Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-07/13/2022 Glenn Goldsmith,President ``�QF S0 Town Hall Annex A. Nicholas Krupski,Vice President �oV� ®lO 54375 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Eric Sepenoski i Southold, New York 11971 Liz Gillooly G @ Telephone(631) 765-1892 Elizabeth Peeples Fax(631) 765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD RECEIVED Minutes Wednesday, July 13, 2022 AUG 1 8 2022 5:30 PM SOufhold Town Clerk Present Were: Glenn Goldsmith, President A. Nicholas Krupski, Trustee Eric Sepenoski, Trustee Liz Gillooly, Trustee Elizabeth Peeples, Trustee Elizabeth Cantrell, Senior Office Assistant Lori Hulse, Board Counsel CALL MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All right, good evening and welcome to our Wednesday July 13th, 2022 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 is recited) . I'll start off by announcing the people on the dais. To my left we have Trustee Krupski, Trustee Sepenoski, Trustee Gillooly and Trustee Peeples. To my right we have Attorney to the Trustees Lori Hulse. We have Senior Clerk Typist Elizabeth Cantrell, Court Stenographer Wayne Galante, and from the Conservation Advisory Council we have Caroline Burghardt. Agendas for tonight' s meeting are posted on the Town's website as well as hardcopies out in the hallway. We do have a number of postponements tonight. In the agenda on page four, under Amendments, number 1, Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of FOUNDERS LANDING BOAT YARD, LLC requests an Amendment to Wetland Permit #8666 for the as-built 68 ' long solid splashboard system under the offshore fixed finger pier. Located: 2700 Hobart Road & 1000 Terry Lane, Southold. SCTM# 1000-64-3-10 & 1000-64-3-11, is postponed. Under Wetland and Coastal Erosion Permits, number 1, JMO Environmental Consulting on behalf of J. GEDDES PARSONS requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit to remove the existing 5 'x81' fixed dock and piles (16) , 31x20' ramp and Board of Trustees 2 July 13, 2022 9'x18 ' floating dock; construct a proposed 51x81' fixed dock secured by sixteen (16) piles; install a 4 'x16' adjustable ramp; and install an 8'x18.5' floating dock situated in an "I" configuration and secured by four (4) piles; and to replace the five (5) existing tie-off piles as needed. Located: 515 Sterling Street, Fishers Island. SCTM# 1000-10-9-3.1, is also postponed. On page five, number 2, JMO Environmental Consulting on behalf of W. HARBOR BUNGALOW, LLC, c/o CRAIG SCHULTZ requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit for the existing 6.5'x53' fixed dock with a 11'x11' fixed portion in an "L" configuration; existing 3.51x12 ' ramp and existing 8 'x20' floating dock; the 6.5'x53' fixed dock and 11'x11' fixed portion in the "L" configuration to remain; remove existing ramp, float and two piles and install a new 41x20' ramp with rails and an 8'x18' floating dock situated in an "I" configuration secured by four piles; and to install four tie-off piles. Located: 371 Hedge Street, Fishers Island. SCTM# 1000-10-7-18, is postponed. On pages eight through ten, numbers 12 through 23 are postponed. They read as follows: Number 12, Raymond Nemschick, AIA on behalf of ROGER SIEJKA requests a Wetland Permit to construct a two-story, single-family dwelling with a basement; first floor is 24'5" wide by 50' 0" deep; front porch is 11' 0" wide, 6'2" deep; rear veranda (deck) is 24 '5" wide by 10' deep; and overall max height is 32' 3". Located: 955 Blossom Bend, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-115-6-22 . Number 13, Charles Thomas R.A. , PLLC on behalf of MARY HOELTZEL requests a Wetland Permit to demolish existing 28 'x59. 6' dwelling to first floor deck and demolish existing 20'x20.2 ' detached garage; construct a proposed 32'x104 .2 ' (2,278sq.ft. ) two-story dwelling with seaward side covered porch and attached garage consisting of the proposed dwelling to be 32 'x63.4 ' , proposed attached garage to be 221x31' ; the proposed dwelling will be using the same foundation and first floor deck of existing dwelling with additions to the east and north; construct a proposed 10. 6'x29' covered porch with a 10. 6'x29' second story balcony above; a proposed 14. 6'x26. 4 ' patio on east side and partially covered by a second story bump-out; construct a 5'x8 . 6' covered front porch; and for the existing 7 . 10'x12.4 ' shed landward of dwelling to remain. Located: 6190 Great Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel. SCTM# 1000-128-2-5, is postponed. Number 14, Suffolk Environmental Consulting on behalf of TOWN CREEK REAL ESTATE, INC. , c/o MICHAEL LIEGY requests a Wetland Permit to construct a proposed 251x50' two-story, single-family dwelling with attached 20'x20' garage; install a pervious driveway; install a new I/A OWTS system; and to install gutters to leaders to drywells to contain roof runoff. Located: 480 Ackerly Pond Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-69-3-13 is postponed Number 15, En-Consultants on behalf of DANIEL McGOVERN & CATHERINE LUCARELLI requests a Wetland Permit to remove existing Board of Trustees 3 July 13, 2022 31x4 .5' steps, and construct a fixed timber dock with water and electricity consisting of a 4'x60' fixed timber catwalk (53' seaward of bulkhead) , constructed with untreated decking (including open-grate decking at least 15' seaward of bulkhead) , with two (2) 41x6' steps for beach access; a 3'x14 ' hinged ramp; and a 6'x20' floating dock situated in an "L" shaped configuration and secured by two (2) 8" diameter pilings. Located: 830 Oak Avenue, Southold. SCTM# 1000-77-1-4 Number 16, SLATTERY NASSAU POINT TRUST requests a Wetland Permit to replace the existing 41x16' set of stairs; 121x18 ' deck; and 4 'x32' walk; deck and walk are 30" AGL. Located: 460 West Cove Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-111-2-6 Number 17, East End Pool King on behalf of KIERAN COLLINGS requests a Wetland Permit to install a proposed 16'x32' vinyl swimming pool with approximately 1,300sq.ft. at grade patio; install pool enclosure fencing; install a drywell for pool waste water; and install a pool equipment area. Located: 3960 Ole Jule Lane, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-122-4-26. 1 Number 18, En-Consultants on behalf of ELIAS DAGHER requests a Wetland Permit to remove existing wood platform, walk and steps; construct a fixed timber dock with water and electricity consisting of a 4 'x74 ' fixed timber catwalk constructed with open-grate decking; with two (2) 41x6' steps for beach access; a 3'x14 ' hinged ramp; and a 6'x20' floating dock situated in a "T" configuration and secured by two (2) 8" diameter pilings. Located: 90 Oak Avenue, Southold. SCTM# 1000-77-2-6 Number 19, BRIDGET CLARK requests a Wetland Permit for the existing 20'3"x22' 4" (452sq.ft. ) detached garage and to convert it into an accessory apartment by replacing existing windows, exterior door, add plumbing to connect to existing septic, and install a wall mounted electric heating unit. Located: 7825 Soundview Avenue, Southold. SCTM# 1000-59-6-15 Number 20, Michael Kimack on behalf of NUNNAKOMA WATERS ASSOCIATION, INC. requests a Wetland Permit to perform work on the property located at 645 Wampum Way (1000-87-2-42.3) , consisting of installing 235 linear feet of Shore Guard 9900 vinyl hybrid low-sill bulkhead with helical supports installed at discretion of contractor; restore approximately 200 linear feet of eroded bank with 90-100 cubic yards of sand recovered from storm deposit area; install filter fabric (±1, 600sq.ft. ) , and plant American Beach grass @ 18" on center (±1, 200 plants) over restored bank area; construct storm water concrete diversion swale (10'x43' , 430sq.ft. ) with rip-rap runoff area (10'x20' , 200sq.ft. ) , consisting of 50-150 lb. Stones set on filter fabric; the storm washed sand area is to be restored to the original grade line and the removed sand (90-100 cubic yards) is to be used on site to restore the eroded bank area; on all three properties, dredge a portion of Moyle Cove to deepen channel in three (3) areas, AA, BB and CC to a depth of -4 . 00ft. (Approx. 365 cubic yards) , and area DD to a depth of -3. 00ft. (Approx. 85 cubic yards) , for a total dredging of approximately 450 cubic yards; the dredge spoils is proposed to be spread on the two Sauer properties (255 Wigwam Way, SCTM# 1000-87-2-40. 1 & Board of Trustees 4 July 13, 2022 175 Wigwam Way, SCTM# 1000-87-2-40.2) , in an area of approximately 8, 000 sq.ft. And to a depth of approximately 1.5ft. ; the dredged spoils placement area will be surrounded by a silt fence with hay bales to be kept in place and maintained until the spoils are de-watered. Located: 645 Wampum Way, 255 Wigwam Way & 175 Wigwam Way, Southold. SCTM's 1000-87-2-42.3, 1000-87-2-40. 1 & 1000-87.-2-40.2 Number 21, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of SADIK HALIT LEGACY TRUST requests a Wetland Permit for the as-built bluff stairs consisting of the following: 41x4 ' at-grade top landing to an 8, 2'x9.5' upper platform to 181x4' steps down to an 81x3. 8 ' middle platform to 161x4' steps down to a 19.41x10' lower platform to 14.51x4 ' steps down to beach; all decking on structure is of untreated lumber. Located: 2200 Sound Drive, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-33-1-16 Number 22, 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. Located: 3875 Main Bayview Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-78-2-15 .1 And number 23, 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 31x16' 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 Under Town Code Chapter 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 applications. I. NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: At this time I'll make a motion to hold our next field inspection on Tuesday, August 9, 2022, at 8: 00 AM. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . II. NEXT TRUSTEE MEETING: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I' ll make a motion to hold our next Trustee meeting Wednesday, August 17th, 2022, at 5:30 PM, at the Town Hall Main Meeting Hall. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . Board of Trustees 5 July 13, 2022 III. WORK SESSIONS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I'll make a motion to hold our next work session Monday, August 15th, 2022, at 5:00 PM, at the Town Hall Annex 2nd floor Executive Board Room, and on Wednesday, August 17, 2022, at 5:00 PM at the Main Town Hall Meeting Hall. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . IV. MINUTES: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I'll make a motion to approve the Minutes of the June 15th, 2022 meeting. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . V. MONTHLY REPORT: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: The Trustees monthly report for June, 2022, a check for $5, 481.78 was forwarded to the Supervisor' s Office for the General Fund. VI. PUBLIC NOTICES: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Public Notices are posted on the Town Clerk' s Bulletin Board for review. VII. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEWS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Roman numeral VII, State Environment Quality Reviews, RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold hereby finds that the following applications more fully described in Section X Public Hearings section of the Trustee agenda dated Wednesday, July 13, 2022, are classified as Type II Actions pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations, and are not subject to further review under SEQRA. That is my motion, and they are listed as follows: Carole Bradley SCTM# 1000-57-2-17 John Londono & Courtney Kelso SCTM# 1000-113-9-11 William Frank SCTM# 1000-66-3-7 Stirling Basin, LLC SCTM# 1000-34-5-21 1260 Jackson Street, LLC, c/o Valerie Marvin, Managing Member SCTM# 1000-117-10-9.2 John M. Carroll & Amelia Murphy SCTM# 1000-43-5-4 Stephen & Fortune Mandaro SCTM# 1000-31-16-7 9450 Main Bayview, LLC SCTM# 1000-87-5-22 TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . Board of Trustees 6 July 13, 2022 VIII. RESOLUTIONS - ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Roman numeral VIII, Resolutions - Administrative Permits. In order to simplify our meetings, the Board of Trustees regularly group together actions that are minor or similar in nature. Accordingly, I'll make a motion to approve as a group items 1 through 4 as follows: Number 1, SOFIA ANTONIADIS requests an Administrative Permit to conduct construction activity within 100' from bulkhead for the addition to first floor and second floor of dwelling. Located: 12500 Main Road, East Marion. SCTM# 1000-31-14-7 Number 2, ANNAMARIE IERACI & JOHN NASTASI request an Administrative Permit to install an 181x20' stone paver patio. Located: 706 Wiggins Lane, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-35-4-18 Number 3, ROBERT & DONNA DRUMMOND request an Administrative Permit for the replacement of existing sanitary system with a new Innovative & Alternative Wastewater Treatment System further landward than existing, as previously approved under Emergency Permit #9804E. Located: 675 Private Road #12, a/k/a Windy Point Lane, Southold. SCTM# 1000-87-4-7 Number 4, CUTCHOGUE NEW SUFFOLK PARK DISTRICT c/o DAVID BERGEN, COMMISSIONER requests an Administrative Permit for a Ten (10) year Maintenance Permit to trim vegetation at top of bank to no lower than three (3) feet. Located: 55 West Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-110-7-13 TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . IX. APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS/TRANSFERS/ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENTS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Roman numeral IX, Applications for Extension, Transfers and Administrative Amendments. Again, in order to simplify our meeting, I 'll make a motion to approve as a group items 1, 3 through 7, 9 and 10. They are listed as follows: Number 1, 1050 WEST COVE ROAD LLC requests the Last One (1) Year Extension to Wetland Permit #9501, as issued on July 17, 2019 and amended on September 18, 2019. Located: 1050 West Cove Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-111-5-1 Number 3, PILLAR K. WILLUMSTAD requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit #7024 from Varujan Arslanyan to Pillar K. Willumstad, as issued on October 15, 2008. Located: 1280 Sage Blvd. , Greenport. SCTM# 1000-53-5-10 Number 4, PILLAR K. WILLUMSTAD requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit #4259 from Joseph W. Suda to Pillar K. Willumstad, as issued on December 7, 1993. Located: 1280 Sage Blvd. , Greenport. SCTM# 1000-53-5-10 Number 5, SANGROK LEE requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit #10096 from Albert W. Selden, Jr. & Christian Rasmussen to Board of Trustees 7 July 13, 2022 Sangrok Lee, as issued on March 16, 2022 . Located: 200 Beebe Drive, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-97-7-1 Number 6, 622 CHURCH LANE LLC requests a, Transfer of Wetland Permit #9214 from 2 Peconic Road, LLC to 622 Church Lane LLC, as issued on April 18, 2018 . Located: 1625 Naugles Drive, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-99-4-18 Number 7, 622 CHURCH LANE LLC requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit #9215 from 2 Peconic Road, LLC to 622 Church Lane LLC, as issued on April 18, 2018. Located: 1625 Naugles Drive, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-99-4-18 Number 9, En-Consultants on behalf of GAYLE MARRINER-SMITH & CHRISTOPHER F. SMITH requests an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit #10080 for the relocation of the 41x10 ' step-down platform from the north side to the east side/seaward end of the 4 'x13' fixed dock, in a "T" configuration. Located: 2555 Kirkup Lane, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-121-3-8 Number 10, SHEENA ACHARYA & ADRIAN SAPOLLNIK request an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit #9860 for the on-grade 8 'x12' platform with the addition of eleven (11) steps leading to it; in lieu of the permitted 101x10' on-grade platform. Located: 645 Glen Court, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-83-1-7 TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 2, En-Consultants on behalf of NORTH PARISH DRIVE, LLC requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit #10124 from John & Lynn Scott to North Parish Drive, LLC, as issued on April 13, 2022. Located: 495 North Parish Drive, Southold. SCTM# 1000-71-1-5 Unfortunately, this file came in late and we did not have a chance to conduct a field inspection, therefore I make a motion to table this application. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 8, William C. Goggins, on behalf of MAIA KHUTSISHVILI requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit #63-7-38 from Janet Knight to Maia Khutsishvili, as issued on March 11, 1993; and for an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit #63-7-38 for the existing 14.5 'x22.8 ' boathouse, with walkway leading to a 4 'x121 ' dock in lieu of the previously approved 4 'x105 ' dock. Located: 1645 Calves Neck Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-63-7-38 Trustee Gillooly conducted a field inspection and upon her field inspection noticed that the dock was not the same size as what was on the permit. So we requested some new plans to show the new dock, unfortunately the new plans came in without dimensions. So I will make a motion to table this application for submission of a new survey showing the dimensions of the dock, the steps and the walkway. Board of Trustees 8 July 13, 2022 TRUSTEE KRUPSkI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 11, PHILIP & LIA CHASEN request an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit #10095 for the as-built increased square footage of the pool patio to 2245 sq.ft in lieu of the previously approved 1850 sq.ft. ; as-built 75'3" x 1613" retaining wall with a 4 ' non-turf pathway seaward of retaining wall; establish and perpetually maintain the entire property seaward of pathway as a vegetated non-turf buffer; install 175' of fencing surrounding patio and on the retaining wall; proposed pool house (350sq.ft. ) Not to be constructed. Located: 1585 Long Creek Drive, Southold. SCTM# 1000-55-7-3 The Trustees have been to this site numerous times. We requested some new plans showing a vegetated non-turf buffer. The new plans that we received unfortunately did not adequately address our concerns. It didn't match what we had spoken about in the field. Therefore, I 'll make a motion to table this application for submission of new plans. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . X. PUBLIC HEARINGS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Roman numeral X, Public Hearings, at this time I make a motion to go off regular meeting agenda and enter into Public Hearings. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . 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. WETLAND PERMITS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Wetland Permits, number 1, Nigel R. Williamson on behalf of JOSEPH & DEBORAH POLIDORA requests a Wetland Permit to demolish existing one-story entrance and construct a new 6'x24 . 6' one-story entrance to dwelling with a basement under (same footprint) ; construct a new 4 . 81x8 . 9' enclosed addition connecting the existing dwelling to existing 489.25sq.ft. , 1.5 story garage; construct a new 4.0'x10.5 ' covered entry porch; construct a 4 . 6'x4. 6' outdoor shower (open to the sky) ; demolish existing 8.8 'x24 .4 ' seaward side covered porch and construct a new 18. 67'x38.0' single-story addition with basement under and 4 .0'x4 . 0' egress window; the total Board of Trustees 9 July 13, 2022 square footage of existing and proposed dwelling habitable area is 1, 682.58sq.ft. ; construct a new 383sq. ft. stone patio in between the new addition and garage; remove existing cesspool and existing boulder retaining wall closest to dwelling on seaward side, install a new I/A OWTS system with a waterproofed 66.0' long retaining wall with a 19' westerly return and a 17 ' easterly return to retain the proposed I/A sanitary system; and create a 4 . 0' wide pervious access path with stepping stones to creek. Located: 1055 Point Pleasant Road, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-114-1-1 MR. WILLIAMSON: Good evening, Board members. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: The LWRP found this project to be consistent. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support the application with a non-turf buffer planted with native vegetation. The Trustees most recently conducted a field inspection July 16th, 2022, noting the revised plans and project description that were both received June 24th, 2022, seem to address the issue that we were having with the house exceeding the pier line. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application? MR. WILLIAMSON: Nigel Robert Williamson, for Mr. and Mrs. Polidora. I believe all your issues from the last time were addressed. The building was moved behind the pier line. There was a new addition to the east side, and the septic, the IA septic, retaining wall, remained in its existing, or in its previous location. And everything else is being forward of the front of the house. There is a new addition on the front six feet by, 6'x16. 