Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-08/15/1990 HEARING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS COUNTY OF SUFFOLK : STATE OF NEW YORK SPECIAL SCOPING HEARING ON APPLICA- TION FOR VARIANCE OF GUSTAVE WADE, -x Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southotd~ New York August 15, 1990 7:30 P.M. BEFORE: GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman BOARD MEMBERS: SERGE DOYEN, JR. CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR., Absent JOSEPH H~ SAWICKI, Absent JAF~S DINIZIO, JR. DOREEN SERWERDA, Board Secretary 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 BOARD OF TRUSTEES: JOHN BREDEMEYER, III, President Town of Southold Trustees ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR. Southold Town Trustee BRUCE ANDERSON Consultant to Trustees CRAMER, VOORHIS ~ ASSOCIATES Environmental and Planning Consultants to the Town of Southold 54 North Country Road Miller Place, New York 11764 BY: CHARLES VOORHIS ALSO PRESENT: EN-Consultants, Inc. Appearing for Gustave Wade 1329 North Sea Road Southampton, New York BY: ROY HAJE 11968 NORTH FORK ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL Route 25 at Love Lane P.O. Box 799 Mattituck, New York 11952 BY: ROBERT GOLDMAN FRANCIS McCAFFERY Chief of Cutchogue Fire Department CAROL WADE 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE CHAIRMAN: This is a scoping session. Trustees is lead agency. 3 We welcome you all here. Our Board of I shared lead agency with the SOuthold Town Trustees, approximately 20 days ago. The purpose of this meeting is to evaluate certain areas that we will ask the Applicant and his consultant to address qn the draft environmentla impact statement. Normally I believe Chickee (phonetic) would have a check list. You want to be dealing with this in ~articular, sir. MR. VOORHIS: I have prepared a check list. I just did it this afternoon and you obviously have not had a chance to go over it, but based on the format of the State Law there are really no surprises. THE CHAI~LAN: I just think maybe before you start, we can ask Brue and John for presentation. They are the co-lead agents, and then we will go around the room after that, if that's all right with you. MR. VOORHIS: Sure. MR. BREDEMEYER: Yes. Bruce had developed a list of issues for the Trustees as 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 4 our consultants, and I had just provided a little overview for the Applicant and all here. I guess maybe I will start in that capacity. First of all, the Trustees have had prior actions in certain areas with a history of'previous -- prior disapprovals, approval, or active review of subject parcels, and with- out going into the detailed history -- just to say that prior actions by the Trustees included a denial of access over Trustees' lands exclusive access or easement and ruled in certain court actions and those are still standing. So we are not anxious to see any use of Trustees' land filled in at the end of East Road. The Board has a formal position against ~ny exclusive easement across those Trustee lands. On 10/20/89, the Board of Trustees approved the construction of a dock for recreational purpose for the subject parcel, and the description of which is in a permit. which is issued from our office. On January 28, of 1990, we received an application to construct a house on the ~2 3 4 5 8 9 I0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 5 property which included re~erence to a bridge and as a result the Trustees, having had prior actions in court against such exclusive types of easements, we requested no action by any agencies, where the bridge was still shown on the survey. Subsequent to the communication from the Trustees' office, the Applicant withdrew the application before the Trustees, which the Board of Trustees accepted by a vote on February 22nd, 1990. At the work session on February 13, of 1990, the Trustees by affirmative unanimous vote went on record in favor of establishing a small boat mooring facility on the land adjacent to Mr. Wade's property, and I have a copy of ~hat resolution for use by the Appli- cant in preparing the DEIS. So it is not misunderstood, the Trustees wish that all the lands abutting and adjacent to Mr. Wade's property be considered as if they were lands under water, since the Trustees have historic rights to maintain their lands under water whether they be filled in or not. And any preparing of the impact statemen 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1'0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 6 must take into consideration the fact of the legal rights that the Trustees have to consume the sand and gravel and create the waterway. that was there. MR. WADE: I have a question with regards to that, Jay. First of all, if it was to be treated as water, why don't you hold this hearing in a bay right now and go down and dredge out the sand and gravel and make it water again? Then we can continue this process Is the Town ready to go dredge that out now and make water again? MR. BREDEMEYER: The Town Trustees have directed, myself as the President of the Board, to start the application process and I have designated a member of the Board to start getting information in what will probably be a lengthy process. MR. WADE: Two or three years. MR. BREDEMEYER: It may be this action. MR. WADE: Where are you going to get the money to do this? MR. BREDEMEYER: really for this. This is not the subject You know, as far as the money 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to do this is the subject of a determination the Board itself. MR. WADE: Which board? MR. BREDEMEYER: The Trustees. It has nothing to dO with what we are discussing here. MR. WADE: Do yon have a budget? MR. BREDEMEYER: Yes. It is coming from the whole Town Board. MR. WADE: Then it's got to be approved by the Town Board. MR. BREDEMEYER: Not necessarily. MR. ~AJE: Let me just say what we have to do here tonight is we have to listen to what they want us to put in the impact state- ment. So whether you have a problem with that, what they may or may not do, it is really not the night. MR. WADE: It could affect the outcome of my hearing and my DEIS report based on water or based on land. MR. HAJE: Whatever they do or may not do, they are not going to do it before we do this impact statement. MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: What we are discussin~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 8 anyway is something that was discussed as a result of an application before a permanent easement over Trustees' propertY. The fact that the Trustees' plan for this part of the property bottom is not resolved. They may change in the future. We don't want to make any permanent mark there that we won't be able to undo. MR. WADE: We don't have any problem with that. That's why we went around and changed our application and came back to the Trustees to get a permit for the dock. So that we could come to the property by water. There are 13 islands in the Town of Southold presently, all uninhabited, all which have received building ~ermi%s from this Town Board and none of them have gotten Zoning Board of Appeal approvals for SectiOn 280A. Sc I decided at this point, beck, if I own an island I'll come by'water like the other residents in the Town are. The residents on Fishers Island, they get there by boat or helicopter or plane, but when someone goes to build a house on Fishers Island they go to the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1'1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 9 Zoning Board of Appeals to get relief from Section 280A of the Town Code. Upon searching through the BuildinqJ Department records, I cannot find where anyone else who has a home on an island -- MR. HAJE: Let me interrupt. ~his is something we can argue with them or we can include, or your attorney could put in, if you disagree with what the Board is doing; if you feel you are being treated differently, but really we are not here to argue whether we should or should not be in their juris- diction of the Zoning Board of Appeals. What we are here to do is to hear what they want in the impact statement. If, again, you disagree with what they do underlying the whole thing~ then you have to fight or file an Article 78 or some sort of proceeding to stop that. MR. WADE: Roy, basically why I changed my application and came to the Zoning Board of Appeals is because when we found out there were 13 other islands in the Town of Southold uninhabited, we said, at that point, hey, I hav] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16' 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 10 no problem with coming by boat. Let's file an application to the Trustees for a dock, which Roy did and here we are. Mr. Goehringer, the Zoning Board of Appeals said, gee, this presents a problem. We did have to have relief of Secction 280A in order to get a building permit. That's what the Building Department told me to get -- to file an application with the Zoning Board of Appeals. I went back to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Now what Mr. Bredemeyer is asking us to do is to determine this whole thing on the fact there is water surrounding my island, whic there is not. If we are going to prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement based on the fact~there is water around my property, let them get the water around my property. going to, change? MR. BREDEMEYER: Let me continue to speak for just a moment. The Trustees are goin~ to continue. This is the decision they made now, to place a small boat mooring facility there. No matter what the form of the appli- cation or impact statement you take, or form of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 11 future ownership is., the Trustees have the rig of ownership to maintain it as a waterway and the reason I am telling it to you now is that was one avenue for your consultant to look at. Among a number of possible scenarios would be to include that as a concept. Th Board has taken action. We are moving ahead. I guess if Mr. Wade wanted to suspend these proceedings while the Trustees move, with all do haste, at opening up the channel and creating a small boat mooring facility we would oblige him. don't know if that is what he wants. MR. WADE: How is that going to change the Draft Environmental Impact Statement? MR. HAJE: I think all we have to do is mention the fact that's what the property looks like now. It now filled in and in there is or will be an application by the Trustees to remove -- execute a big yard from an area of X square feet and that they may ultimately get approval to do that; to make it a small boat mooring area. MR. BREDEMEYER: The form of your application before the agency -- we don't have 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 12 the application. We do not have a current application before the Board for the con- struction of the home sanitary system and other facilities and clearly the survey which we do have in our possession does show sanitary. Wha' we have b~fore us is a prior submission that had sanitary system rings alongside the water. Clearly the Trustees are not going to be in a position to allow any invalid agency or the Applicant install facilities on the property that are going to aggravate one of our rights and your right to maintain open waters in the Town. We don't want this to just develop out of thin air, after you have gone through a lengthy and costly impact review process. We are telling it to you up front. We are going to have a mooring facility there for boats, and so you should take that into account when you make your submission to the Suffolk County Department of Health for the cesspool or resubmission to the Department of Environmental Conservation for a re-establishment of a Department of Environmental