HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB-02/28/2023 PH 1
1 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: STATE OF NEW YORK
2 ------------------------------------------- X
3 TOWN BOARD PUBLIC HEARING
4 MKS REALTY, LLC
------------------------------------------- X
5
6
7
February 28, 2023
8 10 : 00 A.M.
9
10
11 B E F 0 R E :
12
13 SCOTT A. RUSSELL, SUPERVISOR
14 LOUISA P. EVANS, JUSTICE
15 JILL DOHERTY, COUNCILWOMAN
16 BRIAN 0. MEALY, COUNCILMAN
17 GREG DOROSKI, COUNCILMAN
18 SARAH E . NAPPA, COUNCILMAN
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
1 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: We just
2 opened the Public Hearing with reference to
3 the mitigation appeal . I am going to ask
4 that anybody that would like to come up and
5 address the Town Board, please feel free.
6 I am sorry, Councilman Doroski has to read
7 a series of legal requirements.
8 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : Just
9 want to go through all of the documentation
10 that we have received through the lead up
11 to this . So in this, we have the
12 application itself from MKS Realty to the
13 Town Board. We have an affidavit from them
14 that they posted the signage on the
15 property itself. It is signed by the
16 applicant' s attorney, Pat Moore. We have a
17 letter that is the same . We have a letter
18 of opposition that we have received from
19 one of the neighbors that is outlining four
20 individual issues that they foresee with
21 this application. We have an affidavit
22 that the legal notice was published in
23 Suffolk Times . We have a copy of the legal
24 notice itself. We have the notice of the
25 Public Hearing and a affidavit signed by
3
1 the Town Clerk affirming that it was posted
2 on the back bulletin board. And a copy of
3 an invoice and affidavit that it was in the
4 Suffolk Times . Then we have the whole
5 Coastal Erosion application and appeal
6 file. That is what we got.
7 MS . PAT MOORE: When I start, I
8 want to introduce everybody to you. So
9 first and foremost, Anthony --
10 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Excuse
11 me . Can you just state your name, Pat, for
12 the record?
13 MS . PAT MOORE: I am sorry.
14 Patricia Moore, attorney for the applicant.
15 The people that are here, just raise your
16 hands, so they know. We have Anthony
17 Varnou and Martella Varnou. They are the
18 property owners . Just a little bit about
19 them so you know. This is going to be
20 their home. They have three children. All
21 under 10 . The youngest being 1 . The
22 youngest being 10 . They also are a
23 caretaker of a cousin, a first cousin that
24 is developmentally disabled and that
25 individual is part of their nucleus family
4
1 and also is with them when he is not in a
2 special school. I also have with me Edward
3 Licazi . He is the architect. Raise your
4 hand. There you go. Other that you know,
5 of course. Doug Adams from Young & Young.
6 Doug is here. Also Kelly Risoto who is the
7 Senior Ecologist IS Manager for Land Use
8 Ecological Services. That' s Kelly. We
9 might have others on Zoom, but I can' t see
10 from this distance. And they will most
11 likely listen. I don' t know if John
12 Armentano is listening in. He was going to
13 come, but I am not sure . The weather. So
14 to start off with, I don' t want to read
15 through my application. You don' t need me
16 to read to you. So that is one of the
17 things that I prefer not to do . I think to
18 begin with, we do have people in the
19 audience. Just to understand here for the
20 purpose of the public. I know you know why
21 we are here. We are here on an appeal from
22 the Coastal Erosion Board. An appeal to
23 the Town Board sitting as a Coastal Erosion
24 Board. And this I will read just for the
25 record. The Coastal Erosion Hazard Law, a
5
1 Coastal Erosion Board to grant variance
2 relief from the standards of Chapter 111 .
3 Town Code 111-24 . The law recognizes that
4 strict application of the standards of this
5 chapter may cause practical difficulty or
6 unnecessary hardship. That is the
7 standards and restrictions may be varied,
8 modified if certain criteria are met . Then
9 there are criteria in which we will go into
10 great detail . I will have Kelly go over
11 the issues . The first being that no
12 reasonable prudent alternative is
13 available. This is our only property. All
14 responsible -- responsible means to
15 mitigate adverse impacts and natural system
16 and their functions and values have been
17 incorporated into the activities design of
18 the property owners expense. Clearly that
19 is our application. In this case, there
20 has been a great deal of mitigation and
21 design and incorporation based on the Town
22 Board' s prior precedent. Unfortunately,
23 for Mr. Bombara who took four years of a
24 saga to get his house, you live and learn.
25 You read through their record and you -- if
6
1 you can, adopt and intergrade and
2 incorporate all of the conditions and
3 recommendations that this Board as a Board,
4 as an appear Board, as well as, the
5 Trustees incorporated in the Bombara
6 decision. That is the most -- I want to
7 call it our road map term. But that is our
8 road map. We don' t three more years to get
9 to the point of incorporating all of the
10 recommendations that have previously been
11 required. The development will be
12 reasonably safe from floods, erosion
13 damage. The variance request is necessary
14 to overcome the practical difficulties of
15 the hardship, which was the basis of the
16 variance. And then finally, where public
17 funds are utilized. That is not
18 applicable. So we will just skip over
19 that. I like visuals . I am a very visual
20 person. And I put on in front of you
21 aerials . Thank you to Kelly because with
22 the GIS being expert in that, she was able
23 to provide these aerials. The first being
24 a birds eye view of North Sea Drive. In
25 particular, the northern area. The
7
1 waterfront lots on North Sea Drive. The
2 second aerial that I had is a more detailed
3 aerial giving lot size that are contiguous
4 to our property. The square footage, the
5 first is the house square footage. The
6 second square footage is the overall square
7 footage, which incorporates the decking.
8 So when you get to that, we will look at it
9 again carefully. As you can see from this
10 aerial, North Sea Drive is very well
11 developed. I don' t -- is that the right
12 one because ours goes further to the west.
13 The one that I just submitted. There we
14 go . Thank you. So you can see -- and what
15 Kelly did was provide the -- we will call
16 it the seaward line of development. Yellow
17 hash line that goes -- starts on the east
18 side by Penny Road -- Penny' s Beach.
19 Pardon me. And then it goes along. And as
20 you can see, the Bombara property and our
21 property most landward of all the houses .
22 And again, the seaward development line
23 goes toward the water. And then
24 substantially towards the water. Many of
25 these homes that are very close to the
8
1 water, predate Coastal Erosion. I
2 acknowledge that. This is well developed
3 area that has been developing prior to
4 zoning and then through the 70 ' s, prior to
5 Coastal Erosion. Then there was a lot of
6 redevelopment in the 90 ' s . And early 2000 .
7 Most of the redevelopment -- and I have --
8 if you want more information, I can provide
9 it after. I just didn' t think here today
10 you needed more paper. I actually pulled
11 all the permits of all the houses from this
12 -- from Penny' s Beach, based on the tax
13 numbers, to the west. And to the extent
14 that the Building Department has this
15 information, many of the homes today would
16 be considered a demo reconstruction. At
17 the time that they were done in the 90 ' s
18 particular. They could do substantial
19 additions. The 50% rule didn' t apply
20 probably the next closest redevelopment is
21 John Betsch' s . I see him here. I know him
22 well . Beautiful house. He worked hard to
23 get that property. He did go through
24 permit process. The Board had to give a
25 variance, Coastal Erosion variance. There
9
1 was a house there. The house that was
2 there was demolished. And a new house,
3 this house was built. That is the next in
4 line of the most recent development on the
5 street. The Betsch house also gives little
6 bit of extra guidance on the Coastal
7 Erosion appeal. We incorporated those
8 recommendations. Mostly it was an
9 acknowledgement of facing a house on piles,
10 addressed the flooding issue. Drywalls,
11 drainage. Everything. It was a much
12 lesser conditions than the Betsch
13 application. Nonetheless, the Board did
14 its job and did a review.
15 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Can I
16 interrupt you?
17 MS . PAT MOORE: Of course.
18 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: You
19 have all these lines, do you have a map
20 showing where the Coastal Erosion Line is?
21 MS . PAT MOORE: Yes .
22 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Can
23 you tell us --
24 MS . PAT MOORE: Well, I can tell
25 you without even looking. The Coastal
10
1 Erosion Line is at North Sea Drive. It is
2 the landward side of everybody' s property.
3 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Okay.
4 MS . PAT MOORE: The DEC when they
5 had mapped this area, they placed the line
6 there. Interestingly enough, I know from
7 -- my personal knowledge from a client that
8 was in another -- where North Sea -- no.
9 Not North Sea Drive. In Mattituck, where
10 Coastal Erosion Line was being drawn. And
11 I forget, he was a dentist.
12 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: I
13 remember.
14 MS . PAT MOORE: You remember him?
15 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Yeah.
16 MS . PAT MOORE: He on his own, God
17 Bless him. On his own, went to the DEC
18 hearing and pushed the DEC to move the line
19 and establish it seaward of his
20 neighborhood. That is why that
21 neighborhood didn' t have to deal with the
22 kind of difficulty.
23 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Well,
24 there is some big differences between that
25 neighborhood and this one too as well .
11
1 Still --
2 MS . PAT MOORE: Environmentally,
3 it ' s still the same. But that is -- we are
4 not going to go there. As a matter of
5 course, this community was very well
6 developed when the Coastal Erosion Law was
7 adopted. And here we are. So I also -- I
8 want based on this aerial and you can see,
9 we will get to the next one shortly. You
10 can see that the size of this property is
11 at least double the size of every lot,
12 waterfront lot on North Sea Drive. Most of
13 the lots on North Sea Drive -- the second
14 exhibit actually has square footages from
15 the Town record. They range -- they
16 generally over 1/2 acres . The square
17 footage may depend on the knee high water
18 or not. Generally the Assessors have a
19 size of the property or the surveyors use
20 the size of the property. Most of them are
21 anywhere -- from the smallest being 19, 950 .
22 Almost 20, 000 . To slightly over 25, 000 .
23 John Betsch' S house is probably -- the
24 property is lot 26, 676 . Most of them is in
25 that range. Our property is 58, 936. That
12
1 is just a few square feet than 60, 000 .
2 This is an R-40 . So we have a conforming
3 lot . As you know, R-40 is 40, 000 . So we
4 are more than double the size of zoning
5 requirements. I take it back. One and a
6 half times zoning requirements. And at
7 this point, we are proposing to develop as
8 far as away. Protecting the shore line as
9 possible. Arguably at no cost of the town
10 -- they are going to be taxed. It' s going
11 to be a valuable piece of property, and the
12 Town is getting 23, 000 which is the size of
13 any one of these properties as undisturbed
14 open space. So this deice has been very
15 carefully developed or proposed for
16 development. Again, at no cost of the
17 Town, we are preserving a tremendous amount
18 of this property. All consistent with the
19 Coastal Erosion Law and consistent with our
20 appeal . So if you look at the second
21 exhibit that we have. That shows you the
22 square footages. And you know, the bubble
23 over the head of the Trustees and maybe
24 anyone else, this is too big of a house.
25 No . When you look at one, the size of the
13
1 property, the square footages of the
2 neighboring properties, we would comply --
3 even though it ' s not applicable since we
4 started way before the gross floor area
5 law. We would comply with that law from --
6 based on what our project is today. And
7 you can see that -- so we' re starting over
8 on the east side next to Kenny' s Beach.
