Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-07/21/2004Albez% J. Krupski, President James I/ring, Vice-President ;~rtie Foster Ken Poliwoda Peggy A. Dickerson Town Hall 53095 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1892 Fax (631) 765-1366 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MINUTES Wednesday, July 21, 2004 7:00 PM Present were: Albert J.. Krupski, Jr., President James King, Vice-President Artie Foster, Trustee Kenneth Poliwoda, Trustee Peggy Dickerson, Trustee E. Brownell Johnston, Esq. Assistant Town Attorney for Trustees Lauren Standish, Secretarial Assistant Heather Tetrault, Environmental Technician CALL MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 at 8:00 a.m. TRUSTEE POLIWODA moved to approve, TRUSTEE DICKERSON seconded. All AYES. NEXT TRUSTEE MEETING: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. WORK SESSION: 6:00 p.m. TRUSTEE KING moved to Approve, TRUSTEE FOSTER seconded. ALL AYES. APPROVE MINUTES: Approve minutes of May 26, 2004 with corrections given to Lauren TRUSTEE DICKERSON moved.to approve, TRUSTEE POLIWODA Board'o~ Trustees July 21, 2004 seconded. ALL AYES. I. MONTHLY REPORT: For May, 2004, check for $8,702,85 was forwarded to the Supervisor's Office for the General Fund. II. PUBLIC NOTICES: Public Notices are posted on the Town Clerk's Bulletin Board for review. III. RESOLUTIONS-ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS: 1. BOBETTE SUTER requests an administrative permit to install glass and screens on the existing porch and to construct a pergola over the existing deck. Located: 855 Fisherman's Beach Road, Cutchogue. SCTM # 111-1-20 & 30. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I looked at this today and it's a screened-in porch and the pergola is right over an existing porch, there's nothing at all going out around, I didn't see any problem with it at all. I make a motion to accept the request. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Second. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: All in favor? ALL AYES. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh For the record I'm going to recuse myself on this action. IV. RESOLUTIONS-MOORING AND ANCHORAGE/STAKES: 1. GIACOMO CHICCO requests a mooring permit in Cedar Beach Creek for a 28 foot boat, Access: Private. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Make a motion to approve. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Second. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: All in favor?. ALL AYES. V. APPLICATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS/EXTENSIONS/TRANSFERS: TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We have a number of extensions. For the Board of Trustees J'uly 21, 2004 benefit of everyone here, these aren't technically public hearings; however, if anyone has any comments on any of these transfers, please, we'd like to move things through quickly so we can get to the public hearings, which generally take more time, so if anyone has any comment, please speak right up. 1. RICHARD AND KlM PERRY request the last One-Year Extension to Permit 5378, as issued on July 25, 2001. Located: 830 Clearview Road, Southold. SCTM # 89-3-11.5. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Do I have a motion to approve that last one year extension? TRUSTEE KING: So moved. TRUSTEE P©LIWODA: Second. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor? ALL AYES. 2. MARY ZUPA requests a One-Year Extension to Permit 5636, as issued on September 25, 2002. Located: 580 Basin Road, Southold. SCTM # 81-1-t6.7. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I believe that's the first request for extension. Do I have a motion to approve? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'll make the motion. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh All in favor? ALL AYES. 3. Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of GREGORY MAZZANOBILE requests a One-Year Extension to Permit 5631, as issued on September 25, 2002. Located: 1360 Lake Drive, Southold. SCTM # 59-1-21.6 and 21.7. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Would anyone like to make a motion to approve? TRUSTEE DICKERSON: So moved. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor? ALL AYES. 4. Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of STEVEN KRAM requests a One-Year extension to Permit 5634, as issued on September 25, 2002. Located: 100 West Lane, Southold. SCTM # 88-6-12 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Is there anyone who would like to approve that? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I believe I denied that one. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think it's for a house renovation. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Okay. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Approve the amendment. This is the September 25th action. We approve the amendment to construct a four foot high lash deer fence around the property being 15 foot landward of the existing bulkhead, construct a 4 X 4 platform and stairs to the beach on the seaward side of the existing bulkhead per project plan by Proper-T Permit dated July 1,2003. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Does this include the house renovation also? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The original resolution, approve an application for Steven Kram to construct additions to the house structure includes three sections, 14' by 27'8", extends east 7 feet, 365' 4". Located along back north side of existing structure 4' by 9' front south side of existing structure with a condition of hay bales during construction 20 foot from the bulkhead, leaders and gutters placed on survey. That's what they want a one-year extension on. That was granted in 2002. This is the first one-year extension. TRUSTEE TRUSTEE TRUSTEE TRUSTEE meeting? TRUSTEE TRUSTEE TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Make a motion to approve. DICKERSON: Second. KRUPSKI: All in favor? ALL AYES. KRUPSKh Do I have a motion to go off the regular FOSTER: So moved. POLIWODA: Second. KRUPSKI: All in favor? ALL AYES. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING IN THE MATTER OF THE FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS UNDER THE WETLANDS ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. 4 Board or'Trustees July 21, 2004 I HAVE AN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION FROM THE SUFFOLK TIMES. PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE MAY BE READ PRIOR TO ASKING FOR COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. BRIEF. PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMMENTS ORGANIZED AND FIVE (5) MINUTES OR LESS IF POSSIBLE TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If anyone would like to address the Board, please be ready, come up to the microphone with your comments, identify yourself for the record. COASTAL EROSION AND WETLAND PERMITS 1. Twomey, Latham, Shea and Kelley on behalf of JOHN F. BETSCH requests a Wetland Permit and Coastal Erosion Permit to construct a two-story, single-family dwelling with a two-car garage in place of the existing one-story, two-car garage and dwelling, and to be built on wood pilings. Located: 2325 North Sea Drive, Southold. SCTM # 54-4-24. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh A letter just came in today. MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Krupski, the attorney representing this client submitted a new letter July 21, and asked that the Trustees review this letter and kindly would request that the hearing table until next month so we have time to look at the letter. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Since the letter just came in today, I'll make a motion to table the hearing application. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor? ALL AYES. 2. ROBERT AND CHERYL SCHEIDET request a Wetland Permit to construct a 5' by 20' dock, 10' ramp and 4' by 5' platform. Located: 2570 Clearview Avenue, Southold. SCTM # 70-10-29.2. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Is there anyone who would like to comment on this application? Any Board members have any comments? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Remember the discussion we had when we Boagd of Trustees July 21, 2004 reviewed this, about a grading system so that the platforms could be lowered; did anyone contact the applicant about that? Could you come up, please? After we spoke with you, we reviewed your plans. We have this problem with most docks, the fact that they have to go up and it's sort of a ridiculous thing in most cases, but we've spoken over the years about this with the DEC because it's a DEC requirement, a certain height elevation. MR. SCHEIDET: That's why we gave you new plans. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We have an alternative to that. There's different kinds of grating, metal and fiberglass, because th~y..:allow for light I~enetration, the State said that they would consider a lo,yet structure,: so you would have the same size pla~fo"rm, it would just be a foot over. You'd have like a step up!instead of three steps up. I mean, [ don't know how you ¢¢ant~ ~o handle this. We'll approve it with the new plan; you oan ¢0rne into the office and 'take a look here and see what;}r~ere:sts, you and see what local dock builders, of cou,rse, can gbt, ~hat would be .the best way to go. Then we could approve this and then contact the DEC on your behalf with ~h~ d:ew plan. TRUSTEE .ERU~SI~f: So, I would rather approve tliis ,~th the condition that we get a different pla~ shgwing something that you find appropriate and then tall~ to the ¢lbck builders and find out what they can get. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: At a height of one foot above marsh. So you'd have to get us a revised drawing showing us. MR. SCHEIDET: Okay. TRUS'rEE PO.LIWOBA: Make a motion to approve the Wetland Permit on behalf of Robert and Cheryl Scheidet to construct a 5' by 20' dock and 10'foot ramp and a four by 5 foot platform subject to a revised drawing that shows the dock being no greater than one foot above the march. TRUSTEE DiCtKERSON: Second. TRUSTEE POL:IWODA: All in favor? ALL AYES. TRUST;EE KR~PSKI: Heather, when we get that plan in, you're going to contaC the DEC, find out who's reviewing it at the DEC arid tell rheem we have approved this with a different plan for the li§llt penetrating decking system that we'd like 6 Board oF Trustees July 21, 2004 to see approved at that height. And we'd actually be happy to meet with them and discuss that if they have any questions. 3. EDWARD WERTHENER requests a Wetland Permit to construct a new bulkhead, inkind/inplace, after removal of the existing retaining structure. Located: 180 Private Road Number 12, Southold. SCTM # 78-6-3.1 and 2. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Is there anyone here who would like to speak on this application? MS. TETRAULT: One thing you could ask is that when they do this.there's a lOt of vegetation there that will be disturbed that when they plant they have some revegetation plan. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: That's what I have down. MS. TETRAULT': Have a revegetation plan after the work is conducted, just add that into the permit. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: CAC recommends approval with the condition that rm treated.lumber is used. Any other Board comments? I'lt,,make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE POLiWODA: Second. TRUSTEE DICKER~SON: All in favor? ALL AYES. TPJJSTEE DICF, ERSON: Make a motion to approve the request for a Wetland Fe~rmit tb construct a new bulkhead in-kindTin-plaoe after removal of existing retaining structure. Located.: i,'80 Private Road Number 12, Southold with the condCtion that,.a replanting plan be in place for after the work bas been completed to keep the buffer. TRUSTEE POL]WE)DA: Second. TRUSTEE DIOKE.~SON: All in favor.? ALL AYES. 4. ROBERT WHITE requests a Wetland Permit for the as-built 6 foot stockade fence running on property line 101'4" on the southwest side of the house. Located: 2400 Ole Jule Lane, Mattituck. SC'TM # 122-4-11. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Is them anyone hem who wishes to comment on this appl'i¢~tion? MR. LARK: Good evening, Richard Lark, Cutchogue New York, 7 Board 0fTrustees July21, 2004 for the applicant. I believe the application is complete. As you know it was inadvertently built without the permit, so you have an as-built, you have a survey, Mr. White is here, if you have any questions on it. Otherwise, I'll take any comments. TRUSTEE KING: Anybody else want to comment? Any other Board comments? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh No, that's fine. TRUSTEE KING: If there are no other comments, I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Second. TRLfSTEE KING: All in favor? ALL AYES. TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to approve the as-built request v~itb the stipulation that it's probably 2 or 3 feet, I would mal~e it 5feet, on the seaward end of the fence be removed and 'r~a~e it even with landward end of the wooden wafl~way. Do't J-rave a second? TRUSTEE P. 0'~IWODA: Second. TRUSTEE I~]NG: All in favor? ALL AYES. 5. MICHAEL IJEGEY, AS CONTRACT VENDEE requests a Wetland Permit to construct a single-family dwelling with garage and sanitary system.~ Located: 480 Ackerly Pond Lane, Southold. SCT~ # 69-3-13. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here to speak on behalf of this application? MS. MOORE: Good evening, Board, I'm the new person here. I have an authorization for the file (handing). Thank you so much, I came to look at it and this is for your file (handing). Mr. Liegey asked that I represent him. He unfortunately ended up being hospitalized yesterday. We hope he's fine. In reviewing the application, apparently there have been a lot of comments and some of which I want to clarify. One of the things that I want to place on the record is that there were comments made with respect to SEQRA, the State Environmental Quality Review Act. For the record, under 617.5B9, construction of a single-family dwelling is a Type II action that requires no further SEQRA review and what I'd like to do for the record is put the law in your Boa:rd of Trustees July 21, 2004 file and give a copy to your attorney. MR. JOHNSTON: Thank you. MS. MOORE: With respect to the Wetland Permit that's before you, there are cer[ain standard conditions that you place on the permits which are certainly acceptable to the applicant, one of the things which the CAC recommended, which is a standard condition by this Board, is a buffer, nondisturbance buffer. I believe the CAC recommended 10 feet landward of the edge of the wetlands. That is certainly acceptable. It seemed to'.me because there is a bank there there's certainly room for additional buffering: The b,ank cohtinues up to the twelve foot,, looks like a 12 foot conto~ur in looking at the contour map in your file. And i~. ~zpu!.d..certainly seem.to me that that'whole area is to be 'ho, n¢isturbance, that's the intention and certainly tlia~ could be th~ condition placed on tf~e permit. With respect to your standard again, again your standard requirements drainage, all roof drains and all gutters should be propedy drained, that is the standard condition that this Board has. This survey just doesn't have it clearly identified, but certainly thai is a condition that is acceptable to the applicant and a standard condition on your part. The property topography tends to go to a certain point then the drainage goes towards the road. So there already the topography ia such that the rain water, the drainage is going to go towards the road, we are not permitted to drain into thi~ road and'we will catch whatever runoff, roof runoff on premises and: not allow it certainly to trespass onto Ackerl,y Pond Road or to the wetlands. Aisc, again your standard conditio~ns are acceptable, which is hay bales and that too should be identified on this survey. V/fith respec~ to the rest of the application, it is a standard application despite all of the additional comments that were made, prior to this hearing; they are not relevant to the Wetlanc~ Permit application. If the Board would like to discuss ar~ et,her reasonable conditions, I'm here. TRUSTEE KRUP~SKI: Let me see if there's any other comment on this application, is there any other comment on this Board of T~stees July 21, 2004 application? I think we had a couple other questions. We just received this? MS. MOORE: Are you talking about the topo survey? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Yes. MS. MOORE: I saw it in your file yesterday. I think it was delivered from the surveyor, or it could have been even from the applicant directly, but yes, the topography survey, certainly I'm glad it was prepared, it was one of the first questions'l had, The 10 foot contour, which is DEC jurisdiction, is clearly identified, The topographic features of the bank go to about a 12 foot elevation, then it's~,a, pretty ievel parcel that reaches a 16 foot elevation, and ther) has a couple towards the road and the west side of the prelze~'18 feet, but that's over a long span of quite a long distance? so it'S a relatively fiat parcel. The area where the house and the g;arage isi proposed is a fiat area, and at~uallY ~rom tt~e road when yo, u're looking at the property i,.t'e obvious, there's a plateau, a flat, there's a term for it - TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We have been to the site twice MS-. M~ORE: So you're very familiar with it. TRU~EE KRUPSKI: Couple of comments that I have and the other.Bo;ard' members have a comment; one is first of all, you made a reference to a CAC? MS. MOORE: If I read it correctly the CAC recommends approxea~;of, the application with condition large trees are proteot~ed a!nd a 1.0 foot nondisturbance buffer -- I'm sorry, I misread it,.landward of the bank. So I guess the bank being t.he 12 foot elevation, that looks to be about the 12 foot elex~atidn so 10 foot landward of the bank. TRUS'CEE KRUPSKh That would be roughly a 30 foot buffer. MS. MOORE: From the edge of the wetlands. Yeah, that looked appropriate. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I think we'd like to maximize that. What is the cfiS!ance between, there's a house to the south, I think this, permit marks this survey incorrectly, it says formerly Slotkin, MS. MOORE: Yeah, I don't think that's correct. From your file, it Ioolss l.ike Mr. Laub. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: He's on the south. 10 Board of'Trustees July 21, 2004 MS. MOORE: He submitted a survey that was in your file and it shows, if it's accurate, it shows apparently a shed that's right in the wetlands, but then he has kind of the closest point to some type of addition to his structure that shows a 57 foot distance to the edge of the wetlands as it was flagged., whenever it was flagged. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh That's true. What I would like to see is to have the house have the same setback as the two neighboring houses off the road, would maximize the setback off the wetlands and also the septic system could be put, I think the'leaching poo s cou d be put in line parallel to the roa~f, which would maximize their setback from the wetlands. MS. MOORE: Let me clarify, if I measured correctly, think the sanitary looked to be about 100 feet or did you measure something closer? It's hard to tell from this survey, it's 43 plus 26. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We have 80 here. MS. MOORE: You think it's about 80? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Right. So that could be maximized because the furthest one is almost 100. So you could maximize that that and we would like to see the drainage shown for the driveway on the plan and the drainage for the house and nondisturbance on the plan. MS. MOORE: Nondisturbance? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh The nondisturbance. I think it would be better if we went out and took a look at it and try to get a better judge, with a topographical survey, we can get a better judge of nondisturbance; and also could you please, we have in the file what Mr. Laub represented of his survey of a setback off the road and could you please get the setback of the neighbor to the north, and I don't know what the name is. MS. MOORE: I'll check, yes. I don't think that's correct. Goggin doesn't sound right. I'll get the adjacent neighbors. The only concern I have with the placement of the front yard setback is that it pushes us to the Zoning Board of Appeals, generally you try to avoid going for variances if you can. One possibility is if we can get the adjacent neighbors, there's a provision in the code that you 11 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 can go to the front yard average setback within 300 feet of neighbors on either side, so certainly Laub is very close. If this survey is correct he's about 10, 15 feet from the road, that certainly pushes us forward, but as far as the other side if it's -- TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Conforming. MS. MOORE: If it's conforming. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It's similar. MS. MOORE: It is, okay. That would make sense given the way that street has been developed. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Right. I would rather see that that would maximize it off. MS. MOORE: i11 talk to the Building Department as well because.someti'mes -- I always try to remind them of that pro'is :on h '~'he code. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thankyou. MS, MOORE: Okay, we'll get that, that's not a problem. TRuSTBE ~UPSKI: If there's no other comment, does anybody else have a :comment? I'll make a motion to table the hearing. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Second. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh All in favor? ALL AYES. MS. MOORE: Did you want to meet with the client out in the field? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's fine. MS. MOORE: I'll give him the date. Thank you very much. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Before we go any further, Number 6, Ernest Schneider; Number 12 Salvatore Guerrera; Number 25, JHL Associates, and Number 30, Frankola have all been postponed as well as off of the public hearing. Under Resolutions, Jeffrey Hallock has also postponed. So if anyone's here for those hearings, they will not even be opened tonight. 7. John Koehler on behalf of FRED KOEHLER requests a Wetland Permit to construct a deck attached to the existing house. Located: 1595 Bay Shore Road, Southold. SCTM # 53-4-5. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I looked at this. Is there anyone who 12 Beard of Trustees July 21, 2004 would like to comment on this application? MR. KOEHLER: Members of the Board, John Koehler for the applicant. ~ have the affidavit of posting, and the affidavit of mailings, (handing). TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Any other comments against or for?. If not, I'm the Board member who visited the site. I didn't have a problem with the deck being attached to the house over the grass in one area. You have a deck currently sitting on the beach on top of phragmites beyond the concrete wall? MR. KOEHLER: Yes. TRD. ST~EE POLIWODA: I'd like to see that removed. I don't know if you're, going to pull that deck up and bring it back? MR. KOEHLE, R: No, that's a deck that we had Jn place of a concrete platform that was removed partially from erosion, but we do have a permit from DEC from back in the '70s when that wa,~ gra. k~df,athered in, and that is remaining. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Do you have a Southold Town permit, Trustee ,permit? MR. KOEHLER: For that deck, no. But it's been there since 1975. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Our Board didn't have jurisdiction on the bay until 1991. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: More or less it looked like four floating docks tied together, looked like to me? MR. KOEHLER: That's exactly what it is. We bring them in every season because the water does sometimes, in storms, come up that high, but every season we bring it back out. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I've never seen it, I thought you just tied those docks together. MR. KOEHLER: No, we built it that way. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Do you have a permit? You said you have a DEC permit in place, could you just provide that to the Board? MR. KOEHLER: I could probably get it from the DEC, I don't have it on me. But l'm sure that they can give me something that says that it's been there since the '70s. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: If there's no permit in place, if you can't provide the data, I might recommend that you remove that deck and just approve this deck or make it a 13 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 stipulation that this deck approval -- MR. KOEHLER: Why is that? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Because we have a policy that there should not be decking on the beach. Flowever, if you do have a deck grandfathered permit, I'll swing that way. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh This isn't something we would approve today, but if you have some preexisting condition, I don't think we have a problem MR. KOEFILER: Okay. TRUSTEE POLIW'E}:DA: Any other Board comments? Would anybody else l:[ke to. con, merit? If not, I'll make a motion to close the public hea,~ing. TRUSTEE DIC, KERSON:. Second. TRuS'I~E P.O'~I:WODA: Make a motion to approve the Wetland Permft te conSt:J"uct a deck attached to the existing house for Fred' .Koelller, with the stipulation that he provides us with evidence that the deck on the beach has DEC approval, and if not, shal]!~be, subject to removal. TRUSTEE D;I,Q~E,.RSON: Second. TRUSTEE ,PQ,fJIWODA: All in favor? ALL AYES. 6. Meryl Kramer, Architect,' on behalf of RICHARD AND JOAN ARNOLD requests a Wetland Permit to construct a second floor addition to the existing single-family dwelling. Located: 2105 Bay Shore Road, Greenport. SCTM # 53-4-13. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Would you like to comment on this application? MS. KRAMER: Meryl Kramer, Architect, for the applicant. I just wanted to let you know, and just wanted to make sure it was understood that the second floor addition is directly above the existing one stow house and that all drainage will go to gutters and leaders to a new dry well. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Is there anybody else who would like to comment on this application? Any Board members? Fairly straight-forward when J looked at it, if not, I'll make a motion to close the public hearing? TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Second. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: All in favor?. ALL AYES. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'll make a motion to approve the Wetland 14 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 Permit on behalf of Richard and Joan Arnold, do I have a second? TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Second. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: All in favor? ALL AYES. 9. Patrick Brennan on behalf of ROBERT and KATHLEEN LAWRENCE requests a Wetland Permit to remove a one-story frame house and construct a two-story frame house with attached two-car garage, extend driveway, construct dry stone retaining walt, and excavate and fill as required. Located: 800 west Creek Avenue, Cutchogue. SCTM # 103-13-6. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Is there anyone here who would like to speak for this application? MR. BRENNAN: Good evening, my name is Patrick Brennan, I'm here on behalf of Robert and Kathleen Lawrence. I'm here to address ahy:c~),~,cems you may have or answer any questions. TRUSTEE: O[CKERSON: Is there anybody else here that would like to speal~,for ~ against this application? CAC recommends approval of the application with the condition of a 20 foot no~rf',bt~ffer and dry wells and gutters are installed 1~o cen~;ain the rqof runoff. TRUSTEE r~l~.¢S.'Kh Standard condition on the permit to have dry wel:ls and!:~iuttem on the house to contain the roof runoff. MR. BRENNAN: Yes, we can accommodate that. The current plans being prepared for the Building Department include two dry wells and the house is fully guttered with leaders to the dFy wells. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Second. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: All in favor? ALL AYES. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I'll make a motion to approve the Wetland Permit to remove a one-story frame house and construct a two-story frame house with the attached two-car garage, extend driveway, construct dry stone retaining wall, and excavate and fill as required. And you say the drainage will be put on the plans? MR. BRENNAN: Yes. 15 Board of Trustees July21,2004 TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Okay, do I have a second? TRUSTEE KING: Second. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: All in favor? ALL AYES. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh On 9, excuse me, we're also going to require staked hay bales on that; we're going to require staked hay bales during construction. MR. BRENNAN: 20 feet back from the wetlands? TRUSTEE KRUFSKI: Yes. MR. BRENNAN: NO problem. 10. Frank Notaro on behalf of DAWN RYAN requests a Wetland P~rmit for a partial demolition of the existing single-family dwelling, expansion of the first floor, and second floor addition. Located: 165 Bungalow Lane, Mattituck. SCTM# 123-3-4.1 TRUSTEE'KiNG: Is there anyone here to comment on this application? MR. KRAMER: Steven Kramer and Dawn Ryan, we're just here to answer any questions. TRUSTEE KING: I think we all looked at it. Are there any other comments? TRUSTEE KRUPSKi: We'll require dry wells and gutters. You have to have those put on the plans. TRUSTEE KING: Are there going to be new cesspools? MR. N.QTARO: I'm Frank Notaro, I'm here on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Kr~meL Four bedrooms and will remain four bedrooms, so we will' not expand the cesspools. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh You've got sufficient setback there even if you upgraded the system, as long as you keep it in your back yard. If we put that in the permit that if the system is going'to be upgraded that it be put outside Trustee jurisdiction greater than 100 feet, I don't know if you could - you know, it depends on neighbor's setback and whatnot, neighbors to move it to the front yard, road side. Even il: you moved it back, if you move it just landward there, you could get it out of our jurisdiction. TRUSTEE 14lNG: You're going all through this now, just take care of that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Whil~ everything's dug up. 16 Board of Trustees July21,2004 MR. NOTARO: Would we require Health Department approval on that? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If they move that, would that be considered a repair?. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Move what? MR. NOTARO: Are we asking for an additional pool? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, an upgrade of the existing system. TRUSTEE FOSTER: You have public water?. MR. NOTARO: That's coming very shortly. TRUS'ItF=E FOSTER: You don't, if you want to move them, you don't.,have to, you know, you go to the Building Department and you tell them y;pu're going to move them, they're going to make you go to the Health Department. I just know that. TR.USTEE KRUPSKh I don't know what the procedure is, so. TRUSTEE FOSTER: If he wants to move them and should move them, that"s fin.e, but I wouldn't go in there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So the condition of the permit is that if this system is updated, then it has to be moved outside of our jurisdiction. So if you find the system's sufficient for whatever during construction, after construction, at a certain point you!re, going to have to go to the Health Department. TRUSTEE FOSTER: You don't really. MR. NOTARO: I'm sure the client would be willing tomorrow to put in a new system, two pools, thousand gallon tank and that's probably 100 percent better than what's in the ground now, it's probably just a couple of cesspools. The problem is the time frame. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: My point is if you find that the system's sufficient that's my point, and you have to do something at that point then you have to move it outside of our jurisdiction, but at that point, you won't have to come back to us, it will already be in your permit to do that, you might have to go to the Health Department, Building Department or somewhere else, you'll have it in our permit you can do that. As opposed to during construction or right after construction then you have to come back to us. TRUSTEE FOSTER: I wouldn't go there. As far as we're 17 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 concerned, give him the permit and if he has to upgrade the system, then he can deal with it later. It's going to hold him up four months at least. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Okay, we'll go with Trustee Foster's recommendation. TRUSTEE KING: Any other comments, anything else from the Board? I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second. TRUSTEE KIN.G: All in favor?. ALL AYES. TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to approve the application. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Second. TRUSTEE KING: All in favor? ALL AYES. 11. Michael Irving on behalf of CUTCHOGUE HARBOR MARINA requests a Wetland Permit for the site plan of the existing marina. Located: 3350 West Creek Avenue, Cutchogue. SCTM Ct 110-1-12. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anybody here to speak on behalf of the application? Is there anyone that would like to speak at all in regard to the application? MR. IRVING: I'd like to introduce myself, my name is Michael Irving. The application presented before you is an application for an as-built facility. At the present time there's no additional construction alterations or changes to what we've already submitted. TRUSTEE KPdJPSKh Thank you. Before the Board makes any discussion, I'll take any comments. MR. HUNTINGTON: Ray Huntington speaking for the Fleet's Neck Proper~y. Owners Association. This marina is, of course, on Flieet's Neck and it's our understanding that the marina seeks to obtain an approved site plan, and the Planning Board wants to have the comment of the Trustees in order to support that plan. We believe it's in the interest of the membership of our association that this comment be received at soon as possible; so we'd like you to expedite that, We want a.n approved site plan, an approved proper site plan, I should'say. So we ask your expeditious response, but'we also seek a fully proper site plan. 18 Boai:d of Trustees July 21, 2004 There's been a number of abuses that have occurred through the years and hopefully that's all behind us. We like very much the way the marina's being operated for the past nine months or period of time since the prospective owners came along. We believe in order to support such a proper site plan, we sent a letter to the Trustees earlier that covers certain points. If you received that letter, and are fully satisfied with respect to that letter, I need not detail them, but if I needto, I will. TRUSTEE. KRUPSKI: Why don't you go ahead for the record, but before you start, the Town is getting more organized, we do have someone hired full time to review information like this, and so as I'm sure we're going to get a comment from Heather yet who ¥~sited there today and who we have not heard from yet, MR. JOHNSTON: Could I ask you to comment on both your 24 April as well .as your July letters? MR. HUN'E1.NGTON: Sure. First I'll take the most recent one, that's the 4th of July letter. It was our understanding at that time and. it still is, that the Trustees would do a field inspect~n on the 14th of July, that would hold the hearing today, which you're doing, that you wanted to overview the updated final site ,plan that would be provided either by the I~lanning Board or by the marina operator. And that you were going to perform a review of the Trustees' files. HaYe:alllthose things been accomplished now? TRUSTEE K, RUPSKI: We haven't heard from Heather yet. MS. TETRAU.LT: Do you want me to answer? TRUSTEE :K~UPOKI: If you like. Just specifically about the site plan, we I~new,~that Bruno in Planning had mentioned to us that there-was a newer site plan with a few changes on it that the Plan;ning Department had asked for, and we just received that today. So the Trustees have not had a chance yet to look at it, but: we do have it now. MR. HUNTINGTON: The items of concern with respect to the Trustees jurisdiction are, Number one, the cesspools, which are very close to the creek. There's a Trustee permit of 1994, I bel. ieve, that requires the marina to submit to a dye test; however, 'there is no enabling or no initiating aspect to that, so it never happened. We say from our point of 19 Board of Trustees Jul3' 21, 2004 view that that test should be done now. We would think that the prospective owners would like to do that too, to have that done before closing,-i would think. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Can we address point by point? MR, HUNTINGTON: Sure. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: 'Which septic system? MR. HUNTINGTON: One, but there's one that's closer than the other to the creek. They should both show up on the map. One is behind the service building. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And the other one presumably is behind the house, the res!0ence; is there a residence? MR. HUNTINGTON: Yes. We think too, that the test should be repeated at'.a minimum frequency once every five years. That means (hat'just won't sit in the file forever. It should also be repeated ii~ihere's reason for suspicion, if the Trustees coma to a point of saying there's something wrong here, tha.f?s ~he,.time to do a dye check. That's our position on the cesspools. Ob¥iouslg, if. there is a problem that the test shows, there will: have tg be corrective action and have to go further upland ~tl~ any kind of system. Is that it on cesspools or is there anything else? TRUSTEE ~UPSK: That's fine. MR. HUNTI:N.,GTON: Okay. The next topic was the pump-out log records, which the Trustees required copies to be sent to the office an.nuall¥. In discussing that with Mr. Irving, he advised us th~qt the policy of the yard is to only launch a boat with a sealed, system, that that goes into their standard c:ontra.e,t. That he's been doing that and with respect tothe re,COrds, first of all, I should say apparently nobo~ly ever kept any record before and there may never have beert, a pump-out; that's how bad the operation was earlier, again thal's yesterday. So this is obviously a much better pradtice that he has as part of his standard business plan, it ,pleases us a great deal. As you know this part of the creek is closed every year and the only reason for such closure has to be the marina because that's where the problem is. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh He closes to shellfishing? MR. HUNTINGTON: Yes. 20 Boarit of TrUstees July 21, 2004 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I believe that that's an automatic closure isn't it, because of the marina? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Yes, within 500 feet. MR. HUNTINGTON: It's not dependent on conditions but rather just some general policy? · TRUSTEE POLIWODA: DEC policy, they set the closure. MR. HUNTINGTON: That's comforting in a way. With regard to the records, since there's a charge for the pump-out, it shows up in the marina's business records and an automatic report could be produced that way. We don't see any rema'rning reason to do an annual filin~t or any kind of:scheduled filing. If there's reason to understand what's been 9oing on, [ believe the marina can be asked for a report thaf c0¥e~s the topic of concern which can be derived from. fheir .busin.¢ss records. That's fine with the association. The next item we had was bottom cleaning and stripping, the m~ina. We understand in their business plan, they do not intend, to do any bottom cleaning and stripping at this Ioca~tion. 'But if it changes in the future, we think those wastes should.be captured, decanted and the solids processed accordio, g.to DEC regulations. We don't envision, and there are Systems I'ike this for car washes, we think that's overkill'; but w~would li:ke to see some effort made here to capture, l;..hose solids so they don't gradually build up in whatever they might go to. You might remember earlier there was a permit issued for the travel lift and in front of that was a washing station with a permeable cesspool right there. Wc~:prot{~sted at' that time that that should be an imperme~aI~le tank. As l~ar as lighter fluids, even organic materials, ~hey'~-e Coming off the top, that shouldn't :be a problem, .they're going to be there anyway. But the heavier materials, the cOpper laden paints, the copolymers and that sort of thing, anything that comes off in pieces should be captu,red. And, of'course, if there's stripping, it's obvious, but if the stripping is typically done upland with the ta.rps and sc~ on, as long as those kinds of practices are followed, we dori't have a problem with it. MR. HUNTINGTON: There may be other issues that spring from your review of thle file, we're not aware of such issues. We 21 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 suspect they don't exist, but if they do exist, we would like to have the opportunity to comment on them. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you, I'm going to ask Ken to review them. The plan on the site today, I'm recapping. MS. TETRAULT: Like I said., we were waiting for this updated plan. The updated plan actually only has three changes from the pian that we had. Planning asked them to add French drains at the entCances. Mr. Irving, there's two places, do. you wanl to just talk about that a little bi.t, the French drains, the.screening on the roads they asked for? MR. IRVING: You will note the most recent site plan is exactly lille the, site plan you had, with the exception of proposed things that don't exist at this time. The Planning Board seem.ed to indicate they would like to see going forward at some point drainage system put in the two entrances which are indicated there and decided French drains are probably;the best use, there's some additional screening, there's some additional zoning along the north property line with the exception of that, I thi'nk both of those site pla, ns are, the same. One's an existing one is what the P~a0nihg .Board would like to see proposed. MS. TETIC, AULT: Dke I said, I was out today, and we still want to ot~eck tl)rou~l:h the file and see that we have permits on file for: what iS out there, and even though it's an as-built, j~ust to see What's in the file, and the TruStees have already; jlu~st to address some of your concerns, made plans that they do Want to see the dye test yearly, and the pump,out redords yearly. So those will be required to come into our office, I:belibve that's what we talked about As far as this site plan, one of the other things I'd like to see at;the no~thern end, I'd like to see the wetlands fringe that's there, the spartina in the upper creek part shown on. here. It shows mean high water, it doesn't show that marsh. MR. IRVING: tf I could just address that for one moment, and you probably are familiar with the history going forward with trying to get this site plan reviewed, and let me bring you up to date real quickly One, there was never a site plan approve~t for that marina until we took over operation; 22 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 we have addressed the Pl'annini] Board, we have addressed the DEC, Department of Health, Army Corps, all in an attempt to get the site plan reviewed. Every time we present a site plan to the Trustees or to the Planning Board, everybody comes back with a different idea. They would either like to see a little more detail down by the water, they would like to see French drains added. They would like to see screening put in.' Our intent is to get what is there reviewed and going forward absolutely. If we do construction, we, have to go.through the perrhit process, if we do any a![erations, chabges; so forth. The m'.ost ira.portent part of this whole thing is that the marina is u, nd~r co .ra'T. act for purchase, The contract date is running ,out in ,A.~gu~t, the more the Board delays on approving wba.t i~th~.' re, the greater chance you're going to have of the [acili~y gaing back to the original owners and would be.operat~d"the original way, You can discuss it with Mr. Hun. ti~bn~ ,but,.~hat marina, quite frankly, was an environm~a! h~\ffi, the way it was being run. We have records~ and~ d~a,~?naterials that we moved out of there. We c{ea, ne~d,'Up;tla~ ~aciiity. I ask the Trustees to review this sitepi?i ac~,a.p,or~ it as quickly as possible, if you don't, o~h~Vi~'~sly~ tr~e ~vhole thing won't go through. MS. TETR.~OL;T: Lel me just ask you about a couple things. The iau;n,.diry ~acility, th'.e bathroom, and then there's so.rne~bul~h~d ng right in front of it. There's a couple of.~m".a' p!pe~: com ng through the bulkheading there; do you knom, are' th~ connected to something? MR. IRVING: No, } don't. There is a pipe that comes from the Town. MS. TETRAULT: Yes, there's two pipes from the roads that goes through the bulkhead. MR. IRVING: There's a straight one at each end. The small pipes, there are a number of old electrical conduits that led Cablevision and stuff out to the pedestals, which no longer exist, which they could be if they're gray piping there's chances are that's what they are. The other thing I would say is that laundry facility, I just want to say thereZ~s a washer and dryer nobody uses, has always been an issue down there. Quite frankly, I couldn't 23 Board o f Trustees luly21,2004 care less, if you want to take them out, that's fine. MS. TETRAULT: You said that before, we just don't want them to be overflowing into the creek. MR. IRVING: I just want to tell you the dye tests done previously, all of them came back negative. MS. TETRAULT: Those two drains coming off the road, that's the Town road? MR. IRVING: I would imagine that's Town jurisdiction. MS. TETRAULT: We would probably want to see those pipes not o. pen into the creek as they are now. We don't approve that. MR. IRVING: Neither do I. MS. TETRAULT: I un.derstand. And, just you did ask there about the bottom painting, you're probably aware that madnas in New York State require a fully enclosed facility? MR. IRVING: Yes. One of the problems I think everybody'S having with this facility is there are a lot of things everybody would like to see. The reality in. a commercial operation like that, there are certain guidelines, rules and regUlati'ons from the DEC, from the Trustees, from the Department of Health that govern how you do business. We don't have an intent to do any major bottom cleaning or spraying over there. Going forward maybe another owner would, but then again, he would be under the guidelines and rules and. regs that are required. So I don't see why we shouid alter what's there for something we aren't making use of. MS. TETRAULT: Okay. But you haul boats out there and you store for the winter?. MR. IRVING: No, we do not. We winter store boats there, but we don't do any haulage or anything like that. MS. TETRAULT: Okay. You have the travel list, that's why. On the travel list, you have a bunch of pilings; are those being replaced? MR. IRVING: When I got there and started to clean up the area, I lifted off the inside of that creek 26 pilings that were on the bottom of that creek, and they were strung in the various positions from the north basin all the way out to the main channel, all the way out past the gas stop. Where they came from, I have not a clue. 24 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 MS. TETRAULT: Okay, those are those ones that are sitting? MR. IRVING: Yes, they all came off the bottom. MS. TETRAULT: When you say you don't haul them but you store them, do people come in and work on their own bottoms in the yard? MR. IRVING: No. To bring you up to date, we have two facilities, one in Cutchogue Harbor Marina and then New Suffolk Shipyard. Just from a business plan, the operation dictates that all the service, hauling, mechanical work is done out of the shipyard and not out at Cutchogue. Our primary use at Cutchogue is more for storage and for the dockage. MS. TETRAULT: Okay. The Conservation Advisory Council recommended that the parking lot is graded away from the water. To contain the runoff from the pervious parki.ng area, a recharge basin is installed and the parking area is graded away from the water. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Does it say which parking lot? MS. TETRAULT: Lauren, d° you know which one they're talking about? MS. STANDISH: They must mean the gravel one all the way to the nor[h. MR. IRVING: There's no problem adjusting the grade so the ru'noff goes -- I think actually, if you look at it now, it does. But grading is not a problem. We're starling to install cement drains and runoff drains for a facility we don't own yet, that's a problem. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Thank you. We didn't look at this this past month as a Board because we wanted to send Heather to look at it, and it did take the whole Board to look at it. MR. WILLIS: Can I address the group? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Sure. MR. WILLIS.: I'm Lawrence Willis. I'm the owner of New Suffolk Shipyard, and in contract to purchase Cutchogue Harbor. We have met with many people on this over the last nine months trying to get to closure, as Michael indicated. We're getting to the end of the rope. We're getting to the end of the rope because we have a contract of sale that is going to expire. Absent a contract for actual closing, we have made considerable investments in that 5 Board of Trustees ..... :; July 21, 2004 property to improve it. We have met with the complete Fleet Neck Associations, and we have indicated that we will do whatever is necessary to make people comfortable with the operation of that marina, I think we have demonstrated through what we have done to date that we're prepared to make that a first class operation. We would be very concerned and would be a very negative situation if the deal falls through simply because we can't get the paperwork completed, which is what is happening. We have been going through thisfor quite some .time. Again, we!re prepared to do whatever is necessary to address all of the regulatory requirements, ail of tl~e Town requirementS, and I'm sure that we can wor.,k ipd'ividually with any of the. neighbors to address ariy c0ncerns they might have going forward, so we just want to-get c}osure on this, otherwise it'~ go.lng to be back in the ha[ntis of'~he old owners. MR. HUN'rtN~ON: l'd like to add atthis point that the associatioe ir:o~curs with that. We would like to see this deal be cocrsur~rnated. However, we also want a proper site plan to be in place, This marina will be sold some day. That's a fact, and who knows how the next owner will behave, we want th~tprot.ecti~n in place.' The Town Code provides for it and the.a,sso.¢iation wants it. we implore youto move as rapidly as you can because of the circumstances that Mr. Willis just descril~ed. There was a request made to go over our memo, the letter of the 24th of April; let me just summarize that right now by saying -, that's about a four-page memo and most of that, has to do with the Planning Board. The items that had to do With the Trustees were summarized in the memo of the 4th of Ju~. $o I don't think we need to go over that in any .more detail that you might want. TRUSTEE K. RtJPSKI: Thank you. Is there any other comment? I think the B~ard is inclined to approve this with conditions. TRUSTEE FOSTER: You know you want to consider there's probably not one square foot of property on here that isn't jurisdictionalized by us, and at a later date if anything pops up, we can control that. So there's no reason to hold them up for unobvious reasons, and you know, the conditions 26 Board 0fTrustees July 21, 2004 that really don't exist at this particular time. I'm sure these people will work with us if anything arises that we need to deal with. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So what's been brought up is the wetlands line on the north side should be marked. Do you want to hold that until the property conveyed and put that on the applicant? Because if, for some other reason, the property isn't conveyed,, then it's too much of a burden to put on the applicant if he doesn't own it. These conditions we're going to put on the permit tonight are only going to be in place if you, in fact, close on the property. MR,. IRVING: What c. onditions are we. talking about? TRU'S-EEE KRU?SKI: We'd like to see the wetlands on the north end flagged, you may be up for removfng the laundry facility. And; dye test every five yearsand pump out records. MR. IRVING: There's no problem presenting you with pump-out records and stuff, but I've got to tel! you, in a busy busii~ess schedule you guys are going to have to remind us; what do you mean, weekly, monthly, yearly? MS. TETRAULT: Yearly. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yearly. How much of an administrative effort is that going to take on your part? MR. IRVING: T~akes an effort, got to print them out and send them to you, every bit takes an effort. We have no problem providing pump-out records and containing the wetlands flag as indicated on the plans as long as it doesn't delay us. MS. TETRAULT: No. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's what I'm saying, to approve this and then once you close on the property, then we would like to see this done; in other words, you have an approval. We're not going to require you to do something, suppose for whatever reason you don't close on it, then you don't do it. You would get an approval tonight. TRUSTEE KING: These requirements are only after the fact. MR. IRVING: That's fine. TRUSTEE FOSTER: We just don't want to hold you up. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Yes, usually we do it the other way, but in this case, since you don't own it, it really isn't fair for you to do the work. I'll make a motion to close the 27 Board 0fTrustees July 2 l, 2004 hearing. TRUSTEE KING: Second, TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor? ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to approve the application of Cutchogue Harbor Marina, with the condition that after the sale is complete, that within one year of the sale, wetlands line on the n'drth side of the property will be flagged on the site plan, and that dye test be conducted once every five years, and that the pump out records be submitted once a year. TRUSTEE FOSTER; 'Starting at the time of purchase, 'MR ,JOFI~S~ON: Requiring a dye test at the time of purchase and every fiYe years? TRUSTEE F~OSTER: No. MR. J'OH;NS~OI~: Five years after the date of purchase or starting at the daCe o¢ purchase. TRUSTEE ~RUP'SKh Starting at the date of purchase. TRUSTEe ~'O.S~ER: You wabt one now? TRUSTEE ' (I~SK~ ,,! . ,~,.¢, .- b~O. TRUSTE.,E.~O$~R!. You don't want one now? TRUST~ .K?~KI:: No, TRUSTEE ~ER: Starting at the date of purchase a dye test within five ye~s? MR. iRVI'.I,~G: ,1' don't care which you want. TRU.STErE I(RU..~SKh Or you want it the first year and then five ye~'s? T'~e first dye within one year and then one every five year.rS. MR. IR¥1.NG: So year one, six, 11 ? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Yes. So after the purchase, you have one year to compiete. MR. iRViNG: The probability is we will not close without a dye test. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well, that would fulfill the requirement for the first one. So that was the resolution. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor? ALL AYES. 13. Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of OLIVE PENFIELD requests a Wetland Permit to resheath 100 feet of existing 28 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 bulkhead by placing new 8' Dy 2' by 10' CCA T and G sheathing landward of the existing sheathin§. Located: 515 Harbor Lights Drive, Southold. SCTM Ct 71-2-3. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Would you like to comment on this apPlication? MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, Jim Fitzgerald on behalf of Mrs. Penfield. It's pretty straightforward, unless you have any questions, i"11 be happy to answer them. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: A~.y other public comments before I begin? If not, I visited the site, the only recommendation I have is to create a 10 foot nonturf buffer where it's all sloped in fall'lng in. MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, that's fine. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Other than that, I have no other comments. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh CAC, for the record, recommended disapproval because, the use of CCA lumber is prohibited. And the project requires a 20 foot nonturf buffer. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: In that area I found most, if not all, of them were 10 foot nonturf buffers, two of them have decking we've g~en permits for. TRUSTBE KRUPSKI: So this sheathing's going to be behind, so it's really not in, contact with the water. If that was their concern. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: If no other comments, I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. TRUSTEE D, ICKERSON: Second. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: All in favor? ALL AYES. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'll make a motion to approve the Wetland Permit on behalf of Olive Penfield with the stipulation that a 10 foot nontu:rf buffer be created behind the bulkhead. Do I have a sec0n.d, ? TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second. TRUSTEE POMWODA: All in favor? ALL AYES. 14. Vicki Toth on behalf of ROBERTS CUSTOM HOMES requests a Wetland Permit to construct a two-story, single-family dwelling with associated septic system. Located: 1500 Bay 29 Board o£Trustees July 21, 2004 Avenue, East Marion. SCTM # 31-8-12.9. MS. TOTH: Good evening.my name is Vicki Toth, I'm here on behalf of Roberts Custom Homes. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Are there any restrictions? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We have been out there, see if there's any other comment. We have been out there a couple months earlier. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Is there any other public comment? I'll make a motion to close the headng. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Before you close this, can you pass that survey down? Therets a 75 foot mark on that survey, we'd just like to see that line follow the edge of the pond line and show that as the nondi§turbance buffer. MS. TOTH: You vFou!ld like it noted on the survey, that would be an undisturl~ed buffer zone and -- TRUSTEE. KRUPSKI: Yes. And a line of hay bales along that line. dudng construction. And even though the house is really nonjgrisdiction, al, we'd like to see dry wells and gutters on it. 1, think that's a building, requirement anyway. MS. TOTH: It is. And for the record, the existing shed will be removed. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Artie, do you have any other comments? TRUSTEE FOSTER: No. Any other comments on this application? 1'11 make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second that. And just add the house really is nonjurisdictional; it's really just one corner of the lot that our jurisdiction covers. TRUSTEE FOSTER: You seconded. All in favor? ALL AYES TRUSTEE FOSTER: I'll make a motion to approve the application .with the conditions that were mentioned. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second. TRUSTEE FOSTER: All in favor? ALL AYES. 15. Vicki Toth on behalf of CONSTANTINOS MARKOTSIS requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 25' by 25' one-story addition with a fireplace on to the existing house. Located: 145 Williamsburg Road, Southold, 30 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 SCTM # 78-5-12 TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Would you like to comment on this one? MS. TOTH: Good evening again, my name is Vicki Toth, I'm here on behalf of the homeowner. I'd like to request an amendment to revise this permit to reflect the revised survey that was submitted to you. The proposed addition is actually 25 by 27, and ther'e"-iS an existing covered screened wood deck and what they're proposing, is to enclose it. I'm not sure if that needs a wetland because they won't be going outside the exi,s, ting: footpd.nt of the home, but I would like that to be noted as a change to the first survey. TRblSTEE POLIWODA: Yes, it would. MS. TOTH: Thank you. TRUSTEE POLiWODA: As far as the amendment to enclose that, I didn't' Io0k for that. MS':. TOTH: Okay. TRUSTEE POE!WODA: I looked at where the addition was going, I didn't have a.~roblem with that. By looking, I don't think there's any problem where'tbis enclosure is going to be. MS. TOTH: JiJst another note for the record, this property is nonj.u, risdictfdn with DEC because of the man-made bulkhead that's, been in e~(i,stence prior to 1977. TRUSTEE POLiWODA: Any other comments on this application? If net, f have orie stipulation I'd like to see dry wells and gutters. MS. TOTH: Okay. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'd just like to see those added. MS. T©TH: So any gutters and leaders you'd like to go into dry wells? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Yes. I'll make a motion to close this public hearing. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Second. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: All in favor? ALL AYES. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I11 make a motion to approve a Wetland Permit on behalf of Constantinos Markotsis for the addition with the stipulation that dry wells and gutters be added on the survey; do I have a second? TRUSTEE KING: Second. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: All in favor? ALL AYES. 31 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 16. Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of CAROL R. DENSON requests a Wetland Permit to construct an upper level on the existing barge restaurant building. Located: 750 Old Main Road, Southold. SCTM # 56-6-8.7 TRUSTEE FOSTER: Any public comment? MR. COSTELLO: George Costello, Senior. I believe at one time we had a waiver from the Trustees for this particular project, and I think it expired, I believe that's why we're here. TRUSTEE FOSTER: We all looked at this. I don't think anybody had a problem with it. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: We did note a few changes for the drainage. TRUSTEE FOSTER: There's a few notes here that there will be no tuff on the site other than what grows naturally. Grade the parking lot away from the water, gutters and dry wells, and cut the phragmites to one foot. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We want to delineate that area. The problem seems to be on the south side of the building. MR. COSTELLO: Yes, water side: TRUSTEE KRUPSKh From the building itself going to the west front of the.building in front of the parking lot. The phragmite$, seem to be choking out the spartina, and if they were cut down tb a foot in height we felt the spartina would grow. And also the area between the bulkhead and the parking lot is like~ a sandy area. We just wanted to make sure that wouldri2 be tuff at all. That would remain either sand or gravel or something? MR. COSTELLO: Correct. MS. TETRAUL:T: One thing I looked at. TRUSTEE FOSTER: It says check all dock permits, which is our responsibiiity~ and keep the runoff out of the water. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Artie, can you delineate that on the survey, the area that the phragmites are to be trimmed at, so it's clear?. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Was there a question since you're going up on a second floor of a restaurant is there going to be a need for more cesspools? MR. COSTELLO: No, I believe the outside seating is going to 32 Bo'ard of Trustees _x~-~l:F/~i ~b%, July 21, 2004 Alber~ J. Kruipski, Presiden~ /~r~~~.~"- ~xo-- --.~ ~ ~ To~ James ~ng, Vice-President ~ ~' ~ -~ ~ 53095 Route~5 :~o~airs. ~ ~~ ~ ~ P.O. B~ 11 ~"~'~'~'~ges out front, ~~~ float layin~e,?~o=e there, sideways the length. We would likS~(eat) 7654866 see that removed. MR. COSTELLO: Okay. TRUSTEE POLI~ ~~~ there. TRUSTEE FOSTER: ~i¢¢ 6~® TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Any other comment? TRUS~E KRUPSK[: Just one question, during construction is there: going to be a need for excavation; should we have a hay bale line? MR. COSTELLO: No. The second story is going to be supposed on. pilings, so it's piling driven, no excava[ing. TRUSTEE FOSTER: I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Second. TRUSTEE FOSTER: All in favor? ALL AYES. TRUSTEE FOSTER: I'll make a motion to approve the public hearing as requested with the changes that were verbally made, no tuff on site, grade parking lot away from water, check all dock permits, gutters and dw wells, cut phragmites to one foot as indicated on su~ey, parking lot keep half higher above parking lot TRUSTEE DICKERSON: That was that sandy area in front. TRUSTEE FOSTER: And keep runoff out of the water and remove the float that's on the marsh. And I think that's it; anybody want to second it? TRUSTEE KING: Second. TRUSTEE FOSTER: All in favo¢ ALL AYES 17. Co'stello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of THEODORE LAOUDIS requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 252 foot retaining wall within 18 inches in front of existing retaining wall using C-LOC 4500 vinyl sheathing, 9 inch diameter piling, and 6' by 6' stringers; place 45 to 50 cubic yards of clean trucked-in fill between existing and new retaining 33 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 wails; place 1500 to 1800 pound boulders in front of new retaining wall; reconstruct existing 5.5' by 20' stairs; construct a new set of 5.5' by 20' stairs on the south side of the property; remove.and dispose of a total of 107' of bulkhead and construct a total of 1'07' of bulkhead using C-Loc 4500 vinyl sheathing; remove and dispose of the most seaward 20 foot section of existing jetty and construct a new 20 foot section of jetty using C-Loc 4500 vinyl sheathing; remove and dispose of a 35 foot section of bulkhead and: construct a new 35 foot section of. bulkhead using C-Loc 4500 vinyl: sheathing~ Located: 405' Kimberly Lane, 8outhold. SCTM # 70-1'3-20.3 and 20.4. TRUSTEE DIC:KE:R~,SON: ks thee anyone who would like to speak in favor of tl~i~,ap~IIcatio:n? R, COSTE~Q: George Costello, Senior. All the structures are e×istin9 ~th the ekception of one set of stairs, which is going to t.~ south and the placement of the 1500 to 1800 pound boulders. I'll ans~ver any of your questions that you may have. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: is there anybody else who would like to speak.for or against this application? TRUSTEE KING: I just had a question, George, on the groin, I have trouble understanding how you're going to do it. You're. going to replace the seaward 20 feet with vinyl? MR.' COSTELI_O: Yes. There is 68 feet, if you recall, bulkhead. And it tums into jetty, most of that is basically on the ground because it's built up so much with the exception of the offshore 20 feet, and you can see it's been repairedl a couple of times and that is still functioning b.ut, as a jetty. TRUSTEE K}~NG: There's one section just stacked up two or three pieces on top of each other, just landward of where the 20 feet would be, can that be removed? MR. COSTELLO: Yes. TRUSTEE KI. NG: It just didn't make sense to me. MR. COSTEL[_O: It was a patch job. TRUSTEE D[~KERSON: I don't have anything else except a 15 foot nonturf buffer. Anyone else here to speak for or against? Board comments? TRUSTEE KING: My one question was get rid of some of that 34 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 excess timber sticking up. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: CAC recommends disapproval of the application because the survey did not match the property. We didn't seem to have a problem with that. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: We found it. You know, if he puts a few more stones out there, it feels like the Catskill Mountains in my back yard. TRUSTEE D. ICKERSON: I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUS-I'E'E POLIWODA: The groin that you want to replace, if you can construct that as a Iow profile groin? MR. COS'rELLO: We're going to carry the same line as the original one, this 0n~'s been built up a couple of times, we're Iow'. profile? :.DEC requested the same thing. TRUSTEE DtCNERSON: I made a motion; do I have a second? TRUSTEE POLIW'ODA: Second. TRUSTEE B[.c. NE;RSON: All in favor?. ALL AYES TRUSTE-E'D'I~RSON: I have all Ayes on the closing of the hearing, i'll ~,.a,,~, a re.orion to approve the Wetland apP'icat~n f;or'~l~Bod0re Laoud s as requested With a 15 foot norrturf buffer aleinr& the bulkhead and also that the top would b,e reCnove, d!fi'oCn the jetty. TRUSTEE K!NG,'; Second. TRU,STEE D,i~RS'ON: All in favor? ALL AYES. 18: Patricia C. Moore on behalf of LISA ED,SON requests a Wetland Permit to construct a single-family dwelling on piles, swimming pool, pervious driveway, sanitary system with concrete retaining wall; 450 cubic yards of fill, dry wells, a 50 foot nondisturbance buffer, and connection to public water and utilities. Located. 9326 Main Bayview Road, SoL!thold. SCTM # 87-5-25. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of the application? MS. MOORE: Yes. I'm here to try to answer any questions that might come UP. I' thank you for going over to the property. We did.'have a clearing area for your convenience, and hopeful that h~elped give you another tour of this property probably for the fourth or fifth time, sixth time you've been there. Did you have any comments or questions? 35 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We might. I'll just take all other comments first. MS. MOORE: Okay. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor or against the application? MS. KIRSCH: Hello, my name is Mary Kirsch, and I'm the adjacent neighbor to the Edsons. First, for the record, I would just like to rectify something mentioned in the April meeting. It was implied that the Edsons tried to accofin'modate us with numerous building proposals. Well, the truth Of the matter was it never decreased in size, whidh was part of the problem. The house, pool' amd decking were .moved around, switched over here, over tl'fere, but ii always remained the same size, very large. A little over two years ago this Board very reluctantly issued a.Wetian.d Permit to the Edsons and told us to fight it. OUt in the Zoni'ng Board. The Zoning Board was extremely forgiving and. the Edsons got' the gre, en light to go and. build. They never did. Now the Wetland Permit has expired and the whim to build again has returned. In this interim of time we have had a building moratorium to keep a handle on the buildif~g boom here, Protect the wetlands with more stringer~t rules, reg,utation; and s:etbacks in order to keep the i'ntegrity of the notlh fork landscape. The Edson buiiiding package, therefore is no longer valid. Not too long ago the Edsons illegally cleared the lot now new growth has returned and wetland vegetation and planted species are clearly everywhere. It is so Iow down there that after a good rain, you are ankle deep in water; and finally, their building package setback from the wetlands no longer meet Southold code. Everyone has been extremely accommodating throughout their whole process and now, in short, they had the opportunity to build, it passed and now their building proposal is no longer appropriate or valid. This is one of those unusual situations where a wrong can be made right. Something that fell through the cracks can be rectified. So in all due respect, I request that the Trustees deny this Wetland Permit. Thank you. 36 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Thank you. Is there any other comment? Just for the record, I'd just like to say, Pat, before you speak, that routinely we are, as we did at the beginning of the meeting, we grant extensions to permits and also fairly routinely, when permits run out as they do, we have to go through a whole review process depending if conditions have changed. Now, just for the record, this permit was applied for in March and it's now July, and' the reason it's going on this long is because the reason we have been ,out there twice since March is because the conditiens on the site Se.emed, not only has the code changed, but the conditions on the site seem to have ohanged somewhat. Andwe I~'ad to have the area cleared and restaked sowe could actubJLy, physically take a look at it, where we couldn't physically IOol~ at it before, it was impossible, it was impa~sa.l~l.e. 'Fhat's why it's go;ne froM. March to July and we are fortunat.e to have someone full-time in the Trustee office working~f~r the Town that can go to this s~te and' review the application and to verify the wetlands lines and to mal~e commend to ~he Board. And Fm going'to ask Neather for what she saw on the site. MS. TETRAULT: Like Al was saying, the conditions have changed from an area that was cleared and graded, so it was more upland and then when those trees were cleared out, it filled back in with some high marsh upper edge marsh species, which indicates things about wetland soils and where the tide is coming up there, where there's some water coming up closer there. I went to flag the wetlands and also look at where this proposal is. I di.dn't see stakes for all of it, but that was one thing I wanted to ask you about because when we went with the Trustees last week, I think the Trustees were looking more at the site, the whole site and where the wetlands were. But today I wasn't able tofind -- has everything been staked? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think we saw the stakes last week. MS. MOORE: It's been staked numerous times. In fact, most recently to try and help, I think Tom McCarthy went to cut from stake to stake pretty much identified where the building envelope was to try and help you identify following 37 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 the building envelope and where the stakes were. He said he actually was able to find the stakes pretty consistently. He had the survey in front of him, obviously because of his construction background, he can identify offsets and stakes. To my knowledge, the cleared area now reflects the corner staking of the development area. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I think we found as a Board last week we found most of the stakes. MS. MOORE: Good. MS. TETRAULT: But the wetlands line that I saw wasn't exactly like what was on here. TRUSTBE KRaal: That's what we wanted to verify. What did you find? MS. TETRALILT: I didn't know if you wanted me to flag them and tear them. MS. MOORE: If I could just put some facts on the record. To begin with, for the record, I did the permit work for Mary Kirsch to the north, and we came in on a parcel that was one-half -- or fully one-third the size of this property; it's one acre versus this 3.7 acre parcel. We were able to get a permit from flagged wetlands that were flagged by Rob Hermann of Eh-Consultants, who's here, and the construction of the house was placed at 50 feet from the closest point of the flagged wetlands. We then, within two years or so, we came in for Lisa Edson, and' Lisa Edson, the wetlands were not only flagged by Rob Hermann, they were flagged in the presence of the DEC to verify these wetlands. These are tidal wetlands, and the:refore they are -- and I asked Rob to put on (he record, -- that the fact that tidal wetlands do not deviate greatly; they are fed by tidal action, so you're not dealing freshwater wetlands. The fact that DEC has been using the same ordinance that you used today to. flag wetlands. So as far as circumstances changing, the code may have changed, however, our wetlands flagging was based on DEC regulations, which you have now mirrored based on vegetation. So the circumstances have not changed, not significantly. We have Health Department approval here; we have DEC approval. We have had numerous years of these .app. rovals. We had to come in to you for approval for extensions of approval and it was 38 .Board of Trustees July 21,2004 only by just oversight on the client's part that she missed being able to come in for an extension of a permit within a month of his expiration because of the way the permits are written, it doesn't fall in line with the permit date on the document; it may fall with the permit date of the hearing. So unfortunately, she ended up missing it, it's not that she ever intended to have this permit lapse. She had architecturals ready, She had Health Department stamp ready. She was ready to go file for building .permits and then~you had the moratorium, which obviously, once the permit lapsed, the moratorium at least originally, you.could not come in and get a,n extension on a lapsed permit. So she was faced with the- hurdle of waiting.. Now you say that we started the process i',n March. Un~erstandab£Y, you needed to have the area cleared because the property h..as been left untouched so thai there would be no issues o¢;¥~dlatfons, and they took great ,b~fforts to flag it, reflag it and ~h.en clear it for you so tha. t you could, see it. We are pretty much locked into, this design or this footprint because we are 75 feet at its c;10~est point from the wetlan~ls;that were flagged by the DEC. TRUSTEE POB!WODA: When is that, Pat? MS. ~MO©RE: The latest DEC flagged wetlands was August of 2000. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: August of 2000? MS. MOORE: 2000, so we're talking about only a four year duration, which is not for tidal and you're certainly all much more knowledgeable than I am on the impacts of tidal wetland. They are not ones that deviate. So here we are, I appreciate Miss Kirsch's complaints, and it's purely a factor of yes, if we can keep this house from being built where it is, it protects her views, but she well knew when she bought this property that Lisa Edson had a right to build here. The parcel is 3.7 acres and it is 90 percent preserved. You should have most of your applications or all your applications that are as limited in their development as this one. I'm sorry, 3.47 acres. TRUSTEE KRUIPSKh Are you finished, Pat? MS. MOORE: What:Mary Kirsch is talking about change is not change at all. Your code has not -- our flagging is not 39 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 based on your code, it is based on the DEC. That has not changed, in fact, it is now more accurate reflecting DEC regulations. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: What if they had flagged this 14 years ago instead of four years ago, would you still argue the same point? MS. MOORE: DEC generally has permits 10 year durations, there's a basis for it. in fact, the USGA map you recog:n.ize, when was that done, '70s, '80s and that's still the basis for your permits, DEC permits, most of the maritime permits. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Not our permits. MS. MOO'RE: They were under the previous code. So it's a state recognized standard. TR.UST~ K'RUPSKI: it has changed because we issued this permft -- originally this was applied for in 1999, I've got the survey her~ that says edge of wetlands is flagged by En,Consultants on March 17, 1999. MS. MooR~: Pi~ase look at the note on the closest wetlands of the 75 feet on the west side of the property says tidal wetla~nds as delineated by En-Consultants and New York State DEC, August 16, 2000. There were inspections, re-inspections. If you recall your original permit came in, you had us revise the access, the right of way, We had to go get Zoning Board of Appeals and the Heal'th Department, we had to go back to the different agencies to modify the permit. This poor woman has gone through numerous permits and reissued permits and modificatio~s o.f, permits. All of these notations were not done at her whiM. They were done based on your requests, DEC requests, Health Department requests. At this point she has an enormo.us expenditure in order to satisfy the Trustees drainage conditilen on this right of way. That was probably the most regula,ted access driveway that you had ever permitted in tha~ the drainage system there far exceeds anything else t,l~t the Town had at that point approved. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh That was atthe applicant's suggestion, not ours. VVe did!n't ask for a structure. MS. MOORE: ,For the drainage structures. TRUSTEE ERUtPSKI: They asked for massive drainage like we 4O Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 did on another project that we did on Cog Neck, we didn't ask for -- MS. MOORE: No, I think you should go back to your transcript. I remember specific drainage structures. In fact, we had to go to the Health Department to modify her permit because it now affected' the Health Department approval. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any other comment? MS. MOORE: I'm here to try to respond. MS. KIRSCH: My comment is that the Zoning Board was extremely forgiving with a zero side yard, which made this whole project possible. I mean, it's total wetlands. The setback should be 100 feet, not 75 feet, and I mean, I welcome you guys, b'ut you should.go b,y the rules, that's what. this wholer moratorium was about. MS. MOORE: Clarification and correction. The Zoning Board at the time the Building Department interpreted right of ways to be a front yard.-- I've put this on the record before, and it's still being repeated incorrectly -- the Zoning Board ga~e a zero Io:t I.i.ne or a 10 foot setback and five foot -- three foot setback for the sanitary system because the righ,t of way is purely a pedestrian right of way for the dredgc~d carlal. It is, not Trustee land to the extent it is not under your proprietary interest, it's regulatory review. So g'en~eral!y, the Trustees recognize that wetlands that are created by artificial means are treated a li~tle bit differently thain wetlands that are naturally created through nature. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh But the value of the wetlands is still high because it's adjacent to undisturbed wetlands. The dredge canal:is the dredge canal, but the adjacent wetlands was probably more extensive before areas were filled and obviously areas were filled when the canal was dredged. MS. MOORE: I don't know that to be the case. It could have been land that is not filled. It doesn't show as filled land. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh It was dredged and diked up. MS. MOORE: Keep in mind that we have provided for a 50 foot nondisturbance buffer. So you have 42 free from the edge of a wet]ands that is kind of spur wetlands not the kind of 41 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 filter wetlands. We have 50 feet of nondisturbance and buffering to these wetlands. That's why this Board thought it reasonable to give the permit that was given and extended and revisited. So here we are today that again, I would emphasize that the conditions have not changed. We have the existing conditions. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: That's where the conflict arises, you're asking for a 50' foot nondisturbance buffer from the survey from the year 2000 and when I go out there to inspect the property, a.t present it appears that the wetlands have taken over and where your 50 foot buffer is completely wetland. MS. K[RSCH~: A~ I think the wetlahds did take over because about 25 oak trees were cut down and that was origir}ally wetlands, and it Was'shaded and the vegetation wasn,'t there, but it was wetland's; that's what your clients did. MS. MOORE: My client hasn't done any ofthat. We haven't cleared anytlting in the time that we have been. before this Board. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Actually, when we went out there it was completely cleared. We went out there in a violation. MS. MOORE: That was before I got involved. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: When we were involved, the original action. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: The very first time I was out there, the entire property Was cleared, and -- MS. MOORE: I don't know that that was Lisa Edson, it may have been another family member. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's what happened. You said it was in the family. MS. MOORE: It's not Lisa, the applicant before you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh That's why we said the property's changed dramatically. We went out there, it was completely cleared and now, five years later, it's completely revegetated as the pictures in the file show, so that it was physically impassible for us to inspect and find the stakes that's why to do a serious inspection it was impossible before this. Now, I'd like to get back to the environmental end of it here and ask Heather if she can verify the wetland line, I mean 2004, I mean -- 2000 wetland line and a '99 wetlands line. We asked her to go out in the field and verify those. 42 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 It's very important because we still want to honor our setbacks that are in the code. MS. TETRAULT: Well, I think, like you were saying, when those oak trees came down, they did open it up and some of the high marsh species like the bacharus grew in there, and so the wetlands line that I saw was not the same as what is on this survey. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Would you recommend having the applicant reflag the Wetlands liBe, not reflag it, that's assuming that it changed, reevaluate the wetlands line. They hired En-ConsuitAnts last time, they can hire anyone they want. MS, TEYRA~dLT: That would-be good because now it's saying this 50 foot bu:ffer I"ike Ken said, but it's not going from the right spot. TRUS',TF~E I~RUPSKI: Then we could reevaluate it because based on the updated information, things have changed. Like I said, many ~ these resubmissions after the prior permit came in and conditiqns haven't changed at all. In many cases they want an area. next to the house, you look at it, and it's the same things. This has been a dramatic change in vegetation on the site. Maybe it would be a better idea to have the applicant reche¢k the wetlands line and' then our office can verify that. That's what I'd like to see. I'm not sayin,g it changed, I'm just saying they have to check it. MS. MOORE: I: asked Rob Hermann to put on the record some facts. MR. HERMANN: Rob Hermann of En-Consultants. I am not currently retained by Lisa Edson. So I, for the record, am loathe to say anything in support of or opposition of the application. I will, Pat, if you don't mind, make a suggestion. This is not a totally unique situation. It's my suggestion that probably the most reliable way to do this would be for the applicant to retain a surveyor to go out and recreate the relative portion of the wetlands. A lot of wetlands are on this property and it's probably a waste of everybody's time and money to have the entire site reflagged. The only part that's really important to the opposition, to the Board, to the applicant, et cetera, is where are the wetlands that are closest to the proposed development. 43 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 If I recall correctly, there were some points from which the buffer arcs were drawn. It would not be difficult for a surveyor to go out and essentially recreate what was flagged five years ago. You could go out to visit those stakes from the surveyor, and very easily see there are now wetlands higher up than that or are there not. So that would be my suggestion as listening to both of.you going back and,forth. Probably the most efficient way to go out and find o, ut whether conditions have changed have in fact changed, it's the 'easiest thing tO .do because nobody's going to. figure out.going in there where those flags Were hanging five years ago? andit do,esn't seem to make all that much sense to try 'and reflag the. entire site. S.o g.iven you have a site :pla,ri. ba.s~d on a specific line, recreafe that line and see ~that: th~ conditions are on either side. ~ it. TRUSTEBPOL'C~fDD~ Can 'ask you a question, d'o tidal wetland li~'es move? MR. HERk~IANN: ~nny, I'm really reluctant to stand here and offer testi.~ny, .be;cause I'm not retained by Lisa Edson. TRUSTE:~POL1WODA: I'm just curious, from a Trustee point of view. MR. HERMANN: t'11. be happy to talk to you somewhere else, but l'm not- TRUSTEE POLIWODA: It's a yes or no. MR. HERMANN: I'm not going to respond. It's not a yes or no answer, so I'm not going to. And, Pat, I hope you understand me, I'm not being paid so I'm not going to get dragged into this. It's not a matter of a value of the answer, it's just that if this thing goes from one way to the Article 78, I'm not going to stand here and put my testimony on the record. I mean, Brownell -- MR. JOHNSTON: I agree. MR. HERMANN: Thank you. TRUSTEE KRUPSI~i: Did you see the picture, you remember the site from four or five years ago? MR. HERMANN: Br0wnell, can you get me out of here? MR. JOHNSTON: Sit down, Rob. TRUSTEE KRUPSK!: Thank you for your suggestion, that was my suggestion also. MS. MOORE: So you only need a couple of points because 44 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 flagging these wetlands was a real tireleSs job for Rob, the DEC, they were out there quite a bit. I called the surveyor, and the surveyor says, you know, just take a measuring from the stake and move it out and you've got your point. So he was not very helpful in trying, to give me a suggestion on how to stake this. If you want to give me some identifier, mark on my map. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Could we mark on your map? MS. MOO;RE: Sure, and then I can give to Joe Ingegno the spots and that would' make my life easier and We're talking about thousands of Collars to survey and stake. TRUSTEE KRUI~St41': (Marking.) I guess he can do these points he had before and ~l~en these points, it's a faidy consistent line. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Make a motion to table the application. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Second. TRUSTEE KRLIPSKI: All in favor? ALL AYES. 19. Andrew Nikolich on behalf of WILLOW POINT ASSOCIATION requests a Wetland Permit to maintenance dredge approximately 900 feet of an existing Budd's Pond channel and canal to an original width of 50 feet and depth of 5 foot. Dredging will be performed by utilizing crane and clamshell bucket. Approximately 900 cubic yards of dredged material will be disposed on Willow Point Association property. Located: Willow Point Road, Southold. SCTM # 56-5-28. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of this application? MR. NIKOLICH: I am Andrew Nikolich, and I would answer any questions that you might have to the best of my ability. We also have here Bob Guarriello. MR. GUARRIELLO: Bob Guarriello, G-U-A-R-R-I-E-L-L-O. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Do you have any comments on this? Let me see if there's any other comments from anyone else; is there anyone interested in commenting on this application? Have you contacted the DEC on this at all? MR. NIKOLICH: Yes, I submitted to DEC sometime in early February a plan to do the dredging. They requested a survey of the marina property, which we complied with. They also 45 Board o f Trustees July 21, 2004 requested that the original plan that I submitted to them be revised showing a high Iow waters, which was done, then we submitted two or three weeks ago, all the information, eight requests that they noted. They also requested a letter of the adjoining owners of the canal that have underwater property for their permission to do the dredging, which we received four letters, three letters, actually, the three people, and we submitted to them. They requested that we submit; that we obtain a permit from you because you own the property outside of the canal and then, only ~heri they would issu:e a perm'it on that. That's why I applied, to you for a permit.and once we. g. et your permit, I will go to St~bmit the permit to them. TRLIS-['EE K:BUPSKI: I don't think the Board has any big problem with.th:t~ dredging itself. I think the issue was with the spoil: site, I think that's where our concern was, where l~he spell.would be placed. MR. NIKQLI.CIFk The disposal for the spoil is on the marina property if ~hat~.s, okay to put it, if not, then we have to look for alternatives. TRUSTEE FOSTER: There's your answer to your question: Do the wetlands' change; do they move? MR. NIKOI,,IOH.: Well, the surveyor-- TRUST. EE FOiS'TER: I was referring to this drawing, but in reference to the last hearing. MR. NIKOLICH.: Right. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Because we went out and looked at this and I think this was an, original spoils site, but which is now loaded with sp:artii~a, and so wetlands have actually grown into that spoils Site. So at the last hearing they wanted to know do wetlands actually move, well, obviously they do. TRUSTEE KRUPSKi: The reason I asked if you have been in contact with the DEC, because it seems unlikely that they would allow you to place the spoils in that location. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Unless they didn't do a visual inspection. They might not have done an onsite inspection and saw what was previously a spoil site and given them permission based on that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh That doesn't seem right because 900 yards 46 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 is a lot of material. They have to give a visual inspection on this because they're pretty fussy about spoil site. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Private land. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Mr. Nikolich, one of the things that we considered was that road ending that goes almost right down to the water's edge. We wondered if you would consider putting that spoil at the end there? MR. NIKOLICH: No.. That would be -- it's like a large parking area. It would be almost like in the middle of it, MR. GUARI~IELLO: You would actually have us put it -- TRUSTEE D.ICKERSON: And move the road back away from the wateCs edge and replant it there as opposed to putti.ng it on top of the - TRUSTEE FOSTER: Getting dd of the cul-de-sac? TRUSTEE BICKERSON: Not completely. ¢O'STER: 900 cubic yards. One cubic yard is 3 by 3 TRU~TF-IE by 3 feet. TRUSTECE TR~JgTb-~ TRUSTEE end of that DICKERSON: Tell me yes or no. FOSTER: Do that times 900. FOSTER: You couldn't get rid of 900 yards at the road. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Okay. MF~. I~IK©LICH: If we could put a portion, we'd appreciate that. The rest .we would have to truck out. The other possibility. We were contacted by Suffolk Department of Bridges, the .owner of the island that is in front of the Port of Fiji Marina, I guess he said that he would give us permi~ssion to put the spoil on this island here, which I have a picture. TRUSTEE FOSTER: That's going to be mostly clay. That's not sand. ProbatbJy some sand in there, but that was all clay. When you dig that with a clam shell bucket, you're going to come up with a lot of clay. I know because I worked on that, project when they dug that canal. They dug that canal out dry, and then they broke the entrance open. MR. GUARRI :P, LLO: Wouldn't that be silt that filled in? TRUSTEE FOSTER: Probably. But when you do it hydraulically, you'd be able to get the sand, but when you go in with a clam shell bucket, a clam shell bucket is going to hit on the hard ground and take a couple of feet or 47 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 whatever out of there. It's clam shell, I'm surprised they're doing it with a clam shell. Drag line is really the only way to regulate the elevation when you pull the bucket in. MR. GUARRIELLO: That's the way it was originally done. TRUSTEE FOSTER: TRUSTEE KRUPSKh outside? TRUSTEE FOSTER: since it's been dug. MR. GUARRIELLO: TRUSTE. E FOSTER: MR. GUARRIELLO: TRUSTEE FOSTER: It was originally done with a bulldozer. Has that channel ever been dredged I don't think it's ever been dredged inside We dredged about 15 years ago. The outside? Along the bank of Budd's Pond. But never inside the actual canal. You go in there with a clam shell bucket, you don't have any way to control the actual depth. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I don't have a problem with using this site as dewatering and then trucking it off and then it will revegetate itself. MR. NIKOLIOH: We can use this area to dewater this thing here and then truck it out. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I don't have a problem with that. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: A majority of it is going to be dewatered on the barge, right?. (Discussion) TRUSTEE FOSTER: I don't think the DEC would allow you to put that clay out there on that island. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Looks like a hard object. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh They're going to tell you about particle size, it's going to have to match the particle size of the beach or 'be larger and in this case the particle size is going to be very s. mall. I don't have a problem using this site as dewatering and then trucking it off. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Where? TRUSTEE KRtJPSKh The association property. TRUSTEE POtcl'WODA: That's fine. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Then it will revegetate itself. MR. GUARRIE[LO: We can use this area to dewater this thing over here and ~lSen truck it out. TRUSTEE KRUiPSKh I don't have a problem with that. 48 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 TRUSTEE POLIWODA: We have the silt from the canal when the operation commences. The bucket picks it up, puts it on the barge, it dewaters on the barge. MR. GUARRIELLO: Originally the canal was dredged, a lot of history was put here. TRUSTEE FOSTER: When it was originally done? MR. GUARRIELLO: Outside the canal, the channel? TRUSTEE FOSTER: I don't know that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What is your opinion on that? I hate to issue a permit and: DEC's going to say you have to do it completely different. Well, we could do that. We could issue a permit, and then at least you could go to the DEC with someth}ng then they make amendments to it; you can come back to us. MR. GUARRIELLO: Put a stipulation based on DEC decision with th~.spoits. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Even the method, like Artie said, they might make you use a different method. They might not let you use a. clam shell. You might have to use a drag line. TRUSTEE FOSTER: It's difficult. I've dug a few canals out here, I did drag ~line. It's difficult with a clam shell bucket. First of all, you're under water and you have no way of'knowing that you're right next to where the bucket was the last time, where with the drag line you can actually control the elevation, you're scooping it, taking a fiat shovel and scraping it off the top. Where with the clam shell it's like a spoon and jello. TRUSTEE KING: Don't you have to do that from a shoreline, Artie, if you're doing a drag line? TRUSTEE FOSTER: Not necessarily. Well, yes, because you're going to do it on. a barge I assume. But the barges they drop, there's ways of holding them, they just drop these big steel pipes down and they get anchored in. You know, taking a small amount of time, peel four, five inches off at a time it's soft, it should come off. I don't care how they do it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right, that's our point. We don't have a problem with the project. I'm inclined to issue a permit tonight for something and then he can go to the DEC and even if the DEC wants to meet us out at the site, we can amend the permit. 49 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 MR. GUARRIELLO: I tried to contact them. I left messages because somebody I think mentioned to me that maybe they should get in touch with you about an inspection. It's hard to get, you leave message and message. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Just come back to us and we'll amend it. I think our big concern was the spoil site, and how that had developed into a wetlands area, but if you isolate it and confine it. What do you have one, two days, see; the DEC may tell you tO~) that you may have to let that material sit for two days to deWater before you can move it. I know that they do regulate that occasionally. Whether they will in this case ontO.or, Ii don't, know, but you're going to have to Iet that sit, before you can move it a second time. So you're geing~ to have probably two days worth of digging there. MR. GUARRIELLO: Are we wasting time saying we're not going to truck it away with this permit or -- TRUSTEE FOSTER: Personally, I think that the DEC is not going to allow you to do what you want to do with it, to put it on that site and just spread it out on there. Because now it's a wetlands and a species indicators there. MR. GUARRIELLO: Would they say that we have to leave 100 yards there, or they have to truck 800 yards away? TRUSTEE FOSTER: it's hard to say what they will say. You know, if it is primarily a lot of clay, what are you going to do with it? Who wants it? If no one wants that stuff then you're stuck with a place to take it. MR. JOHNSTQN: More a legal question than an environmental question, that is, could you explain to me who owns the properties that you are going to be dredging and who owns Willow Point Association? And the last part of the question is: How do my clients, the Trustees, know that the two of you have the authority to make this application for this association. So~ first, how do we know that's really owned by the Will.ow Pr)iht Association; how do we know that the landowners, who may or may not own this, have given you permission to be on their land, as Artie's saying, maybe if you're doing dredging to be on their property? MR. GUARRIE,LLO: The association is owned by the association members, and'we pay taxes to Southold Town on that property. 5O Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 MR. JOHNSTON: We have tax maps showing they're the owners, not just here, I see the tax map numbers over here, how about this area here (indicating)? Because I think the place that you're putting the spoils is on the land the association owns, right? TRUSTEE FOSTER: Yes, but they're not going to be on anybody else's land. If they do it by barge they're doing it totally by water. MR. GUARRIELLO: This is privately owned indicating. And DEC wants us to get your permit because you have judsdi~;tion over this area. MR. NIKOI_ICH: Once come here this is private owned property, one, two, three, owners over here, but this part here (indicating), and we received letters from them, their permission that they're aware and giving us authority to dredge. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Who owns the canal itself? MR. GLIARRIELLO: We did. I'm not sure if the Town took it over. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But the canal's a separate parcel. MR. JOHNSTON: Who owns the canal, that's not ours? TRUSTEE FOSTER: It's privately owned. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It was privately owned. TRUSTEE FOSTER: When it was dug, it was dug on Bleeker's property. It was his project. It was his land. MR. NIKOLICH: Three owners, one owner here, and there's one here, and there's all of this side, indicating. We have letters that I submitted. MR. JOHNSTON: Do we have letters from Robert Bozure, Lauren, is that in the file, a Robert Bozure? MR. GUARRIELLO: Robert Bozure, Esposito. MR. JOHNSTON: Wait a second, one at a time. MR. GUARRIELLO: I have three letters, I can bring them to you tomorrow. MR. JOHNSTON: What do the letters say? MR. NIKOLICH: Two letters I compose. MR. JOHNSTON: What do the letters say? MR. NIKOLICH: Say that we are aware that there is going to be dredging, and we give you permission to do the dredging as long aswe stay 10 feet away from the bulkhead. MR. JOHNSTON: That letter is addressed to the Willow Point 51 Board o f Trustees July 21, 2004 Association? MR. NIKOLICH: Yes. MR. JOHNSTON: Okay, fine. And the last part is how do we know that you have authority from the Willow Point Association? MR. NIKOLICH: There is actually authorization that the president of the association wanted me to do this and also we have a letter to DEC. MR. JOHNSTON: Do we have that letter? MR. N:IKOLICH: I submi.tted that. There was also a letter explaining ,the project and the assignment. MR, JOHNSTON You understand my concern? TR.DST'EE; KRUPSI~: Absolutely. The association president sig. ned~it, l~,don't kn,ow who that is, Thank you. TREJS~E DrCKER~DN:: We had a. concern about the marsh area to the ,no.rthwest over on,.the side, the dredging, that nothing weqldi~terferewith (hat There w. asa very healthy -- MR. N.IKOLIGH: Going to be about 25 to 40 feet away from that. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Okay. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If there's no other comment, I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Second. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh All in favor? ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Make a motion to approve the application for t~he maintenance dredging of Budd's Pond with the condition that during operation, the silt bed at the entrance and that spoil site, temporary spoil site -- TRUSTEE .FOSTER: ReallY depends on how much they do a day. Do they give you a projection time, how long it's goin'g te take? MR. GUARRIELLO: No. TRUSTEE ,FOSTER: They have to put it on the barge and then bring the barge over and off-load it, how much they're going to do Per day and you don't know how many days they're going to have to et it sit before they move it. But if they do 100 yards a day, well, 100 yards obviously takes a lot less area than 900 yards. If they were going to pile up 900 yards and spread it out and leave it, then you're going to need the whole area. But, if it's in fact going to be 52 Board of Trustees -. July 21, 2004 trucked away and you're going to do it, you've got to have let's say every two days you can do it; if you have to let it sit for two days. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: How about we say the spoil site is going to be cooCdinated with the DEC? TRUSTEE FOSTER: Probably more with the contractor, because he's going to have an idea of how much room he's going to need, Who's doing the job? MR. NIKOLICH: We think it's going to be Latham. He just the last minute in I got the permit to do dredging in front of my bulkhead 60 .cubic yards. Within an area, if you fill up 30 c. ubic yards, took it to shore, unload it, come back within h'alf an. hour, he was back.45 minutes, and another hour he was done~ 610 cubic yards couple hours, he was done. So it goes pretty fas~ .He. has 30 cubic yard container on his barge. He picks,it up with a crane and unloads. TRUSTEE PQLIWODA: I agree,with Al. Leave it up to the DEC to approve ttie site because wherever we said, they're going to look at it and'approve their own. TRUSTEE K,R~I~SKI: You might be able to use part of the island to put the spOiI~S. 'W,~3~II approve this with the condition of approved spoil site. ir1 coordination with the DEC. TRUSTEE FOBTI=R',: It's got to be that way anyway. TRUSTEE KRUF~SKI:: Then see what their suggestions are and then you'll ham to b~;ihg the contractor into the mix. MR. NIKOLICH: .If h,e does have to put the spoil, if he puts it on the marina property or if we dewater it there, they're going to. have to repair the road going in because it's in pretty bad shape. So we would like it to become part of the permit that we would;, after the whole thing is completed, that we regravel the access to the marina, if that could be put in the permit. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All right, I'll make that part of the motion that the existing roadway to the marina be restored to a gravel rood, and also the elevation, the dredge spoils, after they're removed, that the elevation of the association property to stay the same, and then we're not going to put a condition on ~he permit, let me make that motion; is there a second? TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second. 53 ' Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor? ALL AYES. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Then we want to see the letters from the neighbors before we write this. MR. GUARRIELLO: I'll bring it tomorrow. 20. En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of WILLIAM AND DIANE BEARDSLEE request a Wetland Permit to raise the existing garage; resurface the existing driveway with pervious gravel; replace existing sanitary system with new, Suffolk County Department of Health Services conforming sanitary system to be elevated' two feet above ground water by approximately 355. cubic yards of fill and concrete retaining wall; and construct access steps over raised septic. Located: 435 Beachwood Road, Cutchogue. SCTM # 116-4-24. TRUSTEE. KING: Is there anyone here to comment on this appl'ication:? MR. HEP, MANN: Rob Hermann of En-Consultants on behalf of the applicants, William and Diane Beardslee. This project primarily involves the raising and renovation and additions to a dwelling, all of which is actually beyond' the'Trustees' jurisdiction. The subject of the permit a~p.lication is for some associated improvements to the site that are located within 100 feet of the tidal wetlands .to l~he north of Beachwood Road. Essentially with what ~he Board is reviewing pursuant to its jurisdiction is the raising of the existing garage that will comply with FEMA el'evations. '~he resurfacing ;of the existing driveway with pervious graveL, and the replaeement of the existing nonconforming sanitary system wi~ich consists of I believe two cesspools with a sanitary system that meets today's Health Depadment ~;ode. So essentially w~at the Board is getting in the application in association with the renovations to the house is more or less a pe~ious driveway, some dry wells, the raising of a garage to meet flood elevation and the improvement- and an upgrade of a septic system. If the Board' has any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. William ,and Diane Beardslee are also here, but it should be pretty straightforward. 54 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 TRUSTEE KING: That garage is within our jurisdiction? MR. HERMANN: It sure is, yes. The raising the garage, the driveway and the septic is all within your jurisdiction and that's the subject of the application. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'm just looking for, the concrete retaining wall around the septic system, what is the elevation in relation to the house to the east, Mrs. Morgan's old house there; is it going to be roughly the same? MR. HERMANN: There is a profile in the plan, the top of wall elevation is seven and-a-half. That will be about a fOot. and-a-half above the adjacent grade to the east, which is 6 feet. On the other side it will tie into the proposed elevation on this lot. I'm trying to find, there's probably ab. out a 4 foot elevation that ties into the property to the west. TR;USTEE KRUPSKh What do you mean a 4 foot elevation? MR. HERMANN: There's a 4 foot contour elevation that ties through this property into the adjoining property to the west. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: From the top of the retaining wall? MR. HERMANN: No, that's what the elevation is to the property to the west. If you look at the survey, if you look there's a frame garage that's shown on the property to the west, there is a 4 foot contour that actually ties from tha{ property over and into the Beardslee lot. So the wall would be about three and-a-half feet above the grade at that point, but the grade that's immediately adjacent to that property, the west, won't be changed. In other words, the retaining wall will be contained wi.thin this site, and I can tell you what the setback of the retaining wall is. About eight and-a-half feet off the property line. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'm not getting through to you. That's not intentional? MR. HERMANN: The elevation on the parcel to the west in the vicinity of the retaining wall is 4 feet. The top elevation of the retaining wall is 7 and-a-half. That retaining wall is about eight feet off the property line. So there will still be maintained that 4 feet elevation overlapping the property, but then about eight feet in, you'll have a 55 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 retaining wall that's about 3 and-a-half feet high that will be containing fill for the septic. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The whole property from the road is going to come right up to 7, to the retaining wall and you'll walk right over level on top of the retaining wall? MR. HERMANN: No, not exactly. The elevation in the front adjacent to the road is not being changed; there's no proposed contours there. The proposed filling on the property wiil tiein from the south side of the retaining waif and around'the dwelling, that's the part that's actually' out of your jurisdiction. All the grade's in the front.are essentially remaining the same. The garage will actually m,atch the elevation., the stab will match the eleva[iOn 0f:thew;a!i. You see it ,says slab wili'be lifted to elevation 7? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I saw that. MR. HERMANN: Then will tie into the wall. So basically you would access ~yer the retaining wall either through the ga'rage :or through the steps to the side of the driveway, but we specifically did not propose the filling of the lot adjacent to the road for obvious reasons. TRUSTEE:KR~PSK: So your cars will get full of salt? MR. B~ARB,$L, EE: When there's high tide, yes. MR. HERMaN,s!: And there's a ramp shown that will be a ramp that shoots right up.to the garage, MR. E~EARD$.I~E: We've always had the high tide in the house over the past'50 years through numerous storms, hurricanes, nor'easters, [he.;tides have gone above the wall sockets, and you can, see:the rust coming down around the walls. TRUSTEE KING.: gny other comments? If not, I'll make a motion to close,the hearing. TRUSTE~E DICI{E'RSON Second. TRUSTEE KINg: Ail in favor? ALL AYES. TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to approve the application as stated. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Second. TRUSTE~E KING: All in favor? ALL AYES. TRUSTEE KING: Thank you. 56 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 21. En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of MARTHA AND JOHN WATTS requests a Wetland Permit to remove and replace (in-place) approximately 140 linear feet of existing timber bulkhead with the vinyl bulkhead and backfill with approximately 50 cubic yards clean sand fill to be trucked in from an upland source. Located: One Harbor River Road, Orient. SCTM # 24-2-8. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Is there anyone here to speak on behalf of this app.ljcation? Rob? MF~ HERMANN.: Rob Hermann on behalf of Martha and John Watts. This is pretty standard, in-place replacement of an existing timlS~r.bulkhead with a vinyl bulkhead. Should be again, pre{ty .s'tr~ightfor~vard. if the Board has any questions, I"lJ ben'happy to answer them. TRUSTEE F~ODWODA: Would anybody else like to comment on this application2' As for the Board, I visited this site. I found it straj~ffprward replacement. The only thing I was conternplat~ :[~ how many foot nonturf buffer we should put in there? MR. HERMANhI: 10 foot I think is usually what you can ask for in these, that would be fine. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Yes, but there was a little more extensive protection in there. MR. H:ERMANN: We show a backfill area of 15 feet. If you want to make it~,the same. TRUSTEE PO~.' WODA: I was actually thinking 20 feet. There's a lot of plants in there, closer to 25 feet, but go to 20 feet. MR. HERMANN: I would be reluctant to -- I mean, I think that area's already planted with beach grass. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Right, there's at least 20 feet there, so I figured just leave it alone. MR. HERMANN: If you want to show that 20 foot area behind the bulkhead to continue to be revegetated with beach grass, I don't think the owner would have any problem with that. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Okay. And as for the finished grade, I'd like to see it remain at least 6 inches below the top of the vinyl, whatever it's going to end up being. MR. HERMANN: Gan. you just put that into the permit so the 57 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 contractor knows? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: That's about all the comments. Anybody else have any comments? If not, I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: All in favor? ALL AYES. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'll make a motion to approve the Wetland Permit on behalf'of Martha and John Watts to remove and repJace the bulkhead as written, backfill the sand and stipulate that the,,g~ade shall remain at least 6 inches bel'ow the top of the buJkhead as well as maintain a 20 foot n.ontuff bu~ferbehind'.the bulkhead; do I have a second? TRUSTEE Di'~GK,~RSON: Second. TI~usTEE,POLIWO, DA: Ali in favor?. ALL AYES. 22. En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of JENNIFER AND PHILIP STANTON requests a Wetland Permit to remove existing 54' long plus/minus 245 square foot fixed dock, and construct fixed timber dock. consisting of a 4' by 50' fixed timber catWalk, 3' by 14,':hinged ramp and 6' by 20' float secured by (2).6" pilings. Located: 720 Town Creek Lane, Southold. SCTM # 64-1-14.7. TRUSTEE D[CKERSON: Is there anyone here who would like to speak for thi~.:applicati.on? MR. RERMANN; Rob Hermann of Eh-Consultants on behalf of applicants Ph!!ip and Jennifer Stanton. This project is basically the replacement of an existing fixed dock which has a fixed, sect. ion that runs out as a catwalk and then widens out to alarger platform at the end. You can see, I don't :know i¢lhe boat was there at the time of your inspection, but if you look in Figures 3 and 4, the photographs, that were submitted with the application, currently the boat is moored out some distance of the fixed dock, and what,the owner is trying to accomplish is actually to extend the float 19feet farther than where the existing fixed dock ends, which would leave it the same distance from the Iow water line as the dock that's immediately to the east, and it would be out 3 feet farther from the Iow water line than the dock to the west. The existing dock is 54 58 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 feet. It extends approximately 21 feet seawardly of Iow water. The proposed dock would extend 18 feet farther, it would be 39 feet from Iow water. The new dock as proposed would start actually 7 feet farther landward than what's proposed, I don't know if that's completely clear on the project plan or not. I tried to show that as best as I could. But again here, since we actually have the depth to accomplish it while still being compliant with the Town Trustees' policy in terms of the portion of the channel taken up, they wou'ld like to dock two boats, so t;hat is why we proposed a deck that extends, straig.bt out as opposed to a T. We have done that again, if you look on the third photograph, you can see the existing dock, then where the boat is, and t;ben in the background you can see .the adjacent dock that extends out; farther th~n. that. I suppose as it's also worth n:o..t ~g tha[we woufd, be reduce the a.m.' :cunt of fixed dock s .8'.bCture bY about 45 square I6et beCause much of the, end of thils dock would be seasonal rarnp and float as opposed to tile larger platform that's there now. So the dock would be longer but the fixed portion of the dock would actually occupy leso,,buik. And I think that's all I.have on it. That's ba'ejcally the rationale behind the proposal that you're looking at. TRUSTEE DI¢.OKERSON: Is there anyone else here that would like to spea.l(for or against this application? I was ~t!st-notiCing-the CAC, their comments were similar to ours, overall I think the Board wanted it shortened an.d try to;l~eep it the same line and I know you had a comment that it was going to be, but our eyes and our pictures weren't showing that. The CAC recommends disapproval of the al~l~lication because the dock will interfere with boat tr~tffic. CAC recommends that the dock be constructed in an. "L" configuration, but you just commented on the need for two boats. I think the Board had discussed it and they were looking at changing, reducing the 4' by 50' fixed to a 4' by 30', reducing the 3' by 14' ramp to a 3' by 12', reducing it 22 feet. TRUSTEE POLIW©DA: I think you said you wanted to go 7 feet more landward. MR. HERMANN: Yes. What you see on the plan is just in 59 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 order to ramp up and get the proposed elevation. The proposed dock is actually 7 feet, starts 7 feet farther landward; so under the numbers that Peggy just mentioned, the dock would end up actually being 7 feet further than what's there. I mean, you can't -- this photograph -- TRUSTEE POLIWODA; The end of the boat would be further out. MR. HERMANN: Obviously the way this dock is on the conservative side, you can see in the photograph and the way the boat is out here is probably about 20 feet further out then where this is now. So basically the dock would end up stopping about here. MS. TETRAULT: You were saying that was for depth of water, right?. MR. HEP, MANN: Right. Because with the float going out as it is, sometimes what we have is on a T float you're reaching your two and-a-half feet of water just on the other side of that, but here, essentially basically the float has to be in two and-a-half feet of water for the deck to go along with it. So what we propesed is this float basically goes from about 2 feet to 4 feet in change from front to back. Now, actually Peggy mentioned an L. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That was the CAC comment. MR. H~ERMANN: Okay. Even when we see the same site a little bit differently, we're usually not seeing a 22 foot differently. Someb0dy's looking at something that's a pretty substantial discrepancy. And again, with the numbers that you just mentioned, the dock would end about 4 feet closer to the land than the existing dock does. So I don't think that's what you meant, but it's not what you meant to end up with, it may have been, but just 22 feet, it's pretty substantial difference. Now Kenny, maybe you're saying 7 feet of that is due in part of a confusion so you get back down to 15 feet. TRUSTEE POL.IWODA: 4' by 37' instead of 4' by 50', so it would be 13 feet rather than the 20 feet that we're thinking. We found in the field it looked like you had plenty of water. You had well over 4 feet at the very end, which iS where the motor's going to sit. MR. HERMANN: At the risk of the clichbd suggestion, would 6O Board of Trustees July 2l, 2004 it make sense to meet there together and actually put a stake on the landward and seaward ends, so if there is some sort of modification, we can make it? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Sure. MR. HERMANN: Where I'm showing on the plan, the 39 foot seaward extend on the adjacent dock, I actually walked over to the adjacent dock and measured from Iow water to the end of that dock. And that was 39 feet and that's why my dock is proposed at 39 feet, because I was trying to stay exactly in line with that dock. When you're standing there or standing in the ,water, it may not look that way. TRUSTEE KR.U.P;SK}: Well, we walked out on the adjacent dock to the west. W~e v~alked out on that dock, we walked out on the westerns dock,first. MR. HE, RMA~N: Th,at dock's about 36 feet from Iow water. In other words~ the measurement I'm taking is from the dry sand at Iow tide, ~,at's ~vbere I'm coming up with that measurement..Somewhere we're looking or measuring, it's just off. So m,a~eWe could just meet there and figure out what the disomi~anoy is and come up with some sort of solution. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Sure. I have one comment, I don't think there's 10 feet of wetland fringe there. It's all lawn then it drops, you have a little bank maybe 10 feet laterally. MR. HERMANIhI: That there's not much vegetative wetlands, but why do you mention that? TRUSTEE POLI.WOBA: I can't see the reasoning of having anything ramp up, 3 and-a-half feet there and then dropping it down for 10 feet of wetland fringes. MR. HERMAN~N.~ A~tually it isn't, Ken, if you look at the cross-section, 'beeapse of that slope you're talking about, we're basfcally starting it at grade and just going straight down, so it will be tight to the grade here and once you get over this little ~ea of marsh, it's going to be 3 and-a-half then we bring it right back down. TRUSTEE POU?WODA: It's going to continue ramping down? MR. HERMANN: It continues ramping down. Again, I tried to do something, the contractors build it this way so it comes out and you're only about 20 inches above high water. See the problem we run into is not only the DEC but the Army 61 Board of Trustees July 2i, 2004 Corps through marine fisheries because they're always trying to get us to put things at 4 feet. So, you can sort of humor the Corps, but the DEC and Trustees we try to make sure we get an elevation that is going to be consistent. But I always try to show these things ramping down so you have your minimum elevation above marsh but then maximum elevation above high water. If you look at most of the docks that Steve Pollock does, he builds them that way and, they come out looking a lot better than where you just take that line and by the time you're at the end you're like 15 feet: abOve the creek bottom and they look ridiculous. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I'm going to make a motion to table this applieation for next month. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Second. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: All in favor.'? ALL AYES. 23. Land Use Ecological Services, Inc. on behalf of SKUNK ' LANE TRUST CIO BRADLEY AND MARY KRAUSE requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4' by 34' fixed timber catwalk, 3' by 18' ramp and 6' by 20' float. Located: 9105 Skunk Lane, Cutchogue. SCTM# 104-3-18.1. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of this application? MR. BOWMAN: Chuck Bowman, Land Use Ecological Services on behalf of the Krauses. First of all I wanted to say hello to Heather, welcome. She's terrific, my experience anyway. I think you helped me a lot. That being said, I wasn't here for the first hearing, Kelly from my office was, and I believe you have a new set of plans that changes the configuration of the dock. So now we just have a timber catwalk with a step down and it ends with two tie-off poles and a ladder. I'm assuming that's what you wanted, because as say, I wasn't here for the last hearing. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: This ~s what I want, one pile, just one pile. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We went to the site last weekend. It was 62 Board of Trastees July 21, 2004 staked, but the stake was .right in the middle of the channel, in fact, Heather was kind enough to measure it for us, and the one-third rule, of course, applies with a structure with the boat, and the stake was easily halfway across. MR. BOWMAN: Well, if I can point out, though, they own the other side of the channel. So theoretically, they would be allowed to have one-third from that side as well. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh But it's a separate iot from the other lot they own, and if that changes ownership, then it becomes an issue with the new owner. You see what I'm saying? Something's on the market also because the sig,n's up. I don't know who's sign it is, but the .sign's up so either the ho:use or the lot o:r both is on the market. So if we block the channel with that dock, we can't, if people buy the house on the bay. MR. BOWM~AN: I think that can be handled through some sort of restrictkm or easement that perhaps the Trustees could review. Their attorney is sitting here as well, coincidentally, that's a legitimate concern. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's why we have the one-third rule because th~ addresses -- that way everyone's provided with their access,. MR. BOWMAN: I understand that. I mean, my own personal opinion is that we should try to restrict anything from being built on the other side. It's great habitat, there's some nice wetland. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: It's the same parcel, right, same lot? MR. BOWMAN: They own two parcels there, three parcels. TRUSTEE IqRUPSKI:- They own both, there's the building lot then there's the house. I think either I'm inclined to go either with Ken's suggestion, or since there really is no -- it's a vacant lot, at some point in time someone builds a house and wants access, we can discuss that at that time. MR. BOWMAN: 1 think from the stand point of the Krauses, they want to see if they can get all these things in place now and see what they want to do with the properties, and I think they have a right to ask for it to be considered. And again, your point is well taken. But I think we have to 63 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 talk to the Krauses on how to guarantee that they're not going to have a problem in the future with some other person coming in and saying, hey, that dock is there. I understand if we do that through a legal mechanism that restricts it, I think that would solve your problem. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think the one-third resolves it. Then it comes back to what's the point of building what's proposed because you're going to cut that back so severely in order to adhere to the-one-third rule. MR. BOWMAN: Basically you're saying they can't have a dock on that lot. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Not like that. M'R, BOWMAN: Maybe you could -- TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: They should move something to the west side MR::, BOWMAN: Correct me if I'm wrong, at the last hearing, didn't you,,ask for it to be amended in this way? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But we wanted it staked and what it shows here th~.stake about a third of the way across from Iow water. ~'.¢w, When we went out in the field, it's staked in the middl.e, of the channel. MR. BO.~.MAN: bet me have the surveyor stake it. -I'RUSTEB KRUPSKh I'm not saying it was staked wrong but somethi~.~i's wrong. MR. B©~MAIN: It may be staked wrong because obviously we don't show it being in the middle of the channel. So I mean, the stake may be wrong. TRUSTEE PQI_IW©DA: What do you show here, what's the end off the shor¢lirte? MR. BOWM~N: it's about eight feet, something like that. TRUSTEE' PQLIWODA: What did we measure off Heather's drawing? MR. BOWMAN: That's off Iow water, not off the high water. TRUS'CEE DICKERSON: 36. TRUS~E POLIWODA: Off what, high water or iow water? We measured.across it. MR. B©WMAN: From where to where? High water to high water or low wat,er to Iow water? TRUSTE, E' KRUPSKI: Vegetation. MR.'BO~., M/~N: What vegetatJon, the patens, the alterna flora? TRUS-CB:E' KRUPSKh Alterna flora. 64 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 MR. BOWMAN: You meant from the top edge of the altema? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No. We went to seaward? MR. BOWMAN: That would be Iow water to Iow water. Basically altema flora is going to grow -- TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The problem with Iow water is it changes every day but the vegetation is going to be pretty constant. So that's why we measured the vegetation as opposed to saying it's not really Iow tide, it's sort of -- MR. BOWMAN: I will go out with you if that's what you're doing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Next month. MR, BOWMAN: Okay. We can do that. We can decide a third from there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh That's fine. I'll make a motion to table the application. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Second. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh All in favor? ALL AYES. and 24. Land Use Ecological Services, Inc. on behalf of MATINE, INC. requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4' by 145' plus/minus CCA timber beach access stairs with an 8' by 6' platform. Located: 590 North View Drive, Orient. SCTM # 13-1-5.1. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh is there anyone here who would like to speak on behalf of this application? MR. BOWMAN: Chuck Bowman, Land Use Ecological Services, representing the owner. If you will recall at the last hearing, there was objections to this application, which is a simple staircase, access staircase to the beach. I have appeared before this Board many, many times. I know you have approved many, many staircases for individuals down bluffs so that they can access the beach. It's a relatively simple application. The DEC approves them routinely. This Board approves them routinely, the question that arose is why the owner could not use the stairs that exist now that are, if you will, community stairs or neighbors' stairs. We did provide this Board with a copy of the deed; you'll notice in the deed that there is no restriction whatsoever on him accessing the beach. It's private property to the high 65 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 water mark. Them is no mention in his deed of an association, a formal homeowner's association. A requirement to pay dues, to join a homeowner's association. Gale Wickham is here and has submitted a letter to you indicating the concerns and the status of that title. And I would like her to be able to talk to you about it. You have a letter from her which I think was delivered to you today. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes, the Board hasn't seen it. MR. BOWMAN: I think that letter's very important because we're dealing here with issues that the owner has., particularly one of liability to those other stairs, his rig'hts.to be able to have stairs of his own. That there really isn't a homeowners association. There is no evidence of one be. ir~g fQrmaliy-formed; there's no evidence of any insqrance on those stairways. Any requirement for maintenance on how people pay for them. There is no requirement on who uses it and what happens if someone trips and falls oin it. And qaite frankly, Mr. Hurtado does not want to be involved with a loosely formed, even that's a loose charactedzati0~ of this association, because no one is required to do anything. How will it be maintained? Who makes someone maiotain that? Do they pass the hat when it needs to be maintain{~d? Who keeps insurance on it so that if I go up there and I ~ip and. fall down the stairs, even though l~m supposed,to be there, who gets sued? Probably the people who put it pp them and use it. He does not want to be a partof that. H'is deed does not require, him to be a part of it; and this Boa, rd is well aware that formal homeowners aSsocia~ons are registered. They have insurance. They collect dues. They have meetings. They have minutes. They [~ave bylaws. None of that exists here. And I; think the Board shourld take notice of that and I believe Gall Wickhacn will add a little bit to what I'm saying, if you don't mhd. TRUSTEE KRU,PSKI,: Before Gall starts, is there any Board me:mber that has any interest in this at all, any private interest, financial or relatives or anything like that? No? Okay. Than, k you. MS. WICKHAM: Good evening, Abigail Wickham for the property owner. I just want to clarify something that Chuck spoke 66 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 to, because I'm not sure he is aware of it, but there is an association that is organized specifically to address the roads and what used to be a private water supply in Brown's Hills Association. The point that he made, and it's one that I made in my letter, is that with respect to the beach access, the association may have a beach access at the end of the road for which they're responsible for, there is absolutely no obligation for that association to provide access to anyone in the community, including this lot owner. There. is no reS;triction against the lot owner having their own steps according to the title that we have ascertained: from our titl.e searches., and there ls no reason that Fm awa~e of;that a, private owner should not have their own access, even if there is a community beaoh'access. It's an im.portaat p[operty right that we think here is not an unreasQnable reguest given the stability of the bluff and all of the e¢ol:e~:i.Cal and' environmental con:cerns that Mr. Bowman, .arid the engineer have addressed, So, if the Board' has ~r~ing more specific, I'm happy to try and address it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you, we'll just take all comments first, before the Board makes any comments. I.s there any other comments? MR. JOHNSTON: Heather raised an excellent point, is there a coastal erosion line? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I really think that a stairs is an exempt activity. MS. TETRAULT: The code says, new construction stairways is done in accordance with conditions of coastal erosion management permit. So I was just asking if it was in coastal erosion. MR. RYALL: The pertinent section is Number 7 under Bluffs C, Bluffs Section 7. Coastal Erosion Management Permit is required for new construction, modification or restoration of erosion protection structures, walkways or stairways. MR. JOHNSTON: Can you back up and give us the beginning of the cite, please? MR. RYALL: Your 5.8. MR. JOHNSTON: Not from the Southold Town Code? 67 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 MR. RYALL: No, I just happen to have these, but you have adopted these regulations. MR. JOHNSTON: In 1991 we adopted the law. MR. RYALL: I know that's what you adopted these laws verbatim, you may have different numbers, but you adopted Article 34. MR. JOHNSTON: I understand what we adopted, sir. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh If that's true, and I was trying to find it. MR. JOHNSTON: What is the title of the section you're reading? MR. RYALL: "Restrictions on Regulated Activities within Natural Protective Feature Areas." TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Natural protective feature in this case would be the bluffs. MR. RY, ALL: Then you go to Bluffs, and then you go to Subseotion 7. TR~JS~E POLIWODA: We've gone through this before. The sta, Jrs are okay, but the platforms, certain size on the platforms. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right. MR. RYALL: We can eliminate a platform. TR~USTEE KRUPSKI: It's not eliminate. They shouldn't be any more than 4' by 8'. MR. RYALL: I think that just answers the question. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't think so. Okay, go ahead, sir. MS. W,I-I-I': Actually, I'm going to speak first. My name is Lynne Witt, I live in Brown's Hills, I'm part of the association. I would like to make a correction. The association has been in existence since 1952. We have bylaws; we have minutes. We collect association dues every year, 100 percent participation, everybody in the association pays, nobody's exempt, nobody is asked not to pay, not to be a part of it. It does go, as you said, to maintain the road, the water, now we have Town water but prior to that as a group. The stairs in the current location were built, I don't recall the year-- 1985, and are paid for by Brown's Hills, insured by the association, everybody's dues goes toward that. So much of what he said just isn't accurate. I just wanted to clarify that point. MR. RYALL: I am Bill Ryall, I am also a resident of Brown's 68 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 Hills, and I am one of the officers, I am on the Board of the Association, as well as Mary Foster Morgan is also on the Board. So we definitely exist and have existed I guess since 1952. We have hundreds if not thousands of emails amongst all of us constantly all year long about everything going on up there. Our annual meeting is this Sunday, and we have, as Gall said, we have 100 percent participation from everywhere on Brown's Hills, all property owners belong, all pay dues, no one is in arrears, everybody votes, and as far as the particulars of the stair are concerned, we own the stair, we're a, corporation. We have an attorney here who kept quiet while the applicant, a representative of the appl cant, sa d that we don't exist. There are four of us here who exis.. ,t. You received a letter from us, WhiCh was signed by I think 15, now we have 17 or 20 Who want to sign and as of this Sunday, you can have 30 ifyou:~ant that many people. We will, ali come to the next meeting if .you don't think we exist. It's a corporation. It, owns the land beneath the 'sl~airs; it owns the roacLs. Once a year at the advice of our attorney, we close the road and,~ve close the stair to maintain our private ownership. We I~ve liability insurance, which we pay for; we :have to. And ~o most of what you jus{ heard ,was untrue. As far as no one being required to mai.ntain the stairs, since I am the official beach commissioner and the stair Commissioner, we do maintain the sfairs. There are three or four treads that need to be replaced with treads which are slightly longer. Denn,is McMahon, who is a licensed'.'.C..O~tractor in Greenport, who dpes most of his work in Orie:nt, now is going to be meeting me out there tomorrow or Friday so that I can report at the ahnual meeting on Sueday that'we' 're going to have to spend a few hundred dollars fixing the Stair and this is what's going to be done. This is just regular maintenance. I think if you have, I'd be welcome to answer any more questions or even give you documentation of any of this, if you require it, such as our insurance policy, which we heard does not exist also. Thank you very much. I don't even know how to count the number of lies that we heard in this room tonight in the last 10 minutes, coming from Ms. Wickham 69 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 also. Now, back to the agenda that I thought we were going to have this evening. We sent you a letter, we would be very happy, any of us, to answer any of the questions you have about the letter or even go through it as sor[ of an agenda for what we thought was important and should be addressed. The letter was July 14th signed by 15 people. Most importantly, on that letter it states there is absolutely no need for another stairs on this bluff. There is no need because the person, whoever the person is who ultimately purchases this house from the owner/developer, will use. the stair that is al, ready there. They in fact will own it~ they wibpay their share of insurance on that stairs. The bluff is 1,320 some feet long, There is one stair only on that bluff; it's really a fantastioa[ly, I would say almost, un que situation On the north fork, on the north shore. And, there are very few properties privately owned that are used. residentially of that size, in this case we have 23 hg~$es,, each one is in a lot which would, in fact, be nonco, nfbr. m ng. They are about half an acre mostly, some are an a¢~re but together we somehow managed to have this whole bluCf s:it f:here in one piece, which is incredibly beautiful and ShOutd remain that way. As far as the envi¢onmental iss.ues, I took photographs, I have them ia my computer I am sorry, I couldn't print them out, but i will ~;how them to you what the environmental situation is. '~heee :is ongoing erosion of that bluff. There is mud ~t the bottom of it, this is after you went because we had a lot, of rain last Week, and it was after your visit to tliat, site, There is mud. There is a huge piece where t~e. top soil fell off completely at the bottom of the stair th,',a~iis about 12 to 15 feet long and about nine feet tall. And;this goes on periodically on that bluff; it's no myste¢/. Th.ils is a very steep, very tall bluff and it is under~pretteetion. We don't understand why there is any need to endanger that when anyone who lives in Brown's Hills can use an existing stair. I would like to talk about the application itself. The application which you all probably have there in front of you states -- i don't understand this -- it says on the SEQRA application, there's no mention of it at all. As far 70 Board of Trustees July 21,2004 as the CAC referral letter sent, April 30, 2004, this was not mentioned except one small bit of it at the public hearing which we attended, This letter coming from the CAC, which is I don't know what that stands for, Conservation Advisory Council Town of Southold moves unanimously that they resolve to recommend to the Southold Town Board of Trustees di'sapproval of the Wetland Permit application of Matine, Inc. to construct 4' by 145' CCA timber, yes, CCA is arsenic. They were so sloppy in their application that they clearly put in somethi'ng which is most obviously written in the code as i~[egai, but they put it in anyway, timber because it'S cheap, timber beach access',stairs with an 8' by 6' platform. -[-hen they put the location. The CAC recommeBds..disappro, val of the application because of the size of'the pl,atfon-n is. not in accordance with Chapter 97. CCA timbers are ,pr.o.h[bited and the construction would cause damage to the bluff. What are we to do with this information? Th-at ,certainly didn't come out at tt~e last hearing. Then, we go further into the applicati..on here. I don't know whether ail, of these are required here or not, but the receipt of'the CAC report was not put on this form even thoL[gh it's dated the 15th of June, pdor to our last hearing, which 1 be.l[eve ~vas the 24th, I don't'know if the technical revie~v is required, but it's not noted. Lastly, then on Page 2, under no prior permits/approvals for site improvements, jus, t conveniently ignored that little check mark right there, it happens to be that there is an open building permit or~ the pr..operty. There is a house just started construction on ~,he site. There was, of course, the original aplplication to, the Building :Department was rejected because it was there w~s no buildabie lot without a variance. So they went,;to ZBA and after much haggling and changing of n~egotiations and numbers, a smaller house was permitted. -Fhat process went on for about eight months and ended with the variance granted last April. Then we get in here, how much does this project involve excavation or filling? No, is check,ed. I would like to know how you.could put a stable Stair into a hill side, which is angled at about like this (indicating) without doing some excavation, maybe footings, and then the drawing 71 Board of Trustees Jtfly 2l, 2004 itself, which is juvenile, shows that there the 4' X 4's which sort of miraculously lands 6 feet underground without disturbing the cliff face, without any excavation at all, but the answer is no. Then, depth of which material will be removed, n/a, even though on the drawing submitted, which is not, in fact, stamped by a licensed engineer as required by the town, again~ 6 foot pilings but no mention of depth of material or anything to be removed. Now, then, Number 11, does any aspect of the action have a current valid permit or approval? No, How about the open building permit? No mention. Miss Wickham says that the poor soul who has to live in this house must walk to the end of the road,to use the stair, end of the road, first of all, it's not at, the end of any road. It's 165 feet further, the applicant's property is where the existing stair is. We Can all get down on our hands and knees and crawl over there in two minutes if we needed to. The end of what road is.what I'd like to know. Don't we think that at least the att?ney for the person who has made this application 6ould bother herself by going and looking at a map or Iookif~g at the site? This is the way this whole thing has gene. Any questions? You know, it's like it's been made too easy for me, honestly, I'm an architect, I spent a lot of time in New 'York City. We are accustomed to problems, but this is like how much time can I spend planning it all out here. TRUSTEE, KRUPSKI: Thank you, any other comments? MR. MORGAN: Tom Morgan, and I also live in Brown's Hills, and I met most of you there last week after the rainstorm for the inspection, and I just want to endorse entirely what Bill just said on my behalf and emphasize the fact that one of the reasons that you saw some emotion is because the applicant is not going to be the ultimate homeowner here. The applicant is a speculative builder who wants simply, his need for the stair is a need to maximize his profit. If the ultimate homeowner chose to build a stair at some future date and can possibly demonstrate a need, there wouldn't be any objection. It would be a bothersome to us because it would ruin the view shed. When we walk down the stair we 72 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 see a distant stair that was built only in the last year, and it's actually a disruption but nothing we can do anything about, it's on the adjacent property so it just emphasizes what a change it would be and one that's actually not called for and not needed and as I said, ultimately there may be a need that can be demonstrated by the homeowner, and I'm sure they can work it out with the association and everything will be equitable and everybody will be happy, but that situation is not at this moment, and that's ail I want to emphasize. TRUSTEE KRUP,SKI,: When we get applications for stairs, they are pretty straightforward. We didn't find that Chapter 37 coastal erosion, other unregulated activities, now they are exempt under coastal erosion because they are regarded as a simple, beach access, MR. RYALL: You observed when you were going up that stairs that t. here seemed to be some of the uprights that had pulled away from their base} the real liability is with some of the handrails. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Sure. MR. RYALL: Those uprights that you were commenting on were actually set in not an upright position, they're set in at an angle and bolted to prevent not a lateral movement but sliding down the hill essentially. So they're in the place that theg were constructed to be in. They weren't pulled loose. I looked at it closer. I was concerned about it when you pointed it out. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Just to explain how we conducted ourselves, it didn't because itls layered, which didn't really make much sense, because stairs are routinely granted to people who want access to the beach from their property because there's no other way you get on the bluff, you destabilize it, you constantly ~vear away. Normally one Trustee goes out and does the field inspection, that's normal procedure. This Board had no idea, as we stated at the last hearing, that there was an association stair available to everyone. We try to get people to share stairs and docks whenever possible, because people are paranoid about legal liabilities and so forth, it very rarely happens. They have to have their own, don't let 73 Board of Trustees J~y21,2004 anybody look at it or use it, it's a problem, so on. So that's the whole function of a public hearing. That's why the project's posted, that's why the neighbors are noticed. So then if there is any kind of a situation that the Board would otherwise be unaware of, it comes to light at the public hearing, that's the whole point of it, otherwise, we would never know. So that's j:ust an explanation of how we feel about this. MR. M©RG~,N: In any case, your obligation is to establish that there .is a need for this additional staircase and our contention is .that there is none. And thank you very much for your- cgnsJ'deration. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thankyou. MR. MOR~GAN: And a whole bunch of you coming out to look at it, thank, yCu very much for that. MS: MOR~AI~I: My name is Mary Foster Morgan, I live in Brown's Hi[is, and thank you also for coming out to look at the site. I app.r~c}ate that. I have a letter here from Bob Gordon, the tr~.easurer of our association, who writes that the beach Stairs area matter of the Brown's Hills Associa~ti, on Sihce they were built and are maintained and insured I~y. the association. Moreover, it is in the associ~.'[On~s, ilnterest to keep the beach area fronting Brown's Hills as natural and pristine as possible. Keeping the beach, front as it is now affects its aesthetic value, and clUtterin~t it up with more stairs and other construction will have a negative impact of the real estate value of each of the members' property. The association keeps the easem.~n:ts leading [o the stairs and pays taxes on them, built the stairs and maintains them so that we as a community,, wou d have the entire use of the stretch of the beach. And he urges us all to speak on this point to you. I also wanted to comment and thank some of you, particularly sD'me of'us in the association, are concerned that there might be some Trustees who may have some business interest. Wa really appreciate your comment and your assuring us ~.hat you will ask Brownell Johnston, the attorney, to look into that and to do the proper thing to recuse anyone who needs to be recused from voting on that. We ap:preci,ate that. 74 Board of Trustees July 21,2004 TRUSTEE FOSTER: There is no Trustee who has any business interest. MS. MORGAN: Thank you, just our concern. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any other comment? I'm asking Brownell, is this association thing a big deal? Honestly, we got this letter from Gall Wickham today, I'll be honest, I didn't get a chance to read it. Is this really important that the association exists, it doesn't exist, because one side says it doesn't exist, the other side says it does exist; do we care? Environmentally does it make a bit of difference? MR. JOHNSTON: First of al'I, it bothers me that we get a letter hours before the hearing and then have to thfnk about it, but that's.a different issue. Al, it goes tothe same thing, each ti'm~.for you to have a governmental agency to act, you have to feel there's a need'for you to act. In establishing thaf-there are many facts you have to weigh and one is that is.t~ere a need or isn't there, and part of your analysis ~OUl¢~e, .,does this property owner already have access to ~e: b~ach., Which is very close to -- TRUST. EEiK~PSKf: Do they?. MR. J.OHhlST~_~N: i don~t know. TRUS~,E.B~_,,,..~'IPSKI': Without analyzing this, we don't know. JOHBl.~¢bh I have never seen the letter, I don't know MR. TRUSTEI~ K~.PSKI: Is everyone clear on that? Ga , brieiy MS. WlC~: Fi!rat of all, I ap,o, logize for bringing the letter in this a¥~rnoon, but I didn t think would be here today. So as. a,~courtesy to the Board, I wanted them to have it, and I'm.h.,a,:.@~iy to address what it says tonight, that was not intended~:4~ slip anything in. It was as a courtesy to your Board. Secondly, just so Mr. Ryall and his group understand, my letter does acknowledge the existence of the association. The question is, to what extent is it relevant to this particular applfcation? It very well may be that there is access by beach steps, and I dispute the distance that he's proposed, but certainly, if there are or are not beach steps, at this .point the association is not the proper party to decide on whether our client needs steps to the beach. My question is whether an association of homeowners whose current majority decides that they're going to have and 75 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 maintain beach steps is necessarily going to maintain that into the future or properly insure them or properly maintain them. It's really not relevant to this proceeding because our client has waterfront property and has asked the Board for access over their property to get to the beach, and I don't think the fact that there may or may not be now or in the future access over beach steps down the road that are possi~bly avail'able to them and many other families should preempt them from having their own direct access over their property. The environmental issues again, I'm going to refer to Mr. Bowman. MR. B©WMAN: If I can make one other comment too, because again, this B~oaFd,:.approves stairs as a matter of course in ve[y simple B,pPlications. If this was another private house next door that ha~l its own set of stairs, you would have no problem apl~o~fi9 a set of stairs for this house. You would not ask them to, g,9 next door to see if they wanted to share the stairs wil~l~ it. Th'ts is a very standard application, gets approved monthly in front of this Board and it's no different than ifit.,was a house next door. That is why this activi,ty ~ even exempted from coastal erosion hazard regulations. It's dirnjn mus It's something that is not harmful to the bluff, ifs not harmful to the beach itself, and it provides access. If I can make one comment on use, which I disagree with, this Board ~oes not dec de whether someone has a need to build a house oln their property or has a need to build a dock to acc~s the water, and I think you have to put this in the context Of your own regulations when you review this application. Thar~k you. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: On your point, does this property have deeded rig.h~ to those stairs, the applicant's property have deeded rights to.those access stairs? MS. WlCKHAI~: The property and all of the properties in Brown's Hills have deeded rights to the roads and to a particular area, strip, I don't know that this is -- it may not be an actual road out to the bluff, whether they have access down the stairs or not, there's a possibility, but I'm not sure again that's relevant whether there's already beach stairs there. We have no way of knowing that and 76 Board of Trustees July 2 [, 2004 there are how many owners, 23 people, 23 lots that use these steps, apparently that's a pretty heavy duty usage. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I just have one question for clarification, i'm looking at the tax map. Could someone identify me the parcel in question? MS. WlCKHAM: Aisc in answer to your question, there are many, many associations and neighborhoods that have beach access. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Okay. What is that? Does the association own that? MS. WtlCKHAM: Yes, that used to be, as I understand it, where, there were steps that were demolished is what I was told, MS. MORGAN: Yes, actually because the hillside fell apart. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I was looking at what we have. We were there. Thank you. We went down it. MR. JOHNSTON: Is there an existing permit for those stairs? MS. WICKHAM: Yes. MS. MORGAN: I'm just going to also point out that using your plot map, that our plot map the 165 feet. MS. WlCKHAM: We're very familiar with it. We went up and down. MS. MORGAN: I also want to say when you talk about heavy access, there's 23 houses in the association, they all have access to the stairs. I'd say on a given weekend, probably on average maybe a dozen people go down the stairs. Maybe they go up and down once in a day. Once you go down, you tend to stay. So they don't get beaten up. It's not like hundreds of people go. MR. MORGAN: Mary and I live there full time, we're there 365 days a year. We often go down to the beach, but I have rarely, maybe on the 4th of July weekend, maybe on the Labor Day weekend maybe on a day like today at 4:00 in the afternoon, there might be one other couple on the beach at the far end or the other. The usage is minimal, far disproportionate to the number of people who live in the community, some of whom have never been up and down those stairs, I grant it. MR. JOHNSTON: 1 want to make sure that each of the Trustees 77 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 takes notice of what Heather pointed out that for the record 97-27-A7; do you feel it's appropriate? Off the top of my head, I can't recall it verbatim. The Trustees all have the ability to look at what critical environmental areas are and at the discretion of the Board of Trustees any operation proposed in a critical environmental area, if you deem that to be in this area maybe stringent may be subject to more stringent requirements ~han detailed in the section, such requirements may include, but. are not limited to denial of operation, shortening or reducing the size of the structure, increasing the width o¢ nondisturbance buffers. It goes to what you feel this area TRUSTEE. KRUPSKI: Thank you. MR. JOH~STO[xI: I have no feeling on it. I just want you to make sure,~hat ~n your determination you address that. MR. RYAI_L: Can I talk just a second about the legal aspect of the ass.oc[ati'on, which is actually a corporation. This is not a fly-bymight organization. It actually has an asset there. This has been very happily going on since 1952. Th[.s is the second stair that the association has built. The: first one was built to 200 feet to the east of the property in q,uestion, and had to be abanrloned in 1985 because Of the erosion on this bluff. We've since built, in 1985, a now stair, but if this whole issue were to hinge on whether this association specifically addresses the legal rights of the owners of the stair, which is us, then we could certainly have Jennifer Gould, who is our attorney, write that up to whatever she thinks is right. So that this becomes a permanent fact for everyone who owns property in the neighborhood, if there was something that said we can use the rdads but they forgot to say the roads.and stairs, then, okay, we will write in the stairs. There's never been any conflict over the stairs in the neighborhood. No one says we don't want to have the stairs; everyone wants to have the s.tairs. So we will write it in if that's what you require. I do think there's one issue, which perhaps erroneously but at the last hearing we went to, we got a very, very bad impression of how it was discussed. Now I realize that you 78 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 cannot go and do due diligence on all these cases. We've got 30 cases here tonight to look at, that's one per day and there are five of you plus a couple of help staff and a part time attorney. So we brought this thing up. But before we got to speak, what we heard was one member of your Board say that we should, that you should -- we the Trustees, meaning you -- should approve, meaning you people should approve this thing, that he knew about it, he had dug a test hole on the property, and just go ahead and approve it. Oh, after reducing the size of the platform slightly as proposed. To us, to anyone sitting here, the appearance woU:ld be that someone who was on your Board had had an interest, a financial amd business interest in this, a corrtract. So, I think that that is whether -- I mean, we're not doing art investigation here, but the impression definitely was a conflict, and I think that Mr. Foster should recuse himself:from anything having to d[o. with this situation here. Whether the peaple doing the: e~¢avation are your son or your self or your cousin or your aunt or your uncle or whoever, you definitely said you had :had: an involvement with that. You didn'~t go up there as a volunteer, and dig a hole on that property. TRUSTEE FOST ,F_R: I didn't dig a hole up there, and I didn't say I did ~lig a hole up there, and I don't have any personal involvement with it; My son did work up there. MR. RYALL: All' right. TRUSTEE FOSYER: I drove a truck up there and put sand in a hole that Ches1:erfield Associates dug. MR. RYALL: We're not talking about sand, we're talking about money. TRUSTEE FOSTER: It has nothing to do with me. I don't even get paid. MR. RYALL: Blood is thicker than what? TRUSTEE FOSTER: What's that got to do with the stairs? Has nothing: to do with my son. My son works for John Hurtado. He doesn't give a hoot whether John gets a set of stairs or not. What does he care? All he wants to do is get paid for the hole that was dug. MR. RYALL: Well, your son is your son, he's been working on the property and you were the advocate. You were the Board 79 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 advocate for this application. TRUSTEE FOSTER: That's right. And every month another person goes and looks at a set of stairs. A set of stairs is a minor thing. We have never denied a set of stairs down the bluff because people have a right to access the beach from their waterfront property. MR. RYALL: You're giving - TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I go through the !nspects, this month there were over 30 minor proposals get handed out. Ken did a number of them. Peggy did a number of them. Jim did some. Artie did a cou. pie, we try to divvy them up geographically, so that somebody can go, because to go to look at a fenc~ in Mattituck to look at a set of stairs in Orient, we did over 20 as a Board together, wells the major ones we do togeth'er, And when. there's a problem, as was brought to ti[Iht I'ast~ month, there was a problem with this then we table il, an~ the whole Board goes to look. That's the way we do, it. I d~n't know about any holes, Artie Foster never said he. dug a hole there. TRUSTEE'FOSTER: 1 didn't dig a hole there. I said I was familiar with tt~e property because I was up there when they were digging the hole. TRUSTEE,KRUPSKI: I took the inspection list from Lauren. I looked at all the files and nowhere in the files did it say that A~ie Fosller did any work there. I looked at the file, it said s. et of's~tairs in Orient. I said Artie is going to get this one, and Lauren writes Artie on it and gives it to him. MR. RYALL: I don't know that, in fact, I don't believe that. But that's besides the point. MS. MORGAN: I think the whole reason that this is a little more acrimonious than maybe it might have otherwise been was the whole idea that the association didn't exist, the neighborhood., didn't exist, the stairs weren't insured, all of that got us off track. TRUSTEE FOSTER: None of that was submitted to us. MS. MORGAbI: Whether there was a need for the stair, the damage to the bluff, I own property in California, coastal property. I've dealt with coastal commissions which is way harder than this. I developed four parcels; so, I 80 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 understand what's involved in all of this. I'm surprised just out of ignorance, really, that you're not to consider what the stairs do to the bluff as part of the environmental impact of this. That's what I am hearing. That the platform matters but the stairs don't. You didn't write those laws, I don't believe, but it seems very odd to me and it is a bluff that is eroding. TRUSTEE KRUPSK[: We did write the law, the wetlands code, the code. Environmentally a set of stairs is the most environmentally sound access you can have down the bluff, if you wind a path dawn there you get a gully. MS. MORGAN:: [ understand, you couldn't have a path down there becaU'se it's so steep. I'm just saying that it's interesting that that isn't -- just for me - my interest, it isn't so or;itical because I wouldn't put another stair on myself. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh How would you access it? MS. MORGAN: There's one stair now. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If there were no association stairs, how would you access the water?. MS. MORGAN: I would probably go elsewhere. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Drive to Orient Point? MS. MORGAN: I might, seriously. I lived in California for a Iong.~ime. And there was no private beach access Hawaii doesn't have private beach access. Florida doesn't, you don't own the beach access. There are accesses that the state maintains and so the idea that I would have my own stairs to. the beach when there's a stair 165 feet away from me, to me it's fairly ludicrous. If there were none? If there were none, I didn't buy there because there were stairs to the beach. I bought there because it's a great place to be living. Other places I looked didn't have a beach nearby, I would have driven, sit near a river or something like that. That's just me. MS. WIOKHAM: I just wanted to ask the Board, unless you have fur[her substantive that you would like to hear from us, we'd like to ask the Board that perhaps you could close the hearing and make a decision. I just wanted to reiterate that what the association does or doesn't do or what rights and obligations there may be, I'm really not sure is 81 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 completely relevant to this consideration because the applicant cannot and should not be required to be limited to their steps, and they have steps so perhaps should we. I would just like you to keep that in mind. MS. TETRAULT: I would just like to speak to something Mr. Bowman said, he was saying it's normal activity. You put the stairs on the bluff, it acts just like a bulkhead, and it's no problem and that's true. But I just want to comment on that ali of that is true. There are many places along the sound and the bay where there is quite a bit of erosion, that I just want to make sure that you do consider that. That stairs, there have been a few areas, there's a few areas in Cu~ tch.ogue, Oregon Road, where it's been totally disastrous with stairs and bluffs and stairs falling down and bluffs eroding; and just make sure, I know you are all aware of that, but just the way he made it sound like, oh, there's no. prot~iem. Well, sometimes it can start to cause problems and disturbing the ground and doing tha! kind of constru~ion th~at changes the bluff, you can change the bluff, this new house up .there, it's to protect them too, it's not necessary to keep their bluff as well, and also just what the Trustees have been trying to do to the shoreline in ke~eping that as much as possible. TRUSTEE DI~ERSO, N: I think one thing I noticed myself is that this area i'~ very :pristine. I mean, there are places where are stairs all along the sound, but this is very unique in that and it's because of the association I think that there is that one set of stairs. It's a natural, pristine area. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I agree. The stairs are disposable on the sound. We've seen that for many years. And mostly I think people consider stairs to be fairly disposable. This is as stable a bluff that you get on the north shore and the sound, and most people most of the times we see stairs in areas that are moving a lot more and need to be replaced a lot more ~requently but everything is eroding. MR. BOWMAN: A very short comment in response to what Heather's saying, is that the erosion on the north shore is not caused by stairs, it's caused by the nor'easters during the winter; it takes the sand out of the toe and that's how 82 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 the bluff falls down; that's how a bluff acts, and like you say, stairs are disposable, I agree with you 100 percent and they get rebuilt all the time, and it's going to erode whether there's a stair there or not, and that's why you don't want to have a bulkhead put down there because then you're stabilizing the bluff, keeping the sand off the beach and the beach disappears. So that should be the experience here is keeping the toe of that bluff unstablized and natural and stairs can be rebuilt. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I agree, thank you. TRUSTEE DiCKERSON: ! would just like to read the CAC recommendations into the mb~utes. They disapproved of the application because the size of the platform is not in accordance wi'th Chapter 97, which we already discussed. CCA lumber is prohibited, but they also do say that construction would cause d~mage to the bluff. TRUSTEE:ER~'pSKI: Are you suggest ng, Peggy, that currently the stairs a~e u...~c-,essary because there's access now? TRUSTEI~ ~iGK~BR$ON: 1 thi~k because of that and also, even though the prop¢rty, ;is owned by the builder, but the builder is going to.be; s¢'!~ and you don't know -- TRUSTF_,E t(RM,?$..!~h I don't know f you were on the Board at the end of'lnd~'.~q N~eck Lane, right next to Mrs. Baize is a new home a.~., ~,he Owner wanted to put -- remember that, Ken? TRUSTEE P~I~i,_W".'(2DA: The boardwa k? TRUSTE~ K~i~P:~KI: He wanted to put that long boardwalk through thi~ ~;~h, hundreds of feet of boardwalk, and when he could go ~t~h~ o~her door and walk down the paved road. TRUS-FEB FOS,q'E~: But h s father was handicapped. TRUS-FEB KR~LIIPSj~I: But the paved road was safer than the boardwalk. 