Conservation permit MR. HAJE: What we would have to see the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 13 is at least your tentative plan to see what you are doing. MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: We have a resolution from the meeting. MR. BREDEMEYER: I have resolutions from the meeting, which I brought here for you, which describe it. Apparently we are getting estimates on getting a survey done. MR. VOORHIS: To dredge. Our suggestion would be -- there is a suggestion dealing with surrounding land use, what is occurring around the site, the fact the land is owned by the Trustees and they do have plans for it. It would be appropriate to include that suggestion and what your plans are and how they interact° These a~e land use capability issues as well as the environmental issues. MR. WADE: As a landowner adjacent to this new facility, am I going to be asked whether or not I have anything to say about the people parking boats in my back yard? MR. BREDEMEYER: They will have permits issued and full review process that's going with this application. We have to secure any 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 14 land use decision by the Trustees or are subject to the same permit requirements as any other individual or corporation. We have to get permits from the appropriate agencies. MR. HAJE: You as adjacent owner have the right to commen~s through the Depar~ment of Environmental Conservation. Who knows? Maybe the Trustees will have to do an environmental review impact statement. THE CHAIRMAN: Could I just hold the seating one second, ladies and gentlemen? Francis McCaffery just walked in. He is the Chief, this gentleman sitting in back of the people. He is Francis McCaffery, Chief of the Cutchogue Fire Department. Welcome, Chief. We are going around the table here. So we'll get around to you hopefully in a little while. MR. BREDEMEYER: The Trustees approved, by a vote of the Board, on 6/26, to have our environmental consultant who is regularly retained to help us on matters help review the project. On June 1st, of 1990, a letter was sent 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 15 to Mr. Goehringer then determined lead agency coordination expressing our jurisdiction over the matter on the Town Wetlands Ordinance Chapter 97. I do not think I have to go into this here, at this time, unless someone would like me to read that letter or go into it further. The current status is that the Trustees do not have an application before them but will require an application for the home at some point in the future. At this point we are commencing with the Zoning Board of Appeals on the impact statement. Mr. Anderson had a check list of items of environmental significance. He may want to run through it, at this time. MR. WADE:Jay, can I ask one other question? As the Zoning Board of Appeals is lead agency and the Trustees are co-lead agency status, which this DEIS report encompass~ both the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Trustees, so that when I file my application for the Trustees for my permit to build a home you will accept that DEIS report. MR. ANDERSON: I believe the Trustees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 16 are an involved agency. What you are, at this point, is to obtain access through the Zoning Board of Appeals. We are here as an effort to sort of coordinate two branches of govern- ment into the same but to, hopefully, have everyone's concerns addressed at the same time. However, that is not to say that new informatio] cannot arrive between now and when you file for your permit to the Trustees. MR. WADE: You are requiring me to fill out another DEIS report. MR. ANDERSON: I didn't say that. MR. WADE: I want that clarified now. I am not going to spend $20,000 for two separate environmental impact statements. In other words., what I am trying to say here is really simple. Here I have an application on file to the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold to begin access or to get relief from Section 280A of the Town Code and they would like me to provide them with the complete DEIS report. Now I am asking at this point in time and I want it clarified tonight and unequivo- 1 ~2 3 4 5 6 7 .8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 17 cally clarified that, when Mr. Haje prepared the report, and being Mr. Bredemeyer is here with Mr. Voorhis and Mr. Anderson and every other concerned citizen within the Town of Southold, that I want this report to be all encompasssd to answer everybody's environmental complaints or everybody else's environmental concerns. MR. VOORHIS: that. MR. BREDEMEYER: It indicates that the Trustees are an involved agency. Under the law itself involved agencies do have certain obligations, and based on the EIS which would be reviewed by the involved agencies during the 30-day period the3 would be required to prepare findings at the completion of that process and that is the law. So not only the Zoning Board of Appeals, but the Trustees and other agencies, that is an involved agency that has a permit, will have to prepare findings based on the environmental impact statement. There is no way we can provide a finding on access when we don't have I believe the law addresse~ "2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 18 an application before us. MR. VOORHIS: An application filed. MR. BREDEMEYER: Because having with- drawn from the Trustees and we did accommodate you in that respect, you knew it in one of my communications, that the Board of Trustees did not consumea recommendation. It was my feeling in discussions with the Trustees at that time that we were serving no one with permitting the withdrawal of the application, because we would end up with this problem we have now. We don't have an application. We can comment on the environmental and wetland permitting. We can comment on the wetland aspects of the 280A access through all of this process here., but without the house -- the permit application, how can we comment on that? We don't have an application before us. MR. KRUPSKi, JR.: We don't know what we are co~enting on access for -- MR. VOORHIS: pending. MR. WADE: -- without the application I have a Department of Environmental Conservation permit to construct 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 19 the home upon a pile on based home. You h~ve seen the plans. You have had the plans for four years. Who'd know what my application and plans are? MR. BREDEMEYER: We don't have an app!ica~ion we an act on. MR. WADE: I have paid the fees. I have got copies of cancelled checks four or five years ago. MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: Which is no guarantee you will submit that same application tomorrow. MR. WADE: It is the same house, same application. Nothing changed in five years. THE CHAi~V~N: Could I ask a question of your consultant? Is it not the case that the issues that you are addressing tonight will be dealt with in the DEIS? If Mr. Wade tomorrow was to file an application before these gentlemen~ if he did it tomorrow or the next day, filed this application, other issues could be addressed in the EIS after we review the findings of the DEIS? MR. VOORHIS: Yes. Could they not? Let me say, Jerry, if I could, the whole intent of that process 1 '2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 20 is coordination; the reason all these Boards are here. MR. WADE: That's why I am here, because I am not Hoing to wait and go through this whole process with Mr. Haje, and a year later after I ~et my Zonin~ Board of Appeals approval I've got to go back to the Building Department with my Zoning Board of Appeals approval and Mr. Lessard says to me, "Now you've got to have a permit from the Trustees and you've got to go back through the whole process again," and the next year we are sitting and find ourselves at the same table. THE CHAIRMAN: Gus, I am not telling you what to do and I am not telling Roy what to do. ,if I were you, tomorrow I would file an application with the Town Trustees for the house. That's the whole purpose. This could be a thing we could spend a long period of time on and we really don't want to. We want to get going on this application. MR. WADE: Jerry, thatWs why I am here. I want to listen to what's happening. I want to include the Trustees and whatever other 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 21 concerned citizens there are in the Town of Southold and proceed to get the permit. THE CHAIRMAN: You will sometime in the future file an application for the house. MR. WADE: Absolutely. If John Bredemeyer has an application here tonight, I will take it home and fill it out. THE CHAIRMAN: i think, Brucet you are about readY to 9o. MR. ANDERSON: I would like to -- I think the way to do this is to go through a formal EIS/DEIS check list and under certain items within that I would like the right to interject the Trustees' concerns. That way it's kind of more orderly and it will be easier f©r whoever addresses it. MR. BREDEMEYER: to hand out that? MR. VOORHIS: THE CHAIrmAN: Chick, are you going I have four copies. We can make more. Why don't we make a copy for everybody? We will take a short break here. MR. DOYEN: Just by way of incidental intelligencet nothing is what it appears to be. 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 22 I~m trying to refresh my memory, since 'there is not a single solitary lot on Fishers Island that is not serviced by a public road. So they don'~ require 280A. That's why there is no application for 280A on Fishers Island. MR. WADE: MR. DOYEN: Fishers Island. specifically. Then the Robins Island -- I.am just speaking about You said Fishers Island i am telling you there is not a single lot not serviced by a public road. (Discussion held off the record) MR. GOLDMAN: Robert Goldman, North Fork Environmental Council. The North Fork Environmental Council recommends that the DEIS cover the following areas: We recommend that a complete investi- gation be performed on site geology with special emphasis on litoral drift, tidal action and flood plain conditions. We recommend that a complete investi- gation of existing and historical wildlife and wildlife habitat be performed with special emphasis on rare/endangered/threatened species 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 23 and marine species. These investigations should cover all seasons of the year° We recommend a complete investigation and presentation of the aesthetic setting and values of the ~site. We recommend a complete discussion of the impacts of the septic system on the wild- life habitat of the site with special emphasis on water quality and impacts on marine speciese We recommend a complete discussion of the impacts of the dwelling unit, attendant structures, and human inhabitants of the same on the wildlife habitat of the site with special emphasis on rare/endangered/threatened species during all seasons. We recommend a complete discussion of the impacts of the d%~e!ling unit and attendant structures on the aesthetic setting and values of the site. We strongly urge the complete develop- ment of the Alternatives section of the DEIS with special emphasis on the "no-action" alternative. This section should thoroughly and realistically incorporate the options for 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ~4 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 24 public acquisition through one or a combination of the following: Town of Southold Open Space Program full purchase; New York State Environ- mental Quality Bond Act full purchase; Suffolk County Open Space Program full purchase; priva~ conservation easement; tax-exempt donation to Town, County, or State via Nature Conservancy, Peconic Land Trust, or othe private agency. THE CHAIRMAN: MR. GOLDY~N: MR. VOORHIS: Thank you. Good luck, folks. My