trustees 41 December 15, 2021, TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number 9, Patricia Moore, Esq. on behalf of ROBERT C. RUOCCO requests a Wetland Permit to install pool enclosure fencing 50' from edge of wetlands; and to maintain the height of existing vegetation landward of the edge of wetlands to a height of 3 feet by periodically trimming. Located: 880 Narrow River Road, Orient. SCTM# 1000-27-4-9.4 I'm going to read the new permit description, which was submitted by Patricia Moore's office on December 14th. It reads as follows: Install pool fence at 80 feet from the edge of wetlands. Natural vegetation on the landward side of the pool fence. And a non-disturbance area on the seaward side of the fence. Owner may remove non-native and invasive species within the non-disturbance area with a permit only, as shown on the'survey prepared by Peconic Surveyors PC, last dated December 6th, 2021. The Trustees did a review of the plans on December 8th. The plans were new plans revised on December 7th, and the notes read that the plans reflect the Board's request to move the pool fence. The LWRP coordinator found this to be inconsistent. The inconsistency arises from the fact that trimming of vegetation to a three-foot height that functions as important habitat adjacent to the tidal marsh is unsupported and may result in functional Foss of ecological components. And the Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this application. That action was taken on November 10th, 2021. Is there anyone here to speak to this.application? MS. MOORE: Yes. Patricia Moore on behalf of the Ruocco family. Thank you. This is a continuation. Last hearing we discussed the proposed location of the fence which we did move to the recommended distance. I did remove from the permit application the trimming of the vegetation since there was some sensitive vegetation there that may not be trimmed. So with only the removal of invasive species that do grow in between with the permit, so. That has been changed. TRUSTEE DOMINO: And we thank,you for that. Is there anyone else here to speak to this application? (Negative response). Any questions or comment from the Board? (No response). Hearing none, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE DOMINO: I make-a motion to approve this application in Board of Trustees 42 December 15, 2021 accordance with the John Metzger plans of October 8th, 2012. Last revised December 6th, 2021, stamped received December 7, 2021, and with the condition that there be no trimming of protected species and thereby bringing this into consistency with the LWRP. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Number 10, AMP Architecture on behalf of DOUGLAS BRADFORD requests a Wetland Permit for the existing 1,438.0 sq. ft. two-story dwelling and to construct an 8.4'x36.2' (304 sq. ft.) second floor extension; a proposed 1.8'x10.7' (19.26 sq. ft.), and a 1.8'x11.9' (21.42 sq. ft.) second floor dormer extensions; and a proposed 5'x12.5' (62.5 sq. ft.) front porch. Located: 3705 Bay Shore Road, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-53-6-16 The Trustees most recently reviewed this application on the 7th of December and noted that we received�an updated survey prior to that time. We had inspected this project on the 9th of November and it was noted that the plan and survey were a little dated, so we were looking for an update on that. Which we have received. The LWRP coordinator found this to be consistent. And the Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support the application. Is there anyone here that wishes to speak to the application? MS. CANTRELL: Anthony Portillo from AMP Architecture is present. Anthony, if you want to un-mute yourself and speak to the Board, feel free. MR. PORTILLO: Good evening, Board, thanks for having me. I just want to let you know I'm here. If there are any questions, it's pretty straightforward, we are staying within the envelope besides the front porch that we are proposing which is basically just an overhang for the entry into the home. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Is there anyone else here that wishes to speak regarding this application or any additional comments from the members of the Board? (Negative response). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Hearing none, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). I make a motion to approve this application with the new plans stamped received in the office December 6th, 2021. Board of Trustees 43 December 15, 2021 TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 11, Young & Young on behalf of GOMB BEACH, LLC requests a Wetland Permit to construct a new two-story dwelling and garage with a 1,532 sq. ft. footprint; proposed 51 sq. ft. front porch; proposed 435 sq. ft. rear deck and 50 sq. ft. of stairs; a proposed 120 sq. ft. side porch and 30 sq. ft. of stairs; a proposed 123 sq. ft. rear porch; proposed 216 sq. ft. pool; proposed 2,001 sq. ft. driveway; install public water service connection; install new sanitary system (i.e. one (1) 1,250 gal. septic tank and two (2) 8' diameter by 8' effect. depth sanitary leaching pools); and install new storm water control structure (i.e. LF 1 - (1) 8' diameter by 8' effect. depth drainage leaching pool). Located: 54205 County Road 48, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-52-1-3 The LWRP found this to be inconsistent. The inconsistencies are the natural feature bluff line may be incorrect. The top of the float appears to be at the 20-foot contour line. Pool setback of 27'6" from the top of bluff is insufficient and inconsistent. Inconsistent with Policies 4 and 6. The two-story frame house and garage close to the top of bluff, less than 43 feet from the coastal erosion hazard 'line. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support the application and recommends an IA sanitary system. The Trustees most recently conducted a field inspection November 9th, 2021, requesting a proposed pool location in proximity to the coastal erosion hazard line and bluff, and suggested a buffer of ten feet landward of the bluff. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application? MR. WOLPERT: Yes. Thomas Wolpert, engineer with Young & Young, speaking on behalf'of the applicant. Since the Trustees field inspection,on November 9th and the subsequent public hearing on November 17th, I consulted with my client Mr. Mike Holevas, who may be on line and waiting, and we agreed to move the proposed location of the pool further from the top of the bluff and actually annex it to the house itself. By doing that, we were able to move the nearest corner of the pool from 27.6 feet to no less than 40 feet. And that's to the nearest corner. On the, that's the northwest corner. The northeast corner of the pool ends up 48-and-a-half feet from the top of the bluff. In addition to that, instead of doing an inground pool, we are proposing an elevated pool so as to minimize the depth of the excavation. In fact the depth of the excavation required for Board of Trustees 44 December 15, 2021 construction of the pool will be less than that for construction of the house itself. I would also like to note that historical records seem to indicate that because this property has been bulkheaded for some time, there has really been no evidence of erosion of this bluff on this lot for at least 40 years. So having said all that, I believe we satisfactorily mitigated the concerns of the Board, but I'm here to try to answer any questions that the Board may have. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you. Is there anyone else here wishing to speak regarding this application? (Negative response). Any questions or comments from the Board? (Negative response). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Just briefly. I think the main issue with this application originally was that,the Trustees in no way, shape or form would approve a pool that close to a bluff. However after reviewing the site and the plans it is very apparent a very small bank behind the bulkhead, and with the addition of making it an elevated pool, it's essentially a hot tub, which the Board has approved in various similar locations. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Any other comments? (Negative response). Hearing no further comments, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion to approve this application with the following amended project description. Project consists of constructing a new two-story frame house and garage 1,532 square foot footprint; front porch, 51 square foot; rear deck 105 square feet; and elevated pool spa 231 square feet; stone driveway, 2,001 square feet; public water service connection; new sanitary system, i.e. one 700 gallon waste water treatment unit and two 8' diameter by 8' effect depth sanitary leaching pools IA/OWTS and new storm water control structure for roof runoff and driveway runoff; i.e. drywell #1, eight-foot diameter by eight-foot effect; depth drainage leaching pool. And drywell #2, eight-foot diameter by seven-foot effect; depth drainage leaching pool; a ten-foot wide non-disturbance buffer will be maintained landward of the top of the bluff, as well as the new plans stamped received December 8th, 2021, and noting that it is not a bluff but a bank, and the structure is set back on the pier line, which will bring it into consistency with the LWRP. That is my motion. Board of Trustees 45 December 15, 2021 TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Number 12, Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. on behalf of ROGER D. TODEBUSH requests a Wetland Permit to construct a two-story, single family dwelling (1,180 sq. ft. footprint) with attached 192.0 sq. ft. seaward screened in porch; construct an outdoor shower; install a 240.0 sq. ft. at grade seaward patio; install an IA/OWTS septic system; and install a pervious gravel driveway. Located: 1130 West Creek Avenue, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-103-13-9 The Trustees most recently reviewed the application, the most recent site visit was on the 9th of November, noted that the patio is too close to the bank, should be