The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTR-10/19/2022 Glenn Goldsmith,President so ti Town Hall Annex ��V� �1 54375 Route 25 A. Nicholas Krupski,Vice President P.O. Box 1179 Eric Sepenoski [ Southold,New York 11971 Liz Gillooly Elizabeth Peeples Q Telephone(631) 765-1892 a Fax(631) 765-6641 coUNT�I,� BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Minutes Wednesday, October 19, 202 RE 5:30 PM CEIVE Present Were: Glenn Goldsmith, President N 0 V 1 7 2022 A. Nicholas Krupski, Trustee Eric Sepenoski, Trustee Liz Gillooly, Trustee Southold ' owri Clerk ; Elizabeth Peeples, Trustee Elizabeth Cantrell, Senior Clerk Typist Lori Hulse, Board Counsel CALL MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Good evening, and welcome to our Wednesday, October 19, 2022 meeting. At this time I would like to call the meeting to order and ask that you please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. (Pledge of Allegiance is recited). I would like to start off the meeting by announcing the people on the dais. To my left we have Trustee Krupski, Trustee Sepenoski, Trustee Gillooly and Trustee Peeples. To my right we have attorney to the Trustees Lori Hulse, we have Senior Clerk Typist Elizabeth Cantrell, and also Court Stenographer Wayne Galante. And from the Conservation Advisory Council we have John Chandler. Agendas for tonight's meeting are posted on the Town's website and also located out in the hallway. We do have a number of postponements tonight: In the agenda on page five, number two; page six, numbers four and five; page seven, numbers six and seven; page ten, number 14; page eleven, numbers 15 through 19; page 12, 20 through 24; and page 13, numbers 25 and 26. So all those have been postponed and we will not be hearing them tonight. They are listed as follows: Number 2, Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of FOUNDERS LANDING BOAT YARD, LLC requests an Amendment to Wetland Permit#8666 for the as-built 68' long solid splashboard system under the offshore fixed finger pier. Located: 2700 Hobart Road & 1000 Terry Lane, Southold. SCTM# 1000-64-3-10 & 1000-64-3-11 Number 4, Suffolk Environmental Consulting on behalf of 18975 SOUNDVIEW AVENUE, LLC, c/o CHRISTOPHER MOORE requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Board of Trustees 2 October 19, 2022 Erosion Permit to reconstruct the existing bluff stair assembly with railings consisting of one (1) 9'x10' top wood platform to 4'x14' stairs to one (1) 4'x5.5' wood middle platform to 4'x13' stairs to one (1) 4'x5.5' lower wood platform to 4'x8' stairs leading to stone steps - --� — ---down-to the-beach that are to-be built into a proposed-102' long-rock-revetment ---- ------ consisting of a 20-501b. gravel base over filter cloth and 2-3 ton stone; stabilize the existing bluff by terracing the areas of excessive scouring, utilizing 206 overall feet of 2"x12" CCA planks secured by 2"x2"x4' CCA stakes placed 6.0' on center perpendicular to the downward slope of the bluff along a horizontal plan; and to revegetate all disturbed area using Cape American beach grass planted 12"18" on center. Located: 18975 Soundview Avenue, Southold. SCTM# 1000-51-1-16 Number 5, Young &Young on behalf of MKS REALTY, LLC requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit to construct a two-story 2,445sq.ft. footprint dwelling with garage; a proposed 21'10"x1'1''9" (253.5sq.ft.) seaward bedroom balcony with railing system; a proposed 10'4"x20'2" (191.7sq.ft.) mezzanine level bedroom balcony, railing system, a privacy screen wall along west side, and a 6' wide spiral staircase to ground; a 1,218.8sq.ft. elevated deck with a 522sq.ft. pool on seaward side, privacy screening along portion of east side, a 3'9" wide stairs with railings to ground to west and a 3'6" stairs with railings to ground to east; proposed 10' wide bar/grill area on pool deck; seaward of pool to the east off pool patio, a proposed 203.6sq.ft. elevated (ranging from ±7.5' to 10' above natural grade) catwalk leading to a 127.9sq.ft. open air gazebo with flat roof over, 3'6" wide stairs with railings to ground, and 110.6sq.ft. storage area under gazebo; proposed 663sq.ft. of non-pervious front entry stairs; proposed 4,095sq.ft. of stone blend driveway; proposed 1,200 gallon underground propane tank; new I/A OWTS sanitary system, i.e. one"(1) 500 gallon wastewater treatment unit and six (6) 8.5' long by 2' effect depth sanitary leaching galleys; public water service connection; new storm water control structures for roof runoff and driveway runoff; approximately 690 cubic yards of clean material from the excavated areas will be used to fill the site to the proposed grades; and all mechanical equipment (i.e. A/C unit), to be located above the second-story structure. Located: 1925 North Sea Drive, Southold. SCTM# 1000-54-4-20 Number 6, J.M.O. Environmental Consulting on behalf of J. GEDDES PARSONS requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit to remove the existing 5'x81' fixed dock and piles (16), 3'x20' ramp and 9'x18'floating dock; construct a proposed 5'x81' fixed dock secured by sixteen (16) piles; install a 4'x16' adjustable ramp; and install an 8'x18.5' floating dock situated in an "I" configuration and secured by four(4) piles; and to replace the five (5) existing tie-off piles as needed. Located: 515 Sterling Street, Fishers Island. SCTM# 1000-10-9-3.1 Number 7, J.M.O. Environmental Consulting on behalf of W. HARBOR BUNGALOW, LLC, c/o CRAIG SCHULTZ requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit for the existing 6.5'x53' fixed dock with a 11'x11' fixed portion in an "L" configuration; existing 3:5'x12' ramp and existing 8'x20' floating dock; the 6.5'x53' fixed dock and 11'x11' fixed portion in the "L" configuration to remain; remove existing ramp, float and two piles and install a new 4'x20' ramp with rails and an 8'x18' floating dock situated in an "I" configuration secured by four piles; and to install four tie-off piles. Located: 371 Hedge Street, Fishers Island. SCTM# 1000-10-7-18 Number 14, Suffolk Environmental Consulting on behalf of PHYLLIS SOUSA requests a Wetland Permit to install a 14'x38' swimming pool surrounded by a 58'x28' stone patio with an 8'x8',spa along the pool's landward side; remove the existing seaward deck stairs and install two 4'x4' wood stairs along the easterly and westerly sides of the existing deck. Located: 4145 Wells Road, Peconic. SCTM# 1000-86-2-12.6 Board of Trustees 3 October 19, 2022 Number 15, Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of JSK PARK AVE, LLC requests a Wetland Permit to remove and dispose of existing 70' long jetty and construct new 51' long jetty to Mean Low Water, in-kind, in-place, and using vinyl sheathing. Located: 2150 Park Avenue, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-123-8-9 Number 16, Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of JSK PARK AVE, LLC requests a Wetland Permit to remove and dispose of existing 66' long jetty and construct new 51' long jetty to Mean Low Water, in-kind, in-place, and using vinyl sheathing. Located: 2200 Park Avenue, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-123-8-10 Number 17, Suffolk Environmental Consulting on behalf of TOWN CREEK REAL ESTATE, INC., c/o MICHAEL LIEGY requests a Wetland Permit to construct a proposed 25'x50' two-story, single-family dwelling with attached 20'x20'garage; install a pervious driveway; install a new.I/A OWTS system; and to install gutters to leaders to drywells to contain roof runoff. Located: 480 Ackerly Pond Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-69-3-13 Number 18, Mike Kimack on behalf of SCOTT & PATRICIA PASKEWITZ requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4'x136' catwalk using Thru-Flow decking with six (6) pair of 4"x4" Epai O/E pilings set 8' on center with cross ties for the first 44' and thirteen (13) pair of 8" diameter pressure treating pilings installed a minimum of 3' above catwalk set at 8' on center; a 3'x10' aluminum ramp; and a 6'x20' floating dock with marine grade decking situated in an "I" configuration set six (6) feet from catwalk and secured with one (1) anchor piling and one (1) dauphin piling. Located: 1475 Waterview Drive, Southold. SCTM# 1000-78-7-20 Number 19, Young & Young on behalf of STEPHEN & JACQUELINE DUBON requests a Wetland Permit for the existing 1,118sq.ft. one-story dwelling and for the demolition and removal of certain existing structures (project meets Town Code definition of demolition), within and outside of the existing dwelling to facilitate construction of the proposed additions and alterations consisting of a proposed 45sq.ft. addition to northeast corner, and a 90sq.ft. addition to southeast corner for a 1,195sq.ft. total footprint after additions; construct a 1,195sq.ft. second story addition; a 70sq.ft. second story balcony; replace and expand existing easterly deck with a 320sq.ft. deck with 69sq.ft. of deck stairs to ground; replace and expand existing porch with a 40sq.ft. porch and 20sq.ft. porch stairs to ground; install one (1) new drywell for roof runoff; abandon two (2) existing cesspools and install a new IA/OWTS system consisting of one (1) 500 gallon treatment unit and 46 linear feet of graveless absorption trenches and for the existing 84sq.ft. shed. Located: 5605 Stillwater Avenue, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-137-4-3.2 Number 20, En-Consultants on behalf of ELIAS DAGHER requests a Wetland Permit to remove existing wood platform, walk and steps; construct a fixed timber dock with water and electricity consisting of a 4'x74' fixed timber catwalk constructed with open-grate decking; with two (2) 4'x6' steps for beach access; a 3'x14' hinged ramp; and a 6'x20' floating dock situated in a "T" configuration and secured by two (2) 8" diameter pilings. Located: 90 Oak Avenue, Southold. SCTM# 1000-77-2-6 Number 21, SLATTERY NASSAU POINT TRUST requests a Wetland Permit to replace the existing 4'x16' set of stairs; 12'x18' deck; and 4'x32' walk; deck and walk are 30"AG L. Located: 460 West Cove Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-111-2-6 Number 22, BRIDGET CLARK requests a Wetland Permit for the existing 20'3"x22'4" (452sq.ft.) detached garage and to convert it into an accessory apartment by Board of Trustees 4 October 19, 2022 replacing existing windows, exterior door,add plumbing to connect to existing septic, and install a wall mounted electric heating unit. Located: 7825 Soundview Avenue, Southold. SCTM# 1000-59-6-15 Number 23, Michael Kimack on behalf of NUNNAKOMA WATERS ASSOCIATION, INC. requests a Wetland Permit to perform work on the property located at 645 Wampum Way (1000-87-2-42.3), consisting of installing 235 linear feet of Shore Guard 9900 vinyl hybrid low-sill bulkhead with helical supports installed at discretion of contractor; restore approximately 200 linear feet of eroded bank with 90-100 cubic yards of sand recovered from storm deposit area; install filter fabric (±1,600sq.ft.), and plant American Beach grass @ 18" on center (±1,200 plants) over restored bank area; construct storm water concrete diversion swale (10'x43', 430sq.ft.) With rip-rap runoff area (10'x20', 200sq.ft.), consisting of 50-150 Ib. stones set on filter fabric; the storm washed sand area is to be restored to the original grade line and the removed sand (90-100 cubic yards) is to be used on site to restore the eroded bank area; on all three properties, dredge a portion of Moyle Cove to deepen channel in three (3) areas, AA, BB and CC to a depth of-4.00ft. (Approx. 365 cubic yards), .and area DD to a depth of-3.00ft. (Approx. 85 cubic yards), for a total dredging of approximately 450 cubic yards; the dredge spoils is proposed to be spread on the two Sauer properties (255 Wigwam Way, SCTM# 1000-87-2-40.1 & 175 Wigwam Way, SCTM# 1000-87-2-40.2), in an area of approximately 8,000 sq.ft. and to a depth of approximately 1.5ft.; the dredged spoils placement area will be surrounded by a silt fence with hay bales to be kept in place and maintained until the spoils are de-watered. Located: 645 Wampum Way, 255 Wigwam Way & 175 Wigwam Way, Southold. SCTM#'s 1000-87-2-42.3, 1000-87-2-40.1 & 1000-87.-2-40.2 Number 24, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of SADIK HALIT LEGACY TRUST requests a Wetland Permit for the as-built bluff stairs consisting of the following: 4'x4' at-grade top landing to an 8,2'x9.5' upper platform to 18'x4' steps down to an 8'x3.8' middle platform to 16'x4' steps down to a 19.4'x10' lower platform to 14.5'x4' steps down to beach; all decking on structure is of untreated lumber. Located: 2200 Sound Drive, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-33-1-16 Number 25, Cole Environmental Services on behalf of SCOTT & LEA VITRANO requests a Wetland Permit to remove existing pier and float; construct a proposed 4'x14' landward ramp leading to a 4'x35' fixed pier with Thru-Flow decking a minimum of 4' above wetlands; a proposed 3'x12' metal ramp; and a 4'x20' floating dock situated in a "T" configuration and secured by two (2) 8" diameter piles. Located: 3875 Main Bayview Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-78-2-15.1 Number 26, Cole Environmental Services on behalf of JUSTIN &ALLISON SCHWARTZ requests a Wetland Permit to construct a proposed 4'x165' fixed pier with open grate decking a minimum of 4' above tidal vegetative grade; a 3'x16' aluminum ramp; a 6'x20' floating dock situated in an "T" configuration; and to install a natural path leading from upland to fixed pier using permeable material. Located: 2793 Cox Neck Road, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-113-8-7.6 So those have all been postponed and we will not be hearing them tonight. Under Town Code Chapter 275-8(c), files were officially closed seven days ago. Submission of any paperwork after that date may result in a delay of the processing of the application. I. NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: At this time I'll make a motion to hold our next field inspection on Wednesday, November 9th, 2022, at 8:00 AM. Board of Trustees 5 October 19, 2022 TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). II. NEXT TRUSTEE MEETING TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I'll make a motion to hold our next Trustee meeting Wednesday, November 16th, 2022, at 5:30 PM, at the Town Hall Main Meeting Hall. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). III. WORK SESSIONS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I'll make a motion to hold our next work session Monday, November 14, 2022 at 5:OOPM at the Town Hall Annex 2nd floor Executive Board Room; and on Wednesday, November 16, 2022 at 5:OOPM at the Main Town Hall Meeting Hall. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). IV. MINUTES: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I'll make.a motion to approve the Minutes of the September 14th, 2022 meeting. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). V. MONTHLY REPORT: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: The Trustees monthly report for September, 2022. A check for$9,211.53 was forwarded to the Supervisor's Office for the General Fund. VI. PUBLIC NOTICES: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Roman numeral VI, Public Notices. Public notices are posted on the Town Clerk's Bulletin Board for review. VII. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEWS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Roman numeral VII, RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold hereby finds that the following applications more fully described in Section XI Public Hearings Section of the Trustee agenda dated Wednesday, October 19, 2022 are classified as Type II Actions pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations, and are not subject to further review under SEQRA: Karl Abdelnour& Megan Grace Abdelnour- SCTM# 1000-51-4-17 Board of Trustees 6 October 19, 2022 Cutchogue 6213, LLC, c/o Stephanie Guilpin, Managing Member- SCTM# 1000-82-2-3.1 Cutchogue 6291, LLC, c/o Stephanie Guilpin, Managing Member- SCTM# 1000-82-2-3.2 Koryn Estrada - SCTM# 1000-123-4-7 Laura Chilton -SCTM# 1000-78-7-9 Founders Landing Boat Yard, LLC - SCTM# 1000-64-3-10 & 1000-64-3-11 Peconic River, LLC, c/o Adam Prestandrea, Member- SCTM# 1000-81-1-18.1 . Kenneth & Elizabeth McCulloch - SCTM# 1000-71-1-15 Jeffrey Wilke - SCTM# 1000-70-5-49.4 Timothy J. & Ginamarie Stump : SCTM# 1000-87-3-61 Phyllis Sousa- SCTM# 1000-86-2-12.6 K2J4E6, LLC, c/o Patrick Severson & Diane Severson - SCTM# 1000-73-2-3.1 Shamgar Capital, LLC, c/o Daniel Buttafuoco - SCTM# 1000-70-13-20.7 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). VIII. RESOLUTIONS -ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Roman numeral VIII, Resolutions -Administrative Permits. To simplify our meetings, the Trustees regularly group actions that are minor or similar in nature. As such, I'm making a motion to approve Items 1 and 2. They are listed as follows: Number 1, Twin Forks Permits on behalf of YASMINE LEGENDRE & COREY WORCESTER requests an Administrative Permit to remove a brick patio at grade; construct new north deck (261 sq.ft) with new back sliding door; construction of a west porch (34.5sq.ft.); construction of an east porch (66sq.ft.)with new wider residence door; construction of a sidewalk (253sq.ft.) to connect north deck and east porch. Located: 4355 Aldrich Lane Ext., Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-112-1-13 Number 2, MARLENE LANE CIVIC ASSOCIATION requests an Administrative Permit to replace existing treated boardwalk with new 4'x400' long boardwalk constructed with 6"x9" pavers. Located: Marlene Lane/Peconic Bay Blvd., Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-126-6-16. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 3, Ural Talgat on behalf of CHARLES SALICE & CAMILLE PASSARO requests an Administrative Permit for a Ten (10) Year Maintenance Permit to hand-cut Common Reed (Phragmites australis) to not less than 12" in height by hand, as needed. Located: 9326 Main Bayview Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-87-5-25. This was found to be consistent by the LWRP. Trustee Peeples did a field inspection on October 5th, 2022, where we just wanted to specify the location of the trimming. As such, I will make the motion to approve this application with the site plan stamped received September 13th, 2022, and the site plan stamped received April 15th, 2022, that are in accordance with Wetland Permit#10176. That is my motion. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second. Board of Trustees 7 October 19, 2022 TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 4, Michael Macrina Architect, P.C., on behalf of MATTHEW & ERIN CUNNINGHAM requests an Administrative Permit for the as-built 12'x12' deck with stairs; and 12'x10' shed. Located: 2980 Ole Jule Lane, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-122-4-17 The LWRP found this to be inconsistent. The inconsistency is: The as-built structures were constructed without proper permits. The Trustees conducted a field inspection on October 16th, 2022, noting everything was straightforward. As such, I'll make a motion to approve this application and thereby granting it a permit will bring it into consistency with the LWRP. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). IX. APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS/TRANSFERS/ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENTS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Roman numeral IX, Applications for Extensions, Transfers, Administrative Amendments. Again, I'll group them together and make a motion to approve as a group Items 1 through 11, listed as follows: Number 1, RACHEL MURPHY requests a One (1) Year Extension to Wetland Permit#9738, as issued on October 28, 2020. Located: 21695 Soundview Avenue, Southold. SCTM# 1000-135-1-7 Number 2, STICKS & STONES OUTDOORS, LLC requests a One (1) Year Extension to Wetland Permit#9739, as issued on October 28, 2020. Located: 3995 Wells Avenue, Southold. SCTM# 1000-70-4-1 Number 3, SETH &BARBARA EICHLER request a One (1) Year Extension to Wetland Permit#9753 and Coastal Erosion Permit #9753C, both issued on'November 18, 2020. Located: 17915 Soundview Avenue, Southold. SCTM# 1000-51-1-6 Number 4, ERIC VON AMMON BAIZ & PAUL ALOYSIUS SKIERCZYNSKI request a Transfer of Wetland Permit#4249 from Eric Baiz & Robert Baiz, to Eric Von Ammon Baiz & Paul Aloysius Skierczynski, as issued on October 28, 1993 and Amended on July 27, 1995. Located: 1260 Bay Home Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-56-5-1.2 Number 5, Martin D. Finnegan, on behalf of PATRICK & ANN MARIE BROWNE requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit#63-7-38 from Maia Khutsishvili to Patrick & Ann Marie Browne, as issued on March 11, 1993; and Amended on August 17, 2022. Located: 1645 Calves Neck Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-63-7-38 Number 6, David Bergen on behalf of STEVEN & DANIELLE PORTO requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit#4491 from Dr. Selim Samaan to Steven & Danielle Porto, as issued on July 28, 1995. Located: 4875 Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-111-9-10 Number 7, David Bergen on behalf of STEVEN & DANIELLE PORTO requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit#7432 from Selim & Judith Samaan to Steven & Danielle Porto, as issued on November 17, 2010; and for an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit#7432 for the installation of up to (34) thirty-four 10" batter piles, one per existing bulkhead piling, along entire length of bulkhead. Board of Trustees 8 October 19, 2022 Located: 4875 Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-111-9-10 Number 8, David Bergen on behalf of BRUNO & OLIVIA ANNICQ requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit#6660 from Elaine Romagnoli to Bruno & Olivia Annicq, as issued on July 24, 2007. Located: 1230 First Street, New Suffolk. SCTM# 1000-117-7-29 Number 9, ANGELIC &JOHN DURANTE, JR., request an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit#9105 for the existing 8'x14' outdoor barbecue adjacent to existing 12'x3' on-grade stone patio. Located: 4260 Ole Jule Lane, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-122-4-29 Number 10, JAMES A. MALONEY requests an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit#3828 for the as-built 4'x3' wood platform connected to 4'x47.7' permeable composite decking pier leading to a 3'6"x16' ramp connected to a 6'x20' permeable composite decking float with pilings. Located: 505 Bungalow Lane, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-123-3-7 Number 11, David Bergen on behalf of STEVEN & DANIELLE PORTO requests an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit #10073 for the as-built reconfiguration of two (2) 4'x4' stair landings and an as-built fall protection barrier running along the 405sq.ft. Lower deck landward of the bulkhead. Located: 4875 Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-111-9-10 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). X. RESOLUTIONS -OTHER: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Roman numeral X, Resolutions - Other, Number 1, Set 2022/2023 Scallop Season: RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Board of Trustees open the following dates to scallop harvesting and pursuant to Chapter 219 (Shellfish) of the Code of the Town of Southold: From Monday, November 7, 2022 from sunrise to sunset through Friday, March 31, 2023 inclusive, in all Town waters, as per Town Code. That is my motion. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). XI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Roman numeral XI, Public,Hearings. At this time I'll make a motion to go off our regular meeting agenda and enter into our public hearings. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: This is a public hearing in the matter of the following applications for permits under the Wetlands Ordinance of the Town of Southold. I have an affidavit of publication from Board of Trustees 9 October 19, 2022 the Suffolk Times. Pertinent correspondence may be read prior to asking for comments from the public. Please.keep your comments organized and brief. Five minutes or less if possible. AMENDMENTS TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Under Amendments, number 1, Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of DAVID C. ESSEKS & KATHRYN R. STOKES requests an Amendment to Wetland Permit#5974 to rotate the existing 6'x20'floating dock to form a straight"I" configuration, and to reset the two (2) float pilings and the two (2) tie-off pilings. Located: 522 Town Creek Lane, Southold. SCTM# 1000-64-1-14.7 The Trustees most recently visited this site on the 12th of October, noted that we, will review the application at work session.- Prior to that, the site was visited the month prior, on the 7th of September, and had concerns about the pier line and being outside of that and not being permitted. The LWRP coordinator found this to be inconsistent due to the introduction of CCA materials into the habitat. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this application. It should be noted that we are in receipt of new plans for this project which show the pier line and it falling into the pier line and being appropriate for this site. Is there anyone here that wishes to speak regarding this application? MS. COSTELLO: I am Jane Costello, Costello Marine, agent for the applicant. If you have any further questions, I'm here to answer them. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Is there anyone else here that wishes to speak regarding this application, or any additional comments from the members of the Board? (Negative response). Hearing none, I make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE SEPEN'OSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I make a motion to approve this application noting that there is a pre-existing dock and this is just a slight modification, thereby bringing it into consistency with the LWRP coordinator, based off the plans stamped received by the office September 23rd, 2022. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second. All in favor? (ALL AYES). WETLAND & COASTAL EROSION PERMITS: TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Number 1 under Wetland & Coastal Erosion Permits, Patricia Moore, Esq. on behalf of KARL ABDELNOUR & MEGAN GRACE ABDELNOUR requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit to install rock armoring in front of existing ±150 foot long steel bulkhead using 1/2 to 3 ton stone, not exceeding 2.5 ton per linear foot; access to be by barge. Located: 21075 Soundview Avenue, Southold. SCTM# 1000-51-4-17 The Trustees most recently visited the site. Our field inspections 10/12/22, notes from that visit read straightforward. The LWRP has found this to be consistent, but notes prohibit using boulders Board of Trustees 10 October 19, 2022 occurring on the beach. And the Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support the application. We have plans stamped received August 10th, 2022. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak regarding the application? MS. MOORE: Yes. Patricia Moore. I'm here to answer any questions you might have. I'm glad to hear that your inspection concluded it was straightforward. With that in mind, I will just leave it to answer any questions rather than --the application does speak for itself and there is a long history of permits on this property. So that's pretty much wraps it up. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: All right. Thank you. Any further questions from anyone in the audience? Public? (No response). Any comments or questions from the Board? (Negative response). Hearing none, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: I make a motion to approve this application. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY:Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Number 2, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of CUTCHOGUE 6213, LLC, c/o STEPHANIE GUILPIN, MANAGING MEMBER requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit to construct along eroding toe of bluff approximately 165 linear feet of stone revetment (to be tied into proposed revetment to east), including a westerly 10' angled return, consisting of approximately 3 to 5 ton stone placed over 50 to 100 Ib. core stone and filter cloth; restore bluff face by constructing terrace retaining walls and placing approximately 209 cubic yards of sand for re-nourishment (including approximately 169 cubic yards of on-site material excavated from toe of bluff for revetment installation and approximately 40 cubic yards of clean sand to be trucked in from an approved upland source), to be vegetated with native plantings; and establish a 4'wide by ±64' long wood chip path to bluff crest through the 50' wide Non-Disturbance Buffer; with the condition that construction equipment and material access will be via Long Island Sound or through the end of Duck Pond Road. Located: 6213 Oregon Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-82-2-3.1 The Trustees most recently visited this site on October 12th, 2022, noting that the application appears to be straightforward. The LWRP reviewed this application and found it to be consistent, noting to prohibit the use of boulders occurring on the beach. And Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this application. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application? MR. PATANJO: Jeff Patanjo, on behalf of the applicant. Any questions, I'm here to answer them. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Thank you. Anyone else here wishing to speak- regarding this application? Board of Trustees 11 October 19, 2022 (Negative response). Questions or comments from the Board? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Just that to make sure with the work, I mean, it was stipulated that any equipment would be brought in by barge. There is a crane there. It is just bringing stone down, so that would be the limit of anything brought down from the top of the bluff. MR. PATANJO: Correct, yes. Just to bring down the stone. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Okay, with the confirmation there will be no bluff cut, I make a motion to close this public hearing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: I make a motion to approve this application as submitted. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Number 3, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of CUTCHOGUE 6291, LLC, c/o STEPHANIE GUILPIN, MANAGING MEMBER requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit to construct along eroding toe of bluff approximately 165 linear feet of stone revetment (to be tied into proposed revetment to west), including a easterly 10' angled return, consisting of approximately 3 to 5 ton stone placed over 50 to 100 Ib. core stone and filter cloth; restore bluff face by constructing terrace retaining walls and placing approximately 214 cubic yards of sand for re-nourishment (including approximately 169 cubic yards of on-site,material excavated from toe of bluff for revetment installation and approximately 45 cubic yards of clean sand to be trucked in from an approved upland source), to be vegetated with native plantings; construct a 4' wide elevated timber bluff stairway with approximate overall_length of 76 feet (top to bottom), including a�5.6'x7' entry platform, two 4'x4' middle landings, two 4'x5.6' middle landings with benches and a 4'x5.6' bottom landing with bench, leading to an approximately 4' wide stone steps through revetment to beach; and to establish a 4' wide by±415' long wood chip path through beach access easement to proposed stairway; with the condition that construction equipment and material access will be via Long Island Sound or through the end of Duck Pond Road. Located: 6291 Oregon Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-82-2-3.2 The Trustees recently visited this site on October 12th, and noted that the application is straightforward. The LWRP found this application consistent, and noted to prohibit using boulders occurring on the beach. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this application. And since this is similar to the previous application, we just want to confirm again that the crane located at the top of the bluff is in order to locate the boulders down to the beach and that there will be no bluff cuts. Board of Trustees 12 October 19, 2022 MR. PATANJO: Jeff Patanjo, on behalf of the applicant. The crane will be used solely for the purpose of moving boulders down to the beach, and there will be no bluff cuts on the application. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Thank you, very much. Is there anyone else here to speak with regard to this application? (No response). Any other questions or comments from the Board? (Negative response). Hearing none, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE PEEPLES: I make a motion to approve this application with the plans stamped dated September 8th, 2022, with the stipulation that there are no bluff cuts in order to access this application for the project. That is my motion. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). WETLAND PERMITS: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Wetland Permits, Number 1, SLATTERY NASSAU POINT TRUST requests a Wetland Permit to replace the existing 4'x16' set of stairs; 12'x18' deck; and 4'x32' walk; deck and walk are 30" AGL. Located: 460 West Cove Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-111-2-6 The Trustees did a field inspection October 12th, noting receipt of a new survey. We do not have an LWRP report on this. We do have a CAC report dated from May, where they do not support the application. The Conservation Advisory Council does not support the application because the size of the deck is not in compliance with Chapter 275, and the application requires an updated survey. Again, I want to note that we did receive an updated survey stamped received in the office September 26th, 2022, that shows the current pre-existing nonconforming structure, and that it is on the applicant's property. We also do have two letters of support for the project in the file. One from a Thomas Cornwell, and one from an Alfonso Martinez Fonts. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application? MR. SLATTERY: John Slattery, the property owner. Any questions, I would be happy to answer them. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Anyone else here wishing to speak regarding this application? (Negative response). Any questions or comments from the Board? Board of Trustees 13 October 19, 2022 (Negative response). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Okay, hearing none, I'll make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I'll make a motion to approve this application with the new survey stamped received September 26th, 2022. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? MR. SLATTERY: Thank you. (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Number 2, Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of DAVID C. ESSEKS & KATHRYN R. STOKES requests a Wetland Permit to install a new retaining wall consisting of 260' on the face with two 6-foot returns for a total of 272 feet. Located: 522 Town Creek Lane, Southold. SCTM# 1000-64-1-14.7 The Trustees most recently visited this site, noted it is in fact an in-kind replacement. It was thought that there was no retaining wall there, however the contractor dug about two inches off the surface and found that there is in fact a pre-existing retaining wall, therefore it being an in-kind replacement. We were looking for a ten-foot non-turf buffer and replacing any disturbed vegetation seaward of the wall, with a ten-foot non-turf landward of the wall. The LWRP coordinator found this to be inconsistent, noted that there is not erosion occurring there. Vegetated planting on littoral shelf is a better option and furthers Policy 6. Introduction of CCA-treated materials to ecosystem has an adverse affect and impact. It should be noted that this was when we were under the assumption it was a new installation of a retaining wall. And the Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support the application. Is there anyone here that wishes to speak regarding this application? MR. COSTELLO: Jane Costello, Costello Marine, the agent for the applicant. If you have any further questions. We did submit revised plans, I know it was just yesterday or the day before, so I don't know if he you had a chance to.even look them over. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Just to clarify, we had met with Jack in the field and he discussed raising the bulkhead six inches. MS. COSTELLO: Yes. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Okay. And then obviously, which is common practice, but we would stipulate re-vegetation of any native disturbance seaward of the wall. MS. COSTELLO: Okay. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't believe I have any more questions. Is there anyone else here that wishes to speak regarding this application? (Negative response). Or additional comments from members of the Board? (Negative response). Board of Trustees . 14 October 19, 2022 Hearing none, I make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And I make a motion to approve this application with the stipulation that any native vegetation is revegetated seaward of the wall. The project is no higher than six inches above the existing based off the new plans and project description stamped received by the office October 18th, 2022, thereby bringing this into consistency with the LWRP coordinator, as it is a pre-existing structure. That is my motion. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Number 3, Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of FOUNDERS LANDING BOAT YARD, LLC requests a Wetland Permit for a Ten (10) Year Maintenance Permit to dredge a 2,854sq.ft. area to -7.0' below mean low water removing approximately ±700 cubic yards of spoil; dredge spoil to be trucked off site to an approved disposal area. Located: 2700 Hobart Road & 1000 Terry Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-64-3-10 & 1000-64-3-11 The Trustees most recently visited the location on 10/12/22, and the notes from that visit read: Inhouse review, questioned the DEC permit, and questioned for the outstanding violation for illegal jetty/groin. .The LWRP found the proposal to be consistent with its policies and with the LWRP. Require that turbidity controls are required. And the Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support the application. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak regarding the application? MS. COSTELLO: I am Jane Costello, and I can answer any questions the Board may have on this application. What do you need, a copy of the DEC permit? Or-- TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Well, when we reviewed this application, we recognized the necessity for dredging in this location due to the sand that was filling in. But based on prior conversations we had in the field, including a public hearing on a postponed as-built splashboard system, the cause of the sand filling in the area is the jetty/groin structure that doesn't conform to our Town Code. So what we are proposing is that this splashboard system be remedied, the postponed application be dealt with prior to your coming back for the dredging permit. MS. COSTELLO: The problem with that I, at this point the structure has been legalized by the DEC. And in order for me to touch this structure, I have to go back to the DEC. And we don't know how long that is going to take. And if you look at the photographs that I gave you, within six-months time, the area has filled up quite a bit. I mean, it's evident that it's building up. And so if it wasn't on the outside of this jetty, it would be on the inside, in the boat basin. So regardless, I Board of Trustees 15 October 19, 2022 would have to dredge. And I have no dredge permit for the Town. I have an active dredge permit for the DEC. I do not have an active dredge permit for the Town. Um, and so to hold a dredging application for a structure that you want to see modified and we have not come to terms, we have been working with you, we've been working on that. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Yes. MS. COSTELLO: And regardless, whatever I do to this structure, I'm still going to need to dredge. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Do you have a DEC permit for the outside part? MS. COSTELLO: I have a DEC permit that covers pretty much the whole underwater land that I own. There is a small section that I'm going off into Town bottom, which they have not given me the amendment for. I have applied for it, but they want approval from the Town because it's Town bottom. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Did they consider it new dredging? MS. COSTELLO: They did not. No, they did not. I did have the material tested, um, because of the benefits that I wanted to use the material as a beneficial use, through the DEC, so it is clean, they know it's cleaned. And it was such a small area. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Did they test it for dioxins? MS. COSTELLO: I was not required to. It was just basically the level of testing, the grain-size analysis that came up, it was 97% or 98% sand. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Okay, because usually one of the things is for, if there was a fire recently, which obviously you had, so the possibility of dioxins or contaminants in that sediment is definitely higher than it would be otherwise. MS. COSTELLO: They didn't mandate it. I mean, I was dealing with --the DEC was aware of the fire. I notified them of the fire. Um, and they did not mandate that. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: The root problem persists. You want to dredge, and you need to dredge, but the jetty/groin situation has not been resolved. MS. COSTELLO: Right. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: And we recommended a few simple alterations to bring it into compliance with our code that could be straightforward to address that first, and then come back to us. MS. COSTELLO: Okay, but I still need -- I don't-- if the material, the material is on the outside filling up that one slip. In general, the slip is not my concern. My concern is it's going past the slip and into the slips, okay, so the majority of the dredging, I mean, if you want to reduce the amount of cubic yardage, but I have a sailboat that at low tide is sitting on bottom. I've got powerboats that are going to plow themselves out of there or wait for high tide. I need to dredge. You know, I just can't hold the dredging for the DEC, which I don't know how long it's going to take. You know, I don't know. Unless you guys want to pull the strings and get the DEC to approve something. But it could take six months. Board of Trustees 16 October 19, 2022 And now I'm outside of the dredge window. And then you are going to affect my navigation for next year. And if it wasn't on the outside, it's going to be on the inside. It would be in the slip. That's all.that jetty is doing, is preventing it from going into the slip. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: I hear you, and I want you to be able to dredge, and for your business to prosper. But I also want to point out that we are all playing in the same sandbox, so to speak. So the laws that we administer apply to everyone. So we have to resolve this somehow so that you are in compliance and other people recognize the laws are upheld. So what I'm suggesting, and perhaps you are not open to it, perhaps you are, is a one-year dredging permit so you can handle what you have going on there in terms of the sand filling in, and then we can address the splashboard system. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: And just for the record, Ms. Costello, we have letter here from you, April 29th, 2022, where you said that the slip on the outside of this finger is no longer useable as a slip due to sedimentation that is occurring from that splashboard. This sacrifice is worth the protection and safety of the boaters and the others within the marina. So back in April you knew it was an issue. You said six months for the DEC. Six months from April, brings us into October. So this was a problem six months ago, it's a problem now. The illegal bulkhead/splashboard, whatever you want call it, is causing the siltation where it is occurring. I agree with you, it will go into the marina where it was historically dredged and was maintenance dredging for that. The problem is that structure is now changing the littoral drift and pushing it further out into the channel, further out into the public, potential to backup toward Founders Lane, towards the public boat ramp, which is our concern. So we met with you numerous times regarding that structure. Some of it, the solutions, are pretty simple, to fix it. We discussed it out in the field. I don't think it will require that much from the DEC. I think it would be probably a real quick response. You are not looking to build something, you are looking to modify it and/or remove it. So if we had started this process, I think you could still get it done right away, get that structure which is causing the siltation removed or altered, then you get to dredge. And once you have that structure changed, the dredging will, once you do it one time, I don't think where it.is right now will require ten years of maintenance in that section. So I think we need to -- MS. COSTELLO: Well, it will, because if will be used as a slip. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: So we need to address the cause of the problem first. MS. COSTELLO: Right. That's what I was trying to say to you. I mean if I, it's one thing to sacrifice the slip for the protection of my boaters, but if I have to take out the Board-of Trustees 17 October 19, 2022 splashboard system, now I'm no longer protecting by boaters. And that's not what I want. That is going to be done because of what this Board decides. Meaning that splashboard has been approved by the DEC, it was consistent with the Conservation Advisory Council, and it's supported by the LWRP. I came to you for an as-built. The Town has never issued me a violation of any sort, and now you want hold up another, a maintenance dredge permit in order-- because of a structure that I am just trying to legalize, and we have not come to the conclusion -- TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: So the Town didn't issue a violation. Did the DEC issue a violation? MS. COSTELLO: They did. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Okay. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And to be honest with you, the only reason you have not been issued a violation is because you are already in front of us at this point and we are trying to work with you on this. But we can remedy that situation very quickly. We are talking about an illegal structure that was knowingly built by this company and the owner of the property that is causing a self-imposed hardship. So do not put this on this Board. This Board'is extremely pro-dredging and boating. MS. COSTELLO: Okay, then support the dredging application. To withhold the dredging application -- TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I would try to fix this with the DEC and come to us and fix the initial application. MS. COSTELLO: I'm not, and you are going to have to issue me a violation. That's what will have to happen, because the DEC will want to know why I want to remove this. It doesn't make any sense to them. They were actually very pro this structure. Everybody understood what I was doing. The structure is so minor in nature and so effective in what it did, it's doing, and I would have to do less dredging. Which is less disturbance. So the littoral drift that you are claiming that is backing into the boat ramp, let me take that out. I'll dredge it and then it will not back into the boat slips. I will remove the sand. That is what I'm here today for. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Ms. Costello, is it your general philosophy to build what you need and then come to this Board for the permits you need to justify it? MS. COSTELLO: No. Originally I told you I did it to avoid a lawsuit. I did it to avoid a boater had significant damage. I did that. I understand that it was not right to do. I came to you, I stood up in front of the DEC, I took care of the violation. They supported the structure. And then I come back to you, try to get you to support the structure. I get it, you are opposed to it. And we have been working on modifying the structure where we could get on equal ground. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: To understand. Just to clarify, you have not submitted anything new this month regarding some of the changes we requested for that bulkhead, so do you intend to still submit Board of Trustees 18 October 19, 2022 something? MS. COSTELLO: Yes, yes. So if we have, I mean, I am working with an engineer, I'm also working with an environmental consultant. So we are going through and we talk in the field and then we try to come up with other solutions, either, or work with the comments. I mean, the first meeting, this Board basically said they didn't want any penetration of the ground. At all. But then it was suggested to look at what was approved for the Orient Yacht Club. Orient.Yacht Club was approved for 120 pilings, which is penetrating the ground but has a two-inch spacing. That's a little different than what was initially advised to me from this Board. So can I put a structure in that actually has ground penetration or can't I? TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: That's not the question before the Board at the moment. The question is -- MS. COSTELLO: We are not really talking about the structure right now. I'm here in front of the Board asking for a maintenance dredge permit. That is what I'm looking for. Regardless if this structure was there or not, I need to dredge. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So what I would offer, or I would suggest is, I mean, you can come to this Board to correct the problem and probably within the same month come in with a solution, which would be the dredging. Not this month, because the other one is postponed because there has been no action. Our permits are good for two years plus two extensions. You have all that time to deal with DEC. If you correct it with this Board with the good intent to follow through on that, you can start dredging. So don't put this back on this Board. You have a very good opportunity -- MS. COSTELLO: The DEC is going to be okay with what you're okay with. You are not okay with what the DEC is okay with. So, I mean --the DEC okayed that structure. You are not okay with it. So I can't see how if I modify this structure how we can guarantee that the DEC is going to be okay. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It would be a lot easier if we were not dealing with something that is as-built, obviously. I'm prepared to move forward with the vote whenever the rest of the Board is. MR. COSTELLO: (The record notes John Costello is the speaker). Mr. Goldsmith, for one, should know. His father dredged that same location multiple times. Why? The drift of natural southwest winds and its rising tides, filled in those last couple of slips, continually, for the last 40 years. Okay? If this Board will give us a permit, and we'll face the consequences of taking that structure out, except what is pre-existing, we'll take it out, if this Board will okay the permit for the dredging. Period. Give us the dredging permit. There is filling in many other slips. Let me tell you the other thing. Could this Board give the Southold Town a violation? One of the other problems we have with toxicity in that location is the outfall pipe from the Town road. It's running into the marina. The entire marina has dog feces and whatnot washing down the road into the marina. That's not Board of Trustees 19 October 19, 2022 anywhere near where We are talking about dredging. But it is polluting the marina. Can the Town correct their problem? And I have asked the Highway Department on multiple occasions. Guess what? They didn't have the funding to elevate it. They didn't have the funding to put new in. And finally, they did put a six-inch elevation on the road to try to minimize some of that. That is a bigger problem for the pollution in that area than anything. The littoral drift of sand is coming in with prevailing winds; southwest prevailing winds in the summertime, and a rising tide. Now, where would the sand, light-weight sand go? It comes in. Comes into the bed. It's shoaling the entire creek. The other thing the Town should address, on their own time, there are several jetties at the entrance of the harbor. Nobody is maintaining them. I've gone in there with tugboats and hit debris on the bottom. What's going on? Can you force somebody to rebuild something? It would be a big occasion to help. Some of the littoral drift that is coming there, is coming from a south direction, right across the bay, where there were four or five large jetties. They no longer exist. And the entrance, the whole channel, is filling in. I have seen sailboats -- and nothing to do with this marina -- run aground out in the middle. What is going on? And this littoral drift of sand is occurring and'is going to continue to occur. If this Board will give me or my daughter the permit to get the dredging, maintenance, I will remove the jetty tomorrow. Anything -- and it's not a jetty. It was just a splashboard to try to keep some of the fill out of the marina per se. The entrance and the slips. So I will remove that, if the Board so wishes, and then we'll have to negotiate with the DEC to find out if that's a violation with them and how to resolve that. We can resolve it. We can resolve anything. If you talk about it. And I think in you want that resolved, tell me and give us a permit.to dredge. There are several slips that are very shoaled now. Before the winter is over there will be more shoaled slips. And please, see if you can get the Town to take care of some of the ones that are shoaling in the inner basin. That would be a help. We would appreciate that. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Thank you. MR. COSTELLO: All right. So if that's the desire of the Board, I would certainly be willing to do it. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: A couple things, just to clarify for the record. That part was never dredged. The inner marina was dredged and goes back to 1940. So it was not 40 years, it was a lot more than 40 years. The inner part, the marina itself was reconstructed back in 2015 or whatever, where it was moved further seaward, out into the creek. There was an east to west Board of Trustees 20 October 19, 2022 jetty, it shoaled around there and into the marina. That east to west jetty which was the end of where the sand built up, now we have that other splashboard bulkhead. So now the sand can go on the outside of that, where it never was. If we had Google Earth up and running, we could go back and see that that sand is never where it is now. So, yes, there was always sand going in. There always will be sand going in. You are correct with across the creek there, where those jetties have deteriorated to the point where there used to be an island, so now all that sand is filling in. We have tried to approach different people on that. The owner of that property is not in favor of doing it. So, yes, it hurts the marina, it hurts Town Creek, it hurts Jockey Creek, 100%. But the sand was not where it is currently. There was always sand, I'll give you that, but not where it is now. So I just want to put that in there. MR. COSTELLO: I want to bring you up to date because you are probably too young to know. But I could remember when Alvah, who is your father--grandfather--when he who had Douglas dredge it, Larry Tuthill dredge it, Ralph T. Preston, we dredged it. And I was a part owner in Ralph T. Preston's. And there's several others that I don't want to name them because they are still in business and they are competitors. That area filled in significantly over the years. And I can tell them, and I'm not going to tell you who, but boy, you can guess them pretty fast. And any time they needed fill, you're welcome to it. And that was your father that said that. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH _I have pictures from the 1940s before they dredged it originally. So I've got plenty, 80 year's worth of pictures, so I know where that sand is and where it was. So, thank you, for the history lesson. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Thank you, Mr. Costello. MR. COSTELLO: So if the Board is so inclined to issue a dredging maintenance permit for the marina, we would certainly like to have it. So we do not want to continually lose another slip and another slip. Because it's going to go out. And if you're right, I doubt it, but if you're right, and it's going around for that extension, we'll take it out. Take it out. And if we have any problem with the DEC, we'll resolve it with the DEC. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: All right. MR. COSTELLO: All right. I would appreciate it. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Is there anyone else who wishes to speak regarding this application? (No response). TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Any Comments from the Board? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think we covered everything. TRUSTEE SEPEN08KI: History, ground. Mr. Costello, what I heard from you -- MR. COSTELLO: If you have any other questions from me I'll answer them. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: What I heard from you is a commitment to Board of Trustees 21 October 19, 2022 removing the splashboard system under the granting of this permit. So I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL YES). TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: I'll make a motion to approve the application for a ten-year maintenance permit to dredge the as written, located at 2700 Hobart Road and 1000 Terry Road, with the condition that within one year the structure that is not permitted be removed. That is my motion. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). MR. COSTELLO: Appreciate that. Thank you. We can move ahead with something. Appreciate the help. MS. COSTELLO: Thank you. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Number 4, En-Consultants on behalf of JAMES & LINDA GEMMILL requests a Wetland Permit to remove existing 16'x20' wood deck and embankment stairs with two landings; construct a new embankment stairway consisting of a 10'x10' top landing with two entry steps, 4'x12'6" stairs, a 4'x8' middle landing, and 4'x9'2" stairs, leading to existing 11'x36' deck; remove easterly 11'x16' portion of existing 11'x36' deck, and shift existing 8'x12' shed approximately 36" west on westerly 11'x19'7" section of deck to remain; replace and relocate existing 4'x6' steps to beach off bulkhead; construct a 10'x20' grade-level masonry patio landward of buffer; and to establish and perpetually maintain a 10' wide non-turf buffer area along the landward edge of top of bank. Located: 6004 Indian Neck Lane, Peconic. SCTM# 1000-98-5-18 The Trustees most recently visited this site on September 7th, 2022, and conducted an inhouse review on October 12th, 2022, noting that we would review the new plans at work session. We are in receipt of new plans stamped received September 28th, 2022, The LWRP reviewed the application and found it to be consistent and inconsistent. The inconsistency stems from the as-built deck and shed structures were constructed without a Wetland Permit. The 11x16 on-grade platform deck does not comply with the Town code. The Conservation Advisory Council reviewed this application and resolved to support it, with retractable stairs at the base and parallel to the shoreline. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application? MR. HERRMANN: Good evening. Rob Herrmann of En-Consultants on behalf of the applicant. It is a straightforward application. We had looked at'it a couple of months ago in the field. Although there was one significant change since then. There had been proposed a 1 0x1 0 platform landward of the top of the bank which has been eliminated from the plan, and there is now just a 48 wood entry Board of Trustees 22 October 19, 2022 landing at the top. So the application was already proposing substantial removal of existing structures, which included the large wood deck right now that is on the bank itself, and also a portion of the existing deck that is behind the bulkhead. Just to speak to the LWRP comment, those structures were actually previously addressed by Trustees permit 7593 in 2011, and at that time that was primarily a bulkhead replacement permit that was issued and that existing deck had to be partially removed and replaced. So that existing deck was originally cited in that permit. But then more specifically, the 11x20 or I think what is cited in the project description is 11 x19.7 foot section of deck that is to remain, is the same section that was previously approved by the Trustees to remain in 2017 under Permit 9073. And actually now that that 1 0x1 0 deck at the top has been removed, and there is now just a grade-level patio and a set of the stairs, the proposal is getting almost identical to what the Trustees had approved in 2017. So I just wanted to clarify that, the status of that deck down there, for the record. Again, it's almost a near replication of the Trustees' prior approval at this point. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Thank you. Is there anyone else here wishing to speak regarding this application? (No response). Any questions or comments from the Board? (Negative response). Hearing none, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: I make a motion to approve this application with the new plans stamped received September 28th, 2022, noting that this permit will replicate a similar permit issued in 2017 by the Trustees, thereby bringing it into consistency with the LWRP. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Number 5, En-Consultants on behalf of PECONIC RIVER, LLC, c/o ADAM PRESTANDREA, MEMBER requests a Wetland Permit to remove and replace in-place approximately 190 linear feet of existing timber/vinyl bulkhead with new vinyl bulkhead; raise westerly 5', 23', 47' and 16' sections approximately 18 inches to match elevation of easterly 99' section; permanently remove existing ±18' middle return, ±71'westerly retaining wall, wood steps, and approximately 23 linear feet of easterly retaining wall around steps; construct approximately 1.04 linear feet of wood tie retaining wall in place of existing easterly retaining wall; backfill with approximately 75 cubic yards of clean sand to be trucked in from an approved upland source; on Board of Trustees 23 October 19, 2022 west side of property, fill an approximately 708 sq.ft. area behind bulkhead to meet existing grade landward of retaining wall to be removed; construct 4'x6' wood platform and 3'x12' aluminum stair off bulkhead; and restore/revegetate disturbed portion of naturally vegetated embankment upon completion of construction. Located: 450 Basin Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-81-1-18.1 The Trustees most recently visited the site on October 13th and noted that the application was straightforward. The LWRP found this to be consistent, and did note that turbidity controls are required. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this application as well. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak in regard to this application? MR. HERRMANN: Rob Herrmann of En-Consultants on behalf of the applicant. It is a straightforward application that is basically a maintenance application with replacement of existing structures. Although the landward retaining wall on the west side of the property and associated return will be permanently removed, that side of the bank would be replanted and revegetated and continue to be maintained as a vegetated buffer pursuant to the previously-covenanted buffer adjacent to the bulkhead. If the Board has any questions, I'm happy to address them. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Does anyone else here wish to speak in regard to this application? (No response). Any other questions or comments from the Board? (Negative response). Rob, I did note that there are a lot of trees that have been located on the plan, and I just wanted to know if, some of them appear to be very close to the structure, and I didn't know if any of these were planning to be removed as a result of the project. MR. HERRMANN: So, I can half answer that. There is no proposal to remove any trees that were not already proposed and approved to be removed pursuant to the previously-issued permit associated with the house. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Okay. That makes sense. MR. HERRMANN: If that changes, we would have to come back and let you know. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Okay, please do, because we would likely request a replacement. MR. HERRMANN: Yes, and I understand, and that was specifically associated, that information was specifically associated with the prior permit. So I'll make sure to let the owner and the contractor know. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Okay, understood. Thank you, very much. MR. HERRMANN: You bet. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Any other questions or comments? (No response). Board of Trustees 24 October 19, 2022 Hearing none, I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE PEEPLES: I make a motion to approve this application with the plans stamped dated September 30th, 2022. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 6, En-Consultants on behalf of KENNETH & ELIZABETH McCULLOCH requests a Wetland Permit to demolish and reconstruct 1,868 sq.ft. portion of existing two-story dwelling over its existing foundation, leaving intact 676 sq.ft. portion of existing dwelling consisting of an attached garage (with second story above), and 583 sq.ft. attached, uncovered waterside deck (to be resurfaced as needed); remove 291 sq.ft. attached deck and steps, 13 sq.ft. covered stoop, 45 sq.ft. roofed porch, wood arbor, and 518 sq.ft. accessory deck; construct 184 sq.ft. masonry patio and steps in place of 128 sq.ft. attached deck to be removed; construct 2.2'x8.3' one-story and 2.3'x13.9'x2'x6.4', 1.8'x11.2', and 4'x10' two-story dwelling additions, 277 sq.ft. covered front porch addition with steps, 310 sq.ft. screened porch addition, 227 sq.ft. covered outdoor kitchen with landing and steps, 3.x5' landing with steps, and new steps to waterside deck to remain; construct 1,163 sq.ft. masonry patio and 310 sq.ft. masonry walkway; remove existing asphalt driveway and install pervious gravel driveway; install 4' high fencing, A/C units, and generator; remove existing conventional septic system and install new I/A sanitary system; install stormwater drainage system; maintain existing vegetated embankment as vegetated buffer, and establish and perpetually maintain an additional 5' wide non-turf buffer along the landward edge of top of bank. Located: 1605 North Parish Drive, Southold. SCTM# 1000-71-1-15 The Trustees conducted a field inspection October 12th, noting the project seemed straightforward. A one-to-one tree replacement for any trees that are to be removed. The LWRP found the project to be consistent. The Conservation Advisory Council does not support.the application because new construction is within 50 feet of the bulkhead, the project exceeds the allowed lot coverage, and non- pervious materials are proposed on the patios and walkways. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application? MR. HERRMANN: Yes. Rob Herrmann of En-Consultants. This is a reasonably straightforward application. It proposes the in-place replacement, basically the seaward two-thirds of the existing, pre-existing residence, and the maintenance of the most landward section of the house, which is an existing attached garage with a second-floor above it. Board of Trustees 25 October 19, 2022 There is a proposal to re-deck, but not to reconstruct, a significant portion of the waterside deck that is attached to the house, but with also partial removal of that deck. Also the removal of the deck that is very close to the top of the bank, the removal of an existing asphalt driveway, installation'of a pervious driveway. And with respect to the Conservation Advisory Council comment, I'm not sure what that is based on. There is actually a slight decrease in Town-defined lot coverage, and it is conforming Town-defined lot coverage. And there is also a net decrease, even with the addition of the patio, of in fact impervious surface on the property. As the Board is likely aware, the Town does not consider masonry, you know, grade-level masonry patios, driveway, et cetera, as lot coverage for zoning purposes. But in any event, we get a slight reduction in both. There is a proposed storm water drainage system, a proposed IA sanitary system. And I think there is also a question in the LWRP about-- is there a comment in the LWRP, something about grass behind the bulkhead? I just wanted to speak to that quickly, because the client actually wanted that retained as a sandy area, it's not a grassy area. It's not a maintained turf. And we do indicate in the plans that the vegetated slope would be maintained as a vegetated buffer, and then we also have the addition of a non-turf buffer landward of the top of the bank. So that will be a pretty substantial covenanting the buffer area between the reconstruction and the waterway. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: One thing that we did discuss at work session, which seems like it probably makes sense in this case, you have the non-turf at the top of the bank, but there is that little sliver right between say the deck and that buffer. Can we make the hole, from the deck to the top of the bank-- MR. HERRMANN: Oh, yes. To be clear, you are talking about this area where there is like a narrow triangle. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Yes. MR. HERRMANN: Yes. And, I mean I think for all intent and purposes that would be non-turf buffer because they are not going to try and maintain this really narrow, awkward triangular section of lawn. So that is acceptable. And to speak to the other special condition that you mentioned about the one-for-one tree removal, we did speak to the applicant about that and they were amenable to that. I think you are talking about something, maybe two or three trees. But that was perfectly acceptable. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Is there anyone else here wishing to speak regarding this application? MS. POWER: Can I -- TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Yes, ma'am. Step up to the microphone and please state your name for the record. MS. POWER: My name is Cindy Power, and I'm speaking for my mother Carol Power who lives just east of this home. And we just had a question about, I think on the plans it said a fence Board of Trustees 26 October 19, 2022 would be, particularly the only part that we really care about is the fence that would be between her house and the current house. Right now there is a strip of tall evergreens, and where the evergreens are to the side of my mother's house is probably, maybe ten feet, maybe 15 feet, however, whatever was legally required at the time. And I think on the plans, I only glanced briefly, but I think it said that they wanted to maybe put a chain link there, and that would be on, you know, basically on my mother's side of those trees, so is that what she would be look at is right next to her back door. So I just wanted to clarify if that was the intention of the owners. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: According to the plans that we have here, it does look like there is a proposed four-foot tall fence on the easterly side of those row of trees. . Is that correct, Mr. Herrmann? MR. HERRMANN: Yes, but not a chain-link fence. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Do you know what kind of material the fence would be? MR. HERRMANN: I don't. It would have to be code compliant, but it would be something that would be a yard guard or something. It would not be chain-link. MS. POWER: That was our only concern. I think it says on the plans chain-link, but maybe I read the wrong plans, or maybe an older version. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: The only thing on the plans that we have stamped received September 2nd, 2022, it just says proposed four-foot tall fence. MR. HERRMANN: Correct. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: And to be clear, this fence is in preparation for a future pool, that would remain code compliant? MR. HERRMANN: Correct. MS. POWER: No other questions then. Thank you. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you. Is there anyone else here wishing to speak regarding this application? (No response). Any questions or comments from the Board? (Negative response). Hearing none, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion to approve this application with the condition of a one-to-one tree replacement for any trees that are removed during construction, as well as a new non-turf buffer at the top of the bank, seaward of the deck, and new plans depicting as such. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). MR. HERRMANN: Thanks for hearing us. Board of Trustees 27 October 19, 2022 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Number 7, Cole Environmental Consulting on behalf of GERARD & KAREN DIFFLEY requests a Wetland Permit to demolish existing dwelling, deck, driveway and curb; construct a new±48'6" x±61'2" two-story irregular shaped dwelling (±2,354sq.ft.) With a full basement (±2,354sq.ft.); remove ±387 cubic yards of soil for the full basement; construct a ±24' x ±5' front porch; a ±21' x±5' rear porch; a ±4' x±5' entry stoop on east side; install a ±40' x ±35' irregular shaped stone patio with a ±15' x 15' shade porch; install a ±30' x±14' in-ground swimming pool with a max depth of±7'; proposed patio, shade porch and pool to be on-grade; install a drywell for pool discharge; install a pool enclosure fencing; install a ±4' x ±4' outdoor shower; remove ±80 cubic yards of soil for pool excavation; install a pervious semi-circle driveway landward of dwelling; existing septic system to be abandoned (system to be pumped clean and filled with clean sand from upland source); and the installation of a new I/A OWTS system landward of dwelling; there is no proposed grade change. Located: 1050 Lupton Point Road, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-115-11-14 The LWRP coordinator found this to be consistent, mainly due to the fact that it would be the installation of an IA onsite treatment system. Also recommended consider required vegetated non-turf buffer to mitigate the shift of structure seaward. Maintain trees and existing vegetation within the buffer. And also questioned where will the outside showers drain. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to not support the application due to the inadequate setbacks of the proposed swimming pool and dwelling, noting they are too close to the wetland boundary. The Trustees most recently visited this site on the 12th of October and noted that we would review the plans at work session. Is there anyone here that wishes to speak regarding this application? MR. COLE: Good evening. Chris Cole, Cole Environmental, .representing the applicant.. We were able to discuss with the architect and we were able to shift the house slightly further landward away from the wetlands. We added a ten-foot wide native buffer at the top-of the bank. We preserved four additional mature trees, including the McDougal oak tree, with a 20 and 24-trunked double tree. All trees that will be removed as part of the plan will be replaced on one-to-one ratio with native species. We removed the pool fence a landward outside of the wetland area. And we have reduced lot coverage slightly from 19.7 to 19.2. The shower, outdoor shower is now going into a drywell. And all trees within the buffer area are to remain. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. A couple of things we came across at work session when we were reviewing the new plans. And obviously all the changes you made were on point for sure. One would be a stipulation of sound screening for the pool Board of Trustees 28 October 19, 2022 equipment, and the other was given the fact that this property sort of starts to slope down to the water probably right around the pool, the Board felt it might be most appropriate to do a non-turf buffer from the pool fence seaward. Which is not actually that much more property, when you look at the plans. Is that something you would be open to? - MR. COLE: That is something I would have to discuss with the client. Because we have the ten-foot, but I think the client did want to maintain some backyard area. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Okay, I mean I can table it at your request to discuss it with your client, otherwise with those changes I would be comfortable moving forward with it tonight. So that's really up to you what you want to do with that. . MR. COLE: So the changes would be,just the buffer, would be from the pool fence all the way across the whole yard? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes. It looks like in some spots it would be five feet more buffer and other spots it would be ten feet more. It's just one section would basically be ten feet more buffer. MR. COLE: Okay, I'm going to have to discuss that with the client before I go ahead with that. Because I know they did want to maintain some yard area, and they wanted that buffer to kind of flow naturally with the grade of the vegetation that exists there. And, you know, we took into consideration everything that we had discussed at the last hearing and added it on to the plan, and we were expecting, you know, this would meet everything that the Trustees were looking for. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Just because, you know, with the plans and the topography on that, as you can see, where the pool is, we're at 18-foot elevation, back where you are calling the top of slope we are at 14 feet. So obviously the slope starts higher than the 14 feet, if we are at 18 at the pool. So any sort of fertilizers, pesticides, whatever, that you are going to use for that is going to.run right down that bank. So for the benefit of the environment, more of a buffer than we could get on that bank to filter out any of that, the better. You know, your client still has a backyard, they still have yard landward or seaward, excuse me, of the pool, and on both sides. MR. COLE: Would it be acceptable to the Board to call that area a non-fertilization area but to maintain some of the grass? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think that would get too complicated, to be honest with you: The Board,-I believe, is pretty strong with this recommendation, so. MR. COLE: Okay, then we'll request to table for next month. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Okay. Is there anyone else that would like to speak regarding this application? (No response). Any additional comments from the Board? (Negative response). I make a motion to table this application at the applicant's request for next month's hearing. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second. Board of Trustees 29 October 19, 2022 TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Number 8, DKR Shores, Inc. on behalf of KORYN ESTRADA requests a Wetland Permit-to construct a 3,236sq.ft. second story addition onto existing permitted 4,184sq.ft. dwelling; construct a 137.40sq.ft. second floor balcony on seaward side; construct a 67.50sq.ft. second floor deck on seaward side; for the as-built 111 sq.ft. trellis on first floor seaward deck; existing 247sq.ft. wood walkway on landward side to be replaced in-kind; abandon existing sanitary system and install a new I/A OWTS system landward of dwelling. Located: 2350 Deep Hole Drive, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-123-4-7 The Trustees most recently visited the site on 10/12/22, and the notes from that visit read straightforward. The LWRP found this proposal to be consistent. And the Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support the application. We received plans stamped September 15th, 2022. We'll open it up to the public. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak? MS. RIGDON: Hi, Agena Rigdon, DKR Shores, here to represent Kory, a/k/a Koryn Estrada, the owner of the property, here to answer any questions. It's pretty cut and dry, as you said. Mitigation, new IA/OWTS system, is planned onsite. I do have the architect, one of the architects that came all the way from Boston, if any of the Board has any questions. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Coming all the way from Boston, I feel guilty not having any questions. (Off-the-record joking between the Board and applicant). TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: That sentence won't translate into the notes, I won't bother making a joke. I lived in Boston for many years, so. The Trustees reviewed the application. As the notes read, they found it straightforward. The one small thing that we did find when we visited the site, and other Trustees have pointed out in the past, that there is a small side yard wetland area on the property, and we would like that to be made visible on a new set of plans submitted to our office. And if the client is amenable to that, I would feel comfortable moving forward with the application this heaving. MS. RIGDON: I can have the surveyor locate that on the site. It was previously located in former permits. It is nota regulated wetlands by the DEC, but I certainly can have the surveyor Young &Young locate that low spot on the survey and get you revised plans. If you would close the hearing tonight for written submission, that would be fantastic. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Any members of the Board wish to comment on the application? (Negative response). TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Members of the public? (No response). Hearing none, I'll make a motion to close the hearing. Board of Trustees 30 October 19, 2022 MS. RIGDON: Thank you. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: I'll make a motion to approve the application with the stipulation that new plans be submitted depicting side yard wetland area on the survey. That's my motion. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). MS. RIGDON: Thank you, have a good evening. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Number 9, Tortorella Swimming Pools, LLC on behalf of LAURA CHILTON requests a Wetland Permit to install a 16'x32' swimming pool with 12" coping on existing seaward side deck and pile; existing 52'8"x40'0" deck situated 12' above grade to remain, and existing 3' high handrail in all deck parameters to remain; for the existing 139sq.ft. of stairs to ground; and existing 7'x7' spa to remain. Located: 105 Waterview Drive, Southold. SCTM# 1000-78-7-9 The Trustees most recently visited the site on October 13th, 2022, noting to change the ten-foot buffer to non-turf, and seaward buffer modified to non-disturbance. The LWRP reviewed this application and found it to'be consistent. And the Conservation Advisory Council reviewed this application and resolved to support it, and recommended an engineer's report on the viability of the pool construction. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application? (No response). Any questions or comments from the Board? .(Negative response). Hearing none, I'll make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: I make a motion to approve this application with the condition that seaward of the existing buffer line on the plans should be marked as a non-disturbance buffer, and that would be on the plans stamped received August 16th, 2022, in our office: That is my motion. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second: TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Number 10, Eileen Wingate on behalf of JEFFREY WILKE requests a Wetland Permit for the existing 1,048.4 sq.ft. dwelling with a 160.0 sq.ft. seaward side deck and 172.0 sq.ft. covered stoop; to demolish the existing shed and construct a 24'x24' attached garage with a connecting 11'x13' room onto the Board of Trustees 31 October 19, 2022 landward side of existing dwelling for a total of 860 sq.ft. of new structure. Located: 3380 Oaklawn Avenue, Southold. SCTM# 1000-70-5-49.4 The Trustees most recently visited the site on October 12th, and noted that while the Trustees were there, though this project is a garage and a mudroom, a breezeway to the main house, they suggested gutters to leaders to drywells on the existing structure, and advised looking into this possibility. The LWRP found this application to be consistent, and noted to preserve the existing vegetation through the creation of a vegetated non-turf buffer to help protect the water quality of Jockey Creek and further Policy 6. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this application. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak in regard to this application? MS. WINGATE: Eileen Wingate, for Jeff Wilke. There is no problems at all containing the roof runoff on the existing house, and everything else is just fine with us. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: I'm sorry, you were clarifying the runoff? MS. WINGATE: Yes, we'll put in drywells. We'll get them on board. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Okay, fantastic. Anyone else who wishes to speak? (No response). Any other questions or comments from the Board? (Negative response). Hearing none, I'll make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE PEEPLES: I make a motion to approve this application with the stipulation that the plan submitted is updated showing gutters to leaders to drywells on the main residence. MS. WINGATE: Do you want that plan resubmitted to the Trustees? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Just one second. There is a motion made. So, second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE PEEPLES: To answer your question, if you could please submit that to the Trustees office, we would appreciate it. MS. WINGATE: Thank you. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 11, Michael Kimack on behalf of TIMOTHY J. & GINAMARIE STUMP requests a Wetland Permit to construct approximately 290 linear feet of permeable bulkhead; backfill approximately 70 linear feet of eroded bank areas with approximately 17 yards of coarse clean sand; maintain a 1 to 2 slope from top of sloughed bank to toe; install approximately 350 sq.ft. of erosion control.biodegradable blanket over reestablished slope area and pin with 8" salinized pins; and to plant Spartina patens 1' on-center (approximately 350 plants). Board of Trustees 32 October 19, 2022 Located: 2200 Minnehaha Boulevard, Southold. SCTM# 1000-87-3-61 The Trustees conducted field inspection October 12th, noting, field notes say a living shoreline project would be more appropriate at this location. The LWRP found this project to be inconsistent. The inconsistencies are: Aerial photos throughout the years of 2001 through 2020, and submitted photographs, show that the bank is stable and not actively eroding at a rate that would warrant the installation of a hardened structures, replacing benefits of the natural shoreline. The stability of the shoreline is attributed to the existing established vegetation including Spartina Alterniflora and Peeps. Healthy tidal wetland habitat will be lost due to this action. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this application. Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application? MR. KIMACK: Mike Kimack, on behalf of the applicant who is the audience. This is an interesting project. We were here about maybe a year ago and it has been placed at the low water mark, and found out that the land seaward of the high water mark was owned by the Laughing Waters corporation, or association, who after a long series of conversations decided not to grant consent. So it was, we looked at it and we redesigned it. I redesigned it to be at the high water mark. Which has a couple of advantages. It doesn't interfere with the intertidal, primarily, there. And there is not any deadmen, basically. It's self-supporting. We are putting in a couple of helicals so that it's minimal or no interference with the Spartina alterniflora. But landward of that is pretty much phragmites, for the most part, from the high water mark up, which my client does not intend to touch. But as you all know, it's invasive species. We are dealing with a situation where my client wants to be able to not only stop the erosion, because about 70 feet of it, which you probably were able to see on both sides of the walkway. And that's probably cut the land"back I would imagine about four or five feet of the existing. So we've got that situation. I do not disagree that the remaining area on the high water mark going, has exhibited the beginnings of some erosion, if you had a chance at low tide to go out there. It would not show up on your aerials. But that is not the point of our request here. My client wants to be able to protect his property landward of the high water mark. Erosion had already started on part of it and it's beginning to start on the other parts of it. There is really nothing in the code that prohibits someone to be able to spend the time/effort to put into place a structure that would inhibit the ongoing future potential of erosion, which will come, the inevitability. You've always talked about high-rising tides and more floods and more dramatic floods and more energy in the waves, and we all know that's coming. We've all experienced it. Board of Trustees 33 October 19, 2022 This is a situation where about a third of it has already experienced that, and it's beginning to, if you had a chance to go there at low tide you'll see it, beginning to show the other ones. This is not something you can stop with coir logs. This is not something --this does meet the requirement of a natural shoreline under the DEC coding, quite readily. You used to use the word "hybrid low sill." If you look at their publications, under that, you'll see the hybrid low sill fits into the natural shoreline. This is not a hybrid low sill. This is, we are calling it a permeable bulkhead, for lack of another terminology on this particular one, because it has openings on the bottom in the event you have a higher than normal high tide, the water can still get back in there and come back out again; and only goes as high as the top of the bank. So we are dealing with the regular tides are not going to be inhibited at all, the movement of any type of sand is not being inhibited at all. If you get a high high tide, some of the water will come back and drain back out again. This is put into place to have a permanent barrier against the inevitability of what we know is coming, to protect property. Even though some of it has already been wasted away, the inevitability.the rest of it will do the same thing. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Anyone else wishing to speak regarding this application? MR. MITCHELL: Yes, sir. Good evening. Ray Mitchell, Laughing Waters Association Vice-President. We understand their need for this bulkhead. We approve it. We think that they should have it. One of the concerns that we do have, the Board may know, our wetlands itself in that area are drastically leaving us, at a high rate. So the only concern we have right now at Laughing Waters is that the underwater property that is going to be in that area will be maintained and taken care of and not destroyed by the project. But we thoroughly agree he needs a bulkhead. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Just to comment on that last statement,just a little bit of education. This is just one Board member's opinion, but if we put that permeable bulkhead, which is probably my least favorite term of the night, in this location, we won't be able to preserve what is seaward of it, will wipe it out, and eventually it will just be a regular bulkhead that is leaching earth from the property through it. So that's what happens when you put new bulkheads in. MR. KIMACK: You are talking about the intertidal area? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes. MR. KIMACK: Okay, the intertidal area is sparse at the present time, Nick. It has some growth, but whatever is there, whatever has energized, whatever has spread in terms of the Spartina, is not going to be effective by putting a bulkhead in because we are doing it above the high water mark. So the plants are basically behind it. There may be some Spartina but then for the most part it's phragmites, which are invasive. We are not asking Board of Trustees 34 October 19, 2022 for a permit to cut them down at all. That would continue to be under natural --when you've got the high water mark, and we are not affecting anything seaward of that high water mark, whatever goes on naturally, will occur naturally, whether there is more Spartina that is going to grow, whether the waves are going to come in and'take it out, that's the natural action of things. We are not interfering with that. With that movement. And to back up what Ray said, I'm also doing a permit for Laughing Waters, God help us with that one, and that is somewhat not unlike this one, basically, and it falls within the same category as being a hybrid low sill, or a natural shoreline approach, basically. And I'm also doing the Nunnakoma, which is the dredging operation, above that, which will come before you because you sent me to DEC, exactly the same. Because they already had erosion against their whole back, they're losing against erosion. The same permeable bulkhead. I didn't call it a hybrid low sill, Nick, simply because the term did not quite fit what this was doing. And the reason it's a permeable bulkhead is because, as you well know, this Board does not permit solid bulkheads. So this is permeable in order to meet that requirement. That's why we have the cutouts. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: To that point, I think that this Board is, you know, this project sort of sets a bad precedent for hardening the shoreline, which is something we have been opposed to. So calling it a permeable bulkhead, it's still a bulkhead, and I think that is something this Board is not in favor of. MR. KIMACK: But if you are looking at doing the hybrid low sills, their bulkhead is just a little bit lower down. As a matter of fact, you approved, not you, before, a hybrid low sill for Cove Condominiums. 155 feet of it, primarily. And that was raised to the same height as the ground. And we did the cutouts on the bottom. We filled them in and did the cutouts to let the water comes in under natural high tide conditions. So there has already been approval of this type of method. Now, you have to look at this not from the fact that, when you have a negative approach and say, well, we don't like it because. We have the rising tides. We are having much more ocean. You are not going to be able to resolve these issues with the way you did it in the past. We were able, if you took a look at, if you had a chance to take a look at what we did at Cove Condominium and how that actually has grown into global planting, essentially, like that. It was a different approach. We were at low tide at that one. I probably couldn't get that today, because DEC doesn't like that anymore. They like to keep the intertidal. But we could, at that particular one, by filling in and letting the water come in and then replanting the entire intertidal area, which we did, and then re-pounding the top of the hill, which we did, on that one, the thing had grown Board of Trustees 35 October 19, 2022 amazingly well. It's just refilled in beautifully. So that was one method. And the reason that happened is because within a two-year window, their three400t high bank sloughed in. In two years. From being a natural slope, well vegetated. It sloughed in. And that's what is going to happen here. So you are asking me to say come back here in three or four years when it erodes and then basically you'll be in a better position to make that go, as opposed to doing it as a preventive, as a prophylactic measure. But it should be the same analysis. Is this something, I mean you talk about hardening the slope, yes, absolutely. Because it's the only way that we are going to be able to resolve the kind of erosion that we are beginning to face. And it's not going to stop. It's not going to stop. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Just to comment on that a little bit and to reiterate our preference for a living shoreline, I get your point on the coir logs and everything, but there's different natural living shoreline projects that could be constructed, potentially with some stone and everything mixed in, because this does have a pretty healthy intertidal marsh. It does have some sloughing of the bank, but it's not at a'precipitous angle. So, maybe, obviously we don't want to design the project, but potentially a living shoreline project for the slope in conjunction with a retaining wall landward of it where it's not going to get its feet wet, so that way if, or when, the sea level rises, and that natural living shoreline project doesn't hold the bank, you have the backup of a retaining wall to protect the remainder of the property. MR. KIMACK: I understand the alternative, and I appreciate the Board trying to get me some leeway of play. But to put a retaining wall up there, a regular wood retaining wall, I would have to cut back in about six or eight feet to do my tie backs. It would have a lot of disturbance into that phragmites wetland, which we don't have right now. Now, it is phragmites, they are not as sensitive, perhaps, as some other plants would be, but to put a retaining wall up two or three feet and tie it back, I could probably get away with six but I would have to have a lot of disturbance behind it, Nick. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I think you could also use the helical screws that you are proposing for this project. - MR. KIMACK: I did the helicals on this one for that very reason, that I wanted it freestanding. And it's interesting, because you can free-stand it as long as you can get them down deep enough. And that becomes a function of what kind of soils we have. I don't think we have clay here. Because if we had clay, it would be very difficult to get it down. You could spend an hour going a foot, to try to power it down. But I talked to the different types of contractors and they said we could free-stand this. If it's up three feet, we can get it into the ground six Board of Trustees 36 October 19, 2022 or seven feet. The only reason I did helicals as an option, in the event that there was some shallowness and the contractor felt that he needed a helical to sustain the durability of that. So it was put in not as something we are going to do. We may not need helicals at all. But we are only dealing with the piling and with that we are only dealing in there about this wide, going straight down. That's it. Nothing else is being touched, landward or seaward. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Unfortunately we don't have the benefit of the projector tonight-- 'MR. KIMACK: Yeah, what happened, guys? TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Technology. But it would show, we saw in field inspections and what you can see from say Google Earth or whatever, the property to the west of this applicant's property . has a bulkhead, and there is no, or very little, intertidal marsh in front of it. So our concern is doing a similar, albeit hybrid, project where it results in the same loss of that intertidal marsh where you don't have one. MR. KIMACK: We have the intertidal marsh now. He doesn't because he's got a bulkhead. So he put the bulkhead in before the intertidal had chance to develop. What happened the sand movements up and down, and Ray can speak to this now, too, because that whole area by Laughing Waters was wiped out, primarily, there is beginning to build up sand adjacent to Mrs. Stump's property, that little wrinkle that is right in there. MR. MITCHELL: Yes. Trustees, that area is beginning to fill in. So, they also have the same problem with our marina slips as well, as you folks may be aware of. But that area is beginning to fill in, and we are looking at exactly where, myself, I tried to figure out where the actual sand is moving to. But that area is filling in. That bulkhead you were referring to, that property adjacent to it, that has been a bulkhead for a long time. That's why ' there is nothing there. There's nothing ahead of the bulkhead. That bulkhead has been there, and it's just been replaced. So instead of putting a natural barrier there, they were allowed to put in a bulkhead there. It's a solid bulkhead.- So I don't know why we can't go forward and help out the Stump's with their erosion problem that they are having right next door to that bulkhead. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: You just basically explained the problem with hardening the shoreline. So they have that bulkhead, so they lost marsh. The other property.that doesn't have the bulkhead, has the marsh. So we are trying to find a solution to maintain that marsh, which obviously, essential habitat and all that, but at the same time armored protection of your property. As you know, Mr. Kimack, with the DEC, right or wrong, they like it to start at the least obstructive and then work their Board of Trustees 37 October 19, 2022 way up. In looking at this type of project, I know you referenced Cole and some others where it might be more of a marina setting, where this type of hybrid, permeable bulkhead, whatever you want to refer it to, is a little more appropriate, but if we go down that slippery slope starting to consider this in residential lots, and our concern is what the impact of that potential structure would be on the wetland, on neighboring properties and on the environment. MR. KIMACK: Those are fair questions. Those are fair questions. When you are dealing with the fact that you've already got the, that area already created, in the Spartina area, and the sands are beginning to build back in. But by putting it on high water mark, we are not interrupting with it at all. In essence it's not about going to interrupt what has already been created, and certainly what can be added on to moving forward. DEC is a different animal, as you well know. They originally approved Cole Condominium at the low water mark. I don't think I can get that anymore, primarily, under that circumstance. DEC is changing, too. They don't want to, when I filled it in and created a new intertidal, now they basically, you can put it at the low water mark, but they don't want you to fill it in at all. They don't want you to touch any of the existing vegetation. So not touching any existing vegetation, they are allowing, on one of my projects, they are allowing me to put in part at the low water, part at the high water mark. And if at the low water mark we do not do any in-fill like we did at Cole, we simply leave the original slope in place. We identify where the intertidal wetlands are so we don't disrupt them. Or in places we can put it at the high water mark so we don't disrupt it at all. That's what DEC's reasoning and logic is right now. They are the ones that came up with they didn't want any deadmen, regular deadmen. They wanted to put it down straight because they did not want the extra disturbance that deadmen, had we did that, would have created. I was able to convince them that we would need a helical in the event we ran into clay and in the event we couldn't put it down deep enough, so it was a freestanding structure. And they considered that it to be a natural shoreline. I will say this, because DEC has told me,just to give you something to consider. The rock revetment along the whole shoreline, the DEC considers that to be a natural shoreline. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Okay. Enough said. Thank you. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Is there anyone else here wishing to speak regarding this application? MR. STUMP: Hi, my name is Tim Stump. I'm the property owner. I would just like to give a perspective as the property owner of what led us to this point. So my wife and I bought the property about five years ago, I believe this November will be six. During that time we have seen, and I don't ever, I guess the word "significant" is up for Board of Trustees 38 October 19, 2022 debate, but I'll explain my definition of significant erosion. My kids now have to jump from the land to the dock, so I guess we could always extend it landward. I do most of my own landscaping, so my unique perspective is did you guys notice the flagpole on the property? I was able to do two paths between the flagpole and the water line with a 24-inch deck mower. That's four feet. I challenge any one of us to stand seaward by that, from the flagpole. You can't. My son and I have a running joke when does the flagpole fall into Moyle's Cove. So that's what brought me to this point to try to protect the land. I'm open, very open, to any and all best practices. You know,. I would love to, I want to preserve, you know, as much as we can, obviously. That's one of the beauties, that's the reason we moved out here. But again, another unique perspective, my neighbor adjacent to me, just to the west, the bulkhead was just redone, as we mentioned, and already there is significant marsh grass. Again, we'll argue, I don't know the definition of"significant" is to you. But there is significant marsh grass on the seaward, seaside, of the bulkhead. You know, I watched their dog run in low tide, and you can't see it anymore because it's buried beneath the sea grass. . So there does seem to be sea grass that is flourishing. I don't think it's going to, you know, knock down the wave energy that is already, the sloughing has already begun. So the back, you understand the mechanics I'm sure better than I'do, if the sloughing already begun that you can't stand, I would say three feet, or you are just, you are going to lose more turf. You can't get even three feet close to the waterline or you'll just slough off. It's already, the turf is just going to fall in there. So I'm open, you know, we've talked about rock revetment, mattresses, you know, hey, whatever works. You know, coir-logs, to be honest with you, I really don't want to be here every 24 months to try to get another solution, and for my understanding is the coir logs really doesn't solve the solution. It is a viable solution for a significant period of time. But, you know, my right as a landowner to interact with the water, that is why we are here, you know, and I'm just really looking for a way to get the DEC and the Town of Southold onto the same page. Because two years ago this was approved and we found out that the low sill bulkhead would not have been on my property anymore. It would have been on the tax code property for Laughing Waters Property Owner's Association, as a liability of theirs. So I totally understand that and respect that. So my thinking outside the box brought it landward significantly to the high tide, mean high tide water mark, and I'm fine with that. I understand I'm still going to, that in itself I'm still going to lose land,just to fix that. So the only other thing I can say about this, just again, from someone who is there on a daily basis, the pre-existing Board of Trustees 39 October 19, 2022 bulkhead that was there, that was just refurbished, there is a cutback to protect the water from going behind it. So it's about twelve feet. And if you look westward, you can see where their bulkhead is and where my now high tide, mean high tide water mark is significantly behind that, and I would say it's biting into 50% of their protection. So now what's going to happen is the water is going to start coming around and disrupting their property as well. So I'm, you know, hat in hand, asking the Board if we can come up with a solution. I do not want to disturb the environment. That's the reason I'm here. I love it. It's great. It's God's country. But soon my property is just going to continue to encroach and I don't know when we pull the plug on, oh, yeah, you were right, you now do now have significant erosion. So, I appreciate the time. Thank you, very much. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you, sir. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. I would like to address some of your comments, Mr. Stump. And feel free to sit down, that's fine. I don't blame you at all for coming in front of this Board and asking for this. However this Board does have quite a bit of time in studying this, and quite a bit of maritime history and nautical history in dealing with these situations. And I certainly don't fault you for applying for this, because if it was my property and I had not been dealing with it as much as this Board has a history of dealing with it, I would want to do the same thing. And I completely understand that. Your agent is a very intelligent person. This is not the best option for this ecosystem, the creek, or the environment. And he knows that and we know that. There are other options that are here that I personally feel that you should get together and examine first. That's my two cents. And it's been a lot of back and forth on something that I would argue is illegal in our code anyway. So. MR. STUMP: Can I just step back to the mic. Again, it's interesting, the previous owner who went through a process to re-do his dock, so he changed his dock, and I believe when I look back at the past permit, which is a number of years ago, it was a kind of a tradeoff. He had a natural groin, a pre-existing groin, and you can actually see the, you know, the posts, and the tiebacks, or I would just call them wrought iron stays. And what has happened, in the personal conversation we were talking, he said, you know, the dock is beautiful, but he goes, I'm kicking myself because as soon as we took down that groin, he goes, I lost a significant amount of land. And that was before I bought it, you know. I love the dock, the dock is great, but there seems to have been a trade off when they did take away the pilings for the groin there. And I'm not proposing that we put in a groin. I think I understand how the, you know, the sand will pile up and it will erode the down-drift side. That's the last thing I want to do. But there was, when they did take that groin down, and, Board of Trustees 40 October 19, 2022 you know, firmed up shoreline, the erosion accelerated at a pace that the previous homeowner was kind of kicking himself that he did do that. So, I don't know if that adds anymore perspective. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. MR. KIMACK: Based upon the conversation with the Board and the possibility that we may be able to find a halfway point between what you consider appropriate for the.site and what we consider appropriate, I would like to offer to table. I don't think we are doing anything that is in violation of the code. But then again, that's another point. But if we can table it, I might be able to come to a workshop and perhaps discuss some alternatives. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Any other comments from the Board? (Negative response). I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I'll make a motion to deny without prejudice this application. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). MR. KIMACK: Couldn't even table it, huh, guys? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Legal advice. Have a good night. MR. STUMP: Thank you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Number 12, Ural Talgat on behalf of K2J4E6, LLC, c/o PATRICK SEVERSON & DIANE SEVERSON requests a Wetland Permit to construct a proposed 350sq.ft. Pool house; remove existing 116sq.ft. Shed which is not to be replaced; and install an additional 350sq.ft. Of proposed on-grade paving patio onto existing pool patio. Located: 9202 Bridge Lane, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-73-2-3.1 The LWRP coordinator found this to be consistent. The Conservation Advisory Council did not support this application because of the size of the shed, the removal of the trees and new construction due to the close proximity to the bluff and detrimental effects the project would have on the environment. The Board of Trustees visited the site on the 12th of October and noted that it was a straightforward application. Is there anyone here that wishes to speak regarding_ this application? MR. TALGAT--- Ural Talgat, on behalf of the applicant, here to answer any questions you may have. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You are removing one or two native trees. Would you just do a one-to-one replacement on those? MR. TALGAT: Sure. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone else here that wishes to speak Board of Trustees 41 October 19, 2022 regarding this application, or any additional comments from the members of the Board? (Negative response). Hearing no additional.comments, I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE PEEPLES: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I make a motion to approve this application with the stipulation of a one-to-one native tree replacement. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second. All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Number 13, Vincent Quartararo on behalf of SHAMGAR CAPITAL, LLC, c/o DANIEL BUTTAFUOCO requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 16'x46' gunite swimming pool with an 8'x8' hot tub inside; construct a ±2,OOOsq.ft. pool deck in composite around pool; install an automatic cover for pool; install pool equipment area with gas heater; construct a 25.7'x16' pergola over a two-part outdoor kitchen and bar area; and to install 4' high pool enclosure fencing with locking gates. Located: 1165 Kimberly Lane, Southold. SCTM# 1000-70-13-20.7 The Trustees most recently visited this location on 10/12/22. Notes from that visit read straightforward. The LWRP found this to be consistent. The callout reads require vegetated non-turf buffer to help protect the water quality by reducing the amount of turf on the property, furthering Policy 6 landward of the bulkhead. The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support the application. The Board is in receipt of plans stamped received September 2nd, 2022, and I invite comment from the public. (No response). TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Any members of the Board wish to speak on this application? . TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: We just, as a point of reference, we thought about putting a 20-foot vegetated non-turf buffer landward of the bulkhead, and they were talking about just putting one extra timber section on top of the existing bulkhead. The existing bulkhead will remain as is, and just an extra section added to the top. Just to clarify everything. TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Thank you. Any other comments from the Board? (Negative response). TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Motion to approve this application with the stipulation is that a 20-foot non-turf buffer be established from the bulkhead landward, and that the bulkhead be raised by eight inches by the addition of timbers on top of the bulkhead, Board of Trustees 42 October 19, 2022 but the primary structure is not to be modified. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Motion for adjournment. TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second. TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor? (ALL AYES). Respectful) submitted by, Glenn Goldsmith, President Board of Trustees