firm was retained by the Zoning Board of Appeals to assist in the review of the Environmental Assessment Form for the project. When it was initially propose~ this certainly had a history. But we came in fresh and we viewed the project from the beginning, at least in terms of investments. In reviewing that project, inspecting the site, going through the DEIS list, we determined the project would have a significant environmental impact and made recommendations to the Board that a Positive Declaration should be issued. We prepared quite a lot of back-up 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 material through that process. What I have done, the cover letter indicates exactly what we are doing here. It is basically what we referred to before. We are scoping documents, establishing scope of documents, putting together a package which includes the declaration. There was a point in the document on the environment. You were This is the first time sent a copy. MR. WADE: I have seen it. No. MR. VOORHIS: I know the Town Clerk acted as clearinghouse and you were part of this. MR. WADE: This is the first time I have seen it tonight. MR. VOORHIS: I think it would be good to review it. In the package there is a copy of our recommendation to the Board for a Positive Declaration including the reasons for that determination and it emphasizes the work we have conducted and outlines the impacts we sought based on our review. We also prepared Part III of the 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 Environmental Assessment Form which basically was triggered by the number of actions which were significant, and proceed in a narrative discussion on those impacts,. I think Attachments I and II should be referred to by the consultants in the paring of the EIS. items. They contain important Attachment III is directly out of the State Lawr Part 617.21. It is the SEQR scope status, the SEQR scoping check list. This is the format that the State provides for all environmental impact statements. Both the contents and the outline are appropriate to use for the EIS. It is the best guideline we can provide, because this is a Single-family residence. There are a number of issues which we deleted from the original check list right off the bat; things such as we are getting into bedrock geology and some of the things we really didn't feel pertain to items such as topography. All we'll really talking about is one dwelling. We didn't feel pertinent areas of impact. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 27 There are changes on the thing, on the check list. We removed them. If there are items anyone here has concern that should be reintroduced to the list, we can do this at this forum. Attachment III is our suggestive .scope and contents of the EIS. I think we can go through this, at this time. The first two items on the cover sheet table of contents is self-explanatory. I will go right down to the description of the projec~ Basically we work off the survey and the proposed site design. We'd like to see the specifications on the impervious surface land- scape area, natural vegetation that remains and wetland vegetation existing on the site. MR. WADE: I notice you put in here, Page 8 of the environmental impact section, project results and physical change to the project site. It says down here: "Due -to the low elevation of the subject site, and its relative proximity to a large body of water, this site will have an even greater chance of flooding. The magnitude of a severe storm 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 coupled with flooding may irreversibly damge any structure built on this site." I have been on the property for eight years. Mr. Gloave (phonetic) owned the property 50 years prior to me. In Hurricane Gloria my wife and I visited Cutchogue and walked out on our land and stood there with the pilings.on 0~ur_.hou.se. We ~e..re four' fe-et above mean high water. The houses on the point across the way there, Fisherman's Wharf, every house on Fisherman's Wharf had about four feet of water in their dwellings. The water was completely over the top of Fisherman' Point, and my wife and I walked from the end of the East Road down to our subject property and were standing four feet above the high water mark during the storm of Hurricane Gloria which was the highest elevation of water in Cutchogue and Peconic Bay since 1866 or some- thing like that. So the chance of water coming over the top of my property and encroaching in my dwelling is nonexistent, and no one that I have talked to in the Town of Southold has ever seen the water over the top of Fleets Neck 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 '19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Beach. MR. VOORHIS: Hurricane Gloria. have no reason to doubt you. flood rate mapping. 29 I was not there during That may be very true. I We reviewed %he MR. WADE: How can yon j~risdic~ what is good on my case? MR. VOORHIS: This will not affect the use of the property. Based on the rate map you have to construct your dwelling -- the bottom of the first floor has to be above a certain elevation. So you do that and / supposedly based on their flood zones you won't have a problem. MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: It is a major point because the septic system -- the fact it won't be above that -- the bottom of the floor joist. I am saying that where there is one of the potential hazards, property flooding, the fact the septic system will not be above that specified level. MR. WADE: The water has never been within four feet of my elevation of the proper~ MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: Just to say it never 1 '2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 30 has doesn't mean it never will be. MR. WADE: How do they let the people stay on Fisherman's Point? You are talking about a flood tide. You are talking about sewage in the canal. After the flood waters come over Fisherman's .Point, everybody's: sewers are into the canal. I am stating this is an erroneous statement. MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: If mistakes were made previously, there is no reason to repeat those mistakes. MR. WADE: You are not going to be repeating in my case. My septic system has a two-foot shallow pool with the top exactly flushed w~th finished grade. My pools are two-feet!deep and~there are six of them in line, at which point if the tide is four feet within the top' of my pool, my pool will still be two feet above the high water mark. MR. KRUPSKI, JR2: What happens when you come to the scoping session and there is an impasse, when the Applicant disagrees? THE CHAIRMAN: He addresses it in the DEIS. 1 ~2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 31 MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: Mr. Wade is saying it is impossible completely. MR. VOORHIS: It is up to the lead agency to determine the adequacy of the docu- ment. When it is submitted that review will take place, and information pertaining to the flood zones and the designation from the Federal Government, if this report is correct and they establish criteria for the con- struction of that dwelling as far as the sanitary systems that are regulated by the Health Department and they had standards as .... well which are referred to in this docu- mentation. So I would like to keep it to establish standards and variances, if we could ~oing back to the description of the proposed prOj.ect, we really would like to see a detailed discussion of exactly what is going to take place on the property. There is no way to assess the impact that will take place to the site without knowing exactly what is going to happen. That includes the location of the proposed project, access to the project site, the zoning, a description oz 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 32 the waterways', the design and layout, the sanitary system and Health Depar~tment com- pliance and water supply. We did put the outlined nesd for. a dock and parking facilitie~ with access to the site to be obtained by boats, and that certainly is a question I have. If there is going to be boat access, where will your upland facilities be? Will you have a place to park the car, and the dock or the shoreside facilities in order to access'the property? MR. WADE: Absolutely. MR. VOORHIS: I think that is an important item to include in a documentation. MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: Why would you. need a car? MR. VOORHIS: When you are on the mainland. THE CHAIRMAN: We are talking about an A and B 'site here. MR.' WADE: Transfer of development rights; is that what you said, Jerry? MR. VOORHIS: Under the future develop- ment, the water access you may want. 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 33 MR. ANDERSON: You may want to reiterat what the conditions for the permit issued by the Trustees originally were in the statement. And the reason for that is this. is going to be a public document. That I know. It is for an3one from the public to go in and know, well, he may say we had a Trustee permit. What was controlled under that? MR. WADE: WOulC It says recreational boat If I obtain access to my property by use. use of my 17-foot BostOn Whaler, is that recreational? MR. ANDERSON: I recommend you put it in the document. MR. WADE: Can you elaborate what is considered a commercial use of that dock? access to my home be commercial use? MR. ANDERSON: I am not a lawyer. What i am saying is it may be useful for you to refer to the conditions in your permit. MR. WADE: Do the Trustees in the Town of Southold have a differentiation in the type of dock permits issued? MR. BREDEMEYER: Yes. Based on our 1 3 4 ,5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 34 permit a dock for a single-fmai!y dwelling is now considered a Type 2 action. In other words, a dock used for recreatian is a Type 2 action, which ~he Board considered in an informal quick order, as you know with your application before the Board. We even go so far as individual properties, where the house is not even sited yet we do allow a dock for recreation to afford the owners acces~ to thewater. But in that context, the Trustee mean it to be for recreation, not for sole access. I think tha~ the reason it was stated explicitly on your permit, we do not want to contravene any action of another board such as Mr. Goehringer's in developing access in the public safety, issues ~hat surround 280A access. MR. WADE: Are you stating the Trustees' permits I obtained from the Town Trustees to construct a dock on my property is not going to be sufficient for me to gain access to my property? MR. BREDEMEYER: No. I am sayin~ this process here will be addressing the issues, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 35 but as it .was issued back then the Board was not prepared to make a statement about it being suitable in all ways to access your property as the legal sole accessee, because we were aware at that time of such a thing as the 280A acCess with the requirement realizing, in Mr. Goehringer's words, the reason why we are here. Hopefully~ this process will address that. MR. WADE: In my permit that i have existing right now for my dock. MR. BREDEMEYER: I have a copy here. It says recreational use only. That is to go fishing~ crabbing. The intent for the dock is it is an accessory structure. MR. HAJE: We may not have a problem because recreational boat use only -- Gus is not going to be doing any commercial boating to the property. He is going to be using his own boat which is a recreational boat. I .don't think that would contravene the con- dition. MR. BREDEMEYER: say that his access I am not trying to is going to contravene 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 $ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 36 the condition. At the