9 You have John Betsch' s house, which is
10 shown as the house square footage, 2, 607 .
11 With decks . , 3 . 512 . So again, his is one
12 of the bigger lots but it also have one of
13 the larger footprints. We ' re using the
14 percentage based on the actual lot. So
15 we ' re -- we ' re comparing apples to apples .
16 The development of the Betsch property is
17 13 . 20 of the overall property. As you go
18 towards the west. Some of these homes are
19 additions, alterations. They are slightly
20 smaller. Some of them have smaller houses
21 but larger decks . It ' s a very seasonable
22 summer community. Some of these people
23 have yards . We have proposed a yard that
24 -- has grass -- sorry, play areas . We have
25 none. Our entire area is going to be
14
1 natural and re-vegetated. So essentially
2 what you have is the house and the deck and
3 the kids will -- they have to live in that
4 area. They take the pathway of the beach.
5 That is the extent of the activity on this
6 property. All activity is within the
7 confines of the existing structure or
8 proposed structure, pardon me. The house
9 next to us is a smaller lot . Again, 20, 000
10 square feet. The house size is smaller.
11 The overall decks are overall smaller.
12 Interestingly, that house is preexisting.
13 The moment one of somebody either the
14 family or a future owner, acquires that
15 house, it doesn' t conform with FEMA
16 standards. There reality is and why you
17 have seen so much development on North Sea
18 Drive, Coastal Erosion and flood zone
19 applications require the houses to be
20 elevated on piles . As soon as you do that,
21 it ' s a lot of construction. A lot of
22 raising. So the construction process of
23 building enough in a Coastal area,
24 logically requires more square footage.
25 Again, because everything is up and your
15
1 living space and activities are all
2 occurring on your structures. So going
3 further west, the houses are all
4 proportionately sized. Our property is
5 58, 000 . So our development is 7 . 90 .
6 Clearly that is less and comparable in fact
7 to some of the smaller properties. So our
8 neighbor to the east is 7 . 6 . That is teeny
9 little cottage but on a small lot. So our
10 development is proportional to the
11 property. That is what I want to emphasize
12 here. Because the bubble over everyone' s
13 head, is that, oh, you' re building too
14 much. No, we ' re building -- we have a very
15 large piece of property. It ' s -- and it ' s
16 proportion. Under 80 . At this point, let
17 me -- one more item that I just want to
18 show you, and then I will leave it with the
19 Board. Here is the house, the proposed
20 house. Here is our development lot.
21 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Based
22 on what?
23 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Based on --
24 thank you. I am glad you asked. Doug Adams
25 who is more familiar with how the line was
16
1 drawn, but again, taking from Bombara.
2 During the Bombara application, the process
3 and I don' t know if any of you have had a
4 chance to review the entire record there.
5 It ' s very length.
6 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: I lived
7 it .
8 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Yes . Sorry
9 about that. So the Trustees denied the first
10 application. They came back a year later and
11 came in with a completely different
12 application. At that point, Pete Donowski
13 was their lawyer. They have Chachoonian.
14 They had other experts with them. Doug Adams
15 and Young & Young. They -- and the Town had
16 their own expert. They probably got together
17 in the third or fourth year of the process
18 finally. And they looked at the topography
19 of the property. The environmental
20 conditions of the property and they
21 established what -- I have to read it because
22 there is extra words that I am not used to
23 saying. They identified the most landward
24 natural protected feature on the site. The
25 landward geomorphic toe and landward
17
1 regulatory of the sand ridge and the Dune was
2 identified. It was plotted by Young & Young
3 surveyors. Based on that, vegetation is
4 pretty much one continuous vegetation. You
5 don' t have property line when you' re dealing
6 with vegetation and the geology. So they
7 took the line. They applied the standards
8 and how the line was established on the
9 Bombara property and they carried it over to
10 this property. The red line that I just
11 showed you is our environmental line. Kind
12 of the don' t go pass this line. Take all
13 your dimensions and all your instruction
14 development landward of that line. And that
15 is one of the things that we want to
16 establish for sure with the Board today. If
17 we get nothing else accomplished, we need to
18 get that line established because everything
19 derives from that line. We design. We have
20 our setbacks. All of it is based on that
21 line. So we -- in working with the Trustees
22 and very early in the process, Ed -- and I
23 don' t know who else, but certainly Ed was out
24 there with the Trustees. And their initial
25 reaction was, "Oh, there is Bombara. Okay.
18
1 Do what Bombara did and you shouldn' t have
2 any issues . " Or at least that was kind of in
3 the shortcut. You know how the Trustees
4 speak. And Trustees speak, it ' s about a line
5 and you have to interpret a lot from that
6 line. So based on that interpretation,
7 again, they went back and redesigned. At
8 time, the Trustees set it for a hearing or
9 reviewed the application. We get an e-mail .
10 Not even a full communication. We had the
11 original site inspection that had a list of
12 things . And it ' s in the full record. But it
13 wasn' t -- it wasn' t a big deal . It wasn' t a
14 lot of stuff. It was all things that we
15 incorporate and agreed with. So Ed went
16 back, the clients wear back to the drawing
17 board and redesigned. They said push the
18 pool back. We pushed the pool back. Push
19 all the development forward, yes, we did.
20 They used that crazy pier line which does not
21 exist in the Town Code and every time that
22 some one would step up -- and poor Kelly was
23 at some of the hearings. They said what
24 about (gibberish) pier line? And she went,
25 what? What are you talking about? It
19
1 doesn' t exist. Nevertheless, the bubble over
2 the head. I said, this is what they mean by
3 pier line. They did it. They drew a line
4 from the house from the west. They drew a
5 line. All within, again, inside a red line
6 of no development past that point. So we did
7 everything that they asked and here we are.
8 We would hope with the Board, we proceed with
9 the appeal and hopefully get the appeal from
10 this Board. We can return to the Trustees
11 and hopefully get them to agree with us . So
12 at this point, I think you heard enough from
13 me . I am going to have Doug just speak to
14 your question regarding --
15 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Before
16 you do that. I just have a question?
17 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Sure.
18 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Do you
19 have a copy of the denial? From the Coastal
20 Erosion?
21 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Sure.
22 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Am I
23 missing it in the packet that you gave me?
24 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: It should be
25 there. But I will certainly -- oh, yeah,
20
1 it ' s an exhibit. It ' s Exhibit B. Let me see
2 -- No, I am sorry. Exhibit B is Bombara.
3 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : For the
4 record, we have it here. Missy will make a
5 copy.
6 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: I just
7 didn' t get a chance to look it up.
8 MR. PAUL DECHANCE: For the record,
9 it was not included in your appeal to the
10 Board.
11 MR. DOUG ADAMS : Good morning.
12 Doug Adams . Just a point of clarification,
13 Young & Young has been reorganized to Young &
14 Associates. They think of us as Young &
15 Young. You can keep calling us . We like the
16 name. One of the things that I think is
17 important here is understanding that we did
18 try to mimic the characterization of the
19 landward toe to the most landward beach-ridge
20 as Rob did here. I met with them a couple of
21 times on that property and I have met a
22 couple of times on this property as well .
23 And we surveyed this property. And basically
24 when you try to do something like this -- I
25 am also a geologist. You need to consider a
21
1 few things . It ' s not very cut and dry. You
2 have to consider vegetation, topography. And
3 actually the proximity to the toe to the
4 crest. And the lines in this map, which
5 isn' t covered and we can show it to you
6 again. It ' s the crest of the landward
7 beach-ridge. So on the Bombara piece, the
8 land is a little bit easier to determine the
9 lay ward toe that we ' re talking about because
10 the grades are pretty dramatic and the
11 vegetation was pretty different. And the
12 difference in vegetation that we ' re talking
13 about here is basically mature vegetation and
14 not so much mature vegetation. Vegetation
15 that is young is obviously typically hasn' t
16 been there that long. That part of the
17 beach-ridge would still be experiencing some
18 movement. Where it ' s mature vegetation is
19 less so . So on the eastern portion of our
20 property, as we get closer to the eastern
21 property line, there is certainly more mature
22 vegetation that gets further and further away
23 from the road which is why you see the red
24 lines sort of a little bit further from the
25 North Sea Drive. So we follow this edicks
22
1 (phonetic) and stayed within some proximity
2 of the crest, the vegetation and with the
3 topography. And that is basically how we did
4 it . I am also available for any questions or
5 concerns about the stability of the dune,
6 beach-ridge or any other creations you might
7 have or flooding or anything like that.
8 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : I have a
9 question. But I don' t know, do we want to do
10 questions now or wait till everyone comments?
11 How do -- I guess maybe before we get too far
12 from this, Pat mentioned the idea that the
13 applicant was preserving open space. I don' t
14 see an application in here with the Land
15 Preservation Department to preserve open
16 space.
17 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Sir, I used
18 open space in the very generic sense.
19 Undeveloped. We ' re not donating.
20 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: What we
21 would ordinarily call a yard.
22 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Yes . Well,
23 yard in that it ' s still privately owned and
24 completely left in its natural state.
25 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : Thank
23
1 you.
2 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Holly (sic)
3 Risotto is our environmental expert. She can
4 introduce herself and her background.
5 MS . KELLY RISOTTO: Good morning
6 everybody. Kelly Risoto with Land Use
7 Archaeological Services. I have been a GIS
8 manager with them for 26 years now. I can' t
9 believe that. Basically our job on the
10 project here was to assess the existing site
11 conditions and develop -- native planting
12 plan, which is part of your packet. So I
13 will just go through those things . And then
14 also as part of the Coastal Erosion hazard
15 area and the question of, you know, potential
16 of flooding and erosion, we looked at
17 historical aerials going back about 65 years .
18 To see -- to assess the beach and dune
19 change. To determine what the site
20 conditions are. So basically, with reference
21 to what Pat gave you earlier, the property
22 is, as you know, undeveloped right now.
23 Largely undisturbed. There is some wildlife
24 paths and things through the site. The
25 northern, approximately a third of the
24
1 property is un-vegetated beach habitat. The
2 central third of the site is vegetated dune
3 habitat that as herbaceous species . Beach
4 grass, beach pee, coastal grass . Some salty.
5 And then there is a large patch in the center
6 of the site going east-west Riverest Rose and
7 some Bayberry. The southern third of this
8 site and again, approximately, has similar,
9 Bayberry, Beach Plum. And then you get
10 trees, Eastern Red Cedar, Post-Oak. And the
11 herbaceous vegetation there is fairly sparse.
12 Mainly coastal grass . And then unfortunately
13 you get to non-native invasive species along
14 the road. Black Locust, autumn olive, mixed
15 with the Post-Oak and Red Cedar. So we took
16 that sort of vegetation assessment with the
17 site plan and developed a native planting
18 plan for the project that basically one,
19 preserves the Northern two-thirds of the
20 site. So the entirety of the dune habitat of
21 the property. And as Pat mentioned, almost
22 23, 000 square feet of the existing dune
23 habitat. That will be preserved in its
24 natural state. We vetted the homeowners oath
25 to the beach through an existing wildlife
25
1 path where there is no vegetation. So we
2 don' t have to disturb anything. There is
3 also a strip along the east side that will be
4 preserved where you have some of those trees .