1' , and the covered porch got moved further to the west end side. And would you like me to read the project description out again or not really. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: That's okay, we have it in the file, stamped received June 24th, 2022. And I will read it when we get to it. MR. WILSON: And it was provided by Angelo, AJC Land Surveying was the revised survey from June 16th, 2022. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: One thing, I guess amongst all the visits and everything, the pier line, one thing that we did forget to address was the non-turf buffer. Looking at the plans, it looks like you do have a pretty extensive natural vegetation line already existing. So potentially can we look for a ten-foot vegetated non-turf buffer, ten-foot landward of that vegetation line as depicted on your June 24th, 2022 survey? MR. WILLIAMSON: (No response) . TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: So between your proposed retaining wall and say west, you see where you have the line for the natural vegetation, kind of going down the bank? MR. WILLIAMSON: Right. Right by the gazebo. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Yes. MR. WILLIAMSON: So, sorry, Mr. Goldsmith, what are you looking for? Board of Trustees 10 July 13, 2022 TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: A ten-foot vegetated non-turf buffer. If we can get new plans that show a ten-foot buffer from the natural vegetation line landward toward the house. MR. WILLIAMSON: So up onto the retaining wall. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Yes. MR. WILLIAMSON: Okay, okay. And may I approach you just one minute, please. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: As long as you don't bite. MR. WILLIAMSON: We were just talking about from this point here. From here. Ten feet there (indicating) . TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Yes. So on this section you might not get ten feet because you are coming to the retaining wall. So, from there to there, if you take this vegetation line that is depicted on your survey, do a ten-foot line around it and just call that out as a non-turf buffer. MR. WILLIAMSON: Okay, because my client was proposing, in I guess the hatched area, native plantings and everything else to the retaining wall. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: So if you want to just submit new plans that show that as a non-turf buffer. The only thing we don't want is just manicured lawn in that area. MR. WILLIAMSON: Right, right. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Okay, anyone else here wishing to speak regarding this application? (Negative response) . Any questions or comments from the Board? (Negative response) . Hearing none, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . MR. WILLIAMSON: Thank you. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion to approve this application with the new plans submitted June 24th, 2022, and the new project description which reads as follows: Demolish the existing single-story entrance and bathroom and construct a new single-story foyer, bathroom and basement under; construct a 16.1'x6' addition to the existing one-story structure on the west; construct a new covered entry porch; construct a new enclosed connection between the new foyer and existing garage as a laundry area; demolish the existing covered porch at the rear of the dwelling; and construct a new 9.7 'x24. 4' single-story addition with basement under; construct a new 16.5'x26. 5' addition with basement under at the rear of the garage; construct a window well from the new basement; remove the existing cesspool and install a new IA/OWTS system enclosed with a new concrete retaining wall; drywells, new well and also that the land seaward of the retaining wall be depicted as a non-turf buffer. That is my motion. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI : Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . MR. WILLIAMSON: Thank you. Board of Trustees 11 July 13, 2022 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Number 2, Patricia Moore, Esq. on behalf of JOHN COSENZA requests a Wetland Permit to establish and perpetually maintain a Non-Disturbance area seaward of the top of bluff with existing vegetation to remain natural with selective hand pruning in order to maintain view shed; establish and perpetually maintain a 10' wide Non-Turf Buffer at top of bluff planted with ground cover with a mix of native grasses and native species; remove existing flagpole; remove existing 411" high stone retaining wall to allow natural slopes to be regraded and place 21x3' natural boulders stacked to maintain natural grade; install new 6" high by 7 ' wide natural split face bluestone slabs placed at grade for steps (two steps 7 ' 61Ix6") , and following the natural grade; regrade to establish natural slopes; curbs along natural grade, each curb l' high split face bluestone curb and 4" wide with 6" steps embedded in the slope, 5 curbs in total, each curb along elevation 79 is 6 linear feet, curb at elevation 78 is 24 linear feet, curb at elevation 77 is 34 linear feet, curb at elevation 76 is 42 linear feet, and lowest curb at elevation 75 is 24 linear feet; 10' and 50 linear feet of existing section of retaining wall along easterly property line to be repaired, alternating flag stone steps (3'x3' ) and 3'x6' (26 steps in total) ; regrade east side yard of property for placement of pathway with 31x3' flagstone pavers and 3'x6' , 26 pavers stone pavers set into the slope and level with the retaining wall (grade rising from elevation 66 to elevation 72 on north) ; plant slope with new native species along east side of property; along west side of property plant native trees and vegetation to thicken existing vegetation, 26 stone pavers walkway (3'x3' stones) to existing beach access; at 70' from top of bluff replace existing terrace and expand existing stone terrace (total size 700sq.ft. ) ; and repair existing concrete block wall on west side of property line; in front yard install a new gravel parking area with Belgian block curb to match driveway. Located: 1700 Hyatt Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-50-1-5 The Trustees most recently visited this location on the 6th of July and noted that we would review the plans further at work session. As noted, prior to this hearing, in hearings past, the LWRP coordinator found this to be inconsistent due to the lack of non-turf buffer, the pruning in the area, and the particular plantings that were defined in the initial application. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved not to support the application due to the clearing at the top of the bluff and noted they should be replaced and replanted with the same diameter trees. It should be noted for the record that the Board is in receipt of new plans stamped May 18th, 2022, which they have reviewed at work session, as well as the new project description stamped received June 17th, 2022, both of which show the size of the non-turf buffer increasing and the non-disturbance buffer seaward. Is there anyone here that wishes to speak regarding this application? MS. MOORE: Yes. Patricia Moore, on behalf of Mr. Cosenza. Thank you, those are the plans that are before you, so I just need any Board of Trustees 12 July 13, 2022 comments or -- TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Is there anyone else here that wishes to speak regarding this application? (Negative response) . Any additional comments from the Board? (Negative response) . It should be noted that the Board has gone over this application for quite a few months and tried to work with the applicant to come up with the plans that were recently submitted. Hearing no further comments, I make a motion to close the hearing on this application. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I make a motion to approve the application with the following stipulations: That the pool is tied into a drywell no further seaward than the pool itself. That the pool equipment is located no further seaward than the pool itself, and be surrounded with noise-canceling structures or plantings. That no permanent irrigation or fertilizers are utilized seaward of the retaining wall. With the new plans stamped received by the office May 18th, 2022, with the new project description stamped received June 17th, 2022, which will be read as follows: Non-disturbance area seaward of top of bluff with existing vegetation to remain natural. Additional 30' non-disturbance area to be planted with drought-tolerant native grasses and perennials. Landward of non-disturbance buffer, a non-turf/no-mow zone will be planted with drought-tolerant native grasses and perennials up to retaining wall. Above planting as detailed in planting plan dated May 12th, 2022, received -May 18th, 2022. Irrigation landward of top of bluff until vegetation is established only. Remove existing flagpole. Pathway through non-disturbance buffer with 26 stone pavers, (31x3' stones) to existing beach access. Repair 4 ' 1" high stone retaining wall located landward of non-turf buffer. Place existing clean fill and topsoil (from the excavation of pool) and regrade rear yard landward of retaining wall to bring to grade to the height of house terrace (average height of terrace above grade is two feet) . Two drywells in rear yard to capture all runoff. 75' from top of bluff plunge pool angled width 713" to 5'2" to 318 1/2" by 22 ' , and maintain 307 square feet existing terrace. Regrade east side yard of property for placement of pathway with 3'x3' flagstone pavers and 3'x6' . Board of Trustees 13 July 13, 2022 26 stone pavers set into the slope and level with the retaining wall (grade rising from elevation 66 to elevation 72 on north) to tie into existing retaining wall. Plant slope with new native species along east side of property and proposed stone pavers set into slope. Along west side of property, plant native trees and vegetation to thicken existing vegetation. Repair existing concrete block wall on west side of property line. In front yard (beyond 100 feet) , new gravel parking area with Belgian block curb to match driveway. With the new plans and project description that will thereby bring this project into consistency with the LWRP coordinator. That is my motion. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Number 3, En-Consultants on behalf of 1260 JACKSON STREET, LLC, c/o VALERIE MARVIN, MANAGING MEMBER requests a Wetland Permit to remove and replace in-place approximately 58 linear feet of existing timber bulkhead and ±6 linear foot long return with a vinyl bulkhead and return; backfill with up to 15 cubic yards of clean sandy fill to be trucked in from an upland source; and to remove and replace in-place existing ±3'x4' wood steps to beach. Located: 1260 Jackson Street, New Suffolk. SCTM# 117-10-9.2 The LWRP resolved to support this application, found it consistent. And the Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support the application as well. The Trustees most recently visited the site on July 6th, 2022, and field notes from that visit read straightforward bulkhead replacement, protect existing vegetation. Mr. Krupski' s handwriting is illegible. What is pink stake and what is access. But you should see my handwriting. We have stamped plans -- Mr. Herrmann, these are the May 27th plans? MR. HERRMANN: Well, they are dated May 17th. I don't know what date they are stamped in. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Stamped in May 27th, 2022 . And is there anyone here that wishes to speak regarding this application? MR. HERRMANN: Yes. Thank you, Eric. Rob Herrmann of En-Consultants on behalf of the applicant. It is a straightforward bulkhead replacement for the portion of the bulkhead that is exposed on the subject property. The area immediately behind it is generally flat, particularly between the bulkhead and the accessory structure located behind it. Most of the vegetation within that area is a privet hedge that will be removed. Of course all that area will be disturbed, and we show that 12-foot wide area behind that replacement bulkhead to be maintained permanently as a non-turf buffer. Access will come from the bay by barge, which is noted in the top left corner of the locator map on sheet one. And the stake that Nick saw, I'm guessing what it is, it' s unrelated to Board of Trustees 14 July 13, 2022 this project. There is an adjacent parcel here to the west where we are in the planning stage of putting together an embankment stair, and I believe either the landscape architect or surveyor had recently set a couple of stakes at the top and bottom trying to figure out the best location for that stairwell. So that' s probably what you saw but would be unrelated to this application. You'll see it eventually, but not yet. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Okay. Any questions or comments from the Board? TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Just one question. The beach cottage, the 12 feet from the bulkhead, do you trust that this work can be done without compromising that? MR. HERRMANN: So, that' s a good question, Liz. If you look at the page, sheet two of the plan, it'll show that the backing system here is proposed as helical anchors as opposed to traditional lay log and dead men, and the reason for that is they don't want to excavate that whole area substantially in order to put in a lay logs and dead men, which could compromise the integrity of the structure. So they have designed around that. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Thank you. MR. HERRMANN: You bet. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Any other questions or comments from the Board? (Negative response) . Hearing none, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: I make a motion to approve this application, stipulating to protect any vegetation during that construction. That is my motion. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second. All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: En-Consultants on behalf of JOHN M. CARROLL & AMELIA MURPHY requests a Wetland Permit to raise in-place existing 1 and 2 story dwelling by approximately 2. 8' to FEMA compliant elevation; construct a 459 second floor addition over one-story portion of dwelling and covered porch in place of existing roof deck; construct a 5. 11x18 .5' extension of covered porch with 6'x6' steps and new roof deck above; construct a 5'x13.5' covered front entry porch with 61x6' steps and 4'x13' open-roofed pergola; replace existing outdoor shower with a 5.7 'x9. 6' outdoor shower enclosure over gravel base and piped to proposed drainage system; install 21x2 ' paver stone walkways; expand existing pervious gravel driveway; remove existing conventional septic system and install new I/A OWTS sanitary system; install stormwater drainage system; and establish and perpetually maintain a 10' wide non-turf buffer along the landward edge of the tidal wetland boundary. Located: 230 Inlet Lane, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-43-5-4 The Trustees most recently visited this site on July 6th, Board of Trustees 15 July 13, 2022 2022, noting non-disturbance seaward of existing line of vegetation, ten-foot non-turf landward from existing line. Since that note I am in receipt of new plans state stamp dated received July 6th, 2022, which depict the changes that were requested. The LWRP reviewed this application and found it to be consistent. And the Conservation Advisory Council reviewed this application and resolved to support the application, observing -- with one note. They observed the higher elevation of the neighboring property and asked the applicant to consider raising the dwelling to the same height, plus or minus two feet. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application? MR. HERRMANN: Yes, Rob Herrmann of En-Consultants on behalf of applicant. Liz, I want to check, it sounded like you said received July 6th. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Is that not the most recent one? MR. HERRMANN: Well, Liz just stamped them in about a minute ago TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Okay, so July 13th. MR. HERRMANN: I was wondering if someone else had beaten me to the punch. So, in brief, yes, this is an application that will raise in place an existing structure from a FEMA non-compliant elevation to a FEMA compliant elevation, with the construction of a second floor within the footprint of the existing first floor, and associated extension of the covered porch that will remain behind the seaward projection of the existing dwelling. As we discussed in the field, the Board had requested that a ten-foot wide, non-turf buffer be added to the landward side of the existing edge of lawn. It could be landward of the existing landward limit of natural vegetation, up until where the natural vegetation took a sharp turn to the west and toward the road. Miraculously, we were able to get Peconic Surveyors to shoot that edge of lawn since we met last week and the revised site plan that I just discussed with Liz shows that non-turf buffer. In addition, the Board had requested that we show the area of existing natural vegetation between the edge of lawn and the tidal wetland boundary to remain and be memorialized permanently as a non-disturbance buffer. So both of those labels have been added to the plan, and that is the one last dated July 12th, 2022, which I had e-mailed to Liz either yesterday or the day before. The hard copies just got stamped in now. So we did make those changes. I think that' s all I have. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: That' s correct. Sorry, I had reviewed that plan, and it was stamped received July 12th, in the office but it was received by e-mail, so this is our first time seeing the whole plan. MR. HERRMANN: Correct. MEMBER GILLOOLY: Is there anyone else here wishing to speak regarding this application? (Negative response) . Board of Trustees 16 July 13, 2022 Any questions or comments from the Board? (Negative response) . Hearing none, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: I make a motion to approve this application with the new plans stamped received July 13th. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . MR. HERRMANN: Thank you. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Number 5, David Bergen on behalf of WILLIAM FRANK requests a Wetland Permit to replace existing bulkhead in-place with 88 ' of new bulkhead using vinyl sheathing; 10" diameter pilings installed 6' on-center; 3 rows of 6"x6" whalers; 16' long tie-rods leading to vertical dead-men with horizontal lay-log; install a non-treated lumber cap with four (4) pilings elevated to approximately 8 ' above grade to secure a boat in middle of bulkhead; install two swim/safety ladders; install water and electric to bulkhead; install and perpetually maintain a 15' wide non-turf buffer along the landward edge of the bulkhead to match adjoining neighbor; reclamation of dredging along total length of bulkhead to a depth of 2 ' at Mean Low Water; approximately 10 cubic yards of dredge material to be used to fill holes behind bulkhead. Located: 1255 Arshamomaque Avenue, Southold. SCTM# 1000-66-3-7 The Trustees most recently visited this site on the 6th of July, and noted that the application appears straightforward. The LWRP finds this application consistent. In the event the action is approved, an alternative to CCA treated pilings is recommended, and turbidity controls are required. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this application, and they noted the support with the following conditions: 15-foot non-turf buffer planted with native vegetation; exterior lighting to be Dark Skies compliant; size of the vessel moored next to the bulkhead to be no larger than ten feet; three, four-foot drywells installed parallel to shed/bathroom; installation of a four-foot drywell along the southern corner of the dwelling, and the dredging is consistent with NYS DEC regulations. And I do have a permit here, a general permit for the bulkhead replacement with dredging from the New York State Department of Environmental Conversation, stamped received dated July 11th, 2022, that notes approval from the New York State DEC. And the plans I have stamped dated June 7th, in regard to this application. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak in regard to this application? MR. BERGEN: Good evening. Dave Bergen on behalf of William Frank. As you alluded to, this is a straightforward bulkhead replacement of approximately 80 feet of bulkhead with minimal reclamation dredging. This bulkhead was previously permitted Board of Trustees 17 July 13, 2022 from the Trustees back in ' 87. It did get permission from Mr. John Nichols who owns the underwater lands there and the pond. As you mentioned we have a DEC GP permit, and so I'm here to answer any questions you might have. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: You just noted that there was an approval or permission from the owner. Is this what I have dated July 8th in here, from Frost Road Associates? MR. BERGEN: Yes, President John Nichols. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Great. Thank you, very much. I just wanted confirmation. I do see that in the file. Thank you. Is there anyone else here who wishes to speak in regard to this application? (No response) . Any other questions or comments from the Board? (Negative response) . Hearing no further comments, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE PEEPLES: I make a motion to approve this application. And that is my motion. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 6, David Bergen on behalf of STIRLING BASIN, LLC requests a Wetland Permit to remove and replace failing bulkhead and return consisting of an approximately 10' northern return, an approximate 76' long north bulkhead leading to an approximately 12' long bulkhead to an approximate 90' southern bulkhead consisting of vinyl sheathing, 12" diameter pilings 6' on-center; 3/8"x8" timber whalers, tie rods leading to helical screws with wood cap over entire bulkhead; project included existing 61x7.5' platform supporting a 10' long aluminum ramp and a 14' long aluminum ramp, all to be removed for construction then put back in same location post construction; remove existing first and second floor deck to accommodate bulkhead construction; maintain existing non-turf buffer; for the reclamation dredging to a depth of four feet at Mean Low Water along entire length of bulkheads with approximately 40 cubic yards of material to be used to fill holes behind bulkhead with balance of material to be trucked to an approved offsite location. Located: 1100 Manhanset Avenue, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-34-5-21 The LWRP found this project to be consistent, just noting the use of turbidity controls required. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support the application. The Trustees conducted a field inspection July 6th, noting that it seemed straightforward. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application? MR. BERGEN: Dave Bergen, on behalf of Stirling Basin LLC, and we Board of Trustees 18 July 13, 2022 have already noted everything on the record. This is zoned into a commercial establishment, and so it has previous Trustee permits for this, which is replacing things that have already been approved. If have you any questions, I'm here to answer them. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Is there anyone else here wishing to speak regarding this application? (No response) . Any questions or comments from the Board? TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Just one brief question. It says that the decks will be removed. Will they also be replaced? MR. BERGEN: There will be an application in the Building Department for that, yes. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Okay. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Any other questions? (Negative response) . Hearing no further questions, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion to approve this application with the condition that turbidity controls are used during construction. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . MR. BERGEN: Thank you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI : Number 7, AMP Architecture on behalf of STEPHEN & FORTUNE MANDARO requests a Wetland Permit for the existing one-story wood frame dwelling 22 .8 'x36. 9' (840sq. ft. ) ; existing entry vestibule 4 .3'x8. 4' (35sq. ft. ) ; existing entry stoop and steps 3. 0'x5.0' (15sq.ft. ) ; the existing wood deck with proposed screened-in porch 12.2 'x13. 9' (170sq.ft. ) ; and a proposed covered porch 9.0'x12.2 ' (110sq. ft. ) . Located: 2370 Bay Avenue, East Marion. SCTM# 1000-31-16-7 The Trustees most recently visited the property on the 6th of July, noted that it was a straightforward application. The LWRP found this to be inconsistent. The structure is located within FEMA A flood zone, and 81.2 feet from Gardiners Bay. The structure in this area should be minimized to prevent exposure to flooding and damage, and repetitive loss over time. And the Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support the application with the installation of gutters to leaders to drywells to contain storm water runoff. Is there anyone here that wishes to speak regarding this application? MR. PORTILLO: How are you, Board. Hope you are having a good evening. We have received approval for this -- well, let me describe it, I guess. So there is an existing deck on the property. It's off of the, basically the side of the house, but it' s pretty much their main entrance. They would like to cover the deck and then a portion Board of Trustees 19 July 13, 2022 of it is being closed in, but more of a three-season room. It's unheated. It would be finished like with possibly p-board or something like that on the walls, and maybe some sort of ceiling finish. But it will still remain a deck underneath. It will be an open structure. So the idea is to build on top of that. We did file with New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, and we have approval there. And we did have to go to Zoning and we did receive approval from Zoning as well. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Okay, thank you. MR. PORTILLO: One thing, just to let the Board know, Zoning did have, did ask that the rafters stay open, but we went back and wrote a letter, we gave it to Kim, to the administrative office, and they are reviewing that to basically -- they might hopefully would amend that request, because we are not putting in any heat, we are not insulating it. It's just closed from the wind and insects and stuff like that. That' s the purpose of it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. I would also just recommend doing gutters to leaders to drywells on the property. MR. PORTILLO: Not a problem. We'll take care of that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI : Thank you. Is there anyone else here wishing to speak to this application, or any additional comments from the Board? (Negative response) . Hearing none, I make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I make a motion to approve this application with the stipulation of stainless steel hardware to prevent storm damage, thereby bringing it into consistency with the LWRP coordinator. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second. All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Number 8, AMP Architecture on behalf of 9450 MAIN BAYVIEW, LLC requests a Wetland Permit to construct a proposed 16'x59' (945sq.ft. ) two-story dwelling on a proposed 10"x10" concrete piers upon helical piles (24 total) foundation with Azek Break-Away walls; a proposed a 61x22 .3' (135sq.ft. ) wood cantilevered deck; and a proposed 3 'x14 .7 ' (45sq. ft. ) cantilevered front entry deck; install a new I/A OWTS sanitary system buried at front/side of property; install a 560sq.ft. Gravel driveway; install (1) 6'x4' deep drywell and (1) 6'x5' deep drywell located at front and side of property; install (1) 1, 000 gallon propane tank at front of property; and install buried utility connections at front of property. Located: 9450 Main Bayview Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-87-5-22 The LWRP found this proposed project to be inconsistent. The inconsistency stems from a number of concerns, which are as follows: New York State DEC permit does not current single family home configuration. Note the lot coverage calculation is incorrect. Lot coverage is calculated for buildable land only, subtracting all wetland areas from total parcel acreage. The straight line showing the northwest delineation line of the Board of Trustees 20 July 13, 2022 freshwater wetland is odd and requires verification from 1962 aerial photo below, included in this finding, shows a more circular wetland. Further, the wetland seems larger than depicted in the file. These sets of freshwater wetland expand and contract seasonally, due to the hydro-period indicative of this area. Test hole data shows water encountered at four-and-a-half feet below grade. The hole was dug in 2005 and data is 17-years old. Updated data should be required. Corey Creek is a New York state Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat. The surrounding upland area is an important habitat that provides value to wildlife species. Finally, a non-disturbance buffer is not proposed in freshwater wetlands. Wetlands and benefits are dependent upon the condition of adjacent lands which provide buffers between wetlands and surrounding uses. These buffers are necessary to ensure the long-term viability of the Town' s wetlands. That concludes the findings of the LWRP. The Conservation Advisory Council of the Town of Southold resolved not to support the application. And the Conservation Advisory Council does not support the application because the project is not in compliance with Chapter 275 Wetlands, and inconsistent with the LWRP. The Trustees most recently visited the site at field inspection July 6th, 2022, and the notes from that visit were reviewed during work session. The Trustees did review the application during work session, looking at plans stamped May 3rd, 2022, and considered the survey that was given to our office on June 28th, 2022 . We also received a letter from Ashley and Isaac Ichenberg, residents on Main Bayview Road. And I'll try to summarize their comments briefly. - The riefly. _The property was not properly noticed. The area should be considered highly valuable because of the wetlands resources. And the third consideration, which is more expansive, states that rising sea levels predicted in our area which threatens flooding on this property and adjacent properties. Without further ado, I would invite comments from the public. MR. PORTILLO: So this proposal was obviously, you guys saw this a few months ago. One of the biggest changes we came up with that we thought should be considered was that we were considering removing the basement, not digging up, you know, not digging the land, and putting in a helical pile system with piers. So we really thought this would reduce the disturbance of the land. The other thing, after the denial last time, was we did receive approval from DEC on our original application, which was the original application we had with Trustees that we then revised the design based on comments received by the Board. Regarding the mark out of the fresh water was done in 2021. We will get a new test hole, which will be required moving forward with the septic system. We'll have to obviously do that for the Health Department. So, you know, I think the large change here of not digging Board of Trustees 21 July 13, 2022 4 a basement, which I think was one of the larger comments from what I heard last time, from the LWRP, we took out the basement and we considered looking at this as a post beam construction. And it really does reduce the disturbance to the land. So a helical pile, just to describe it, is basically a corkscrew that gets drilled in. We would be putting in a grade beam so we would not be taking any berth away. It would be at grade. And we would be building columns from there and then the structure on top of it. So our proposal changed in that sense and, like I said, that now at this time we have the DEC approval of the last design. Obviously we have to go back to DEC to submit our revised drawing based on what the design changes are. But I thought that, you know, coming back to the Board to discuss this, um, because of, you have these couple of, these large revisions, but also 'this evolution of what happened with the DEC, I thought it was something the Board would consider thinking about a little further. Unfortunately the owner of the property was unable to make it today due to some family matters. He did want to speak to you guys again, but he' s looking to put something small on the property for his family, as he expressed last time. And we are looking for the Board to consider something and, you know, we are willing to discuss it further. We are willing to work with the Board, if it' s going to a workshop with you guys, but we think that there should be something we can do here. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Thank you. So how does this new application address our previous concerns about the proximity to the wetlands? MR. PORTILLO: Well, like I said, based on our last application, we were showing larger .excavation amount, where we were going to remove, basically digging into the ground and taking dirt out and creating a basement. So by doing this, you know, helical pile structure, it' s a lot less disruption. It' s basically drilling into the ground and building up from there. So we are not, I mean, we obviously need to clear, we are willing to clear a small portion where the house is going to be, and we'll leave the rest, you know, the way it is. We won't touch it. We just need enough room to be able to do the drilling portion. The truck can be at street and then it can drill from there. So we don't have to do a large clearing. I think it' s a good solution to the discussion from last time. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Are there any comments? TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: The primary concern I had last time was the distance to the wetlands. You are seeking nearly 40% relief from our code, with a distance of 62 feet from the wetlands, where we require 100 feet. You have not moved it at all, and that was the primary concern I had last time. So can you address that at all. MR. PORTILLO: So if that' s a concern then maybe there is something we can consider in the design to get further away from the wetland. I mean, we obviously have a zoning issue here. We do need go to the Zoning Board and request a front yard variance. Doing research in this area, there are homes that are, you Board of Trustees 1 22 July 13, 2022 know, 15, 20 feet off of the street. So, you know, maybe we can adjust that and try to get' a little closer to the street. The thing is Zoning, really, they heard us first, they wanted us to come here. So I mean, adjusting that distance, it' s something, and it's a difficult situation, right, because it' s one Board then another Board. I 'm not sure where Zoning is going to be on this. I'm not sure if they. are going to approve us to be 30 fate. 30 feet to me makes 'sense, because if you look at a property that, if you look at an R40 property, front yard setback is 30 feet, if you. are a certain lot coverage, which, I'm sorry, a certain lot size. So in my mind we are at a certain lot size here because most of it, there is wetland there. So that was going to be the way that I was going to go and present that to Zoning. that we really should be considered with this, and being 30 feet off the front property line makes sense. Again, there• is some homes that are on this street that are 20 feet off the property line. You know, so I would use that as part of my argument with Zoning. Again, Zoning asked us to come here first, so, we are back here for that reason. And I'm trying to create a structure that I think, like I said, we don't need as much clearing to do this type of application. We really just need enough room to get in the there and to drill in the helical piles and then we can do our work from there. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: The plans we are in receipt of, those were prepared for this Board; is that correct? MR. PORTILLO: That's correct, yes. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: So is there a reason why on there it says the rear yard setback required' is 75 feet from the wetlands when our code states 100 feet? MR. PORTILLO: Just one thing to state to the Board, our original application to the DEC, I know you guys don't make decisions based on what DEC makes decisions but, you know, our original application -- TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: We are actually a totally different Board from the DEC and DEC does not regulate wetlands smaller than 11. 4 acres. They leave that to local jurisdictions like us to deal with, so that's why you are here. MR. PORTILLO: Okay, no problem. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Obviously we can't speak for another Board as far as the setbacks from the road and everything. From this Board' s perspective we areilooking to protect the environment the best way we can. So obviously we want as much distance from whatever structure you are proposing in that wetlands. I know it's a tough position to go back and forth between two Boards, but obviously we would like it as close to the road and as far away from wetlands as possible, which may not be necessarily what the ZBA is looking for. So that is something we would like to see. We do appreciate you are trying to work with the ground disturbance. So, you know, I think between the lack of ground disturbance and potentially moving it closer to the road, we might be heading in the right direction here. I don't think we are there yet. I Board of Trustees 23 July 13, 2022 I don't think this particular application adequately addresses our previous concerns, but I think we are moving in the right direction. Whether we get there or not, I don't know. But I don't know if this one is quite there. MR. PORTILLO: I mean, could I propose that I go back to the Zoning Board, I guess and 'start, maybe, that conversation over with them, and see if I can work out what they would accept as a front yard variance. I mean, that would help me adjust our building line. I mean, our building positioning. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Unfortunately, one has nothing to do with the other. So what you propose to us may not be what the ZBA ultimately allows. So, you know, to find a distance that potentially works for us and then, you know, after that, take it to the ZBA. MR. PORTILLO: I understand. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It' s up to you if you would like to do that, obviously. MR. PORTILLO: Um, well, seeing that they actually asked me to come here, I probably would be bounced back. So I would imagine, so it might not make much sense. So I guess I would, let me do a little more recognizance on the area and see what I believe ZBA might allow me to push the home up to the road, and then I guess. I'll take a little bit of a gamble there and see if I can get it to a point where you guys are satisfied with the distance from the fresh water. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: I was also surprised not to see any non-disturbance buffer on the plans you submitted to us. Based on our comments last time. I would think that would be a very extensive non-disturbance buffer, and we really shouldn't be doing this at a public hearing. We should be getting complete applications that are really ready for us to consider. This is no way near that for me. MR. PORTILLO: Understood. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Just to piggyback off that. With a property of this environmental significance and fragility, I would recommend, you know, something, you know, complete non-disturbance surrounding any structure. MR. PORTILLO: Fair. Okay, if I can have some time, I would like to come back. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Is there anyone else in the audience this evening to speak to this application? MS. KIRSCH: Hi, my name is Mary Kirsch and I have property adjacent to the 9450 building proposal. And a legal friend advised, suggested that I express this. So I ask the public hearing of record and the Trustees files for the prior application previously heard by this Board on February 16th, 2022, and March 16th, 2022, made by AMP Architecture on behalf of 9450 Main Bayview LLC, and your decision in this matter be incorporated into the record for this application. MS. HULSE: You are not permitted to do that. It' s a different application. MS. KIRSCH: All right, all right. So, to continue on, I own the property adjacent, and first thing I should probably mention is Board of Trustees 24 July 13, 2022 that it was posted incorrectly. It was not on that property. And the only reason I discovered it is because I take my daily walks. Aside from that, my first and most important concern with this building package is, again, environmental. It' s in the middle of the buffer zone. 58 feet, they want to, 58 distance from the pond and to create their building, which is kind of absurd because it's a really sensitive piece of property. They don't comply at all with the 100-foot fresh water setback, which is the Southold code, which you guys enforce. The other thing is, I know some, that pond, I've lived there for 25 years. And it's a big pond. It's 75 feet by about 35 feet wide. And it' s a vernal pond and it' s alive and well. You can come to my deck, mid-April, the peepers start singing and then I got the bullfrogs and then I have the salamanders and then I have the turtles that lay eggs in my compost. So it' s, um, it' s, it would be really a hardship that all would disappear, because as soon as the trucks come in and the, everything disappears. You'll no longer have that whole environment. Besides, also, the snakes, the possums, the deer, the hawks, the owls. Right now that area is pretty much a nature preserve at this point in time. Um, the other thing ghat was disturbing was, a front yard of 30 feet is also ridiculous. It doesn't meet the code from the Zoning Board. So another issue that was about, you heard, you discussed it earlier, about the test hole of 2005. And I tell you, that pond goes up and down all year. It's different. And around the perimeter of that pond, gets really saturated and really wet, depending, I don't know if it's the moon or the stars or the springs, but it should be noted that as far as leaching and all that kind of thing, that' s going to be another problem. So the Trustees have rejected this proposal as well as the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program and the Conservation Advisory Counsel, all stating that it does not comply with Southold code and that it is environmentally unsound. So if you can't meet the correct criteria for all these different agencies I just mentioned, I believe this proposal should be denied. 