time we issued it we did not want to construe that as being the acceptance by the Town of 280A access to the property. This is why we are here now, to address the concerns ~of the people. MR. HAJE: ~ appreciate that, but I think the adverse to that also be true, that your granting of this doesn't necessarily say that he can't use it for that purpose. MR. BREDEMEYER: That's correct. MR. HAJE: It says it is for recreational It is what we are going to use boats. Fine. it for. MR. ANDERSON: We are trying to scope an impact statement and in that impact state- ment tha~ issue should touch on it, the issue of water approval whether obtained and what the purpose is. MR. BREDEMEYER: The permit describes use. It didn't describe the vessel it would use. It is not an issue of commercial versus residential. We are not prepared to say it was sufficient for access. If we comment on the body of the information before us we would 1 3 4 6 7 8 9 1~) 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 37 be in a position to, at that point, comment that it would be acceptable'or unacceptable for access based on our work With the Zoning Board of Appeals and %heir review. MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: If you have not applied ~Dr the ~ock you could still certainly apply for the 280A access without a dock; just pull right up onto the shore. That has nothing to do with the dock. MR. BREDEMEYER: The clear intent of the Trustees was to allow you to enjoy your property, it has nothing to do with the construction of the house. As one of the members, last year I was involved in a question to the Board: Did this constitute a seg- mentation? There was interest in building a house. The Board felt no, let the man enjoy his property but let it be clearly stated it is for his recreational use. So we don't have a problem with the Zoning Board. MR. WADE: Perhaps my question should go to Mr. Goehringer, which is: Will this dock that I have a permit to construct in Eugene's Creek adjoining my property be 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 38 sufficient for the Zonign Board of Appeals to consider it as my access in lieu of getting to by a street, Mr. Goehringer? THE CHAI~V~AN: I have no problem with it. I am not an attorney, either. However, i am not si~stepping your question, i hawe no problem with it. i think the reason why Bruce brought it up, and correct me if I am wrong, Bruce, is that the Fleets Neck Property Owners' Association, which is the group that is most clearly related to your property and adjacent to, are going to be reading this document and I think the purpose of him bringi~ it up was to have that addressed in the docu- ment so we don't have to spend a great amount of time ~uring a!public hearing to address that particular issue. MR. WADE: I think it ought to be addressed because it is my means of access and I think it ought to be addressed very explicitl in your ~raft Environmental Impact Statement. THE CHAIRMAN: what you are saying? MR. ANDERSON: Is that more or less That is what I am asking. 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 39 MR. WADE: This particular dock Roy Haje designed and I intend to construct meet and satisfy all requirements of the Fire Department, if that is the case. If the fire marshal of the Town or the Chief of the Cutchogue Fire Department says that, you know, well, if we can't get there by land, how do we get there? By dock. is this dock Sufficien~ We will be than happy to address those question~ providing I know that this dock is.going to be my means of access to my house. MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: I understand if this dock -- if this application before the Trustees or the Trustees acted upon and granted a permit for it if it was the intent for recreational use.~ And I understand if it was your intent for permanent access in the future, doesn't it seem you would have to review it all over again to meet all of the requirements? MR. WADE: Yes. I already have the permit ~ r ko_ the dock. You issued me the permit. If you wanted a DEIS report and Scoping Session and SEQR review, you would have asked for it. MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: Because we didn't 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 40 intend it to be permanent access to the property. We did not intend it to be some- thing the Fire Department could not access your property from and it wasn't asked. MR. HAJE: Let's ask. ~andard for ~docks? MR. VOORHIS: Well, no. Is there any There is no standard that I know of right off the top of my head as far as docks are involved with the Fire Department. Basically, we are talking about a dock. We are not'talking a continuous path from land to land. This is a dock. MR. WADE: This dock construes from landward edge down within -- out into the creek 60 feet. Is that right? MR. HAJE: Something like that. MR. McCAFFERY: My only question~ and I am probably jumping out of turn: If there was a fire on your property what do I do to get my men and hose and equipment there? That is my only concern. MR. WADE: Drive right down the street and walk right to my property, sir. MR. HAJE: Unless they dig it away. 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 41 MR. WADE: They still can walk around from the Fleets Neck Property Owners' Association. My land is separated by one foot of water on the whole southerly border of my property, if they dig out one foot of water -- can you span one foot of the hose? MR. McCAFFERY: .creek, Chief~ with Yes, one foot I can understand. Let's put it this way. I just want to make sure that, as i say, by the time this gets done I will no longer be Chief. really want to make sure my Board of Fire Commissioners are aware of what goes on. I am not here to argue whether a house is to be built or not. I am just here to protect the Fire District. MR. WADE: The water is not going to be separating my property by other than a foot on the whole southern side of my property if they decide to dig it out. THE CHAI~¥~N: Chick to go back. MR. VOORHiS: I guess we are ready for Just getting back on tracl the next section will have to do with the 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 42 environmental setting of the property which should really be much more straightforward. The geology of the property in my mind really just encompasses what the surface soils are like and what the surface soils are like in ~rmsof ~he £~nctionin~ of the sanitary system and support of the structure. The soil survey of Suffolk County provides information on surface soil and I would expect to see a test hole of the soil, the surface soil, certainly at least the groundwater and, if subsurface excavation'is required, to the depth of excavation. MR. WADE: Would you accept it from the Suffolk County Health Department, because we already dug a test hole and we dug down 12 feet? MR. VOORHIS: Yes. I believe I saw the location, but not the actual profile on the survey. MR. WADE: There is a profile with the Suffolk County Health Department. MR. BREDEMEYER: Where are you on the check list? 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 43 MR. VOORHIS: Page 16. MR. BREDEMEYER: Let's go back a second. We go% out of stride as far as the design and layout section. I am trying to get Bruce's attention here. We don't have the Trustees' wetlands line on the property yet, as far as setting. I think Mr. Wade might want to have his consultant, Mr. Haje, meet with Bruce Anderson. MR. ANDERSON: We need a wetlands line on the survey. MR. BREDEMEYER: We don't have the jurisdictional wetland line for the Board of Trustees, where the Board of Trustees will place the landward limits of the total wet- lands. It has to be on the survey, which we are going to use in our evaluation along with the application. That line is to be placed with the consultant, with the Trustees and Mr. Anderson working with the surveyor of the environmental consultants to Mr. Wade. They can take those points off as soon as they are reflected so there is accurate representation on the licensed land survey. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 44 MR. VOORHIS: That's fine. I think we would have picked it up under ecology but it certainly is important in terms of design, because that's ~hat our setbacks are going to be based on. The site is relatively flat. I think slope is just to the extent that maybe concern that as construction occurs or soil stabilization occurs through the trails or landscaping that anything that may take place around the structure may cause erosion in the waterway and the slope and topography of the site are important from that standpoint -- groundwater reverses. The test hole should show the depth of the water. So the water season area shown is important because your sanitary!system, ~he final leaching elevation has to be two feet above seasonal high water. I am not'reai!y clear what the water supply situation is for the site° MR. WADE: Reversed osmosis. THE CHAI~V~N: Reversed, Chick. At some times quite shallow under the Points. MR. WADE: I would push it out of the bay. 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 45 a~ MR. VOORHIS: Just to address th u~ I believe Article 4 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code deals with the water supply. MR. WADE: They already approved ito MR. VOORHiS: You do have approval for reverse osmo si s.. MR. WADE: Yes. MR. VOORHIS: There was a section in the description of the project for water supply. That would be appropriate in that section. I think just for original groundwater mapping you can discuss the general flow of ground- water. I am not really too concerned about that, because you are adjacent to the bay. MR. WADE: At this point in time the Suffolk County dePartment is allowing me to flush the toilet with salt water, anything that is pumped out of the ground, and reverse osmosi would only be required for the drinking part of the water in the house because there are so many wells right here in the North Fork that don't have potable water. I imagine 75 percent of the homes in Southold don't have potable water as such, so to preclude me from using 1 2 3 4 ,5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 46 unpo~able water. Now they are letting people use unpotable water to flush toilets because it is going through the toilet and back out into the system, and then only potable water is going through the faucet. $o you have a second system. MR. VOORHIS: In terms of water resources, the relationship between ground- water and surface water will be important. So the prime concern here when we get the information will be the sanitary system, what effects that may have on bay water quality. Again, I think an acknowledgment of the relationship between groundwater and surface water will be important in this section. In terms of ecolo~y~ it is fairly straightforwar, like the list of vegetation items on the project site. MR. WADE: What page? MR. VOORHIS: Bottom of Page 16. Again value of wildlife habitat; unique, rare and endangered species; distribution of vegetation dominance -- association -- it is fine. Shellfish and wildlife require a list 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 47 of the wildlife species utilizing this site seasonally/permanently. Number III discusses the wetlands, and that will be where we will be looking for the wetlands boundary. Dnd~r Euman Resources~ Transportation; we are not concerned about the effect on the Town roadway. It is one dwelling. However, just in terms of the existing structures, some discussion should be applied on the roads accessing the site° MR. ANDERSON: Could we back up to "wetlands"; the last part says "Discussion of benefits." Maybe it is simpler to say, "All benefits described in the Department of Environ mental Conservation Title Wetlands Law" -- cover them all. I want to say we are