5 Eastern Red Cedar and Post-Oak. The rest of
6 the site where we have the development, as
7 Pat had mentioned, everything is not
8 structure will be planted with the same or
9 similar native species that is similar to
10 whatever is already out there. So we will be
11 planting. I don' t know if you' re looking at
12 the plan, but there is an area where we ' re
13 calling the proposed shrub herbaceous buffer
14 that will have the same tree and shrub
15 species found on the site, as well as, the
16 same beach grass and coastal panic grass with
17 some Tea (inaudible) thrown in there as well
18 for some color and some fun. Over the
19 sanitary system --
20 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Just a few
21 seconds . Because I want to -- they have in
22 front of them, that is in fact in your
23 packet. The plan is the second page is a
24 colored plan. And she is referring to that.
25 They can follow along. Yes, that is in your
26
1 case not colored.
2 MS . KELLY RISOTTO: I have some
3 extras if you want?
4 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Does anybody
5 want?
6 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: Sure.
7 MS . KELLY RISOTTO: While Pat is
8 handing those out, I will keep moving and
9 keep talking. Over to the sanitary system
10 and adjacent to the structure, we have just
11 an herbaceous buffer proposed. So trees and
12 shrubs . Suffolk County Health Department
13 does not -- they have new requirements now
14 that do now allow vegetation with roots . So
15 that it -- those things can affect the
16 system. So over the sanitary, we just have
17 herbaceous and then again, right along, we
18 don' t have any. Mainly for safety and
19 maintenance. Things like that. But it is
20 the same native species that we proposed
21 throughout the rest of the proposed area. We
22 are preserving and restoring about 800 of the
23 property with this plan. Even with the
24 construction. So the next thing that we did
25 take a look at, and that is also in the
27
1 project narrative. There is two colored
2 exhibits that show -- each -- seaward dune
3 vegetation over time. I looked at aerials
4 going back to 1957 . Periodically. 1957,
5 1971, 1994 . 2013, which was -- that aerial
6 is from 2013 . So about 6 months after Sandy.
7 And then again, in 2020, which was the most
8 recent high resolution aerial publicly
9 available. The gist of that analysis both
10 the beach and dune are stable. Change over
11 time is minimal . There has not been a
12 significant landward migration. As a matter
13 of fact, the narrowest beach was, was
14 following Superstorm Sandy. And since that
15 time it has recreated another 40 feet
16 depending on the location, since that storm.
17 Based on -- if you compare 1957 to 2020, the
18 beach is actually at its widest. Similarly
19 with the vegetated dune, it expanded. At the
20 site, it has expanded north. About 50 to 70
21 feet. 1957, An similar to the beach, it ' s
22 currently at its widest since that time. I
23 would like to point out, if you look at the
24 aerials as well, in 1957, there was very
25 minimal development in the area. So these
28
1 not only expand natural change, but North Sea
2 Drive over time and to current. The current
3 is the widest beach and dune. So when we
4 talk about whether this site is reasonably
5 setting an erosion, we have a long term
6 assessment showing that this is a stable
7 area. This is not an area that is
8 chronically eroding. You know, such as some
9 of the beaches and dunes on the South Shore
10 that get nourished over time. This is a
11 stable area. Even after development. Most
12 of which is seaward to where we ' re proposing
13 a development. So I can go into the
14 standards and impacts and mitigations and
15 proposal to reduce the impacts . First off,
16 potential impacts, are minimized. Siting
17 everything, house and vegetation landward.
18 As you saw in the aerials that Pat showed,
19 especially the one showing the length of
20 North Sea, this house is proposed as the most
21 landward line, with the landward most homes
22 on North Sea Drive. It is in line with the
23 development east and west, which are also
24 landward most to North Sea Drive. Potential
25 impacts to water quality are minimized. By
29
1 one, using the most innovative wastewater
2 treatment system and sanitary waste. By
3 maintaining the vegetated buffer which is
4 approximately 100 to 120 feet wide.
5 Depending on where you' re measuring from.
6 Again, siting everything as far landward.
7 Also storm management proposed on the site as
8 well . So all of those things really minimize
9 impacts to water quality. There was an issue
10 raised, I think with the Trustees, about
11 shorebird nesting. So there is documented
12 shorebird nesting to the east or west. None
13 to my knowledge at this site. Again, the
14 entirety of the beach will be preserved and a
15 100 foot buffer between the beach and
16 structures with natural preservation will be
17 preserved. If you look at North Sea Drive,
18 there are certainly homes closer than that.
19 Beach walkers unfortunately and people that
20 walk their dogs on the beach unleashed result
21 in more disturbance to shorebirds then the
22 proposed residents would. Again, as the
23 landward most residents of North Sea Drive.
24 And again, I did get into the buffer quite a
25 bit. So getting into the variance standards
30
1 now that Pat had mentioned earlier. The
2 first one being no reasonable alternative
3 site is available. The owners own this one
4 piece of property in Southold. They don' t
5 have other sites . They don' t own any
6 contiguous sites . This is it . So there is
7 no other place for them to build a residence.
8 Everything is pushed as far landward as
9 possible. So no alternative location on this
10 property to build the structures. So we have
11 looked at various configurations, everything,
12 and everything is as far landward as
13 possible. All reasonable means and measures
14 to mitigate impacts on (inaudible) their
15 functions and values have been made into the
16 design at the property owners expense.
17 Again, is as landward as possible. The
18 setback of the proposed structure to knee
19 high water is 213 feet. Probably not a whole
20 lot of properties that can say that, that are
21 right on the water. It' s a significant
22 setback. And they are setback from the dune
23 crest 35 feet. The dune crest -- that native
24 planting plan that Pat passed out, the dune
25 crest is the -- shown on their for clarity in
31
1 black and -- so the minimum setback is 35
2 feet. The center is quite a bit more than
3 that. We are planting the entirety of the
4 site with native vegetation. Overall, this
5 design preserves and protects 67 . 4% in its
6 current natural state. And restores another
7 12 . 6% with native vegetation. So 80% of this
8 site will naturally vegetated or native beach
9 habitant when the project is done. And
10 finally, as I mentioned earlier, the beach
11 and dune have been stable going back at least
12 65 years through the development of North Sea
13 Drive. The next standard, the development
14 will be reasonably safe from flooding and
15 erosion damage. So not only are they stable
16 here, but some of the standards that we
17 typically use for this variance criteria are
18 set back from knee high water. From the
19 waters of Long Island Sound, 213 feet.
20 Significant setback. The structures will be
21 elevated by FEMA requirements, as not only
22 FEMA requirements but the State and local
23 building codes . And they are all going to be
24 designed and built in accordance with the
25 flood and design construction standards,
32
1 ASTE-24-13 . So with all of those things, the
2 property and the project is considered to be
3 reasonably safe from flooding and erosion.
4 The next standard and I guess the final
5 standard since there are no public funds
6 utilized, one of the variance requested is
7 the minimum necessary to overcome the
8 difficulties, which is the reason we ' re
9 requesting the variance. The sea line here
10 that goes to the Coastal Erosion Hazard Line
11 is along North Sea Drive. So the entire site
12 is within the sea half. There is no
13 alternative. No location that is out of the
14 Coastal Erosion Hazard Area and therefore no
15 alternative that would eliminate the need for
16 a variance. When we looked at the design of
17 the project, as Pat mentioned, we looked at
18 house sizes along and within 500 feet of the
19 property. The existing dwellings within that
20 500 foot radius are range from 1, 559 square
21 feet to 2, 607 square feet, on lots that are
22 19, 950 square feet and 26, 767 square feet.
23 We ' re proposing a house that is 2, 450 square
24 feet. So in the middle, in that range --
25 within that range. We are right within the
33
1 character of the neighborhood. And that is
2 visibly shown on the exhibits that Pat shown
3 earlier. So the next is, again, preservation
4 and restoration of 39, 700 square feet of
5 property. Larger than any of the lots that
6 within 500 linear feet. We ' re preserving
7 more area than those lots . Maximizing
8 setbacks to knee high water, the dune crest.
9 Maximizing that area that is preserved.
10 We ' re not proposing any lawn areas . There
11 are some properties along North Sea Drive
12 that have front yards between the house and
13 the road. That is not going to happen here.
14 The entirety of the site, again, will be
15 planted with native vegetation. Once the
16 construction is complete. And then finally,
17 the sanitary system, the Nitrogen treatment
18 sanitary systems, while they' re great for
19 water area, they do take up a whole system.
20 So we had to design around that and keep that
21 in mind in terms of the area of disturbance
22 and grading and things of that nature. That
23 is it as far as the standards goes . If
24 anyone has any questions or Pat, if you want
25 to say anything else?
34
1 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: You did a very
2 thorough job addressing all the standards.
3 And I think we would like to be able to
4 answer any questions that you might have or
5 the public.
6 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : I guess
7 before -- this may be -- I don' t know who to
8 direct this question to, but we ' re talking a
9 lot about the ridge line of the dune. I
10 guess the way that I see it, the Trustees
11 rejection is kind of two-fold. One is,
12 related to its location and hazard area. And
13 the other is related to its location within a
14 natural protective feature area. And the
15 natural protective feature area, as I
16 understand it, is the dune . So is it your
17 contention that the dune stops at the crest
18 -- and I guess I am just trying to understand
19 --
20 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: That requires
21 a geologist to explain this one .
22 MR. DOUG ADAMS : Hi again, with
23 Bombara for example, I believe if you look
24 through the examples there, the idea that
25 this landward beach ridge, landward toe or
35
1 dune were -- the purpose of that was to call
2 out where the feature -- not the feature
3 area. The feature area would be seaward of
4 that, but that natural protective feature,
5 the most landward part of that would be that
6 -- that toe . That landward toe of the
7 feature. So Bombara for example, that was
8 there new line. I don' t want to call it that
9 but that is sort of like a locally
10 jurisdictional -- kind of like where a
11 wetland, you hear the wetlands and then
12 somebody comes in and flags it . Where you
13 have somebody flag the wetlands to find the
14 exact same location of it . And I think that
15 is what the intent was on Bombara, which is
16 we extrapolated that philosophy from the
17 property to come up with the same -- sort of
18 idea here, that this red line as we said
19 before, is the -- sort of -- what we ' re going
20 to use as the limit of the natural protective
21 feature and area which would be north of
22 that.
23 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : Maybe
24 this is as much as philosophical question as
25 anything. But a dune is three dimensional;
36
1 right?
2 MR. DOUG ADAMS : Right.
3 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : And what
4 would prevent you from drawing the same line
5 on a dune in the reverse direction? As there
6 is a crest, you have the seaward side but you
7 also have the landward side of that feature?
8 MR. DOUG ADAMS : So we ' re talking
9 about the landward side feature. Here -- in
10 this case, it would be at the back of the
11 beach end. Where the dune would start. And
12 at some point, you have upland. So you have
13 to go to another dune or protective feature.
14 The sea ha law I guess you would call it, is
15 -- the natural protective feature would be
16 the seaward most natural protective feature.
17 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : What I am
18 trying to do here to clarify. It seems like
19 there is two separate issues . There is the
20 sea-ha line, which is the Coastal Erosion
21 Hazard area. And that is a defined area but
22 there is also this natural protective feature
23 area, which seems to me -- and I could be
24 wrong here. Like it ' s something different.