'Po'rne that kind of equates with that in that if there is access, there's access. And there's no need to duplicate the access. If some point in time the association doesn't maintain the access for whatever reason, I don't care what.it is, then.you would reconsider it. If there's access I dOn't see why you need it. TRUSTEE D~CKER.GON: I agree. TRUSTEE POLr'IWODA: I agree. TRUSTEE KRLCPSKI: Any other comment? MS. WlCKHAM: Mr. Chairman, I would seriously have to 83 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 dispute your right to deny steps to a private owner just because there may or may not be common access down the street. I really think that that is a legal principal that has no basis in the law. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh It might have or it might not because under Chapter 97 we are charged with protecting the environment. Adding a set of steps, no matter will certainly cause an effect on the bluff face, and it will cause some environmental, damage. Walking down the bluff will cause environmenfal damage, without steps will cause environmental damage also se doing anything will cause environmental damage. This Board has in the past i:lenied people exactly the kind' of access that they have applied for because alternative access was available, and I think because it causes less environmental damage. MS. WlCKHrAM.'. I don't know if that was a stair, Number 1; and Number 2, the access is not available on this particular piece of proper~y. It is not on this piece of property that the access is available and that I think is a distinction. Also, I think you have to balance the environmental harm that these stairs could make on a stable bluff with a relatively modest.angle of repose compared with depriving a property owner of his right to access the beach directly. We also, just to recall, we went to great lengths to stablize the upland area of this property with a retaining wall, and for the most part, the angle of repose -- that's not the right term -- the angle from the bluff face landward is downward. So it's not a straight shot down. There is not water running over the bluff. TRUSTEE KR,UP'SKh That's what we observed. MS. WICKHAM: So that would further minimize any further impact on the. bluff. So -- but I would strongly urge you to consider seriously not restricting an owner's right to access to the, stairs in this particular circumstance. I don't think it's something that the Board has the authority to do, frankly. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. MR. RYALL: I just want to answer what she said. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Briefly. MR. RYALL: She said the owner went to great lengths 84 Boat-d of Trustees July 21, 2004 building retaining walls to stablize the situation; in fact, the retaining walls were built in order to build a platform to build a generic house on that platform, the developer's solution to the sloping problem, it had nothing to do with environmental considerations at all. it was to simplify construction of the house. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE DICKERSON: So moved. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Second. TRUSTEE KRUPSKi: All in favor? ALL AYES TRUSTEE KP~UPSKI: I make a motion to deny the application for a set of stairs for Matine, Inc. because on the current condition of, an access stairs that's available to the applicant to. reach Long Island Sound. I make a motion to deny without prejudice. If the access stairs ever becomes unavailable to the applicant at any .time, the applicant is more than welcome to reapply for access to the Long Island Sound, the b, each, TRUSTEE ~OLIWODA: Second. TRUSTEE ~UP'SKI: All in favor? ALL AYES. TRUSTEE CP, U~PSKI: Opposed? TRUSTBE FO.S.'TER: I'll recuse myself. 26. Land Use Ecological Services, Inc. on behalf of JOSEPH LOGIUDICE requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4' by 108' fixed timber catwalk with a boat lift. The catwalk is proposed to be elevated a minimum of 4 feet above the average highwater mark and will utilize four (4) 4'X 4' piles with a depth of penetration 6' plus, and (26) 6" diameter timber piles with a depth of penetration of 10 feet plus. The boat lift is proposed to be an Alum-A-Vator, utilizing (8) 10" diameter timber piles with a depth of penetration of 10 feet plus. Located: 10995 north Bayview Road, Southold. SCTM # 79-5-20.13, TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favQr of this application? MR. BOWMAN: Chuck Bowman, very tired, if you have any questions, just ask me so we can all go home. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Have you done an environmental assessment 85 Boa. rd of Trustees ~n~¥2L2oo4 of the water out in front of this property? MR. BOWMAN: What do you mean environmental assessment? As in eel grass beds? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Did you find eel grass? MR. BOWMAN: No. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Or flora or fauna? MR. BOWMAN: No. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Or submerged aquatic vegetation? MR. BOWMAN! Not where the dock is going, no, and yes we did. We didn't find sostera beds if that's what you're asking. TBUS,-TEE POLIWODA: The reason I asked that is because the day we inspected it, which was Wednesday, July 14th, we have php.tos to back us up, there was 4 inches of eel grass on the shoreline, as:you can see, tons of eel grass. MCR. BOWMAN: You mean on the rack line? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: On the rack line. In this photo, just behind, that rack line, approximately beginning 5 or 10 feet below the Iow mean water, we noticed extensive SAV. MR. BOWMAN: Most of that area, and again I'm talking about the sostera, when ~ was out there, there was a lot of algae. It's a rocky substrate, and that's where the dock was going. Now, I didn't do a whole story to see where those so.,stera beds are, if you want, I'm sure the water is clear enbugh, I'tl. go out to the end of it, and I'll to the end of it and I'll -- if you want, I'll even have an underwater camera, we, ll stick it under where the dock is going and shpw you a picture of where the dock is going, if that's what you lille. But to answer your question, yes, we always look at that. 'When we put a dock out, we always look to see if there's eel grass beds. TRUSTEE ,POLIWODA: As far as the (inaudible) according to Town code. MR. BOWMAN: You have new plans, the boat lift has been eliminated. There was new plans sent to you, quite some time ago. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: That's about all my comments. I see a lot:of eel grass here and this property off the location. MR. BOWMAN: I'll be more than happy to do what I volunteered to do, make you feel comfortable. This g6 Board of Trustees July21,2604 application's been around for a long time; I have no problem. It's a legitimate question, if you will feel more comfortable, I will provide you with that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Why don't we bring everything up so we don't get to the next one. You had other questions about the fish movement and sedimentation? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Right. I figured it went all through this at a hearing. MR. BOWMAN: Understand you all approved the Miller dock. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: That was a different location, different bottom structure. MR. BOWMAN: It's fairly close by though. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Different code also. MR. BOWMAN: I say it's a different code, absolutely, but it has very many ~)f the similar characteristics. TRUS~ POLIWODA: I'd just like to point out in this location, it wf!! abut a fish trap there. So right now there are. no hard structures in that water that impede or prohibit certain fish. MR. BOWMAN,: But again I would ask you the question, what makes you thint< an open pile dock is going to impede fish? Usually open pile docks would attract big fish which may actually bring more fish into the area and not certainly impede their movement. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: To rehash the whole long scenario I drew up last time, you bring in hard structure, you bring in a change of species. You bring in black fish, you bring in bass, right now there's probably flounder, fluke. MR. BOWMAN: I would imagine those trap nets are there probably for bass, weakfish, they're not there for fluke. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: They're not meant to be inhabited areas. MR. BOWMAN: But you just said it's going to change species and bring in bass, that's what's there now, that's what the target species are there now. Probably weakfish are the target species now. It is certainly not fluke that are the target species or winter flounder that are the target species. So I don't see where that changes species are going to be, blackflsh, I doubt if in the summer time, maybe in the winter time, in the winter time you might get some or 87 Board of Trustees July 21,200'4- in the late fall when the water temperatures fall, but certainly in the summer time they're not going to be there, the water temperature's too warm. They're not going to be anywhere around. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: They probably catch all those fish you mention because they're migrating through the area; however, if you put a structure through the area, all of a sudden they become an inhabitant and they may chase away various species. They maY chase out the squid. MR. BOWMAN: Again, I would certainly not see where a pier is going to affect a migratory fin fish in the area there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any other consideration of sedimentation from the piles? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: That's always a consideration as we've seen in the other locations in the bay. One great example would be off'Cleat's Point in Greenport. The sedimentation is incredible. MR. BOWMAN: Again, I'm going by my recollection, and I think that's a legitimate question, and I will certainly document-the bottom type to you. My recollection is that it was a rocky substrate. I will go out and again, it was a while ago because we started this whole process when actually, I' think it was probably a couple years ago then it was put on hold because the house got sold. I will go and update that data for you. That's a legitimate question. TRUSTEE KRLIPSKh I wanted to just bring everything up. MR. BOWMAN: I appreciate that. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: And depth of water at the end of the dock; will you provide that? MR. BOWMAN: Four feet. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Four feet? TRUSTEE K'RILIPSKI: Can I make a motion to table this application? TRUSTEE KING: Second. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh All in favor? ALL AYES. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Did you see eel grass on the shore? MR. BOWMAN: I've seen eel grass there. TRUSTEiE POLIWODA: Probably the first time I've seen it there in 10 years. MR. BOWMAN: Let me take you down to Great South Bay Board of Trustees July21,2004 sometime, and they're piled this high and they're not eel grass beds all over the bay. So you have to keep that in mind. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Thank you. 27. Catherine Mesiano, Inc. on behalf of DEBORAH DOTY requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 3' by 85' fixed walk at minimum 3' above grade, 3' by 12' ramp and a 6' by 20' floating dock. Located: 670 West Creek Avenue, Cutchogue.. SCTM# 103-1'3-5.3. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Is there anyone here who would like to speak on behalf of the applicant? MS. MESIANO: That would be me. TRUSTEE KRUPSKt: Any questions, comments? MS. MESIAN©: Yes, Catherine Mesiano on behalf of the applicant. At the time of the site inspection, we had extensive conversation about alternative materials that migh! be in the construction of the structure. After diScussing with Miss Doty, she is willing to consider the alternatives. I have contacted the company that Jim had recommended, I had, by the way, gone to North Fork Welding. They had no material. They really weren't sure what I was referring to. I got t:he information from Lauren and took it back to them. They still couldn't help me, so I contacted the company directly. They're sending me samples, which I hadn't received, gr, ading material, and when I got that material, I'm going to have this looked at by an engineer, so that they can give us an opinion as to the feasibility of using that type of material, and if the material is adequate structurally and has the type of life that you would expect that type of material in that type of an application, then we will be able to design, a dock of a Iow profile, and we would then like to take that to the DEC. What I would like to ask of the Board in this instance is that you grant me an approval subject to my submission to you of a plan that is acceptable to you because I would like to take that plan then to the DEC with the Board's. endorsement. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Just did that about five hours ago. MS. MESIANO: Did I miss it? 89 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Someone else. MS. MESIANO: With this type of material? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Yes. Actually his catwalk is 4' by 5' long. MS. MESIANO: We've got a significantly-- TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What is your length? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Do you know what the DEC told that man? MS. MESIANO: No. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: He had to go 3 and-a-half feet, go up 3 an0-a-half feet so he could go 4 feet -- go up 3 and-a-half feet so he Can go 5 feet this way, then 3 and-a-half feet down. MS. MESIANO: Yes, it's absurd. It makes no sense. They're only looking at the regulations and they're looking at the numbers, they're not taking the site and the site considerations into effect. The applicants would rather have the Iow prot~ile. If it's a matter of safety and it's a matter of the wave velocity and so on, I think you have other considerations, but across the salt marsh, in this instance, we~ve got an 85 foot fixed walk, so if we take the 85 foot fixed walk, the 12 foot ramp, that's 97, and the 6' by 20' floating dock, so that's 97 -- say 117 to 120 feet thereabouts, would be the distance to get us out to a depth of about two feet. TRUSTEE KRLI, PSKI: If you draw the line between them, it's pretty close, it's just a pier line there. MS. MES:IANO: I believe the originally proposed structure, our seaward end is in line with the two neighboring existing docks, so therefore we wouldn't propose to go any more seaward than those docks that presently exist, but again, given the fact that we don't have the material in hand and it's going to require some engineering, I would like your approval subject to my presenting to you an acceptable plan, again, for the, endorsement so that I can go to the DEC on this. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Everybody good on this? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Will you try for one foot over marsh? MS. MESIANO: Yes. When you say one foot over marsh, do you mean the grade or the top of the vegetation? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It's got to be the grade. 90 Board of Trustees July21,2004 TRUSTEE POLIWODA: One foot above grade. MS. MESIANO: I know it can grow that long, but it can fold over. I just wanted clarification, you mean from the grade, not from the vegetation. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Yes. MS. MESlANO: That's what we were hoping. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And the grass can grow through it? MS. MESlANO: Yes, the material that we're looking at. I had an extensive conversation with one of the sales representatives. It's a two inch thick material and the openings are .two. inch square, and they're approximately one inch thick. The liGhtpenet[ation is at about between 70 and 75 percent. It's constructed or manufactured with some type of a rib.ar so that. it's bearing capacity is at about 200 PoUnds l~er square foot. TRUST~ t41NG: Tl~ey have some other stuff too, like an inch, inch and~a-h41f thicl(,fiber glass that has light penetration but it's prob. ,..~!y notas strong. MS. ME$I'~.¢,~O: Yo~ see that was intended for not to be the weight 'beadpg structure but to be set on top of like a concrete area. They didfCt re~6emmend that because they felt it wouldr~'t.b,e,'..strong enough. TRUST.;_E.,E ~UPSKt: ~ make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE ~![GKEP~SON: Secon~d.~ TRUST~ ~.R. tJPSl¢(I: All in favor. ALL AYES. TRUST~I~E ~,~tdP. SKI': Make a motion to approve the application for a 3 b~ 1!.2.'..~ fixed, dock, elevated one foot over grade subject' to P!~0s submitted, TRUSTEE P.;~LIW~,DA: Second. TRUSTEE ~uPSKi: All in favor? ALL AYES. MS. M~II;~: With that approval will you be able to provide me w th. ~a I~r that can subm t to the DEC? TRUS~E.E,~UPSKI: Abso ute y. 28. Catherine Mesiano, Inc. on behalf of JAMES SWEENEY requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4' by 33' fixed walk at minimum 3,5 feet above grade, 3' by 15' ramp and a 6' by 20' floa~ti'ng dock. Located: 2950 Minnehaha Boulevard, Seuthoid. SCTM # 87-3-42 91 Board of Trustees July 21, 2004 TRUSTEE KING: is there anyone here to speak on this project? MS. MESlANO: Catherine Mesiano on behalf of the applicant. Again, at the site inspection we discussed similar proposals as in my previous application, which was to employ a grate system in place of the proposed timber walk, thereby enabling us to build a lower profile dock, and I make the same request that you 'give me an approval subject to my submission of an acceptable plan for a Iow profile walk. In this instance, we wi!f, however, still require the ramp and float because we are getting out to a depth of about -- I think it's about 6.8 feet at the seaward en.d of'the float. The fl~a.t.- is in line with the neighboring structure, that neighbori~.g structure is pretty much identical te that which we o,riginal'[~ proposed; however, Mr. Sweeney would favor a tow pr.ofile structure as we discussed, sq my request is the same a,$ the earlier. You wanted to also add, we discussed that in both ~nst:ances in, particular in this application, ypur c0,rfim.ent was to maintain the phragmites at one foot by hand cutt:ingthem, so we needed to write that in. And if I m[~ght dig,f-ess, in the Doty application it was a similar condition. TRUSTEE KRU'PSKh Yes. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Why would the CAC ask for a 5 foot nonturf buffer? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I don't know. TRUSTEE KING: They did that on another one also. MS. MESlANO: Why would we disturb what was already developed? MS. TETRAULT: Right. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh They always do that when it's got to be dug up. TRUSTEE TRUSTEE TRUSTEE TRUSTEE TRUSTEE KING: Any other comments? KRUPSKh No. KING: Make a motion to close the hearing. DICKERSON: Second. KING: All in favor? ALL AYES. TRUSTEE KING: Make a motion to approve the application, the submission of plans showing the new grading system and to hand trim the phragmites at least once a year down to 12 92 Board of Trustees July21,2004 inches. TRUSTEE POUWODA: Second. TRUSTEE KING: All in favor?. ALL AYES. MR. JOHNSTON: Are you having any problem having the DEC to give you a similar permit for the one foot phragmites? MS. MESIANO: No. MR. JOHNSTON: Thank you. I want to make sure we're not make it difficult reconciling the two permits. 29, Catherine Mesiano, Inc. on behalf of SCHEMBRI HOMES, INC. requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 30' by 66' single-family dwelling and sanitary on-site sewage disposal system, and a pervious driveway. Located: 1025 Seawood Drive, Southoid. SCTM # 79-7-63. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Is there anyone here who would like to comment on this application? MS. MESIANO: Catherine Mesiano on behalf of the applicant. I have still received no comments from the Board; therefore I am unable to go any further. This has been tabled, I believe this is the third month i'm here on this, and I'm waiting for the Board's comments. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do we have a Letter?. Where is the letter? MS. TETRAULT: I went on the site. I went out to the site and we decided what we wanted to do there, and I just gave the Board a letter that they looked over and then you will be getting a letter in the mail, I would think that they would get right back to me in a few days. MS. MESIANO: 1 wQuld just like to say that ~ did request to meet with you at the site and to be involved through the process and not to have the big surprise at the end. I try to work with the Board and i did request a site inspection and I am wai1~!ng three months. TRUSTEE KRUPSKk The problem was, we've got a back log and we just got Heather. MS. MESIAN',O: My point is I just, I did request to meet on site and to be involved in the onsite inspection. I think I could be more effective in performing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We're not saying this is it, take it or 93 Board of Trustees July21,2004 leave it. ~ think what we're saying, here's our recommendations, now let's see your comments. It's not like an ultimatum. It's just, this is what we think. MS. MESIANO: Okay. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's the way it's got to go and you can make comments on it. It's not a permit. MS. MESIANO: I didn't think it would be. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh it's going to take us a while to get up to speed. MS. MESIANO: That was not my point. My point was that I asked to -- TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But now you're part of the process. It's not like you were excluded. You were brought in at this part instead of earlier. MS. MESIANO: My only comment is that I had requested that onsite meeting and to be involved at that earlier point, that's my only point. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You can still do an onsite meeting. MS. M'ESIANO: I don't want to duplicate efforts so it's done. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Any other public comments? MS. MESIANO: I want you to remember the pictures that I submitted to you and do keep in mind the conditions that we presented to you as far as the flooding and the runoff and so on. There's other culpability and that contributes to some of the problem. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I recall. MS. MESIANO: Thank you. MS. TETRAULT: This is an application for Wetland Permit to build a house and what we decided is they need to take care of the violation before they can proceed with this application to build a house. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I was going to make a motion to table. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I'll second. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: All in favor? ALL AYES. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I'll make a motion to amend the Debra Doty application to the permit to include cutting the phragmites by hand trimming. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Second. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh All in favor? ALL AYES. 94 BOard bf Trustees Suly 2 l, 2004 to iss,u.,~ to familiar. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We still have Willow point and the snow fences. I'll make a motion to reopen the hearing for Willow Point. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Second. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor? ALL AYES. MR. JOHNSTON: You're going to amend to make it clear that the maintenance dredging permit is the standard 10 year mai'ntenance dredging permit versus the assumed two years on all of our permits if we don't stipulate? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Yes. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Make the motion. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Second. TRUSTEE KRUPS'KI: All in favor? ALL AYES. TRUSTEE KRU.P. SKI: Make a motion to remove all snow fences with from the Ueaches that the Town has put up because violation of Chair 97 and we're going to ask the Highway Depa~ment to'mmov~e them. MR. JOHNSTON,:. By when? TRUSTEE KP~UPS~!': Thirty days. MR. JOH~ISTOi~: lfyou do it 30 days, they're going to remove it AuguSt .31 st' ap~ .y~vay. TRUSTEEKI~,'U~,SKI: Do I have a second? TRUSEE, Di'.C'L~ERSON: Second. TRUS~ K~UPSKI: All in favor? ALL AYES. ~UPSKI: Disregard usage of compliance, we'd like ~ve~ applicant with the final inspection -- I'CI~ERSON: Run this by me again it sounds vaguely TRUSTEE KRUPSKh For compliance at the point of inspection we have to make the file saying this is fine. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Okay. TRUSTEE second? TRUSTEE TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Make a motion to adjourn; do I have a KRUPSKI: Second. DICKERSON: All in favor?. ALL AYES 95