reflectin Pa~e 17, 3b, and an extension of that last classification. MR. VOORHIS: with them. MR. HAJE: Yes. MR. ANDERSON: I am sorry. Roy is quite familiar Each one has to be -- 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 48 MR. VOORHIS: No. That's what it is for. "Land Use and Zoning; description of existing land use and project site," as vacant and surrounding land use which is residential as well as Trustees' land -- as well as the homeowner -- shouLd be discussed. MR. WADE: If I am an island i don't have adjacent land. MR. ANDERSON: As well as underwater lands. MR. VOORHIS: And the zoning as well. As far as land use plans, I guess, in terms of the Town itself the land use plan would be the zoning map in effect now based on the resolutio] conducted in 1989. THE CHAI~N: MR. BREDEMEYER: Right. January 10, 1989. I guess in that context the Trustees intent of putting the small boat facility in there is a land use plan. I give you a copy of that resolution right now. MR. VOORHIS: I think also following in line with that, John, would be discussion of the future development in terms of pressure, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 49 things that may occur based on the existing land use and existing zoning and ownership matters. The 208 study is land use plan, which we see as regulating what can take place on the piece of property. Article 6 of the Sanitary Code is the implementation of that. That should.be discussed just in terms of the single-family residential dwelling and the lot size. The Nationwide Urban Runoff Protection Program really just discusses runoff and the effect on groundwater?and surface water. Then there may be some important recommendations in there, which may be appropriate for the site. UndEr "Community Service" I really just~ulled out the State list: educational facilities; fire is one we discussed some and the Chief may wish %o add anything else that there may be, again keeping in mind this is a single-family residence. This is not a major condominium project. It is one residence. We don't have to be able to put that into too much detail, no public water supply. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 50 Under "Cultural Resources" I think it is important to recognize that the site is on important visual resources. It provides view heads both across the property and from the waterway, and certainly that is one of the desirabilities in using the site but the view and the visual aspects of the property should be outlined. As far as "Historic and Archeological Resources" I think just in reference to the Carrier Circle~ the Anchor Man, there is some contact with the State Parks Department under which the State Historic Preservation Officer -- or some indication as to whether this property may be sensitive. !Under "Noise" I think that the major concern we are talking about is a single- family residence. However, there will be an increase in noise level which should be recoqnized above what is there presently and this may affect certain wildlife resources or other resources. ~R. WADE~ You ~¢ant the noise level after a party on a Saturday night or before? 1 2 3 4 .5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 51 MR. VOORHiS: It certainly is somethin~ that could be mentioned. Under Section 58 through H are some significant environmental impacts we %o;ould like to have addressed in detail. There are items addressed in the Environmental Assessmen· Form and Positive Declaration and some of them we touched upon before and basically what this section will do is look at the existing resources of the site, identify it in the previous section, superimpose the project as will be described in the first section and determine what the impacts are. We are talkinc about alterations of the groundwater and sur- face water quality from sanitary setbacks and this is!an area where the Health Department is looking for a setback between the sanitary system and the surface water of 100 feet on this property. it is 80 feet. I believe the survey shows So I think there is certainly a recognized impact just on the fact it does not meet recognized standards. I would like to have a discussion on that impact, some profile of the system in terms of meeting the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 52 t~o feet above groundwater should be demon- strated and if not, again, what those impacts might be just staying with the sanitary system. I don't really know the status with the Health Department if he fail~ but to my knowledge they do require the system to be set five feet off the property line and I believe they require eight feet between, pools. So the system as shown I do not believe would meet their standards. MR. WADE: The Department of Environ- mental Conservation only wanted us back about 50 feet. It was the Suffolk County Health Department that recommended the pool be moved back. MR. VOORHIS: Do you have a permit, at this time, from the Department of Health? MR. WADE: Yes. MR. VOORHIS: Please present that in the report and we will determine that it is up to date and, again, the Health Department will have the opportunity to review. MR. WADE: It is not up to date and it won't be up to date until such time as I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 53 have this problem sett&ed with -- at the Town level. So it is a Catch-22 situation. MR. VOORHIS: permit. MR. WADE: They did not issue the The permit has been issued but it expired'just like any other permit I have had, and I am in the process of trying to renew those permits. MR. VOORHIS: I think that means you don't have the permit. MR. WADE: I have a letter to the intent that the permit will be reinstated by the Suffolk County Health Department, when, in fact, the access issues and Trustees' permits are obtained. MR. VOORHIS: Okay. The b~st way to handle this -- I don't want to really get into 'it now -- but present the information in the impact statement. The Health Department will have the opportunity to review this, and I wil just say that: 1) It doesn't meet the surface water setbacks. That is the configuration does not appear to meet the setbacks as I am familiar 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 2~ 22 23 24 25 54 with them, at this time, at least what is in effect now and we would like to iron out some of these irregularities. We talked about appropriate use of site due to flooding potential. This might be an area where if it was flood zoned and you have documentation it woul( be useful, but I think some acknowledgment of %he flood zone and the elevation of the house - that is the house that has to be constructed -- and based on the flood zone regulations. MR. WADE: The' living floor space in the house is approximately 14 feet off of the ground, which is at eight feet above sea level now. MR. VOORHIS: You are well above that.. MR. WADE: I would hope. MR. VOORHIS: "Ecological Impacts Resulting From Use and Occupation of the Site for Residential Purposes, as Related to Identified Species." We don't know what the ecological impacts will be yet, but that will be required as part of the environmental setting. 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 55 MR. ANDERSON: Yes. I want to include to that "creek Surface Waters." So ecological impacts resulting from use and expansion of the site from creek surface water. i refer you back to Page 16 under "Water Resources," where it says "Classi£icatiol according to New York State Department of Health and/or New York State Department of Environmental Conservation." What I want you to do is relate~ the action and to how this classification might be affected for the creek. MR. VOORHIS: Again Bruce had mentioned before, listing what the wetlands functions are in terms of Article 25~ the potential impairment of each one of those valuable functions should be discussed under "E" of the "Significant Environmental Impacts." MR. ANDERSON: MR. VOORHIS: the proposed project. "Function" means benefit~ "F": the conformance of This compares the pro- ject to those plans, the surrounding land uses zoning that were identified in the environmenta setting. "G" I think is important. "Visual 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 t0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 56 intrusion of site which may affect ability to enjoy views of waterways, and impair landward view from waterways." In the visual deter- mination -- end of Part 3, it certainly is recognized that the property is privately owned. However, the State Law, all the way through Part 1, part of the State Law tlhrough the Environmental Assessment Form talks about scenic qualities, open spaces, enjoyment -- that kind of thing -- and I think it should be discussed. It should be recognized that there will be an effect to-the visual aesthetic quality of the site. "H" I think must have already been dis- cussed by the Trustees in their issuance of the .per,it. So that can be struck from the outline. MR. BREDEMEYER: That is correct. You can strike "H" from the outline. MR. VOORHIS: Just "Mitigation Measures" would be for those impacts which I identified in Section 5. Section 5 determines what mitigation measures may be available and refers to the State list and refers to what they have 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 57 to mend to minimize the' impacts and I think in preparation of the EIS. We are all fairly familiar with these mitigation measures that are directly from the State Law. MR HAJE: "(1.a) Use excavated ~ater±at f~r t~d re~tamat±~~ mean? MR. VOORHIS: ~ what does that The idea would be -- I think I would like to see some indication of where the material will be from. The excavatiol from the sanitary system, if it can be used on the site that is fine. If it has to be remove~ from the site, I guess that is fine too~ but we have to have some information on how that will be accomplished. MR. HAJE: ! The: wording here, the word "reclamation'' -- we are not proposing to reclaim land. That would seem to indicate to me we are going to be filling in water or something. MR. VOORHIS: I don't think that is advisable. Let's leave it that -- identify what will be done with the excavating material and I will just say if it qualifies -- all of 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 58 this was taken out of the State list and it is probably a little out of context. MR. HAJE: Next one, too. MR. VOORHIS: the site. TM Ct[AIRM_A~: There is no topsoil on The issne, Chick~ of topsoil -- and we had addressed that briefly as one of the areas I had given Mr. Wade in our first meeting with him on Saturday in April -- and I asked him specifically what the top dressing was going to be on the property. He told me it was going to be just the ~ay it is. It was going to be sand. I would hope that that would be restated in the project DEIS, because the use of fertilizer and so forth would definitely cause a problem in this particular area. MR. VOORHIS~ Yes. MR. WADE: There is a use for topsoil to refill the construction, topsoil for restoration and landscaping. MR. VOORHIS: Again, I do not really think it is necessary to go through this. I will just reiterate these are the mitigation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 59 measures straight out of the State list, mitigating the impacts identified in Section The next section would be an identifi- cation of Section VII!. of Page 20 of the avoided considering the mitigation measures. Okay. The area really for the most discussion I think is the alternatives of the project. I have included some that I thought would be appropriate. Page 20, "Alternatives," the State Law again requires the investigation of alternatives to the proposed project. The "No Action" alternative is one that is required to be discussed by law. Other alternatives may!have to do with modification of the plan such as relocated