25 MR. DOUG ADAMS : The sea-ha, the
37
1 Coastal Erosion Hazard area -- they call it a
2 CR Hazard Map. And they drew a line on that
3 map. That line on the map that is on North
4 Sea Drive is the -- it ' s the landward line of
5 the most protected feature. It depends on
6 what the natural protective feature is . If
7 it ' s a bluff for example, it' s 25 feet
8 landward from the crest to the beach, I can' t
9 even explain that. I don' t even have enough
10 time for that. It' s a physiographic 100 foot
11 back before you get to vegetation. In the
12 existence of a dune and multiple beach ridges
13 here. If you go back to the record of
14 Bombara again, I think what they were trying
15 to do is come up with, you know, at some
16 point, it morphs into (inaudible) . You have
17 sand that moves around. That is why I talked
18 before about mature vegetation for example.
19 That is very stable. That hasn' t moved a lot
20 in decades, if not centuries. So I think the
21 effort here on Bombara is to come up with a
22 landward limit on the natural protective
23 feature, in this case, being a beach ridge or
24 dune. Not a bluff because we don' t have one .
25 Not a beach because we have a dune. And that
38
1 is what happened in that case. So sea-ha,
2 Coastal Erosion has an area sort of programed
3 and it speaks specifically to the natural
4 protective feature that first has to be
5 identified. And then from there, you
6 determine where that limit is .
7 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : So then
8 would it be safe to assume, at least, with
9 this parcel itself, the natural protective
10 feature area and the Coastal Erosion Hazard
11 area are one of the same?
12 MR. DOUG ADAMS : No .
13 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : Okay.
14 MR. DOUG ADAMS : I think the
15 natural protective feature is the ridge. The
16 feature is what protects -- if you read
17 through the sea-ha language, it talks about
18 what is protecting the coastline. So if you
19 have -- if you have a dune or if you have a
20 bluff, basically behind the beach, that is
21 designated as the natural protective feature
22 or structure let ' s say.
23 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Greg,
24 the Coastal Erosion Line was developed by the
25 State and we struggled with it when we were
39
1 Trustees. There wasn' t a solid reason why
2 the line was where it was .
3 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : And I
4 guess my bigger concern here is determining
5 what the natural protective feature area is .
6 And I guess just going back to this line of
7 questioning -- and I -- maybe I am trying to
8 over simplify a complex point, it would be
9 your contention that the natural protective
10 feature area runs to the ridge only seaward
11 or does it run landward at all?
12 MR. DOUG ADAMS : No . That is what
13 we ' re trying to determine here. What the
14 land would limit. The natural protective
15 feature that defines the -- the natural
16 protected area. Everything would be seaward
17 of this lune. If you were to determine what
18 an area -- you are talking about sea-ha. I
19 think that is more of a broad thing. I don' t
20 know that it is necessarily used -- a Coastal
21 Erosion Hazard area. That is just talking
22 about the area of the shoreline. I think the
23 natural protective feature, if you look at
24 the sea-ha maps, I believe when they labeled
25 that black line that is the only line on the
40
1 map, I believe it ' s labeled landward limit of
2 natural protective feature. So that would be
3 the limiting -- the line that is -- you know,
4 everything you want to do landward of that.
5 You don' t want to do anything seaward of that
6 line.
7 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : All
8 right. That is fine. It seems like there is
9 two different things here and I am just
10 trying to clarify --
11 MR. DOUG ADAMS : I think sea-ha is
12 more the title of the program. And I think
13 the important -- you know, the meat and
14 potatoes thing is whatever that land would
15 limit -- whatever feature we' re talking about
16 is . And that is what we have tried to define
17 here.
18 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: I have
19 a question pertaining to that line. Pat
20 mentioned that she would like to establish
21 that. And then just quickly reading what we
22 just got from the denial from the Trustees,
23 it seems like there is -- difference of
24 opinion of where you think that primary dune
25 line is or that natural protective feature
41
1 line is, between you and the Trustees? Am I
2 sensing that right? Do you both agree on
3 that line?
4 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Well, it was
5 never -- that decision was just -- I want to
6 say to regurgitation of the code. We never
7 ever discussed it or debated it .
8 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Because
9 that is one of there --
10 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: They don' t
11 handle Coastal Erosion Hazard appeals. The
12 wetland line and the definition -- if that
13 were the case -- again, the (inaudible) was
14 developed within the last 10 years . And they
15 came to the conclusion -- they had to
16 establish some line. If you' re going to say
17 the entire property is a natural protective
18 feature and you can' t --
19 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: I
20 understand that part. I am just -- reading
21 one of these Whereas ' from the Trustees of
22 their denial, they' re kind of implying that
23 part of the proposed structure goes seaward
24 of that line. So that is why I am asking --
25 you' re showing it ' s not but they' re saying it
42
1 is . So it sounds like the trustees don' t
2 agree with what you say the line is .
3 MR. DOUG ADAMS : I don' t think they
4 entertaining where we ' re actually showing
5 that line or what it even meant. They were
6 just "Whereas-ing" based on the sea-ha map
7 line, which we know is the seaward side of
8 North Sea Drive.
9 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: -- the original
10 project description had the house really
11 centered on the property, right into --
12 certainly inside -- well inside that red
13 line.
14 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: It says
15 here, "Whereas, some of the proposed
16 structure as applied for is located within a
17 primary dune area with the proposed deck and
18 proposed pool, encroaching seaward of the
19 proposed dwelling. "
20 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: We disagree
21 with that conclusion. There was a lot of
22 confusion. The last meeting when they were
23 looking at the survey, there was a lot of
24 lines . And I think that -- that -- certainly
25 at the hearing, they were questioning, "Where
43
1 is the pier line?" And I think Doug had to
2 go up to the computer and say or the dais and
3 say, here it is . So I don' t know if they had
4 pre-written that before the hearing. So they
5 could clarify some of those points they made
6 in the resolution. The resolution was
7 adopted pretty much at the hearing and we
8 were still in the process of going through
9 the hearing. And again, that issue was never
10 addressed. They didn' t say we disagree. We
11 think we ' re within the line. And we would at
12 that point said, well, what are you looking
13 at? And there was never a discussion at all .
14 I was -- Kelly and I were the last.
15 MS . KELLY RISOTTO: At the last
16 Trustees meeting, which was certainly the
17 first one I was at. Really the focus of the
18 line discussion was on the line of
19 development. The "pier line" that they were
20 looking at between the two adjacent
21 properties. So this dune line, landward, was
22 not ever discussed. That was the line that
23 they were focusing on.
24 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: Can I
25 just ask, is this the development line? Are
44
1 they using it interchangeably? I am -- the
2 reason I ask, because I am unaware of a
3 development line in the code, particularly
4 one that meanders one like this .
5 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Interesting,
6 during Bombara, there was never discussion of
7 pier line. During the (inaudible)
8 application, never discussion about pier
9 line. In really any of the reviews that I
10 had through of the Trustees, that was never
11 -- that pier line, if you look at Page 75,
12 pier line is a defined term and it takes --
13 dots . And what they tried to do -- just
14 policy wise, it was just incorporated into
15 the code. When you are putting in
16 applications for a dock, you put in a pier
17 line. Sometimes -- and it ' s -- it allows for
18 some discretion because obviously if you' re
19 in a curve, you have circumstances, you can
20 create those hardship for people. If you
21 got, you know, curve and you are here and
22 wherever. They have been trying to stick to
23 that definition almost on the housing
24 setback. And it ' s so misapplied.
25 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: What is
45
1 development line?
2 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Development
3 line? Are you asking --
4 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: You are
5 the one that put it on the map. Where did
6 that term come from? It ' s not a line --
7 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: What we did
8 is, through Bombara, they came up with the
9 development line. So some kind of a
10 short-cut, but in Bombara, based on the site
11 condition, all of the factors, they came up
12 with the Bombara line, okay.
13 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: In
14 other words, it ' s the primary dune line?
15 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: It' s the co of
16 the primary dune line .
17 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Yes .
18 Yes .
19 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: That is why I
20 had to read it. It ' s just a defined term
21 that the experts use .
22 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: This is
23 a pretty novel argument, essentially really
24 what you' re calling it, a yard. I --
25 undeveloped like most yards . So I am trying
46
1 to figure out what -- what is going to
2 distinguish that from someone else' s yard?
3 In other words, is there going to be a
4 covenant that requires no development of any
5 -- of each level of structures? Decking? Is
6 there going to be boat storage? Is there
7 going to be any of those things? What makes
8 it preservation?
9 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Well, when you
10 issue a Coastal Erosion permit, you can
11 condition it on -- the application that you
12 approve is the one that we submit. The
13 Trustees application when you submit it, they
14 require a non-disturbance buffers. So if you
15 see the -- the planting plan, that is
16 described as a non-disturbance buffer. That
17 is a covenant that the Trustees required to
18 be filed prior to the issuance of the actual
19 permit. So -- I take it back. They issue
20 the permit before the Compliance Certificate
21 is issued. So pretty much on 900 of the
22 wetland permit applications are submitted if
23 they require a 5 foot vegetated buffer, a 10
24 foot non-disturbance or whatever. They --
25 that is a condition of the covenants and
47
1 restrictions. So this owner and future
2 owners will have knowledge that that area is
3 to be left in its pristine state. And I
4 think it probably -- I believe there is a
5 covenant on the Bombara property as well .
6 The area -- the dune area. That area is left
7 in its natural state.
8 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: You' re
9 talking about a non-disturbance buffer?
10 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: I spoke -- no .
11 No . That was my brain -- you know, it ' s an
12 open and undeveloped natural area.
13 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: The IA
14 system, you have done analysis going back
15 what? 30, 40, almost 50 years? Or more than
16 that? Have you done any type of breach
17 analysis? In other words how many times has
18 that area flooded as a result to Sandy? As a
19 result of Irene? One of those Nor'Easter' s?
20 On top of that, what is the plane of an IA
21 system if there is an electrical failure and
22 should there -- that area be flooded? In
23 other words, there hasn' t been a good success
24 rate of IA systems once that barrier -- once
25 an area floods and the electrical system goes
48
1 out, and the IA systems are no longer able to
2 function. What' s the protective measure in
3 place for that?
4 MR. DOUG ADAMS : So if an IA system
5 typically gets over-flooded and there is an
6 electrical problem or just loss of power in
7 general, at least this system -- there are a
8 lot of systems out there that are approved by
9 Suffolk County Health Department. This, I
10 believe is a Fuji System and if there is no
11 power, it basically functions as a regular
12 septic tank. And also, the IA systems are
13 required to have a maintenance contract. I
14 would assume after a storm, they are back in
15 town, just like an electrician or anything
16 else to get the system going once again.
17 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: I am not
18 talking about that. I am talking about what
19 is the consequences of a flooding and a
20 non-functioning IA system? In other words,
21 when you' re flooding, the water table
22 underneath comes up and not just another
23 surface waters . What is the impact --
24 MR. DOUG ADAMS : It ' s actually the
25 exact same as the leaching pools that are
49
1 still here. The only difference is that you
2 don' t have a septic tank.
3 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: I think
4 we just need to point that out . I have seen
5 that in other areas . That water table rises
6 and we ' re pushing a lot of stuff into that
7 coastline.