25 years ago, I took a look at that property and the Trustees said to me then, Mary, find something else. It's impossible, that piece. It''s really difficult, and I just hope that you consider this as a very sensitive piece of property. Thank you. For your time. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you. MR. PASSANANT: Good evening, everyone, my name is Tom Passanant, and I too live next door. For the last seven years I've been there. I attended the March 16th hearing, and when I left that night, I just had a sense that a little piece of Southold Town was saved. And I didn't celebrate, I didn't gloat. It just sounded like a piece was protected. And the strength of the decision was what Mr. Sepenoski and Ms. Gillooly had mentioned about the hundred-foot distance from the pond, freshwater pond. And I remember that. And I went there this Board of Trustees 25 July 13, 2022 morning and I paced out with my own pace, about six feet of pace. I measured 100 feet from the freshwater pond, and I measured 50 feet in from the roadway. And the distance, the two lines didn't meet, but there was approximately 16 feet in that space. So if the integrity of those dimensions were to be maintained, it would not allow for any type of structure. I also saw on the map that was submitted, 50 feet that they include, had a line drawn across the street from Bayview. It was not from the line of the property line itself. So that reduced it to 30 feet. I too, I saw copies of what Mr. Sepenoski and Ms. Gillooly had quoted, and Mary, too, and I just highlighted the LWRP's July 6th proposal as recommended as inconsistent with the LWRP policies. And I also saw the Conservation Advisory Council resolution, same date, July 6th, resolved to not support the application of 9450 Main Bayview LLC to construct a single-family dwelling. And all six members had voted aye to support that. And their conclusion said because the project is not in compliance with Chapter 275 Wetlands and LWRP. It seems such a strong position, I guess, against the proposal. And also, the final thing is, it is a sensitive spot. You know, when I went there today, it was bone dry, but what Mary was trying to say, in the seasons, the rain, it fills up, it fills up. In springtime hundreds if not thousands of those tree frogs, turtles and two other different frogs. I have seen eggs laid in my compost heap. I walked over to Wolf Preserve up the street on Bayview. They used to have pictures of all the animals that were there, and it' s pretty comparable to what this project is. Oh, I forgot, after I left in March 16th, I wanted to thank the Board for their decision. I went over to the Town Hall and nobody was there but Ms. Cantrell, and I said can you tell them thank you. You know, never having an experience with this before, I thought that was the end. And you said, they can appeal. So that' s clearly what has happened, and it sounds like it's possible to happen again. So I hope the same requirements would still be in effect. And the last thing I 'll say is it is a sensitive piece of property. Over time nature has made that look like a preserve, like Mary said. I can stand there and see it. Nature kind of reclaimed it. And I think it is a piece of property that is worth preserving and is worth protecting and is worth saving. Thank you. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you. MS. HULSE: For clarification, on the record. This is not actually an appeal from the previous denial. This is actually a new application. I know it seems like that because it's a similar application, but it is a new application, which is why we couldn't incorporate the old testimony into this new one. So it' s good that you showed up to provide the testimony tonight. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: We welcome public participation, so I encourage else -to come forward and speak regarding this application. MR. SCALICE: Charles Scalice, I'm an adjacent property as well. I appreciate what you guys' do, and I appreciate owners' rights as Board of Trustees 26 July 13, 2022 well. But going back a couple of years, this property had fallen into foreclosure, bankruptcy, and I was at the courthouse steps when it was being sold. And the judge told the buyer several times, you know this property is probably unbuildable because of the environmental issues of the property. And the buyer kept on saying we acknowledge, we acknowledge. Okay, then went to the buyer. The buyer then did some tests and realized it was maybe an uphill struggle or just unbuildable. It then went on the market as listing that says we make no representation. Might not be buildable. This gentleman bought the property and is now here for the second or third time, I don't really know, asking for forgiveness, if you will, okay, and can we build on it, when it was well instructed that it was most likely unbuildable because of the environment sensitivity. Wasting your time, my time, everyone' s time. Just because they are trying to shove a square peg in a round hole. And I appreciate, if it' s buildable, he should build. But it doesn't seem that way. That' s all have I to say. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Just for the edification, if you will, of the audience, the determination of whether or not a lot is buildable lies with the Building Department. However our code gives us powers to make decisions regarding properties where environmental impact is present and significant. Thank you. MR. PORTILLO: And I appreciate that. I was going to say something similar to that. We are not here to make a square peg into a round hole. We are here to work with the Boards and we a're here, I'm here doing my job so, to help my client. I don't think, just for the record, I don't think he was thought that the land would have as many issues, otherwise I don't think he would have purchased it. So it' s hard to say what he knew and what this person knew. I just don't think that' s a viable thing. MS. HULSE: It's not really relevant to this Board's consideration anyway. MR. PORTILLO: I agree. Anyway, my point is we would want to work with the Board, that' s what we here for. I would ask for an adjournment. I'll be taking the comments from the Board, I'll bring it back to my clients and see if we can put together something that makes sense., for everybody, hopefully makes sense for the Board and I guess we'll see where it goes from there. You know, that would be my request. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Mr. Portillo, the opportunities this Board presents to applicants are extensive, in fact. We have a pre-submission process whereby we invite applicants to meet us Trustees, all five of us in the field, to get a sense of what the applicant' s needs are, ; what they would like to do, and where we come from, in terms of an environmental impact. We then review plans extensively. As people have pointed out in the audience, we've review plans your plans extensively, multiple times. We've visited the location multiple times. And we've also had two public hearings regarding this application. My point is there is ample opportunity to understand the Trustees' concerns before we get to public hearings and, as Mr. Board of Trustees 27 July 13, 2022 Scalise has said, wasted this Board' s time and the audience members' time as well. So respectively, I deny your request to adjourn or table this application, and I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Roll call vote on the motion to close, start with Trustee Peeples. Aye or nay if you want to close it. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Aye. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Trustee Gillooly? TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Aye. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Trustee Sepenoski? TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Aye. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Trustee Krupski? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Aye TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Trustee Goldsmith. Aye. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: I make a motion to deny this application. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Based on Chapter 275, inconsistency with the LWRP proximity to wetlands that are undisturbed currently and wildlife, this particular application violates 275-12 (a) because it adversely affects the wetlands of Southold Town, and 275-12 (b) , adversely affects fish, shellfish and other beneficial marine organisms, aquatic wildlife and vegetation within the natural habitat, thereof. In accordance with all that, I make an application to deny this application as submitted due to those reasons, TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Number 9, 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 61x20' 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 The Trustees most recently did an inhouse review, reviewing the plan received June 14th, and the new project description as written here. I 'll read it into the record now. The proposed project includes installation of two 4' 10"x12 '3" long personal watercraft floats, total of 118.3 square feet, fastened to existing bulkhead, in an end to end pattern so as not to obstruct navigation in existing channel. The LWRP reviewed this application, found it to be consistent, recommended minimizing CCA-treated materials in the New York DOS significant coastal fish and wildlife habitat area. And the Conservation Advisory Council reviewed this application and resolved to support it. I do have a letter from our office dated June 21st, asking the following: The two questions: Are the jet ski floats just being tied to the bulkhead, no ramp to go down to them. That was the main concern. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this Board of Trustees 28 July 13, 2022 application? MR. PATANJO: Jeffrey Patanjo, on behalf of the applicant. The floats, as you see, are less than the 120-square foot, so they meet DEC requirements as well as the Trustees. They will be all plastic construction, thereby eliminating and CCA into the water, and they will be tied to the existing bulkhead and accessed by way of a ladder on the side of the bulkhead. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: One question here, the plan we have depicts a house on the property. Is there currently a house on the property? MR. PATANJO: There should - I have not been there, admittedly. I believe there is a house there. I thought there was. I thought they just built a new house. I'm almost positive there is a house there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It was not built the last time we are there. MR. PATANJO: I'm almost positive it was built. Regardless, if it was not built, it will be coming to the Board for a permit to construct, obviously. But I believe the house is built. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Mr. Patanjo, when was the last time you visited the property in person? MR. PATANJO: Last time I was there was a couple of years ago. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Okay. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Is ther& anyone else here wishing to speak regarding this application? (Negative response) . Any questions or comments from the Board? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Just that given this site, the neighboring property across the street, we suggested a cutout, I believe they wanted a cutout because it' s really narrow there. That's what I think is most appropriate for this site. The cut-in to the bulkhead. MR. PATANJO: Right. That was discussed during the time when we submitted for a floating dock for a boat to be tied up and when we eliminated that from this property, so now we are going with this jet ski which does in, fact penetrate down five feet maximum. 12 feet obstruction for navigation. As you see, there' s 45 feet to the adjacent shoreline over there. From the five foot. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I believe one of the other issues that we had with where the proposed jet ski floats are going, you have, I don't have it in front me. ! What's the water depth? TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Two feet'. MR. PATANJO: It varies. Right up against the bulkhead, 2 . 4 feet. 2. 0 feet, 2.3 feet. And it varies out to about 3 1/2 at the opposite side. So it really ramps off quickly. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: One of my concerns is a vessel could be tied to the outside of the floating dock MR. PATANJO: You can make a condition that no vessels to be tied to the outside of the floating dock. I don't feel that somebody would tie off to a float dock when they can tie off to bulkhead which five feet over. So I would condition it that no vessels can be tied'to the floating -- to this jet ski float. MEMBER PEEPLES: You mentioned an access of a ladder, I believe? MR. PATANJO: Yes. Board of Trustees 29 July 13, 2022 TRUSTEE PEEPLES: I don't see that on the plans, on the callout. MR. PATANJO: I didn't add it. I can amend the plans if needed, or we can just specify it- Normally I don't add things such as that to a permit applicatibn. And added to this was the fact, mentioning a boat, we actually placed these in a position so he could still tie up his boat on to the existing bulkhead where there is a greater water depth to the north. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: It's just such a narrow part of the channel here and has you can see part of that area is not navigable because it' s too shallow. So this really is very tight, in this location. MR. PATANJO: Right. And again, there is nothing, on behalf of the client, there is nothing stopping him from tying up a barge here, like there is to the north. There is nothing stopping him from tying up a 50 foot wide, 14, 16-foot beam boat. So he doesn't want to do that TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: I believe his neighbors would stop him from doing that. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Is there anything stopping him from tying up his jet ski to said bulkhead currently? MR. PATANJO: He can't. Jet skis need to be on a float. And that' s pretty much what he's doing. A jet ski is three-and-a-half foot wide. These floats are 4' 10" wide. So it's penetrating a couple inches in each direction, but they are out of the water, they are safe and secure, and they are not smashing around. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI : Thank you. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Any other comments? (Negative response) . Hearing none, I make a motion on to close this hearing. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Given the limited depth of the water and the narrow area where these floats are being proposed, this project is not consistent with best practices of this Board. Further, the proposal is not consistent with standards for issuance of permits as listed in Chapter 275, specifically (d) , adversely affects fish, shellfish and/or beneficial marine organisms, aquatic wildlife and vegetation or the natural habitat thereof, and it would adversely affect navigation with normal use, I therefore make a motion to deny this application as submitted. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . i TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Number 10, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of CAROLE BRADLEY requests a Wetland! Permit to remove and replace the existing deteriorated upper bulkhead and replacement with proposed 51 linear feet of; new vinyl bulkhead with associated 32 linear foot return, both landward of existing bulkhead; install and perpetually maintain a: 10' wide non-turf buffer along the landward side of proposed landward bulkhead; remove and replace existing catwalk/pier consisting of a 4'x16' landward catwalk to a 8 'x12' deck to a 4'x9' seaward catwalk as required only to construct proposed bulkheading; and to install Thru-Flow decking Board of Trustees 30 July 13, 2022 on the entire catwalk/pier surface. Located: 1265 Island View Lane, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-57-2-17 The Trustees visited this site on June 8th, and noted to check the permit history as the existing bulkhead appears non-functional. We also conducted an inhouse inspection and discussion on July 6th. And I have plans stamped and dated April 13th, 2022. The LWRP proposed this action is consistent with policy standards, and did note that the Wetland permit #9101 for the same action was issued in 2017. The recommendation at the time was that the action was consistent with the LWRP. They also noted that the wetland species should be protected during construction, and turbidity controls are required. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this application and noted to provide a ten-foot non-turf buffer along the landward side of the proposed bulkhead, and to remove and replace existing pier as required, only to construct proposed bulkhead and install through-flow decking. And both of those concerns of the Conservation Advisory Council are present in this plan, showing the ten-foot, non-turf buffer that is landward of the bulkhead. And also a note on here that there will be through-flow decking on the entire surface of the dock. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak in regard to this application? MR. PATANJO: Jeff Patanjo, on behalf of the applicant. As mentioned, this is the renewal of an existing expired permit. No major changes to it. And there is a current DEC permit active for this, which they didn't have, for whatever means to do the project at time and now they are able to actually construct it. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Is there anyone else here who wishes to speak? (No response) . Any other questions or comments from the Board? (Negative response) . TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Hearing no further comments, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE PEEPLES: I make a motion to approve this application. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 11, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of JOHN LONDONO & COURTNEY KELSO requests a Wetland Permit to remove the existing deteriorated fixed dock and timber ramp, and relocate the existing 8'x20' floating dock; construct a new 4' wide by 125' long fixed dock in similar location as existing; install a new 30" wide by 14 ' long aluminum ramp; and the existing 8'x20' floating dock to be repositioned into an "L" shape configuration and supported with four (4) 10" diameter cca pilings; the entire proposed fixed dock to have Thru-Flow decking installed; and the existing deteriorated timber bulkhead to be removed and disposed of. Board of Trustees 31 July 13, 2022 Located: 4328 Westphalia Road, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-113-9-11 The LWRP found this to be consistent. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support the application. The Trustees conducted a field inspection July 6th, 2022, noting the proposed dock exceeds the pier line, and the need to use immediately adjacent docks establish the pier line. Subsequently we received new plans and project description both stamped received July 11th, 2022, that addressed that pier line issue as well as shortening the proposed dock. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application? MR. PATANJO: Jeff Patanjo, on behalf of the applicant. Revisions were made based on the comments. If there are any questions, I would be happy to answer them. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Anyone else here wish to speak regarding this application? (Negative response) . Any other questions or comments from the Board? (Negative response) . TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Hearing none, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make to motion to approve this application with the new plans stamped received July 11th, 2022, as well as the new project description stamped received July 11th, 2022, that I will read into the record. The project to include the removal of the existing deteriorated fixed dock and timber ramp and is relocating the existing 8 'x20' floating dock in the same general location as existing; construct new four-foot wide by 114-foot long fixed dock in same general location as existing dock; a new 30" wide by 14' long aluminum ramp will be installed; and the existing relocated 81x20' floating dock will be repositioned and supported with a 4x10" diameter CCA piles. The entire proposed fix dock will have through-flow decking installed; the existing deteriorated timber bulkhead will be removed and disposed of. That is my motion. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion for adjournment. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES) . R tfull su itted y, ry Glenn Goldsmith, President Board of Trustees