structures, changing the size of structures, possible alternatives. These are general alternatives which are usually looked for, because of the site and some of the constraints these may be limited to on this particular project. But I have included a list of the site layout, the location of the structures. Again, I did not 1 2 3 4 5 6 .7 8 9 1'0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 60 do enough analysis and we don't have the individual wetland boundaries to determine how constraining the property is. I believe it is extremely constrained bec~u~ it doesn't meet the minimum setback requirement under Article 25-of the ECL. MR. WADE: What is ECL? MR. VOORHIS: Environmental Conser- vation Law. It seems as though relocating structures is probably not goin9 to have an effect, once we determine the boundaries. It' really picking the area of the site .which will provide the maximum setbacks. MR. HAJE: I have a question, Chick. I think it is certainly something I don't think has been done in Southold. THE CHAIRMAN: There was only one done and basically it was not sustained by the courts. There was a problem with it. MR. HAJE: appropriate here. I don't think that is really That is Usually an indicatic where you want to preserve some foliage area and increase density somewhere else. We are proposing one house here. It wouldn't be 1 2 3 4 5 6 :7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 61 appropriate. Either you have a building lot somewhere else or you don't. MR. VOORHIS: One way it might bear in a case like this, if there is a piece of Town land that were less sensitive, some portion of ~h~ Tow~nt~mt could be allocated for That purpose, there could be some type of transfer that would take place. That is one example of a single family. MR. WADE: The Supervisor simply states the Town thinks this~is a very sensitive piece of property and they don't want to see me bui] my house there. I would be than happy to transfer developer rights. Find me another piece of property I can build a home on. will be happy to solve the Town's problem. MR. VOORHIS: I don't know what the procedures are, but going to the site and looking at the site plan this is a sizable -- this is a sensitive piece of property and obviously the Trustees and the Zoning Board of Appeals made the right decision in requiring Environmental Impact Statements because the project as proposed would have an environmental 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 62 ~ffect and most likely a significant one. It doesn't meet the setback standards and so I do see this as a very sensitive piece of property and this option probably should be explored. F~R. BREDEMEYER: There is a viable to satisfy the Board of Trustees or involved agencies that may have serious concern about the project in requesting that their part of the review would include a look into the alternatives, because obviously there would be limitations to your ability to conduct the search. MR. VOORHIS: Does the Town have an inventory of the property? MR. BREDEMEYER: Not presently. MR. VOORHIS: Tax maps? MR. BREDEMEYER: Tax maps. THE CHAIRMAN: Well, I just am thinking, Chick, the most recent one we saw in Brookhaven was moving the Grucci fire -- '81, '84, and where they moved it from the downtown South Bellport area to up. in the middle of basically a commercial zone but away from everyone else. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 63 Of course, part of the Brookhaven industrial study, now just recently voted on by the Brookhaven Town Board -- another one I found interetsting and probably has more effect is the one on Mount Sinai Harbor, where they had an individual person who had a restaurant and a small marina boa% yard and what they actually did was swap him property and put him down further away from the Town ramp -- the mooring area. MR. VOORHIS: And out of ~he more sensitive back harbor area. I really don't think it is beyond the scope of the study to look at some tax maps in the area, at least within the district, and see if there are other appropriate parcels. MR. WADE: Is that my obligation? MR. VOORHIS: i am saying I don't think it is beyond the scope to take a look at the tax maps. MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: They're saying, that's swapping an existing business for an alternate site as opposed to here where we are swapping a piece of property that doesn't 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 64 have any improvements on it for something that would be a buildable site. MR. VOORHIS: This may seem out of character for a consultant, but he is paying taxes on it and it is private land. It ihas ~at~e potential ~til ~hown otherwise. MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: It has a lot of merit MR. HAJE: Before we go through that effort, that could be a sizable effort, I think it would be appropriate to determine: A) Whether the Town has anything. B) Whether if they do have anything, they would be willing to do it.because if we can discuss it, you know, at length and if the Town says, "No, that's not really what we are interested in," what is the point? MR. WADE: We'd belabor the point., spending a lot of money doing the survey at which point the Town doesn't have any real estate they want to transfer. MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: It doesn't make sense to discuss it until you've got an appropriate site to consider. Say you've got five sites and, or whatever, then we could be in discussio 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1'9 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 65 on the specific sites. .MR. WADE: Let's strike it out of the report and if you come up with a site we will be more than happy to talk to you° MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: It should be left in the~e if it is worth consideration. ~MR. VOORHIS: school district? THE CHAIRMAN: MR. VOORHIS: What is the size of the Mattituck/Cutchogue. Waterfront land within the school district owned by the Town. You might find they are all either more sensitive -- there may not be anything but it certainly narrows the scope of the study. MR. HAJE: You did not say similarly. You said! land. So I mean it could be that property that the Town developed out East there. 'I mean that land, too. It is in the middle of the woods somewhere. MR. VOORHIS: Let's say similar land -- this is an open discussion -- similar land within the same school district. MR~ BREDEMEYER: Fine. What would be the prQblem? 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1.7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 66 MR.~ HAJE: With~Mr. Wade describing the suitability of that alternative site and describing those factors he would be looking for and then just left to that, it would be the individual agencies who are commenting on the documents -- MR. BREDEMEYER: If you desire certain sites of parameter it could be contingent on your accepting the alternate site concept and require that the alternate agency review the Board's copy and that would be something we could accept or give to the Town Board of Trustees. MR. HAJE: It would be the same idea with acquisition. We would be willing to sell the!property to any Town Board, state or private, if they would give a reasonable price But, you know, we can only go so far. We are not -- at least I don't think that Gus is ready to give it away. MR. WADE: look so far. MR. VOORHIS: You said you don't have to It is as simple as lookin¢ at the adjacent lands, which is closer to 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ~9 2O 21 22 23 24 25 67 access to the East End,~and determining whether the wetlands setbacks are maximized and compare that to how the Trustees might utilize your par. cel in the swap.. That is an example~. It is right there in front of us, but that is the type of thing I think 3ou should do on similar lands within the school district and you might find that certain parcels drop out very quickly because they are non-constrained or totally unsuitable for residential purposes. Again, I don't think it is bey6nd the scope of this study, now that we narrowed it to be a similar land within the school district for the purpose of perhaps determining if a residential dwelling would be more appropriate on an alternate site. MR. WADE: You are asking me to d0 that in my study, which would take months and months of time on the real estate broker's !par't. Now I've got to engage a real estate broker to find another parcel suitable. MR. VOORHIS: i don't think that is necessary ~ you look at the tax map I wanted uo get it narrowed down that way, not 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 leave the door wide MR. WADE: could take years. MR. VOORHIS: open. This could take forever. John, you want to check for similar parcels which to me would mean waterfront. T mean, I don't ~hink an inland parcel is similar and a parcel within the same school district. MR. WADE: Before we do that I would want some assurance from the Southold Town Board that a transfer of development rights would be equitable. Then we include it in our survey. So let's put it on the record tDnight that if the transfer of developer rights would be acceptable -- THE CHAi~¥~N: This is not a transfer. This is a swap. MR. WADE: The Town Board of the Town of Southold would have to buy the property and swap deeds with me. Before %~e go into surveys and do anything big, I want assurance from the Town Board of the Town of Southold that if we are going to include it in our survey and be made to go out and find another Thi~ 3 4 5 6 ,7 8 9 10 1t 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 69 piece of property and include it in our EIS report, that I want assurance from the Town Board of Southold that they would swap deeds upon Ks finding another parcel that would be suitable to me to swap the DTR transfer of Tight'to 'G~st~ Wade from the propertyhe presently owns at the end of East Road. (Discussion held off the record) THE CHAIRMAN: Gus, what you said was a little different than from what Chick said. Chick said, "Property that was owned by' the Town." Now you are saying -- MR. WADE: own any property. THE CHAIRMAN: I did not say that. We don't kn~w that, at this point. MR. WADE: In fact, we should omit it from the survey. MR. BREDEMEYER: The Town does own waterfront properties. They do. We don't have an inventory. As such they are on the tax map. We know that. MR. DOYEN: Buildable? MR. VOORHIS: You told me the Town doesn't That is the question that 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 70 really would have to be answered. MR. BREDEMEYER: Yes. There are some buildable properties. MR. WADE: We will be doing business with Trustees, swapping deeds with Trustees or ~e Town of MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: We don't want to swap if we had to go through this sort of extensive study and repeat this whole process. I think if we wanted to make a swap it would be for a site that was morebuildable. MR. DOYEN: Sure. MR. VOORHIS: in whose case, the Trustees; or are the Trustees going to build houses, affordable housing? MR.· HAJE: No. What he is saying is that the Trustees or the Town's property should be more buildable than Gus' (Discussion held off the record) THE CHAIRMAN: For the sake of clarifi' cation, there would be the Trustees and the Town Board. Mr. Wade, just for the sake of clarification, the Town Board or the Board of Trustees could be active in this particular 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 71 item because the Trustees hold the lands with the right ~to convey the properties of the Trustees.~!