8 MR. DOUG ADAMS : I think it ' s
9 important to remember that, as far as
10 leaching is concerned and rate through the
11 soil, the rate through the soil, whether
12 there is introduction of groundwater or not,
13 is the same. So when a leaching pool is
14 filled, it ' s emptying right? It ' s going
15 through the soil . If it hits groundwater,
16 it ' s still going through the soil . It goes
17 at the same rate. It would be very short
18 term.
19 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: Which
20 again raises the issue, how close is the
21 leaching pool to the water table and the
22 water table elevates during a storm which is
23 not uncommon. And you' re going to have
24 septic intrusion.
25 MR. DOUG ADAMS : I think the only
50
1 way septic escapes a system is other than the
2 normal way, which is out -- it still moves at
3 the same rate. As long as it ' s in the
4 ground, it ' s moving through the soil at the
5 same rate. Also in recent years, Suffolk
6 County has raised the separation distance and
7 the minimum of feet. The separation from the
8 system has to be a minimum of 3 feet, which
9 is where we are at here.
10 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: I have
11 a couple of questions on the deck. The pool
12 I assume is going to be on pilings as well?
13 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Yes . Do you
14 need actual pool construction description?
15 We have the architect.
16 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: I
17 understand what it' s like when it' s on
18 pilings and the others may have questions.
19 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Yes . It ' s
20 going to be elevated. The design, so that
21 you do have a massing of all -- from one end,
22 the depth, the house and so on. There was
23 openings --
24 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: To the
25 current FEMA standards?
51
1 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Yes .
2 Everything has to be clearly to the FEMA
3 standards.
4 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: I am
5 looking at the color map here because it ' s
6 the biggest one that we have in front of us .
7 Where is the backfill for the pool? The
8 overflow?
9 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Drywell?
10 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY:
11 Drywell, yes .
12 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Let' s see,
13 just -- let me show it. It ' s easier than
14 describing it.
15 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: That
16 says propane tank. Yeah, you' re right.
17 COUNCILWOMAN SARAH NAPPA: I have a
18 question also on the west side of the house.
19 I can' t quite read the survey that I have.
20 What is that square inside of the square on
21 the west side of the house?
22 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: The way this
23 house was designed, that is actually a master
24 bedroom suite. Almost a two-dimensional --
25 Ed, you want to come up and describe? Leet
52
1 me have the architect describe it. I think
2 he can do better.
3 COUNCILWOMAN SARAH NAPPA: Sure.
4 MR. ED LICALZI : Hopefully I can
5 answer your question. The square within a
6 square as you' re calling it, you have to look
7 at it, the shaded square is really ground
8 level . It ' s about a 10 foot high point to
9 where the second floor is over it. So
10 basically you' re seeing around that core
11 structure. It' s giving a view from the
12 streamline, straight through from the beach.
13 It ' s not this whole solid mass from left to
14 right. So it ' s an elevated portion floor,
15 higher than the ground floor.
16 COUNCILWOMAN SARAH NAPPA: Is it
17 part of the deck, outer square and the inner
18 square is the structure?
19 MR. ED LICALZI : It ' s two-fold.
20 It ' s part of the master bedroom that is
21 there, as well as, an outside deck. So it' s
22 a combination of those two spaces .
23 COUNCILWOMAN SARAH NAPPA: Is it
24 attached to the structure?
25 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Because
53
1 it looks like it ' s separate.
2 MR. ED LICALZI : I am sorry, could
3 you repeat the question?
4 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Yes .
5 Is it attached --
6 MR. ED LICALZI : Yes, it ' s
7 attached.
8 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Doesn' t
9 look like it. It looks like it is detached
10 with a --
11 COUNCILWOMAN SARAH NAPPA: That ' s
12 what it looks like.
13 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: I asked the
14 same question. So yes .
15 MR. ED LICALZI : (Inaudible) .
16 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Which
17 is bigger than the first floor.
18 MR. ED LICALZI : (Inaudible) partial
19 outside deck.
20 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: So the
21 second floor is bigger than the first floor
22 in that section. It ' s twice the size of it
23 or more .
24 MR. DENIS NONCARROW: Can we have
25 your name for the record, sir?
54
1 MR. ED LICALZI : The entire
2 building envelope, yes .
3 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: So the entire
4 building envelope is a dash line that
5 continues around that shaded rectangle. So
6 if you see -- there is an elevation of 10 . 5 .
7 That is kind of the west side of the house.
8 And then you clearly see the shaded proposed
9 -- the building envelope. It ' s kind of like
10 layers . So it does extend to the -- to the
11 west side, and the decking is part of that.
12 So the deck doesn' t extend out the water.
13 It ' s part of that dashed line. Does that
14 make sense?
15 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: No .
16 What dash line? Yeah. Yeah.
17 MR. ED LICALZI : This is the piles .
18 Up to the elevation. This elevation here
19 also starts on piles .
20 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: And
21 that is the first floor?
22 MR. ED LICALZI : This is the first
23 floor. This for a lack of a better term,
24 second floor. This here is what she means by
25 the dash line --
55
1 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Oh,
2 that is what she meant. Got it . Okay.
3 MR. ED LICALZI : This is a modern
4 design. The idea was to allow -- to view
5 straight through the house.
6 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: Is that
7 2500 square feet of the first floor lot area?
8 MR. ED LICALZI : Yes .
9 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: What
10 would be the total living space?
11 MR. ED LICALZI : 5600 .
12 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: The
13 elevation to the ridge line?
14 MR. ED LICALZI : We are just under.
15 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: He is showing
16 the model . He has a picture of it .
17 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: What is
18 the finished elevation?
19 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Finished
20 elevation is 18 . So --
21 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: 35 feet.
22 You are going to get two floors over that
23 in --
24 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: He was able to
25 design.
56
1 MR. ED LICALZI : Based on the
2 topography as well, yes .
3 COUNCILMAN BRIAN MEALY: Can you
4 just restate your name at the podium, sir?
5 MR. ED LICALZI : Ed Licalzi, Sitar
6 (phonetic) Engineering.
7 COUNCILMAN BRIAN MEALY: Thank you.
8 COUNCILWOMAN SARAH NAPPA: And I
9 just want to clarify. I think I heard it --
10 but it ' s a flat roof house?
11 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Yes .
12 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: This
13 isn' t a question but just an observation that
14 I have here, one of the problems with FEMA,
15 people are building in areas that they
16 shouldn' t build. And that is the problem.
17 There is wetlands construction. And one of
18 the problems -- what is the Town Board' s role
19 is we ' re not going to mitigate those hazards .
20 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: You can' t
21 adopt the law on laws that are already
22 existing. I mean, every time you adopt a
23 Zoning Code, I am here complaining --
24 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: It
25 doesn' t necessarily relief. Sometimes lots
57
1 are simply not buildable. And some times you
2 can' t keep perpetuating decisions from the
3 past. I am not suggesting that is my
4 position here. I am just saying let ' s be
5 realistic on the discussion. FEMA really
6 does not require the approval of the building
7 permit.
8 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: We will agree
9 to disagree.
10 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : If I may,
11 I was wondering if we could go back to these
12 lines again and maybe, you know --
13 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: These lines,
14 the development lines?
15 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : Where the
16 dune is -- you know --
17 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: I will send
18 the people up.
19 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : It was
20 your contention that the Trustees were
21 unclear on where they wanted the line to be?
22 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Sorry. One
23 moment. I am sorry, I couldn' t hear you.
24 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : So we
25 were talking about where, you know, where the
58
1 dune line is? The landward limit? The
2 seaward ho and all of that . One of you had
3 made a comment that it was unclear where the
4 Trustees felt the line was . And just going
5 through the record, I see part of the -- one
6 of the documents that they cited was the LWRP
7 finding. And I was wondering if you can just
8 comment on this last line here? This is
9 talking about a site visit that was conducted
10 by the Board of Trustees, the LWRP
11 Coordinator, the DEC Environmental Program
12 Specialist, where they confirmed that the
13 proposed actions --and this application are
14 entirely located seaward of the sea-ha line
15 and within the primary dune. So it seems
16 like it ' s their contention that the primary
17 dune and the sea-ha area are one in the same.
18 MR. DOUG ADAMS : Again, what I
19 think they were referring to is the sea-ha
20 map that is on record right now, which shows
21 the sea-ha line. Which on that map is
22 labeled with a limit of coastal protective
23 feature area or natural protective feature,
24 sorry, is on North Sea Drive. They were just
25 referring to that map and didn' t possibly
59
1 consider -- I don' t recall talking about it .
2 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: And
3 those areas might overlap Greg.
4 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : No. Not
5 that they may overlap.
6 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: They
7 do .
8 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Let me correct
9 something. They actually cited on
10 October 17, 2007, which was the Bombara
11 application and it was at that meeting, that
12 the LWRP and DEC coastal reservice person and
13 the Trustees, they were at that property.
14 They never came to this property or even
15 reviewed it . So the 2007 --
16 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : That is
17 untrue though. Because in this letter, they
18 are saying that they' re reviewing it.
19 They' re referencing that site visit, yes .
20 But the LWRP Coordinator who quite frankly
21 could be helpful to maybe hear from regarding
22 this matter, is saying and confirming that
23 this proposed action -- the proposed action,
24 "the proposed actions are entirely located
25 seaward of the sea-ha line and within the
60
1 primary dune. " This is important here. This
2 determination still applies.
3 MR. DOUG ADAMS : Clearly that is
4 their opinion.
5 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : Okay.
6 Thank you.
7 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: And I would
8 just -- in the Bombara case, that was the
9 conclusion that they drew at all these
10 properties on North Sea Drive, every single
11 one that is developed is in the Dune area.
12 Because the dune area overlaps -- according
13 to the Bombara inspection, every property is
14 the same here. The dune lines run to the
15 street and actually across --technically
16 looking at it, goes across on the south side
17 of the North Sea Drive.
18 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Which
19 was designated an intertidal dunal swale.
20 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: No Coastal
21 Erosion or wetland ordinance review. The
22 houses that are on that side --
23 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: No .
24 They have wetland review.
25 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Maybe more
61
1 recently.
2 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: No .
3 When I was on the Board, we did the wetland
4 review.
5 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: I didn' t see
6 -- okay.
7 MR. ED LICALZI : (Inaudible) (Not
8 near the microphone. )
9 COUNCILWOMAN SARAH NAPPA: Sorry,
10 could you talk into the mic.
11 MR. ED LICALZI : It is helpful to
12 have something to reference to . I will try
13 and do without it. The meeting with the
14 Trustees basically on site, answered to, how
15 to basically design or utilize any type of
16 zoning to design the new home, was to take an
17 imaginary line from the back of each one of
18 these two residences, which they refer to as
19 a pier line. And we would stay landward of
20 that line. What came about in the
21 development of meetings thereafter was that
22 when we established a pier line from the
23 furthest most point of the home on both
24 sides, east and west. They disagreed with
25 the line, stating that, living space of the
62
1 homes . So what we had done is establish the
2 living space. This corner here to this very
3 corner here. And also realized that we would
4 have to create another pier line to cover the
5 limits of the deck that re going to be
6 protruding out, which makes some sense. And
7 we only offered that to a solution to the
8 fact if we hold to the living space and only
9 the living space, even though the parcels,
10 the adjacent parcels had decks past that
11 point, it made sense to establish that second
12 line. And I think at that point is where we
13 kind of lost it, if you don' t mind me saying,
14 with the members and there was slightly a
15 disagreement. I think the point here today
16 is the establishment if this line and where
17 does it come from, and that three dimensional
18 dune, which your question makes perfect sense
19 to me . I think what happened here, is that
20 Doug from Young & Young has gone out in the
21 field. Taken the Bombara' s toe, which was
22 approved in a prior application. And
23 literally went out in the field and
24 established the same grade elevations there.