noted that that has been removed from the plans,. We were looking for a 15-foot non-turf buffer on the plans. We are in receipt of those new plans stamped received December 10th in the office. The LWRP coordinator found this to be inconsistent, however he addresses trimming along the marsh, which I believe is not included in this application. Perhaps the applicant can clarify this after. And the Conservation Advisory Council,was unable to make a fair assessment and therefore no recommendation is made at this time. Is there anyone here that wishes to speak regarding this application? MR. ANDERSON: Yes. Robert Anderson, Suffolk Environmental Consulting, on behalf of the applicant. As far as the trimming goes at this point our client is not proposing any trimming at this time. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. The Board also had discussed at work session the possibility of making a stipulation for this site that no future structural improvements will be made seaward of the house and patio such as being applied for at this time. MR. ANDERSON: That was discussed in the work session but we feel that we have provided more than adequate mitigation as far as a 15-foot buffer, we've since extended from a ten-foot buffer. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Basically what the Board is looking to do is stipulate that in the future, the deck won't be extended; the patio will not be added going forward. MR. ANDERSON: I'm sure we would be agreeable to that. Our client is on Zoom, I believe, if she would like to -- TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't know that we have any more questions on that. Is there anyone else here that wishes to speak regarding the application? Or any additional comments from members of the Board? (Negative response). All right, hearing no additional comments, I make a motion to close the public hearing. Board of Trustees 46 December 15, 2021 TRUSTEE DOMINO: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I make a motion to approve the application based off the plans submitted stamped received in the office December 10th, 2021, with the stipulation that no future improvements of structures shall be made seaward of the house and patio such as applied at this time, and Trustee inspections noting that the LWRP coordinator may have made an error which would make this application consistent. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Next application, Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. on behalf of ALBERT & FRANCES TROTTER requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 1,440 sq. ft. two-story dwelling with an attached 596 sq. ft. garage and a 699 sq. ft. wrap-around porch; install a 10'x210' (2,100 sq. ft.) driveway along with a 3,063 sq. ft. parking area; install a walkway between the parking area and dwelling totaling 360 sq. ft.; install three (3) 8'x4' drywells to contain roof runoff; and to install a septic system. Located: 34460 Route 25, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-97-2-9.1 This application is a reapplication of a permit that I believe expired and at the request of the Trustees Krupski, they added back in on the set of plans was a 15-foot non-disturbance buffer, which was received in the Trustee office November 3rd. And with that we also have a revised project description which I'm going to read into the record before going forward. The applicant proposed to construct a 1,440 square foot two-story dwelling with an attached 596 square foot garage and 699 square foot wraparound porch, 71.2 feet from the wetland boundary; a ten-foot by 210 foot, or 2,100 square foot driveway along with a 3,063 square foot parking area 120 feet from the wetland boundary, and walkway between the parking area and the dwelling totaling 360 square feet at 88 feet from the wetland boundary; install three drywells of eight-feet by four-feet each at 120 feet, 80 feet and 160 feet from the wetland boundary; install a septic system of 127 feet from the wetland boundary outside Trustee jurisdiction, and to maintain one 15-foot non-turf disturbance buffer landward of the edge of the lawn as depicted on the survey prepared by Peconic Surveyors PC, dated March 20th, 2019, and stamped approved April 17th, 2019. And with revisions as stamped in the Town Trustee office on November 2021. The LWRP has determined this project is consistent. Board of Trustees 47 December 15, 2021 The Conservation Advisory Council did not support the proposed dwelling, indicating it should be located more than 100 feet from the wetland boundary and moved to the eastern north, and the project would have to have an IA system in their determination. In their vote, rather. Is there anyone who wishes to speak to this application? MR. ANDERSON: Yes, Robert Anderson, Suffolk Environmental Consulting, I'm here to answer any questions the Board may have. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: The prior application, which expired, still has a Suffolk County Department of Health approval for the onsite wastewater system? MR. ANDERSON: Yes, it does. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Okay, anyone else wish to speak to this application? MS. BROWN: Carol Brown, Conservation Advisory Council. This is a very large piece of property. This is new construction. Why in the world can they not.move it a little bit to the north and have it within the hundred feet from the wetlands. Additionally, an IA system should be required, because if they put it within the hundred feet then the building is within the hundred feet and it doesn't matter that the system is outside the 100 feet. But we feel really strongly that there is plenty of other space on this property, six-and-a-half acres, to put in a structure that fits in with our laws. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Thank you. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I appreciate that. I do believe that because there are prior standing Health Department approvals, in accordance with the policies of the Trustees and all new construction, and the county, we are required the IA, so unfortunately I don't believe that we are in a position to counter-mandate'prior standing approvals of the Health Department. The structure itself is 98 feet from the wetlands and the addition of the buffered area is 15-foot non-turf, excuse me, non-disturbance buffer, does create a very substantial buffering for the lowland wetland and will allow for it's actual growth into that area: So it's a difficult application since it predates the absolute requirement for an IA, and with the house 98 feet,, also siting considerations where it's next to a school, the Board is cognizant of the applicant's desire to try to have some buffering from the noise that would be occasioned by the use of the school property. Are there any additional comments or questions from the Board? Anyone else wish to speak to this application? (Negative response). Seeing and hearing none, I make a motion to close the hearing in Board of Trustees 48 December 15, 2021 this matter. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I make a motion to approve this application as submitted with the new project description as read into the record, with the plan received in the Trustee office November 3rd. That's my motion. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). MR. ANDERSON: Thank you, very much. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number 14, BRANKO & MARGARET PEROS requests a Wetland Permit for the existing one and one-half story dwelling with a 1,200 sq. ft. footprint, existing 8'x12' (98 sq. ft.) front porch and 460 sq. ft. rear deck; reconstruct the northerly wall in order to install new sliding doors; remove existing second story and construct new 32 '/2 'x24.8' second-story with a new 6.4'x11.2' balcony. Located: 815 Rabbit Lane, East Marion. SCTM# 1000-31-17-18 The Trustees conducted a field inspection at this site on December 8th. The notes read needs a 15-foot non-turf buffer. I assume that is on Marion Lake. And discuss at work session clarify elevation and IA system. The LWRP coordinator found this to be consistent. And the Conservation Advisory Council on December 8th resolved to support this application. Is there anyone here to speak to this application? MS. PEROS: We are the owners. Margaret Peros. I'm the owner. So, we are here. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Okay. Trustee Bredemeyer and myself did an extensive review of this entire area after Super Storm Sandy. And the area was destroyed. So this is in reference to the notes where it clarified the elevation. The Trustees would like to see a 15-foot non-turf buffer. That's a separate issue on Marion Lake. We would like a clarification. We are suggesting you might consider in this extensive renovation, that you might elevate the building. MR. PEROS: It's elevated almost three feet. MS. PEROS: And during Sandy the water did not come in the main building. MR. PEROS: It's elevated almost three feet. TRUSTEE DOMINO: You owned it at the time. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Yes, the only thing we had to replace was cottage. TRUSTEE DOMINO: You were very lucky. Board of Trustees 49 December 15, 2021 MS. PEROS: Yes, very lucky. TRUSTEE DOMINO: As you know, the people on the bay side -- MR. PEROS: We know. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Are you amenable to the 15-foot non-turf buffer along Marion Lake? The Trustees did not like to see lawn going down all the way to the water body. MS. PEROS: Okay. TRUSTEE DOMINO: And the non-turf buffer would mean that you have the opportunity to put mulch or gravel or something there, but we don't want to see fertilized lawn. MR. PEROS: We only have like ten feet? TRUSTEE DOMINO: It's 15 feet. MR. PEROS: From the deck to the water line? TRUSTEE DOMINO: What is delineated on here as the water line landward. MR. PEROS: From the deck to the water line? TRUSTEE DOMINO: No. If you approach the dais, I can show you. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: There is an existing wetland fringe there that is 18 feet depth which we would not want to see disturbed. With the existing wetland fringe with the vegetation that would area that would be non-turf that would go on that landward. TRUSTEE DOMINO: This would be non-turf. No lawn here, in other words. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It could also be vegetated. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: He's thinking of the wetland. We are talking from where the phragmites grow landward. TRUSTEE DOMINO: You follow this line. That's the existing water line. MR. PEROS: This is all the way to here. TRUSTEE DOMINO: The phragmites there, you can always ask for a permit to cut them. MR. PEROS: We have the permit for the whole -- TRUSTEE DOMINO: All we want to put down is to formalize there won't be lawn in this 15-foot area. MR. PEROS: There is no lawn now. TRUSTEE DOMINO: We want to formalize that. Do you understand that? MR. PEROS: Yes. there is no way. TRUSTEE DOMINO: You have the permit for that. MR. PEROS: That's Marion Lake Association. We have that ten years. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Understood. All right. Thank you, sir. Okay, we are going to need new plans reflecting that non-turf buffer. It might be advisable to table subject to new plans or revision of this plan to show the 15-foot non-turf buffer. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Maybe I can -- MR. PEROS: I don't understand. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Maybe I can clarify. The standard practice on Board of Trustees 50 December 15, 2021 every application that comes in front of this Board, is we do not want to see lawn down to the wetland line. So wherever your wetland line is on your property, on your survey or site map, that has to be clearly delineated as the line of tidal wetlands, then from that line we need on our set of plans drawn back 15 feet, and that area should say non-turf buffer. Meaning no one, if you sell the property or keep_the property, no one can ever go and put lawn there. It's a form of environmental buffer that we put on all applications of varying lengths between 10 and 50 feet. MR. PEROS: But there is no way we can put a lawn there. TRUSTEE DOMINO: I understand. As I say, we have to formalize the fact there cannot be lawn in that area. You are saying physically it's not possible. We have to make it legally. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right. I think there is some miscommunication here. On your.plans it says the water line, however that is not the wetland,'the natural vegetation wetland line. So'we'need two more lines put on the plans for approval. We need the edge of which is where your lawn ends right now, where the Spartina alterniflora starts to.grow, where the tide comes in on high and low tide and fluctuates, and then from there we need a buffer where the lawn is now so there can't be lawn there in"the future. MS. PEROS: We need a new survey showing that? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It just has to be added to the survey. If there is some confusion, we have to table your application anyway because the plans without that line are deemed incomplete. If there is some confusion we can meet you on our next field inspection and just show you where we mean. If you can get a quick enough turnaround you can have someone add that line. MR. PEROS: Yes. Because we keep; losing that anyway. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Absolutely. So that date is January 11th, would be the next field inspection we could meet you at the site. Some time in the morning, MR. PEROS: Okay. And you'll tell us what we need. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes. MS. PEROS: Thank you, very much. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Does anyone else wish to speak to this application? (Negative response). Any further comments or questions from the Board? (Negative response). Motion to table this at the applicant's request. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). Board of Trustees 51 December 15, 2021 TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 15, Kristin Trovitch on behalf of FRANK MARSILIO requests a Wetland Permit to remove and replace in-place existing 128' of bulkhead with a 6' south return and a 20' north return. Located: 1080 Deep Hole Drive, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-115-12-15 The LWRP found this to be consistent. However there is notes, there is Spartina alterniflora located just seaward of the bulkhead. New York State DEC issued permit requires no disturbance of vegetated tidal wetlands. How will this be accomplished? Will the incidental disturbance of the vegetation be addressed with replanting. The Conservation Advisory Council supports the application with the installation of a 15-foot non-turf buffer. The Trustees conducted a field inspection December 8th, 2021, noting would like to see the 20-foot non-turf buffer to match of the neighbor to the south. Is,there anyone here who wishes to speak regarding this application? MS. CANTRELL: We have Kristin Trovitch who would like to speak. Ms. Trovitch, if you want to un-mute yourself to speak. MS. TROVITCH: Hi, this is Kristin Trovitch on behalf of Frank Marsilio with regard to the project at 1080 Deep Hole Drive. The proposed replacement of 120 feet of bulkhead, six-foot southern return and 20-foot northern return, we are going to do it landward on that side of the bulkhead to avoid any disturbance of the existing vegetation in front of the bulkhead, as per the DEC request. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Okay. Thank you. And could you get us a new site plan that shows the 20-foot non-turf buffer landward of your proposed new bulkhead, please? MS. TROVITCH:'On the south side of the property, since there is -- I'm looking at the north here. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Continuous with the bulkhead. MS. TROVITCH: Okay. So we already have a ten foot behind it. You want to extend that to another ten feet? TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: ,Yes. So the neighbor-to the south has, appears to us when we measured in the field, has a 20 foot non-'turf buffer, so if you can continue that line acrosslso in some sections will be 2p feet, where you have the bump out it will be less, but we need_a new site plan that shows that 20 foot line non-turf buffer. MS. TROVITCH: This is Mike Trovitch. He'll speak on behalf, because he's the contractor, so he just has a quick question regarding what'you are requesting. MR. TROVITCH: Hi,guys, my question is pretty simple. What does the property to the south have right now as a buffer zone? TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I believe it's gravel. But you are open to a i Board of Trustees 52 December 15, 2021 lot of iterations of what constitutes a non-turf buffer. If you look in the Town Code it will show you so you have a lot of variations to what you can use. It doesn't have to be limited to gravel. MR. TROVITCH: Okay, but I'm just trying to figure out why you guys are pushing for a 20 foot on the south as well as the match north? What is your reasoning for the 20 foot instead of a six foot return and ten-foot buffer? TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: So your neighbor already has an established non-turf buffer that is in place, so we would like to keep that line as well as you have a, I don't know what the size cut out is, to the north of that as well. So we need, if it's 20 foot to the south where that cut out is, will more likely be ten feet from that, so just to make it consistent we take a line of 20 feet from the south, run it all the way to the north and that would suffice. MR. TROVITCH: Okay. And you guys don't mind what buffer it is, you just want to see a buffer basically 20 feet now; or is it just the return? TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: A non-turf buffer. MR. TROVITCH: Okay. All right, you got it. Anything else that you guys object to? TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: No, sir, it seems like you can address the vegetation by putting the bulkhead landward of the proposed -- or proposed bulkhead landward of the existing. We would probably stipulate at that point in time that any vegetation that was disturbed would be'replanted in consistency with the DEC permit. MR. TROVITCH: Yes, 100%. You got it. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you, sir. Anyone else here -- MR. KIMACK: You got it, guys. Thank you. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Anyone else who wishes to speak regarding this application? MS. BROWN: Carol Brown, Conservation Advisory Council. When it comes to buffers, what we really prefer to see is a native vegetated non-turf buffer. That would do the best job of mitigating any runoff into the water. So, we'd just like to have that on the record. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak regarding this application? (No response). Any questions or comment from the Board? (Negative response). Hearing none, I make a motion to table this application for the submission of a 20-foot non-turf buffer. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? Board of Trustees 53 December 15, 2021 (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 16, Twin Forks Permits on behalf of SCOTT ROSEN & LORI GOEDERS ROSEN requests a Wetland Permit to construct additions and alterations to the existing 3,742.1 sq.ft. Dwelling consisting of a landward side 27'x7' (184.5 sq. ft.) addition; an approximate 25'x28' varying dimensions (302 sq. ft.) addition onto the southwest corner of the dwelling; construct an approximately 14'x5varying dimension (29.6 sq. ft.) addition to the existing 747 sq. ft. upper-level deck that will have approximately 310 sq. ft. of deck removed in order to accommodate the addition to dwelling; for the existing 267 sq. ft. lower deck to remain; construct a 22'x22' second story addition; relocate existing Bilco doors to accommodate new addition; remove existing septic system and install an I/A septic system; install gutters to leaders to drywells to contain roof runoff; and to install a row of staked hay bales and/or erosion control silt fencing. Located: 850 Lupton Point Road, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-115-11-16 The LWRP found this to be consistent. The Conservation Advisory Council does not support the application due to inadequate setbacks. The Trustees conducted a field inspection December 8th, noting there was concerns about the house going closer than the neighbors. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application? MS. POYER' Lisa Poyer, Twin Forks Permits, on behalf of the applicant. In response to the Trustee inspection, we did submit to the Trustees a pier view or pier ling plan. I believe you are looking at it right now. And if you look at that, the neighbor immediately to the west and the two neighbors to the east, cif you draw a line between those neighbors, you will not exceed the existing pier line between those more seaward neighbors than exists right now. ` TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: There is also, if you draw a line between your immediate adjacent neighbors, you do exceed it. And that's our problem and,concern. MS. POYER: The proposed decision is occurring on the opposite side of that neighbor in question as well as that neighbor has issued a letter in support of the application. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: So we'are in a predicament here because we do not allow new structures seaward of the adjacent neighbors and pier line. So looking at your proposed pier line, there is two, but the correct one is the one that includes the adjacent, immediate adjacent neighbors, where the current structure is at the threshold of that pier line. So the proposed addition would bump out seaward of that. So -- J Board of Trustees 54 December 15, 2021 MS. POYER: We do have letters of support. It's on the opposite side of the residence. It will not impede their view. The house is oriented in such an angle if you stand on their porch and look at the angle of the existing house, it is in line with their view, that exists right now for that corner of the residence. It's such a unique house and its angled in relation to the shoreline and the other adjacent lots. It's not square to the shoreline. We are trying to work what we have as far as the residence and its orientation. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Speaking to your point about the neighbors' letters of support, I could understand if it was, if the structure was say two feet outside of the pier line. And the neighbor who currently lives there supports the application, I could take something like that, possibly. But the issue is, you know, we have to think of every house on this block. We have to think about you future neighbors. So if new people move in next door and now we have established this pier line further seaward then the next two houses can move down, and that's the whole purpose of the pier line is that it's not an average. It's the neighboring property, to avoid everyone marching further seaward. To that point the pier'line.which we take heavily into account, because it does benefit the neighbors, I think it's just a little, I think it would be headed in the wrong direction at this date, point and time, almost 2022, to be moving a house further seaward. That is really not what the Trustees are trying to do in the Town. Environmentally speaking, I mean, we are trying to pull houses back when we do projects and this would not be keeping with best practice of what we have been approving for years. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: And it does seem with the layout, there is plenty of alternatives, and plenty of room to relocate that proposed addition where it would not impede on the pier line. MS. POYER: Based on your comments I would like to request to have the application and we'll go back -- TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Is there anyone else here that wishes to speak? Yes, sir? MR. ROSEN: I'm Scott Rosen. Thank you, for letting me address the Board. So I just want to point out that, as Lisa said, the way the house is oriented, there really would not be any way to extend the, we are basically just trying to make the kitchen and bedroom a little bit larger, they are quite small. I know the plan says something like 3,700 feet. The house is actually 2,100 square feet. And all of the addition was being placed on pre-existing footprint, so there is all decking there, multi-level decking that pre-exists there, which I know you guys Board of Trustees 55 December 15, 2021 saw. And the actual amount of additional space taken up on what would be lawn worked out to about 120 square feet. It's a long triangular area adjacent to the deck that was there. Which I guess, you know, we could be willing to truncate that extra 100 feet. Other than that, almost the whole addition was going on pre-existing footprint. And the trade off, of course, would be that we would then be able to, you know, do a project, change the septic system. We already actually have a 14 foot gravel buffer, and, you know, there really is no other way to do the project or we would. You know, unless we went straight up from where we were, which seems like it would be a worse situation for the neighbors. So, you know, .the way the house exists now, the part that sticks out, the longest part of the house, not the most seaward, from the neighbors view, the part that is sticks out the most is already pre-existing. And so. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else here wishing to speak regarding this application? (No response). Any questions or comments from the Board? (Negative response). Hearing no further questions, I make a motion to table this application at the applicant's request. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Martin Finnegan, Esq. on behalf of 1055 SOUNDVIEW ROAD, LLC, c/o ELIAS & JEANNINE KASSAPIDIS requests a Wetland Permit to demolish existing 3,320sq.ft. One-story dwelling and garage; construct a new two-story dwelling on existing 3,101 sq. ft. footprint consisting of 2,709 sq. ft. on the first level and an additional 2,684sq.ft: On the new second level with a 75 sq. ft. cantilever; removal of 110 sq. ft. bump-out on northeast corner of dwelling; 1,009 sq. ft. of multi-level decking to be replaced with a single level wood deck of the same dimensions, 27'x38'; excavation and removal of approximately 277 cubic yards of fill from within the existing foundation to enlarge basement space; remove existing outdoor shower and install a new chrome shower unit on the west wall of the proposed "pool room" without walls, shower drain to lead to drywell; abandon existing and install a new I/A Wastewater Sanitary system in southeast corner of property; existing 2.3'x30' pool to remain with an 8'x20' rectangle removed reducing the square footage to 530 sq. ft.; the pool is surrounded by a stone terrace 43'x55' less the 16'x24' cutout leaving about Board of Trustees 56 December 15, 2021 1,981 sq. ft. including the pool which will need to be repaired and infill due to construction; existing 4' high pool enclosure fencing to be repaired as needed; existing 6' high and 72' long wood fence including the pool equipment enclosure and entry gates; existing 4'x2' generator on west side; install an additional a/c unit against dwelling; install gutters'to leaders to drywells to contain roof runoff; existing 19.3'x4.6' brick walk and the 8.6'x15.2' concrete block thing will be replaced by a walkway of smaller size; and the 1,400 sq. ft. driveway is to remain. Located: 1055 Sound View Road, Orient. SCTM# 1000-15-3-13 The Trustees most recently visited the site on the 8th of December and noted that we were going to hold for a ten-foot non-turf buffer landward of the bank. The LWRP coordinator found this to be consistent. And the Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support the application. Is there anyone here that wishes to speak regarding this application? MS. CANTRELL: We have Martin ,Finnegan on Zoom. MR. FINNEGAN: Yes, good evening. Thank you very much. It is my honor to be I think what is the last matter that Jay and Mike will preside over. This is not the, hopefully not the most exciting application. We talked about it last week, as you know, this is an application to demolish and reconstruct the single story home that exists on this property and construct a two-story home on the precise footprint that exists, which is about 57 feet from the top of the bank. There is a deck in the back that is a multi-level deck that will be replaced with a single level deck and a small bump out off the rear of the house that will be removed as well. The applicant proposes to install an IA sanitary,system on the southeast corner of the property. And as you also may know, this application went before the Zoning Board and was approved back in December of 2019. There was a de minimis amendment of that approvement just to address a slight change in the design of that bump out. So basically all the other existing improvements will remain. We had the inspection last week and the Trustees had suggested and the applicant has agreed to a ten-foot non-turf buffer just landward of the top of bank, which has been added to our survey which we submitted today for the record. So with that, I would be happy to address any questions the Board has. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Is there anyone else here wishing to speak regarding this application? (Negative response). ,Board of Trustees 57 December 15, 2021 Additional questions or comment from the Board? (Negative response). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: It's your last chance. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I think this might be the next to last attorney I speak with in my capacity as a Trustee. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Hearing no further comments, I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I make a motion to approve this application with the plans stamped received in the office December 15th, 2021. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). Motion to adjourn. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). Respectfully submitted by, Glenn Goldsmith, President Board of Trustees RECEIVED AJAN thold Town Clef