~ It should be directed to the Trustees as well as to the Town Board. MR. WADE,: ~ At my request. I would like to have it entered into ~he minutes tonight, we include it in our survey -- DEIS report -- providing the Town of Southold and the Trustee~ of the Town of Southo!d are amenable to discussing transfer of development rights. safe. MR. VOORHIS: MR. HAJE: I think that is pretty Can I suggest something else? I have not heard this. I don't think we discussed this before. If there is a possi- bility~ thy don't we look into it first before we go through all this nonsense? Maybe we can eliminate this whole thing, and get Gus a decent piece of property that is not felt to be so sensitive and get this purchased or swapped by the Town. There is no reason why you cannot approach this whole situation right now, as of the end of this evening. It is up to you.iThey must know what they own. 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 THE CHAIRMAN: point, to perfect the DEIS. So whatever period of time that takes you to do it, you choose to take two weeks to discuss this with the Trustees before you perfect this DEIS, ~ha~'s fine wi~h me~ MR. HAJE: It sounds like a pretty exciting possibility to me. MR. WADE: I spent the better part of two hours in Supervisor Scott Harris' °ffice, about four months ago, discussing the same thing we are discussing tonight. He prepared different addendums and minutes, and he pre- sented to the Town Board to buy my land. I said to him, "Well, Scott, if you are going to give me !X amount~of dollars for my property I want to be able to replace my building with another'building lot in the Town of Southold. Unless you can do that, don't call me back." Well, he had his attorney call my attorney back and forth and they couldn't come up with another piece of property, evidently, because I went to the real estate broker two days afte~ that -- spent four and a half days with him 72¸ It is up to you~ at this 1 2 3 4 5 6 ? 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1;7 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 73 up and down every crook and cranny and street in the Town of Southold. MR. VOORHIS: That's looking for a vacant piece presently on the market. MR. WADE: What else do I have to go too. MR. VOORHIS: This is another possibilit. MR. WADE: I wanted a piece of property I could get my boat out of, that's got a four-foot level at low tide. Someplace I can go out and enjoy my property -- put up residence and reside there. End of story. MS. SERWERDA: But you did not ask him for transferring of the property that the Town owns. MR. WADE: suggested it. i su~rgested we could make a swap, if the Town has property and I wanted to swap a piece of deed for a deed. End of story. MR. VOORHIS: If the real estate pro- posal were on the table now, you know, I certainly think that it would be entertained. i mean that is just my opinion, but you are 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 74 'looking at preparing an Environmental Impact Statement. It takes a number of dollars and a number of months to do that. Part of that -- what we are saying right now is, that we would like you to look into ~his transfer of develop- MR. WADE: Before I do that~ I would like assurance from the Town Board or the Town Trustees that something like this can happen. MR. VOORHIS: I will come at your request. I am sure John and Albert will report back to their Board members. I believe that is wrapping up to'the DTDR concept. I do not really see any other possibilities there -- alternative sites -- I don't know if you can get a smaller structurs. MR. WADE: Well, the Town has a Building Code. It says it has to be a minimum of 700 square feet by 900 square feet. THE CHAIRMAN: MR. ANDERSON: THE CHAI~N: one floor. MR. WADE: It is 850. 850; is that one floor? 750, two floors; 850, But we have. another problem 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 75 because DEC originally gave me permits based on the fact this building only has a footprint of about only 15 feet on the main street -- no, 15 feet on the pile line -- excuse me -- basically. Okay. When Roy Haje and I first went to DEC to obtain a permit, they stated -- they said, "Prepare some type of a plan with the house that is environmentally sound." We came back to the pile line shape house. They said, "Fantastic." It's got a 15-foot foot- print on the ground. MR. BREDEMEYER: Can we assume this is held by the DEC? ~ MR. ANDERSON: I think you should stay it as much as you can. MR. VOORHIS: I don't see any alternati% in terms of size. It appears to be as small as it can getf which is the method of mini- mizing impacts. THE CHAIRMAN: That's a good point, Roy, to pass that along to the building inspector to see if there is any alternative variances required, because it would be ak this point we would like to address that same 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 76 issue and get it in. So speak to either Mr, Lessard or -- he's concerned about only having 15 feet on the first story ands of course, we are concerned about what the elevation floor is because we are the ones that deal with the variance from ~he f!~od plan. Is this zone -- MR. VOORHIS: THE CHAI~V~N: MR. VOORHIS: a~4. Is that eight feet? Eight feet. MR. WADE: Property -- right. And the ground level is 8i. 3 feet according to VanTuyl'/~ survey where the piles are for the house presently. The elevation from there is.another eight feet to the first of the living floors plus or minus~ and then you have the living area which is another eight feet; then the roof. THE CHAI~U~N: What we are referring to is the lowest floor. MR. WADE: The lowest floor would be 16 feet above mean high water. is. THE CHAI~LAN: That is exactly what it You ~ould be eight feet above whatever is 1 2 4 5 6 ~7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 77 presently there at grade. MR. WADE: Right. THE CHAI~AN: So you're fine. I would ask Mr. Lessard. No question about it. MR. ANDERSON: I hate to keep going back, ~t ~metime~ when ~ g~ through these outlines what happens later, you know, triggers something. Maybe we can talk about the design and layout. What I forgot to mention is that you have what looks like a septic system on that property, is that correct? MR. VOORHiS: There is something in the There is a cover -- is a concrete He says he put the It looks as though there ground. cover. THE CHAIRMAN: septic ~n already. MR. V ~ OORHIS: is a cover over a leaching ring. MR. WADE: Not that. MR. ANDERSON: Your property has a septic ring and you just mentioned the footing. I did not see footing. I want to know exactly what is on the property right now. I' think it should be shown in the survey. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 78 When I was out there i noted at least one septic. It might have been a lid. Maybe there was a ring or underneath there. I don't know. MR. WADE: There is absolutely nothing ~ ~y ~roperty other than 29 pilings. MR. ANDERSON: There is a septic concret ring, if I am not -- I can show you where it is on the -- which' one I think it is. I believe one of the rings is there (indicating). MR. VOORHIS: It is possible it is over there (indicating!). MR. WADE: MR. HAJE: property. ~R. ANDERSON: Not on my'property. Maybe it is on Fleet's Neck The monuments are on .your property -- the stake, is it not? MR. WADE: Correct. It was five different times~ and five different times the Fleet's Neck Property Owners' Association went and took them out. MR. ANDERSON: You are talking about design and layout, and we are referring to the/ existing conditions. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2o 21 22 23 24 25 MR. WADE: MR. ANDERSON: and Layout." MR. WADE: 79 What page are you on? Let's go back: "Design~ What page is that? MR. ANDERSON: Page 15. I mentioned we need ~ wetlands line but I ~lso'men~ioned there are, I believe -- and I could be wrong -- there is a septic system within the property. It might be a lid. It might be a ring, but from what I gathered were the stakes on your property. It looked like it was on your property. Would you check that out? MR. WADE: That would be news to me. MR. BREDEMEYER: There were some rumors some stuff was there when Mr. Glover (phonetic) owned the property. structure there. MR. ANDERSON: Maybe. there is an old If it is on your property I believe it should be placed on the survey I mentioned, because we already asked for the wetlands line. So it seems to me if there is any structure on the property it should be on the survey. MR. WADE: That's not a problem. 1 2 5 6 .7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 80 MR. ANDERSON: Is that fair enough? MR. WADE: Sure. MR. VOORHIS: As far as alternatives, we discussed -- bottom of Page 20 and just about done -- you talked about acquisitions before, i think the ~rth Fo~k ~n~ironmen~al Council Agency -- I don't know if this would be a decision with the lead agency -- whether they looked to have you address their comments in the Environmental Impact Statement, but they certainly outlined a number of different acquisition possibilities. It's one of the alternatives to the use of the property, given the environmental sensitivity and depending on what the impact analysis shows. I don't really ~now what's best other than to p~rhaps contact in writing agencies that may be in a position to acquire the parcel. I do see it as a multi-denial thing anytime you have a single-family residence on an extremely sensitive piece of property, if the permit is denied -- denies the right to the use of your property -- and some compensation is required;~_ that in this case the Health Department is 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 81 issuing permits. The Trustees are issuing permits. The Zoning Board of Appeals is issuing permits, and it is a multi-denial thing In order to look at tkis alternative I think really the only thing you could do at this ti~e is in writ±n'g request~hether there is interest in it and whether that is a possi- bility. Other than that, I don't think it is appropriate to get into a proposal or anything beyond that, at this time, at least, but it may be something to be developed in the final Environmental Impact Statement depending on the impact analysis. THE CHAIRMAN: To answer your question, Chick, if they don't deal with what you just mentioned and all that it has addressed in some respect from your point of view, then it is going to be a continual thing that they will be bringing up, say, "Why haven't you addressed that particular issue?" So I think it would behoove them to address it, if they could. I mean, to the best of their ability. MR. VOORHIS: That pertains to the overall letter from the NFEC. 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1'7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE CHAIRMAN: MR. VOORHIS: up as comments. MR. WADE: 8 2 ¸: Yes. I guess it's got to come Chick, I have no qualms to discussing anything with anybody, Town Board or T~wn Trust~es or anything, but what ! am not about to do is to get into another scenario where the property has the same amount of complaining neighbors around me or whatever -- as the Fleet's Neck and Mr. Nowacheck (phonetic MR. VOORHIS: Let me just clarify, at least in my mind and you may disagree, but I don't see this as a swap or in any way through this process has it provided me with an equivalent piece of property. I see this as providing you with compensation based on the market value for your property. That's how I see the acquisitional alternative and it is up to you. It is different from a transfer to developer rights. It is just compensation based on fair market value for your property. That's the way I see the acquisition. It is up to you to say where you may purchase real estate in the future. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 83 MR. WADE: No real estate value comes down on the North Fork. There is a possi- bility. I am not here to say that, hey -- I just would like to see the thing resolved. The who, why, where, whatever. MR. VOORHIS: I am just indicating it has to be addressed, and I am sure Roy has chosen -- perhaps he has incorporated it into other impact statements but it is required by law and this submitment of resources really would just pertain to identifying those natural and human resources previously listed. I did put one in here embodied under "Growth Inducing Aspects," and to me it is development approval of construction on this lot requiring the var%ances -- that is requiring variances on other similar parcels. It is a tough one. It is a.tough one, but I really see again the DEC requires 75 feet for the structure. This is 60 feet. The Health Department requires 100 feet per sanitary system. This is 60 feet. It sets a precedent in my mind. MR. HAJE: How do I know what other similar parcels there are? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ~7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 84 MR. VOORHiS: I think it would suffice to acknowledge that it could create a prece- dent and cause growth in certain sensitive areas. I would be satisfied with that. MR. BREDEMEYER: It also could create of waste. In other words, there could be plus and minus comments on such a -- MR. VOORHIS: Exactly. I am not lookin. for an analysis really. I think it is just an acknowledgment. MR. HAJE: The standard line of Charte~' Hamilton of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation is that each application is viewed on its own merits and not necessarily applicable to other points. MR. VOORHIS: Is that reality? .MR. HAJE: It must be. He is a representative of the Department of Environ- mental Conservation and a speaker at every hearing I have ever been to. It must be true. MR. VOORHIS: It is not true. The guy that looks for approval is looking at 10 or 15 other projects that are exactly the 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 85 same, that they give approval to. MR. WADE: That is the basis whether they issue a permit in the beginning, because on Fisherman's Point the houses are within 25 feet of the water edge there. The Depart- ment ~£ E~vir~men%atC~nservation~r£gina!!F stated to us, upon applying for our permit for the home, that they would create a 500- foot radius map and if we could show the Department of Environmental Conservation that within the 500-foot radius of properties that other dwellings existed with similar nature that then they would have to approve my permit based on the fact that there are other homes within 500 feet that are built as~ close -- within ~lose proximity of the water's edge as my home would be and get what rights on Fisherman's Point there are -- 12 or 15 homes all of which are joined. Okay? You walk out the back door and you are in the water -- five feet -- ten feet -- fifteen feet -- twenty-five feet. So at which point basically -- it is not an exception to the rule because on Fisherman's Point there are 15 homes all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16, 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 86 of which are within 10 feet of the water's edg~ MR. VOORHIS: All I am saying -- my poin~ is that they are bound by their previous decisions regardless of what Charles Hamilton says. It would be precedent, and that's the specific ~xampt~ of it. So that would apply to the Trustees' decision. That would apply to the Trustees' decision, as well the Health Department's decision. That's it. THE CHAIR~N: That is my point exactl~ The only other thing I wanted to mention was the same thing you mentioned, that the Saturday morning I covered the ground or the lack of fertilization, the lack of grass. We covered the dock, the A and B sites ~ssues, and the only other issue was the visual issue of extending powerlines to the site. That is the only other issue that we are concerned about. MR. WADE: General Electric came out wi{h new solar power and I can put those solar panels on my roof. Those solar panels generate enough energy. They are two by four solar panels. Those solar panels generate enough 1 2 3 4 5 ,6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 87 energy and those solar panels tranfer the energy down those batteries and you have enough energy to completely run a home self- sufficient. I don't even need Long Island Lighting Company, at this point, for elec- tricity to my site because the solar panels generate the energy I need and unless the Town doesn't allow solar panels on my roof -- I don't need Long Island Lighting Company. THE CHAI~M~AN: Waht about Cablevision? MR. WADE: I don't have Cablevision at my home now. THE CHAIRMAN: You don't live out here now. MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: That'is not the requirement. THE CHAIRMAN: I am saying if he is running overhead power lines, he is going to run overhead telephone lines and overhead cable lines. MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: MR. WADE: I don't need them. If I could put the solar generator -- that I could put on my roof and put them in the battery. You are not going to. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 tl 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 88 MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: You can always get the satellite dish -- a wand even. MR. BREDEMEYER: One thing the Trustees previously had was a court action for the exclusive easement for the construction of ~ads, but I ~o~'t k~ if~.~ehave entertained or discussed utilities and LILCO going down below Trustee lands. I don't know if that is something you want to approach in the Trustees' application. MR. WADE: Company and Long Island Lighting Company has aerial easements, and in the Town of Southold there are about 60 aerial easements right now whereby the Town of Southold, whether or not k~owingly, they allowed LILCO to string wires over the water. In fact, those 60 aerial easementsf whether they are permitted or not, is unbeknownst to me, but there are 60 places within this Town right now whereby Long island Lighting Company has their wires stretching over your bodies of water. MR. KRUPSKI, JR.: Sure. I am not surprised. I went to Long Island Lightin~ 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 89 MR. WADE: If you want to go back and claim jurisdictiOn and tell LILCO to take their wires down, be my guest. MR. BREDEMEYER: Al's feelings are. MR. WADE: don't know what I~ is really strange. MR. BREDEMEYER: He has got cable going across a state park, I know, and a few other places. I am not sure if it is beyond 'the realm of possibilities. You might approach the Trustees in your application. of ---- MR. WADE: For aerial easement instead MR. BREDEMEYER: Aerial or subterranean The previous denial was when we went to access over the driveways, in the construction of the driveway. MR. WADE: I might just add to Mr. Anderson, also, another thing is that there is a company right now that is manufacturing portable toilets and they are doing one for Company in Florida -- and they are installing in a new 65-foot yacht. This 65-foot yacht that's being built is going to 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 90 be a self-contained boat. It has a generator set, but it has a toilet system on it, made by Lextran (p~onetic), that digests all the fecal matter that is produced onboard -- okay - and discharges it off overboard as potable water. MR. ANDERSON: Maybe you should address that under "Alternatives." This is, you know an impact statement. This is yours. MR. WADE: It is my half. MR. ANDERSON: This is your game. This- is what you prepare. MR. WADE: I did a lot of research on this because I know what is about to happen. The Trustees are going to tell me they are going to dig out this canal here to make access for the people of Fleet's Neck, and my water's edge is right there. The septic system is~not going to be acceptable because it.is too close to the water's edge. (Discussion held off the record) MR. ANDERSON: Explain it in your document. This is your document. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ~17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 25 91 MR. VOORHIS: Suffice it to contact the Health Department and see if an approval system -- MR. WADE: They are going to tell me to go back through the hearings, that's down the road maybe a year, but I just want to bring it to your attention that these things are available today. We are putting men on the moon. We are going to venus. We have got a new satellite up there taking pictures, and we can't digest toilet coliform bacteria. Hey, we are doing it all the time now. MR. ANDERSON: THE CHAIRMAN: Address it. In closing the swapping check list, which encompasses Page 14 to Page 21, are the basic areas that we have just reviewed with our consultants and with the T_usuee~ consultants and with your con- sultants, Gus -- I would hope that except for the one major area which I have seen, which is V, "H," which was stricken from this, that you can address most if not all of these issues in toto as mentioned here to the varying degrees and -- 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 2O 23 ( 92 MR. WADE: Except for the one with the TDR; we address that after we have an answer from the Town of Southold. THE CHAI~;~N: It was my understanding that you now are going to do some research on this with either -- among yourself or with the Town Board or with the Town Trustees, is that corrects before you actually start this process? MR. HAJE: Yes. What I would like to do, before we go on a wild goose chase, is to discuss it with both the Trustees and the Town Board, or one or the other, whomever, to determine the possibilities and the existenc. or non-existence of a~y suitable properties. I ~oul~ sort of like to do that initially. THE CHAi~LAN: Okay. Well, as i said, the time limit of the DEiS and the time limit of your portion of it, you know~ is entirely up to you. So from this particular point on. And, so, you know, whatever you choose to do. I just would appreciate it if anything does come to pass in the near future, that you let us know so that we know that we ~are not going 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2~ 25 93 any further with this project. MR. HAJE: Sure. THE CHAIRMAN: It is as fairly and expeditiously as possible. MR. WADE: in any way, Jay, you want this form filled out -- an application sub- mitted to the Trustees. MR. BREDEMEYER: Yes. If you could submit that as soon as possible for the house and the items that Mr. Anderson spoke to you about and with the survey with the wetlands lines. It would be nice. MRo HAJE: We don't have the wetlands lines they'd like. MR. i~ND?2LSON: %vetlands lines. MR. HAJE: at one point. MR. WADE: You have to ~ave the We did have one from DEC, Absolutely. MR. VOORHIS: If you could reflect it and have Bruce verify it~ that procedure. MR. ANDERSON: Ail right. MR. VOORHIS: It would have to have it as verified and be placed in the file, too. 1 3 4 5 6 10 ~2 ~3 14 17 18 2O o 23 25 94 THE CHAIrmAN: I am offering a motion from my Board. This is a quasi hearing. This is not necessarily construed to be a public hearing, in the context of the fact that the newspapers were notified in a fashion which we don't normally notify them. We usually send them the legal notice and I will explain that, but I am asking my Board, the three members of my Board; myself and two other members, that I am making a motion accepting this swapping check list and as part of our portion of this particular file. I want to thank the con- sultants for coming in and spending their evening with us. I thank you, too, Roy, and may I have a motion. MR. DOYEN: Second. THECHAI~WlAN: MR. DINIZIO: MR. DOYEN: (Time noted: Ail in favor? Aye. Aye. 9:58 p.m.) 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFICATION 95 I, Gail Roschen, an Official Court Reporter, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate transcript of my stenographic notes taken on August 15, 1990. GAIL ROSCHEN