25 Across the lot. Establish this limit line of
63
1 construction. Essentially it ' s the toe of
2 the dune. If you are at the toe, you are
3 going to slightly rise to the height of the
4 dune and then it would taper back towards the
5 sound. And I think that is what we ' re
6 talking about here. So without this
7 establishment of this line, this limit of
8 construction line, we have no where to go.
9 No where to go other than keep providing
10 different design drawings that mean
11 absolutely nothing because we were guided by
12 Town Code, which is an R-40 Zone. And that
13 is essentially out the window here. So the
14 only thing that we' re utilizing from that
15 R-40 zone is a side yard setbacks. Front
16 yard we ' re being controlled by an average
17 front yard between two adjacent properties.
18 Which makes sense. We are in the code to be
19 50 feet back. We ' re agreeing that we would
20 move the house forward and be within that
21 average, which causes a variance which we
22 understand. Also, we ' re expecting this limit
23 line that was also respected by the prior
24 application. So in a sense we ' re trying to
25 help ourselves to generate this limit line
64
1 because we have no other guidance to go by.
2 So that is where our issue lies .
3 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: And I
4 agree with everything you' re saying. My
5 question is, the limit line that you talk
6 about, you think it ' s one way and I think the
7 Trustees think it ' s another. So I think this
8 Board needs to establish if -- we need to
9 have everybody on the same page of where that
10 limit line is .
11 MR. ED LICALZI : I agree with
12 everything that you just said. Perfect. I
13 think where the issue is, the only
14 establishment where we were getting from the
15 Board of Trustees was to use a pier line. We
16 created the limit line. At the same time, we
17 created the pier lines, as they had asked us
18 from a work session. Basically that
19 information was fed back to us . We ended up
20 producing another updated design drawing. We
21 then resubmitted and came back before the
22 Board. And at that point, that has never
23 been resolved. That is the issue. To be
24 clear, if the trustees were to say that we
25 have to respect two pier lines,
65
1 hypothetically speaking, versus an
2 established limit of construction line, then
3 we would do that. We ' re just not getting
4 there. That is the problem.
5 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Yeah.
6 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: One of
7 the things that I would say is not for us to
8 coordinate with the Trustees and get on the
9 same page. We' re an appellate. It ' s for a
10 variance. So what do they mean? And for us
11 to evaluate whether what they said or not has
12 validity and merit as part of this hearing.
13 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY:
14 Correct.
15 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: So we ' re all
16 asking the same questions internally. The
17 Bombara development line was established
18 before this Board, in front of this Board.
19 Not the Trustees . The Trustees at that point
20 had denied the application in total and after
21 this Board granted the Coastal Erosion
22 permit, they went back to the Trustees and I
23 guess either through litigation or whatever,
24 they issued the Coastal Erosion permit and
25 they issued the wetland permit. So it is in
66
1 front of this Board. Internally, your
2 prerogative to ask for whatever comments the
3 Trustees -- that you ask. You are in charge
4 there. But as far as we ' re concerned, we
5 have done -- we have taken the process as
6 your prior precedent for us, have directed us
7 what we should come up with and the facts
8 that we should come up. As I said, we need
9 to be in agreement as to those facts because
10 certainly when you' re asking about setbacks
11 and give us your lot coverage, we have to
12 start somewhere. And it ' s that development
13 line that is key. The more restrictive that
14 is brought towards the street, the more
15 likely you have to go to the Zoning Board for
16 variances and we gave you that aerial to show
17 you how that development of North Sea Drive,
18 what that looks like. We would like to be
19 similar of the character of the community
20 that is well established. And to the extent
21 of Bombara, I think they got a variance for a
22 setback of -- is it 40 . Okay. 39 . 9 is the
23 Bombara front yard. Anyway. We will answer
24 any more questions. Kelly?
25 MS . KELLY RISOTTO: I just want to
67
1 say that the lines are behind all the
2 development that we ' re talking about.
3 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: I
4 understand that. I would like to ask the
5 Trustees if they agree with your line or do
6 they have a different area of the line? Just
7 reading their denial, it sounds like their
8 area where they think the line is, is
9 different than what is on there. So I just
10 need to clarify that with the Trustees.
11 MR. ED LICALZI : And again, I
12 believe they hung that hat on that map -- the
13 current map. Not our map. The sea-ha map
14 which shows the line --
15 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: I
16 understand that. I am talking -- the Coastal
17 Erosion they did. They also mentioned a
18 Whereas, about the primary dune line. The
19 limit line.
20 MR. ED LICALZI : They said primary
21 dune. Not primary dune line. I think they
22 are just throwing -- because when that map
23 was developed --
24 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Primary
25 dune area. Okay. I just --
68
1 MR. ED LICALZI : -- the beach ridges
2 go back across North Sea Drive.
3 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: I
4 understand.
5 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : Were
6 there any discussions with the BOT about the
7 size of the house or scaling it back at all?
8 I guess -- I don' t know how relevant that is
9 but just as general context?
10 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: No. Not in
11 reviewing the transcripts. No . They had an
12 issue -- there was again our communications
13 was through Elizabeth Cantell and e-mail . It
14 was a one liner. Like, we want you to do
15 this . We want you to do that. Whatever the
16 work session discussions were, where they
17 were having their discussions, they came back
18 with their one liners . And we followed
19 whatever they were instructing us to do . The
20 pool originally was in the waterfront. Then
21 it was moved to the side. It is behind the
22 accessory structure pier line. Okay. They
23 may have wanted it to be moved back. I was
24 just trying to guess at that point. At our
25 last hearing, everybody get testy on the
69
1 Board and I was like, please, don' t make the
2 decision. Give us time to go back. So we
3 can understand what your points are . I got
4 cut off and they denied it . So I think there
5 was some discussion but they just completely
6 cut it off. And at that point --
7 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: I hope
8 you appreciate that we ' re not testy. We ' re
9 inquisitive.
10 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: My husband has
11 told me sometimes when things are going on
12 behind the scenes.
13 MS . KELLY RISOTTO: I just wanted
14 to -- there has been talk about this line
15 quite a bit . From the Bombara decision, they
16 talked about the line being adopted by the
17 Town Board. The beach-ridge identified by
18 the applicant' s experts qualifies as a
19 primary dune under Chapter 111-6. And as
20 such, constitutes the natural protective
21 feature. The landward regulatory limit of
22 the primary dune occurs 25 feet landward of
23 the landward toe of the dune. Identified on
24 the property. So the Town Board took that
25 methodology, took that line and there is
70
1 still a landward regulatory limit beyond what
2 that feature is . And that is also what the
3 sea-ha establishes as well . It ' s landward of
4 that. We just need to figure out what line
5 we ' re going to use. The other thing I wanted
6 to point out, the other thing in the Trustees
7 decision, they basically quoted the
8 regulations and didn' t really offer any site
9 specific information or reasoning for the
10 denial . They quoted as you were mentioning
11 before, the 2007 site visit on the adjacent
12 property. You know, they' re quoting adverse
13 effect on fin fish and shell fish. I don' t
14 understand how that is possible when we ' re
15 213 feet from knee high water and a 100 foot
16 dune in between that. So I just wanted to --
17 let ' s take it into context a little bit and
18 understand that is what the denial says .
19 They didn' t say that this project will
20 adversely because of this . It was just a
21 quote of the regulations.
22 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: I got to
23 be honest. I don' t think we should be
24 talking much about Trustee decision making.
25 That is out of our scope. We have some
71
1 pretty narrow focus here and that is Coastal
2 Erosion as mitigation and how do we mitigate
3 that. And one thing I do want to say is,
4 there has been a lot of discussion about the
5 lessons of Bombara. One thing I do think we
6 have to consider and certainly, I have to
7 consider, is the lessons of Sandy as well .
8 So I want everybody to understand where I am
9 coming from. That has a great deal with
10 Coastal Erosion and mitigation.
11 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: I know you
12 know from being a supervisor during Sandy,
13 we ' re impacted the most. I can only tell you
14 from one of my clients. We have one here for
15 a hearing not that long ago for a very small
16 creation to his covered porch. A no brainer.
17 But as far as my conversations with him and
18 he has been there since before the 90s . He
19 has been there a long time . He was not
20 impacted at all by Sandy and I don' t know
21 that North Sea Drive homes were impacted by
22 Sandy. Whether there was flooding by the
23 road, that may be possible because of the
24 beach. Water going to the low spots wherever
25 water will go. So but the homes themselves
72
1 were pretty stable and they were -- this area
2 is one of the better areas .
3 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: I am the
4 Emergency Management Coordinator. So most of
5 the flooding in that instance came from the
6 bay. Most of the flooding from Irene came
7 from the Nor' easter to the sound. Irene
8 wasn' t classified as a hurricane but had all
9 the characteristics of a hurricane. And that
10 as you' re aware took out large sections of
11 the road along the northerly shore of
12 Southold Town.
13 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: I think
14 Scott --
15 MS . KELLY RISOTTO: NOAA had flown
16 images of the entire Long Island coast after
17 Hurricane Sandy that I can certainly provide
18 to the Board showing the conditions, if you
19 would like?
20 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: I think
21 to Scott ' s point, we never know what Mother
22 Nature is going to do . You know, we didn' t
23 -- the worst places that Sandy hit, we could
24 have said in this room and said, it has been
25 that way for years and Sandy hit it . I think
73
1 to Scott ' s point, you don' t know what
2 direction it ' s going to come from or hit . So
3 we have to take that under consideration --
4 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Understood.
5 The clients also want to build something that
6 is to storm, flooding. That is why you build
7 with as many flood protections as -- that are
8 scientifically available. So thank you. I
9 am giving you this map that has the red line.
10 I have three of them. Only one with color?
11 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: One is
12 fine with the color.
13 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: I am
14 going to at this point ask if anyone would
15 like to address the Town Board on this
16 particular Public Hearing? This gentleman
17 had his hand up first. I am going to go to
18 you first and then I will go to you right
19 after.
20 MR. ED THIRLBY: Hi . My name is Ed
21 Thirlby. I live on Soundview Avenue, 11185
22 Soundview Avenue, which is between Horton and
23 Kenny' s . I am probably -- 200-300 yards from
24 this proposed structure. I have been living
25 there for almost 40 years, and over that time
74
1 I have seen profound changes in the
2 environment. The wildlife, the wetlands .
3 You know, the plants, the animals. And I
4 just want to say that having seen a lot of
5 development there, any development that takes
6 place affects not just the neighboring lots
7 but the entire area. There is a ripple
8 affect. So you have to approach things very
9 carefully and understand sort of what the --
10 the macro picture is on this . And this area
11 -- and I would just like to say as a side,
12 the dune does not end at North Sea Drive.
13 The dune extends for hundreds of feet on the
14 south side of North Sea Drive. That area
15 should be protected as well . And it ' s not
16 being currently protected. The point I am
17 trying to make here, the general point I am
18 trying to make, when we are talking about
19 building structures and mitigation and
20 natural plantings and stuff like that, this
21 is not just environmental theory. Real
22 changes happen in the neighborhood when there
23 is construction. Needs to be approached very
24 carefully. We elected our trustees to look
25 after that process. And to look carefully
75
1 and to work hard and they do work hard. And
2 understand and make sure that these beautiful
3 natural areas are protected and they are here
4 for our kids and grand kids . So I am here to
5 support the Trustees and let you know that I
6 am supporting the trustees . I am here to
7 support you in supporting our Trustees. That
8 is my message.
9 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : Thank
10 you.
11 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL:
12 Gentleman in the back. I just need to remind
13 people to mention your name and the hamlet.
14 MR. MICHAEL VERNEY: Michael
15 Verney, 2125 North Sea Drive. I am two hours
16 away from the proposed building site. I just
17 want to straighten out a couple of things. I
18 have only owned my house for 30 years . I
19 have only been a primary resident there for
20 4 . But I have been coming to this area and
21 that particular area, McCabe' S Beach, I
22 remember learning how to swim there when I
23 was 6 . Superstorm Sandy was a South Shore
24 event. You know what, they have zero
25 protection. I almost bought that house in
76
1 the corner. Thank Jesus I didn' t . But we
2 got nothing. Meanwhile when I was in Nassau
3 County, I had gotten 9 feet of saltwater in
4 my store in Freeport, Long Island. So it was
5 a life changing event. I will give you that.
6 That was unbelievable. Not a hurricane but a
7 Superstorm. But any way, there was nothing
8 there. I was in that house before I owned
9 it . I was very close friends with the
10 previous owner. I purchased it from my
11 friend Lee, who was the guitar player for
12 Cindy Lauper. And I am trying to get to the
13 point, I am sorry. The perfect storm, the
14 perfect storm, water came -- the waves were
15 breaking just behind the deck and the water
16 was the foam that was coming in and hitting
17 the house. We were scared. We were there.
18 It was -- we were there. We had cellphones
19 but there was no cellphone service out here.
20 Anyway. That was the last thing I remember.
21 I think Donna was the last time there was
22 substantial erosion. Two of the houses,
23 including the one next to the lot being
24 built, ended up in the woods across the
25 street. And that is when they brought
77
1 everything back. They were just wood on the
2 ground. I don' t think they were attached to
3 pilings . They brought everything back and
4 started to raise everything. Other than
5 that, the dune. The dune changes. The whole
6 environment is a living and breathing thing.
7 Nor' easter' s seems to affect this more. The
8 dune used to be 15 feet further out as far as
9 the peak. Going out and dropping down. It
10 down have a drop down. We lost most of that
11 in the Nor' easter in 2012 . It ' s coming back.
12 The vegetation is coming back. The height is
13 coming back. The distance as they say, this
14 is as long as it has ever been to the water.
15 Other than that, I just wanted to clarify
16 that. I am a simple man. So you guys talk
17 about pier line and shore lines and this line
18 and that line. The only line that I am
19 concerned about and I don' t see that this is
20 going to affect it, and I don' t want to speak
21 for my neighbors, but concerned about that I
22 come out onto my back and I can see Kenny' s
23 Beach. And I can see McCabe' s Beach. And I
24 can literally see the back of every one of my
25 neighbors houses and I can wave . Just don' t
78
1 want to have that blocked. That is the line
2 -- it ' s not -- someone has to come up with a
3 decision as to what the line is . I can tell
4 you what my idea of the line is . I want to
5 be able to see my new neighbors . I want to
6 be able to see my neighbors past them. I
7 want to be able to see my neighbors to the
8 right. Again, this is a big house. I love
9 big houses . I wish I could afford one.
10 Nonetheless, this line is starting to freak
11 me out . There is so many lines drawn on this
12 map and I went to college believe it or not
13 in the way that I talk, but I went to
14 college. Nonetheless, like they said, the
15 line that I am concerned about and the rest
16 of my neighbors. You have to establish that
17 so that these people can figure out what they
18 have to do . And that is all I have to say.
19 Thank you.
20 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: Thank
21 you. Please?
22 MR. JOE BURRASCANO: Good
23 afternoon. I am Joe Burrascano. I am at
24 2120 North Sea Drive. My year-round house.
25 So much I think in your decision is on this
79
1 so-called line. And I want to bring your
2 attention to the original survey that was
3 submitted, the building permit survey dated
4 November 20th of ' 22, as well as the
5 (inaudible) that has vegetation. It ' s
6 probably easier to see the colored one. Do
7 you have a copy in front of you?
8 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: Yes .
9 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Yes .
10 MR. JOE BURRASCANO: You will see
11 from the left of the page, which is the
12 Bombara house, there is a faint dotted line
13 that goes across . Across the new property.
14 All the way across to the Mastro house. If
15 you were to look at the actual survey which
16 is more clear, that dotted line continues to
17 the Mastro' s house to their addition, which
18 was done in 1980 ' s . When that addition was
19 done, it had to be pulled back from the
20 original site of the house because it was
21 encroaching too far into the water line. So
22 back then, 30 more years ago, 40 years ago,
23 they already had to be pulled back to where
24 Bombara' s line is also. And it would not be
25 far to them to have a smaller than usual
80
1 house to have a new house -- what they had to
2 do 40 years ago. If you look at that line
3 also is the demarkation between the Federal
4 Flood Zone V versus the Flood Zone A. It is
5 on the road side of the property. FEMA
6 states that these owners, 100 year storm, and
7 we have had several 100 year storms in the
8 last decade, where damage may occur where
9 debris will be strewn across other peoples
10 property and possibly causing damage. So if
11 you look at the Town Code and I wrote this in
12 my letter, it says you cannot put a
13 construction which might cause trouble that
14 might cause damage to others property. In
15 all respects, the site plan -- I love the
16 fact that we ' re going to have new neighbors.
17 Nothing personal . That' s fine. But it
18 should be respectful of, one, most up to date
19 flood zone requirements. Behind the V line.
20 2, fair to the neighbors to the right and to
21 the left. And also if you go back to the
22 argument, the very first point, they have no
23 other possible place to build their house,
24 you should go back to the Bombara decision.
25 They said well, you could do that by making
81
1 the house smaller. Making it thinner. And
2 that is basically what the decision was . So
3 yes, they fulfilled even that part. While
4 this house would, I think okay, the remedy
5 would be to make it a little bit thinner and
6 behind the pier line. This line that you can
7 say, on the original survey that connects the
8 improved part of the Mastro House. That is
9 the line that you should go by. So I think
10 it is up to you all to decide whether it
11 should be a vegetated dune line or some
12 defined line by the Federal Government and
13 the two adjoining properties. One final bit
14 of information, on the map that you had seen
15 from Pat Moore, and call it this line that
16 shows the tall of the dune, it ' s in black and
17 white. That line goes way far towards the
18 water behind the Mastro house. So that line
19 didn' t apply to them. What applied to them
20 apparently was this V line that I talked
21 about. For those reasons, I think that the
22 site plan should be modified for the house to
23 be completely behind that dotted line, which
24 is demarkation between A and V and in line
25 with the construction on both sides of the
82
1 houses that were permitted. That' s all .
2 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: I am
3 going to agree. That most of the focus
4 should have been on the Coastal Erosion
5 Mitigation Line. There is an awful lot of
6 discussion, I understand all of it . I am
7 here to look at one line and that is the
8 Coastal Erosion.
9 MR. JOE BURRASCANO: Thank you
10 MS . ELIZABETH MASTRO: Good
11 afternoon. My name is Elizabeth Mastro. The
12 owner of the house next to them. The
13 proposed house. The only concern I have
14 actually is that pier line and the living
15 space. Mr. Bombara and to our new addition
16 or to existing addition. Where is that magic
17 line that of the code? I would like to know
18 that?
19 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: That is
20 a question of the Trustees .
21 MS . ELIZABETH MASTRO: Okay. So I
22 just heard before someone saying the house is
23 going to be raised 18 feet . The house is
24 built in the 30 ' s . We owned the house since
25 the 60 ' s . So the house is small . Small . And
83
1 we have this tremendous house coming up at
2 this time. And then we have the pool and 18
3 feet. So we come out to the deck -- as Mike
4 was saying, tremendous amount of structure
5 and bushes and pier line. Really, I think --
6 we don' t mind them being there because they
7 should be there. But just be respectful to
8 all the neighbors along the coast. And the
9 front yard -- no one really front yard and
10 back yard. They almost have two front yards .
11 Front yard to the water and front yard to the
12 street. Okay. So we at one time had all
13 sand. All of a sudden grass showed up. So
14 we mower the grass because it ' s there. We
15 didn' t plant the grass . Just came. The
16 beach side is all sand. And actually berries
17 are there. So honestly, we don' t want to
18 have -- like vibes between ourselves. I
19 think the house, we should all be in line so
20 we can all enjoy the beach and the views .
21 That is the only thing that I have to say.
22 And we have a small house. We decide to
23 build the house and she said 700 or certain
24 percentage we were allowed to extend. So the
25 house was there and we just extended a
84
1 garage. And on top of the garage, we have
2 two small bedrooms. We were not allowed to
3 go towards the water or towards the back of
4 the coverage of the lot. All of a sudden,
5 everyone is building houses and they can do
6 whatever the heck that they want and they can
7 pull out bushes . Box out all the neighbors.
8 Is that fair? No. I don' t think it ' s fair.
9 I have been in front of the Board and
10 trustees and stuff like that, and they give
11 you permission and they push you back anyway.
12 I think for respect, for not wasting
13 anybody' s time, here and coming here all the
14 time, just put the house in line where
15 everyone is going to be happy. You don' t
16 have to have tremendous, you know,
17 encroachment into the water. What they said
18 -- at one time, my husband was able to throw
19 a rod from the street to the water. You talk
20 about Sandy. We didn' t get hit by Sandy. We
21 lost power for very short time. Nature is
22 all funny that way. Just be respectful for
23 each other and we can move on. That is the
24 whole thing. (Inaudible) . But thank you very
25 much.
85
1 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: Would
2 anybody else like to address the Town Board?
3 MS . IRENE VEEDY: Hi . I am Irene
4 Veedy. I live on Soundview Avenue. I also
5 own parcel of land on North Sea Drive. I
6 wanted to note Member Doroski said that you
7 received one letter. I believe that the
8 members of the Board also received e-mails
9 from other community residents?
10 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : Yes, we
11 did. And apologies, I was just referencing
12 the file folder itself. I know we have
13 received one other letter yesterday but the
14 file was printed before that. That will be
15 part of the record itself but not read into
16 the record. So thank you.
17 MS . IRENE VEEDY: This appeal for a
18 Coastal Erosion Hazard permit comes at a time
19 when the residents of Southold are more aware
20 than ever that your decision will have
21 consequences for us who live here now and for
22 all of those that will follow us . New
23 development in this sensitive area between
24 Kenny' s and McCabe' s Beach. Must be held to
25 the highest standards of Southold' s laws .
86
1 The LWRP and the applicable regulations
2 because development on this fragile site
3 will, as we all know, adversely affect
4 wildlife and groundwater. It will increase
5 the hazards of Coastal Erosion and flooding.
6 Endangering neighboring properties and sea
7 level continues to rise. And while the beach
8 and the dune system may be stable now, the
9 past is not necessarily indicative of the
10 future. As catastrophic coastal storms are
11 becoming more and more common. Getting to
12 the appeal, it is understandable -- sorry.
13 It is undeniable that the application for
14 permit failed to meet the standards for its
15 issuance and that this petition fails to meet
16 most, if not, all of the criteria for a
17 variance because this is a self-created
18 hardship. It was the applicants choice to
19 purchase this site when they knew or should
20 have known that our laws have stringent
21 restrictions on waterfront development.
22 "Ignorance of the Law is no excuse. " In
23 addition, the proposed are not mitigation.
24 They are the bear minimum required by law for
25 all new constructions in Southold. Namely
87
1 development of the beach and dune are already
2 forbidden under Chapter 111 . IA systems for
3 wastewater management are required for all
4 projects. And compliance with FEMA
5 construction standards are mandatory. Not
6 voluntary. Moreover, the areas that of beach
7 and dune to be left to be undisturbed, is
8 irrelevant. Because there is no right to
9 disturb them. The beach and the dune will
10 not act as protective features . If there is
11 building near or upon them. The petition
12 also compares this project with the Bombara
13 project. And to some extent the Betsch home
14 down the line. It is inappropriate to
15 compare this project to those. The Bombara
16 home was proposed over 15 years ago . Before
17 Superstorm Sandy and amendments of Chapter
18 111 . The proposed structures in this project
19 are located substantially I 'm the VE ' s flood
20 zone. While the Bombara is in the less
21 hazardous AE zone. The proposed development
22 is oversized and greatly exceeds what was
23 approved by the Board in Bombara.
24 Approximately twice the size. And the Betsch
25 home was a rebuild of a preexisting home more
88
1 than 20 years ago. So the relevance of the
2 comparison being made to those projects is
3 inapt. Quite notably, the variance requested
4 is not the minimum necessary. To the
5 detriment of the community and environment
6 because the proposed structures have not been
7 located as far landward as possible. And
8 they are too close to the dune. The proposed
9 4600 square resident is three times the
10 minimum required in the code. Three times .
11 And finally the proposed structures is out of
12 character with the community. True there has
13 been some newer homes built. Somewhat larger
14 than older ones . This is a beach community
15 of small cottages in the traditional style.
16 So in summary, I believe the application for
17 a Coastal Erosion Hazard Permit should be
18 denied. And the petition for a variance
19 should not be granted because to do so, will
20 deviate in every meaningful way from the
21 better and spirit of the laws in Southold,
22 which were designed to protect the
23 environment and server and preserve our
24 community. And I would like to just note the
25 absence of Louise Harrison who would like to
89
1 be here . So I offer a transcript of the
2 Public Hearing before the trustees in which
3 Ms . Harrison spoke and other people who
4 aren' t here as well . And finally, I would
5 like to ask if you could please keep the
6 record open for two more weeks . So that
7 other members of the public can comment.
8 Thank you very much.
9 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: Who else
10 would like to address the Town Board on this
11 Public Hearing?
12 MR. JOHN BETSCH: My name is John
13 Betsch. I had to stand up here because
14 apparently I have bene very popular today. I
15 am a little surprised with the use of my home
16 as a comparison. Several differences. One,
17 I had an existing home. The concern was at
18 the time, increase of more than 200 . That
19 was the concern. Secondly, that was over 20
20 years ago. Things have changed considerably.
21 Different code. Different place. Mr.
22 Bombara' s house has been brought there.
23 There was no house there. I had an existing
24 house. I think that would be a better
25 comparison. I would consider myself a
90
1 property -- I believe people who do own
2 property have rights to do what they -- in
3 owning a property, they do have specific
4 rights . Those rights can' t trample or
5 incumber other surrounding areas . I am not
6 opposed to a home there at all, but it should
7 fit. You don' t have the original proposals.
8 This goes back to July, August. The first
9 proposal presented included a stock-like
10 catwalk to the gazebo to the water. I think
11 that kind of inferred the understanding to
12 our area and what should be included. That
13 was taken out but subsequent proposals did
14 have similar banes of inclusion. I think
15 that is why the Trustees denied it . And
16 there is lot of statements that have been
17 made. I will just throw in one last thing.
18 Jim King, the president of the Trustees, once
19 told me, when he started as a Trustee, he
20 believed everything everybody said. After a
21 while as a Trustee, he believed nothing that
22 they say. And I have to -- living here now,
23 in my 20 something years . I totally
24 understand it. I am living here forever and
25 the next day it is flipped. That is my
91
1 concern. Thank you.
2 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: Who else
3 would like to address the Town Board on this
4 particular Public Hearing?
5 MS . MISSY: I have one on Zoom.
6 MS . ANNE MURRAY: Anne Murray here.
7 I am a resident of East Marion. I am
8 speaking on behalf of the North Fork
9 Environmental Council . As I did in Bombara
10 all those years ago, I strongly urge the
11 Board not to grant this Coastal Erosion
12 Hazard Permit. I agree with the previous
13 speaker, this is totally self created
14 hardship. And the fact that somebody would
15 buy this parcel after all the hurricanes,
16 after what Mr. Bombara went through and fully
17 knowing, I am sure, that they are building in
18 a Coastal Erosion Hazard Area. To me it ' s
19 just foolish. And I think this is an
20 environmental sensitive area that shouldn' t
21 be built on. I can be a property rights
22 person but not in the case of a self-created
23 hardship. And I also agree with what Mr.
24 Betsch said earlier. It ' s possible that this
25 property could be flipped in one or two
92
1 years . What is the Town Board' s interest in
2 here? Is the Town Board interest in
3 protecting Southold' s environment or is the
4 Town Board interest in protecting property
5 rights? You decide. Thank you very much.
6 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: Thank
7 you. Anybody else from Zoomland?
8 (No Response. )
9 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: Anybody
10 else like to address the Town Board on this?
11 (No Response. )
12 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: I would
13 ask the Board --
14 MR. JOHN BETSCH: I did want to say
15 that Bob Bombara did text me and say that he
16 is sorry he couldn' t be here because of the
17 weather. That' s all .
18 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: I was going to
19 ask what is -- what are your thoughts as far
20 as where we should be going next? Regarding
21 this next?
22 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: That is
23 what the Town Board is discussing now and I
24 am going to accept a motion from any member
25 of the Board as to what they think?
93
1 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : I make a
2 motion we close the hearing but leave it open
3 for two weeks for written comments.
4 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Second.
5 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: All in
6 favor?
7 JUSTICE LOUISA EVANS: Aye.
8 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Aye.
9 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : Aye.
10 COUNCILMAN BRIAN MEALY: Aye .
11 COUNCILWOMAN SARAH NAPPA: Aye.
12 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: Aye.
13 If I could just ask some
14 information. I brought up the issue of the
15 buildable lot land. Would you be able to
16 provide that to me, for the written portion
17 of the -- that would be required to the Board
18 anyway.
19 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: So we will
20 give you the buildable lot area based on our
21 line -- so let me --
22 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL:
23 Buildable plan based on the current code and
24 non-buildable area --
25 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: No. So that is
94
1 part -- let me just clarify. Bombara case,
2 they went to the Zoning Board. The Zoning
3 Board determined that the code says you have
4 zero buildable land under the Coastal Erosion
5 Law. So the street -- you have nothing.
6 Zero.
7 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: I get
8 that.
9 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: So I am not
10 giving you a zero because --
11 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: I get
12 that. The provisional upland buildable area.
13 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: So I will
14 assume the line that we have as the
15 development environmental land being the
16 acceptable line of the -- our wetland Coastal
17 Erosion appeal line. From that point to the
18 street. And that buildable -- that being the
19 buildable area as the Zoning Board has
20 determined in the Bombara case, they used --
21 from that same line as we extrapolated and
22 put onto our plan, they took that area and
23 they developed based on that square footage;
24 correct?
25 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Yes .
95
1 Be aware that we might not agree with that
2 line.
3 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL:
4 Typically a survey will calculate the upland
5 buildable area based on the written content
6 of the code.
7 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: That is the
8 problem. Our code says that -- you' re
9 developing from --
10 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: For
11 now, you can do what you have as a line. As
12 close enough for what we want right now.
13 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : I just
14 want to be clear, we ' re not affirming that
15 line --
16 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: That is
17 what I wast to be clear about. I am not
18 affirming -- I would say for now, given
19 Scott' s --
20 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: Given that the
21 Board has not come to an agreement with that
22 line, I would ask that the record, that the
23 hearing remain open because we need your
24 input and if we need to get more TM --
25 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: You know
96
1 what, then you decide if you can' t comply
2 within two weeks .
3 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : That is
4 fine.
5 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: You have
6 no obligation to submit --
7 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: - I --
8 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: If it ' s
9 too difficult or too ambitious. That is
10 fine. I understand.
11 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: That is not my
12 point. I can get you the buildable area
13 based on the definition from our development
14 line. I can get that to you pretty quickly.
15 As far as when I hear from the Board members
16 and say that they' re not really 1000
17 convinced that we ' re accepting the line that
18 we have drawn as the development line, I want
19 to leave that issue -- if the majority of the
20 Board is not accepting that line, I need to
21 address it because we have given you our
22 expert opinions on how we came to that line.
23 If you find in your deliberations, gee, I
24 still have a question --
25 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: I am
97
1 going to withdraw my request,
2 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : I would
3 like to make a clear statement that I don' t
4 think that is what is before us today. I in
5 asking those line of questions, I am nearly
6 trying to get your understanding of what it
7 is . What is before us today is strictly an
8 appeal of the Trustees decision. On the
9 Coastal Erosion application. It ' s not --
10 it ' s not up to decide where that line is .
11 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: We
12 appreciate all of the input and the argument
13 that you make and presentation you made. I
14 will withdraw my request so that I am not
15 asking you to calculate based on the line
16 that the Town Board, as a. Group of 6 people.
17 So I will withdraw my --
18 MS . PATRICIA MOORE: So --
19 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: And we
20 will make decisions based on the public
21 comment and written comment that we get in
22 the next two weeks .
23 COUNCILMAN GREG DOROSKI : We' re
24 closed.
25 MR. JOHN ARMENTANO: Just for some
98
1 clarification, I am an attorney, John
2 Armentano with Farrell Fritz . Representing
3 the applicant. That public comment period
4 also allows us to provide further written --
5 SUPERVISOR SCOTT RUSSELL: Yes .
6 Public comment is closed. It ' s the written
7 -- absolutely.
8 COUNCILWOMAN JILL DOHERTY: Anybody
9 can submit.
10
11 (Whereupon, the matter concluded at
12 this time. )
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
99
1 C E R T I F I C A T I O N
2
3 I, JESSICA DILALLO, a Court Reporter
4 and Notary Public, for and within the State
5 of New York, do hereby certify:
6 THAT the above and foregoing contains
7 a true and correct transcription of the
8 meeting held on February 28, 2023 .
9 I further certify that I am not
10 related to any of the parties to this action
11 by blood or by marriage and that I am in no
12 way interested in the outcome of this matter.
13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto
14 set my hand this 15th day of March 14 23 .
15
16
17 5Jessica DiLallo
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25