The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTR-07/19/2000Albert J. Krupski, President James King, Vice-President Henry Smith Artie Fester Ken Poliwoda 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 19, 2000 7:00 PM PRESENT WERE: Albert J. Krupski, Jr., President Jim King, Vice President Henry Smith, Trustee Kenneth Poliwoda, Trustee Charlotte Cunningham, Clerk ABSENT: Artie Foster, Trustee CALL MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: Wednesday, August 16,2000 at 12:00 PM TRUSTEE SMITH moved to Approve. TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES NEXT TRUSTEE MEETING: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 at 7:00 PM WORKSESSION: 6:00 PM TRUSTEE SMITH moved to Approve. TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES APPROVE MINUTES: Approve Minutes of May 24, 2000 & June 21, 2000 TRUSTEE KING moved to Approve. TRUSTEE SMITH seconded. ALL AYES MONTHLY REPORT: The Trustee monthly report for July 2000. A check for $2,697.38 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. AMENUMENTS/WAIVERS/CHANGES: 1. J. Kevin McLaughlin on behalf of THE ORIENT WHARF requests a Waiver to allow the existing shed, which houses necessary water filtration equipment to remain on the wharf. Located: 2110 Village Lane Orient SCTM#24-2-28. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to Table the application. Until further notice from the Town Attorney. TRUSTEE SMITH seconded. ALL AYES Board of Trustees 2 July 19, 2000 2. Charles Van Voorhis on behalf of LOUIS BURNMAN PACKARD request a Waiver for the addition of a 18'x18' sunroom and a 18' wraparound deck. Located: Madeline Avenue, Fishers Island SCTM#6-7-12 POSTPONED UNTIL AUGUST - PENDING INSPECTION 3. Richard Daley on behalf of BRUCE & ANN JOHNSON requests a Waiver for an addition 2nd floor on top of existing dwelling with balcony. Located: 3765 Stillwater Ave., Cutchogue. SCTM#137-1-1 TRUSTEE SMITH moved the Approve the application. TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES 4. LEONARD J. FROSINA requests an amendment to Permit ~1430 to add one 6'x40' float and to transfer per #1430 from Richard A. Schlumpf to Leonard J. Frosina. Located: 675 Point Pleasant Road, Mattituck. SCTM#ll3-9-12 POSTPONED UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. 5. DAVID H. GORDON requests a Waiver to put in a 3' fence, to enclose a dog run. The fence will begin at pool fence, go 10-12' down the slope, go left for about 30 feet, and go left again up the slope towards the house. There will be a gate between the fence and the house allowing passage along the house. Located: 825 Bungalow Lane, Mattituck SCTM~123-3-10 TRUSTEE KING moved to Approve the application. TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES 6. WILLIAM & LINDA MERURIO requests a Waiver to construct split rail fence approximately 400' along northern boundary line. Located: 2305 Bay Avenue, Mattituck SCTM~144-4-4 TRUSTEE KING moved to Approve the application. TRUSTEE SMITH seconded. ALL AYES 7. THOMAS C. MERIAM requests a transfer of Permit #1661 from Dr. George Richards to Thomas C. Meriam. Located: Marratooka Road, Mattituck SCTM#115-11-26 TRUSTEE SMITH moved to Approve the transfer. TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES 8. Permits & Drafting Unlimited on behalf of SCOTT SCHULMAN to transfer Permit #1011 in the name of Fred Ventrudo to Scott Schulman. Located: 1495 Pine Neck Road, Southold. SCTM#70-5-41 TRUSTEE SMITH moved to Approve the transfer. TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES 9. JEANNE BARTOS requests a one year extension of Permit #4916. Located: 1820 Mill Lane, Peconic. SCTM#067-07-14 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Noted that the project was substantial started therefore no extension needed. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI Do I have a motion to go off the Regular Meeting and onto the Public Hearings. TRUSTEE SMITH so moved. TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES Board of Trustees 3 July 19, 2000 IV. 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. I HAVE AN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION FROM THE SUFFOLK TIMES. PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE MAY BE READ PRIOR TO ASKING FOR COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMMENTS ORGANIZED AND BRIEF. FIVE (5) MINUTES OR LESS, IF POSSIBLE TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Tonight we have twenty public hearings. Anyone who would like to speak. Please come up and use the micro-phone and identify yourself. So that we have a clear record. 1. Catherine Mesiano on behalf of LAURENCE BLESSINGER requests a Wetland Permit to re-vegetate property cleared within 75' of HWM. Located: 2626 Westphalia Avenue, Mattituck. SCTM#114-07-10.008 CATHERINE MESIANO: On behalf of the'applicant. We were seeking a plan to re-vegetate land that was cleared within the limit of the trustee's jurisdiction. I have presented to the trustee's a re-vegetation plan. I also have before you a survey that was just completed. It is more accurate than what you have with you now. If you would like copies of that I can give that to you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is fine. CATHERINE MESIANO: As you are aware summons were issued on this action. Mr. Coffey has appeared at the Justice Court that was adjourned pending our appearance before this board tonight. Then he can reappear before the Justice Court, pending the outcome of this meeting. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We were advised that violations, just the opposite. That violations should be cleared before we act on it. CATHERINE MESIANO: Mr. Coffey is here and I have spoken with his attorney (cannot understand). TRUSTEE SMITH: What size trees are going to be placed in here. MR. COFFEY: The trees were black oaks and Japanese black pines. They were diseased trees and they were cut them down. Hope to clear the property to put in a new house upland and to cut the pines down and left the good ones. CATHERINE MESIANO: Clearing primarily consisted of removal of dead and diseased trees. The trees that were still healthy are remaining. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We were there. There were not too many healthy trees apparently. This re-vegetation plan is not shown on the survey. CATHERINE MESIANO: No it is not. I was not able to get the completed survey until today. So I had the landscaper designer give me a site plan. Rather than waiting for the survey. It is to the same scale and you can over lay it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Apparently this triangular flag is at? CATHERINE MESIANO: I can explain this better. I have some sketches on my notes. The area of clearing is primarily where I Board of Trustees 4 July 19, 2000 slashed marked. There is a line of hay bales that was placed behind the area that was flagged which was wet lands that were flagged. So the area that was cleared is primarily this area. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well the whole thing was cleared. CATHERINE MESIANO: The whole thing was cleared. Yes, but as far as this board is concerned. I guess we are just concerned with the 75 feet from the high water mark. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do we have the line of hay bales put on the survey and also the proposed re-vegetation put on there. We will inspect it on our next field inspection. We can look at it as a reference point from the hay bales. I guess the edge of the patio staked. So we have an idea. CATHERINE MESIANO: What I have done in the placement of the proposed structures is to put everything landward of the ten foot contour. Because of the DEC jurisdiction would end there. So I have not proposed anything seaward of the ten foot elevation. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But you will have to show us that. Normally we would have the whole house staked in the field. If you only put a house corner or the corner of the patio or something that will be enough. You do not have to stake the whole house. CATHERINE MESIANO: Is there anything else you would like to see.. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anything else? TRUSTEE SMITH: No CATHERINE MESIANO: Add the hay bales. Stake the corner of the house. (cannot understand) TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you and we will be out August 16th. Do I have a motion to table the application. TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Second. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Ail in favor. ALL AYES 2. S.E.L. Permits on behalf of MATTITUCK INLET MARINA & SHIPYARD INC. requests a Wetland Permit maintenance dredge marine basin to maintain a depth of -6.0' at ALW. Dredge spoil not to exceed 100 c.y. each dredging occurrence. Located: Mill Road, Mattituck. SCTM~106-6-13.3 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of the application? SUE LONG: Do you have any questions I will try to answer them. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We have a question? This is town owned property and we would not let you dredge within only to 5 feet. After 5 feet we loose, actually we still own the bottom. But we lose control under the wetland ordinance. We would only allow for 5 feet in the creek to dredge. I believe that is the system with the DEC anyway. SUE LONG: I do not understand? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Although they maybe consistent with us. SUE LONG: I have a question about that, if you are willing to say that you lose the jurisdiction. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is under the wetland code. Not under the Andros patent. Board of Trustees'<~j' 5 '~::~ July 19, 2000 SUE LONG: Looking at the water depth. When the area was dredged. There are allot of areas there. That exceed 5 feet are you saying that. Eventually this entire creek is going to be allowed to fill in. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You mean the navigational channel. The federal channel. That was done by the federal government. I do not know when that was done? None of these board members were here I do not think. SUE LONG: Even the use of the marina now. The boats that are in there now and the water depths that are required. You can see that many of the areas do exceed 5 foot limit. TRUSTEE SMITH: What was that Sue? SUE LONG: The water depth if you look at my proposal here. There are many areas here that exceed the 5 feet. TRUSTEE SMITH: That was done by the Federal channel. SUE LONG: Within my marina right here. Right within. TRUSTEE SMITH: That I do not know. It was in the marina, it might be a natural depth. They only allow dredging up to 5 feet. The DEC does because they lose control over 5 foot depth. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It seems unlikely that would fill in. We took your soundings and we drew a pencil line around. Trying to get an idea. We did it at 6 feet, and then we did some at 5 feet here. It seems really unlikely that those areas would ever fill in. There is quite a bit of water. SUE LONG: We have some boat slips in here that the water depth is down to 3 feet. 4 feet and some that are in 7 feet. I just cannot comprehend. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Could you come up here and see what we drew here. Maybe you can get a better understanding of what we are talking about. SUE LONG: Jim my client is here. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: This is from your prospective, looking out. You can see the area that we drew out here. It involves the contour. There are two concerns, one is the depth and I do not think we have a problem with you cleaning out along the bulkhead here to get your required depth in here. Going to five feet that takes in almost the whole confines of the whole marina. It is unlikely that this out here. Where the water flows will flow in. JIM PAPE: The problem that we have is in covering the area. The tide going out we have water filling in here. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI:L It is filling in here, but we do not have problem with that. JIM PAPE: The reason that we applied for 6 feet because we had a meeting with the DEC. They went in there and talked to us and told us to go to 6 feet. So that was them telling us to go to 6 foot. So that is why we applied for 6, over the five year however it works out. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Then there is another concern that Kenny brought up. There is a shellfish bed on the corner. I do not know if you want to do that area? (Tape change) Board of Trustees 6 ~ July 19, 2000 TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Part of the bottom all through here. Where the oyster exist. SUE LONG: But the depth there is already 8 feet. You are only talking about dredging 2 to 3 feet. In two little sections at the most. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We would not want to see that disturbed. That is all public bottom. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Plus we plant seed there. I plant seed right off of that dock. JIM PAPE: The problem that you are going to run into. The problem that I will run into as a marina operator if I cannot get this cleared out. It is going to make this dry up this much faster. Because it is not going to have any water flowing in. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I do not follow that. Because it is public bottom. JIM PAPE: I am not talking about who owns the bottom. I am just saying that if this continues to get shallower and shallower. I have to live with the fact that the water and the mud is coming from the farm fields east of me. It fills this creek ever time we have a rain storm. There is a board member here that is going to have to live with that mud coming right by his house. You see it, and it stops here, because there is no water flow. I am only asking to clean the existing area. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But before this bulkhead was built. I do not know when this bulkhead was built a 100 years ago. Before that was built. There was no 4 feet of water here. JIM PAPE: We dredged this, we did this when they opened the marina forty years ago. This was land that was dug out. Go back and look at some of your old stuff. This was land that was dug out. There was barges that were sunk all along this property. They took the barges out, this is all man made. This marsh here the contour was all dug out. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is my point. It was dug out. It was not deep water there. It was not naturally a deep water area. You are making it a deep water area. That is my point. It wants to fill in because it is nature and wants to go back to what it was. You are trying to say you want to dig it out to get boats in. JIM PAPE: I only want to maintain the boats that are there. I am not looking for any extra boats. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We do not have a problem going right behind it. Cleaning all this out. JIM PAPE: The ideal situation, what we are trying to do. Is we are trying to eventually get rid of these slips, and move these slips and move these slips over to the other side. So that we can bring these boats in turn them. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: That would be ideal. JIM PAPE. It would be ideal. But if you do not let me do it I cannot bring them in. No way. Take these slips off here. Just a straight dock, put these slips to this dock. Put it over there so that we can bring the big boats in. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Again we would not want to see this dredged. JIM PAPE: But if I cannot dredge that. There is no sense of moving these boats. Board of Trustees 7 July 19, 2000 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes, Ken has a point. It is a public resource. We cannot allow someone to take it all away. JIM PAPE: I am only looking to maintain what we have there now. We even have pictures where this is all clean, and we are not doing that. It is too dry, too much going on. Looking to handle just a marina facility not increase it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What do you think about the rest of it? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: The rest of it is no problem. I do not know about the shellfish resource in the rest of that area. I do not see a reason. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I drew that line about 5 feet. JIM PAPE: We are not looking to do anything outside of the area that has been a marina facility. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I would stick with 5 feet. There is no reason to dredge more than 5 feet. JIM PAPE: But if you are issuing me a permit. That says I can do it. What happens to the confines of the marina and in five years from now. Particular areas are more than five, on the other side of your line. I will have to come down again, and go through the whole permit application. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No I did not draw the line saying that was the extent of it. I drew the line that we have a reference. Original reference of the extent of it. That is all. JIM PAPE: If that is what you are going to do. That line changes from a place and reduces me from the confines of the marina facility. So that you can only go within fifty feet of this area. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I know what you are saying. But that was not the intention. JIM PAPE: That would become the reality. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Possibly in ten years somebody else would look at it and say they allowed this. You are right. But that is not the intention. The intention is to give us an idea about what is proposed. JIM PAPE: Like I said before, I am not looking to increase the size ~of the facility. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We would give you a permit that far sees it would not have a line on it. It would just be five feet. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: If we took a boat out there, rowed around. We would see 17 feet. JIM PAPE: Well you are going. You will see 7 feet, 9 feet, you would see plug holes here and there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We do not want to approve something, but that is the limit. TRUSTEE SMITH: It is in the confines of the marina. The only reason that I mentioned the five feet is because I thought that was a state law. TRUSTEE KING: I did too. TRUSTEE SMITH: If the DEC is going with 6 feet, that is fine. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I have a problem with that, because that floating dock is 5 or 5-1/2 feet, right now. If we say 5 feet there would be no reason to touch any of that. Now if you tell them 6 feet, then you would have to dredge the shellfish area. There is a resource there already. Board of Trustees July 19, 2000 ANGELO STEPONSKI: Come in and eradicate the resource before we dredge. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: They have been trying for years. ANGELO STEPONSKI: Why not come in and dig it. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I would propose 6 feet to the southerly dock. Five feet at the southerly dock. TRUSTEE SMITH: I make a motion to let them go 6 feet. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Wait a second. See what he is saying go here go 6 feet whatever the docks are. But for this area go 5 feet. JIM PAPE: But slowly but surely I appreciate what you are saying but this was taken it away. This was taken away from us already by not being repaired, because we were told not to. We were doing the right thing. We gave up all the slips on the whole inside corner of this dock. Now if you put that in. It will stop me from doing it. Stop me from being able to use that corner of the facility. It will fill up. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: At five feet though? You are taking 2 feet out of there. JIM PAPE: I am just saying that slowly but surely you are keep chisseling away at it. Now this is so dry that we cannot do it because it great mud flat. ANGELO STEPONSKI: It was not a great mud flat. Well it was 9 feet deep at one time. TRUSTEE SMITH: I have no problem with it. You have to accommodate marinas. We do not want new ones to go up all over the place. So the ones that are existing. They have to be maintained. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It is true. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I agree with that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Henry you have a motion? TRUSTEE SMITH: Yes. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there a seconded? TRUSTEE KING: I will seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES SUE LONG: You had mentioned ten years. That is what I am asking for. That is what I applied for with the Army Corp. of Engineer's. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Up to how many times? SUE LONG: Renewal every year. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Keep dredging every year? SUE LONG: If it is necessary. That will only be with the New York State, when you can dredge. They have their own dredge scheduling when you can dredge. I know in Bellport the only time that you can go in and dredge is Labor Day week-end until .. no I don't. TRUSTEE SMITH: I do not think you are going to need that. Probably twice in ten years. I have no problems with it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You should make it run concurrent with the state permits. SUE LONG: Okay. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So you do not get into leap frog problems. What about spoil areas and the method of dredging? SUE LONG: The method of dredging is right on there to do. A crane and a clam shell and the dredge spoil. We are looking Board of Trustees '~': 9 "~ July 19, 2000 behind the bulkheads it will be trucked away. So that we do not get into any trouble. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Some place out of our jurisdiction. SUE LONG: Yes TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Good. 3o S.E.L. Permits on behalf of ?IMOTH¥ & N~/~C¥ HILL requests'a Wetland Permit to install a 4'x45' catwalk, a 3'x12' ramp and a 6'x20' float with 2 piles. Located: 360 Oak Avenue, Southold. SCTM#77-2-2 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Anyone here like to speak in favor of the application? KEVIN MC LAUGHLIN: I have submitted a letter to the Board today. I have been retained to address the ownership of the strip of beach in front of the lots facing Goose Creek. I have submitted a deed to you and some related correspondence from the original (cannot understand). The original deed (tape cutting out) transferred the bulk (cutting out) It also had a specific clause that transferred ownership of the area between the (cutting out) high water mark of Goose Creek. I provided you a copy of the deed that originally pertained to these particular lots. Also contains the rights to the owners of the lots facing Goose Creek. As long as they do not unreasonable interfere with the rights of others to use the beach. I also indicated to you in my letter. That there are at least seven existing docks, located within the subdivision on Goose Creek. Basically what I am here to do is just to try to (tape cutting out) We do own this property subjected to the rights of others to reasonable cross over. But again with the right to construct a dock. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well we just received this. Your letter today. I think we are going to have to review it. Take another look at the site. Then also have the Town Attorney review it. Because we normally do not, as I have explained before. To grant a permit for someone else's property. KEVIN MC LAUGHLIN: Again our position is. We do have the ownership of the property such as the deed. But obviously, you want the Town Attorney to review that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Of course we do. Thank you. Any other comments. I will make a motion to Table the hearing. TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES 4. J. Kevin McLaughlin, Esq. on behalf of MARK L. & PATRICIA R. LAMPL requests a Wetland Permit for removal of existing stairs to the beach and the construction of a new set of stairs in essentially the same location. Located: 910 The Strand. Pebble Beach Farms, East Marion. SCTM~030-2-81 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of the application? KEVIN MC LAUGHLIN: I think the application is pretty self explanatory. I think if you have gone down there and looked at the existing stairs. They are obviously in not very good Board of Trustees July 19, 2000 condition or dangerous. Basically, we are asking for permission to take them down to build new stairs to the beach. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Artie took a look at this one. Anyone want to look at the plans. Is there any other comment? TRUSTEE SMITH: I will make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES TRUSTEE SMITH. I will make a motion to Approve. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES 5. Patricia C. Moore, Esq. on behalf of DOUGLAS & CAROL RYAN requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4'x200' fixed timber walkway, 3'x14' ramp, 6'x20' float. Located: 3710 Beebe Drive, Cutchogue. SCTM~ 103-9-2 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of the application? PATRICIA MOORE: Good evening, I have Mr. Ryan the contract vendee here as well. What we are proposing to do here is that the majority of this catwalk is going to be giving access under the wetlands. There is approximately 2 feet from the average high water in that area there. Consider a small difference and all together it extends out 38 feet from the edge of the wetlands. So it is in keeping with the scope of small docks that you would prefer to see. It is consistant with the area, to the extent that it does have to extend out to 4 feet. I know that you had some questions of the soundings. As far as I know from Mr. Fox he did take actually soundings, of this area. because the DEC had requested it. So the measurements we believe to be accurate. The depth does have to go out to 4 feet in order to get the DEC to accept this application. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I am sorry, Pat, you said it was extended how far from? PATRICIA MOORE: The length of the dock is measured from upland. To the upland area, there is an area about 2/3 of this catwalk is from the upland over the marsh and to the property to the average high water. Then from that point, I measured and it is approximately 18 feet or so from the catwalk. Go to a 3x14 ramp and then to the 6x20 float. What I did is I put 18x14 and fifth and came to 38 feet plus or minus. As far as the actual dimensions from the edge of the wetlands out to the creek. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We must have different plans. Because I am looking at. I just scaled out 80 feet from the edge of the marsh from what is in the file. We must have completely different plans. PATRICIA MOORE: This is what I have. What do you have? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Look at the points of float on these and then scale that backwards. PATRICIA MOORE: 6x20. I did that also. I took 18, and measured 18. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Let me just show you. A 60 foot scale here. This is the edge of the barge. It is almost 80 feet. So it is a big difference. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Look at this float. Board of Trustees ~' 11 ~t July 19, 2000 PATRICIA MOORE: That is how I did it. Because I did not have my ruler with me. So I took two times. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It is almost 80 it is like 78 feet. But we are on the same page. PATRICIA MOORE: We are on the same page. I measured it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: A lot of our problems with this are that. It extends so far into the water. It proposes a navigational hazard. PATRICIA MOORE: Well it is 225 feet from the opposite shore line. So in fact. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That does not matter. It still extending 80 feet into the water. PATRICIA MOORE. We have to reach 4 feet of depth. That is what the DEC. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: In order to get a DEC permit you have to. PATRICIA MOORE: The trustee I understand. Right now there is certainly odds between the trustees requirements and the DEC requirements. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Not necessarily. PATRICIA MOORE: The DEC has been imposing on every application that I have gotten. Has come back with requests for 4 foot depth to water. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We know that. PATRICIA MOORE: I know that the trustees. The other gentlemen here that do this on a regular basis. We all commiserate together. The problem that we have is that trustees knowing this. Is granting us something that you know that another agency will not approve. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No we are not going to grant you something. We are not worried what the DEC is going to grant. We are going to grant something that is appropriate for Southold town. You have to look at it from the right angle, which is what is best for Southold town. You cannot look at what the DEC is going to approve. The Army Corp. is going to approve. That has almost nothing to do with what is best for Southold Town. PATRICIA MOORE: I understand, but I think $outhold Town Trustees to sit down with the DEC and slap them around a little bit. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We did this winter. PATRICIA MOORE: They seem to be going in the opposite direction, because they are actually now fighting all of the policies that the trustee's are trying to invoke. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But it really is not at odds. They are saying they will not approve a float unless there is 4 feet of water. So that is what they are saying. Well that is fine. But we are not going to say you can have any length catwalk to get to 4 feet. If it is going to harm the environment. Or if it is going to effect navigation. Or any other standards that in Chapter 97 or what we consider to be the Andros Patent. They are saying one thing that is like apples and oranges though. That is there thing they need 4 feet of water. That does not mean that everyone on the creek is going to get a dock with a ramp and a float. You can ask some of the other permit agents here. Allot of applicants lately have catwalks to the edge of Board of Trustees ~l' 12 ~? July 19, 2000 the marsh. They have stairs down, maybe they have a pUll-out to tie a boat off on. But they do not get a ramp and float. They certainly do not get unlimited catwalks to reach 4 feet of water. PATRICIA MOORE: I am not disagreeing with you. I think that the DEC is taking positions that are unwarranted. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But that has nothing to do with us here tonight. We are not going to solve that tonight. PATRICIA MOORE: Okay, I understand that. But what we have here is an application that is not impacting navigation at all. Because there is 225 feet and we had it placed on the survey so that we show the distance to the opposite shore. Knowing that you want to be able to maintain the navigability of the creek. This particular area of the creek is a wide area. This dock will not affect navigation. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there any other comment on this application? To approve this would be inconsistent with what we have been doing for the last 2 years. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Do you recall how far the neighbor's dock went? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It shows on it here, I think but. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: That is our policy that what we have been doing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: In some cases, if it is a reasonable dock. You can take a look at this. The neighbor is about 38 feet past the edge of the marsh. The adjacent neighbor is 38 feet past the edge of the marsh. We were out, in fact, when we were on field inspection. He was out there and we walked out on his structure. So we got an idea of what it was like right there. He said he did not have any problem with navigable with water getting enough water. PATRICIA MOORE: I just do not think you would get back on the DEC. That is the problem. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But we have to look at the best interest of Southold Town, and not worry about what the DEC is going to require. The CAC comment was that the catwalk be relocated in order to shorten the overall length. The catwalk right now is about 145 feet from to the edge of the marsh. If you put it at an angle. Towards the southwest you could probably cut 30 feet off of that easily to the edge of the marsh. PATRICIA MOORE: We do not have a problem with the placement. As long as it does not put it into shallow water. I think that is why we are suggesting this location. The closest point to the deeper water. Because you can see that it goes down to 1.4 as it goes towards the south. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is only along the shore line. You do not know what it is another ten, twenty feet out from there. It could be deeper there. I do not know myself. DOUG RYAN: Good evening, my name is Doug Ryan, I would just like to say. I do not want anything more than my neighbor has. I just want to be able a 20 foot boat there. I actually went there by raft. I keep a boat right now in Cutchogue Harbor. I took a raft over with a ruler at dead low tide. Did my own soundings. It seems that particular area is where the deeper is. As you start to go to the south, the water gets shallower. Board of Trustees ~"/ 13 <~-/ July 19, 2000 I spent almost a whole afternoon trying to figure this out. Aga±n I would be happy to have what my neighbor next door has. Just to keep a little boat there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think we will table this. We will take another look at next month. If we could meet you out there. In fact we even have met applicants at low tide. Just to make sure that it is low tide. DOUG RYAN: I will glad to meet you there, whenever you say. I will just take off work and be there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It would be August 16th. In the afternoon. You will have to call the office. DOUG RYAN: We will have to find the low tide on that day. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Call the office and coordinate the low tide. DOUG RYAN: If it would, help the situation. I could even have a small boat there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That would be helpful. You can have Pat put on the waiters. PATRICIA MOORE: Right now the DEC is taking the position that are really unreasonable in that they are asking for seasonal docks. They want a dock that will not cause problems. However, they are not taken what size boat the applicant has. So they are taking the position that we will not give you what you are asking for because you may want a 40 foot boat there. I think they could solve this simply by placing conditions on the DEC permit on size of boat. So in that way the permit they are issuing you is for a boat 20 feet or less, or if appropriate you need a bigger boat then you state whatever restrictions. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is hard to enforce. To be honest with you. PATRICIA MOORE: What they are doing now is going to be more difficult, the seasonal docks. I think they are going to cause such disturbance and affect the wetlands. I think you should be worried about it. DOUG RYAN: I spoke to the DEC about a seasonal dock. I totally do not understand. I do not think that anyone can understand. I asked what a seasonal dock was? They said that was a dock or a catwalk I should call it. That is a catwalk that has to come out every year and go back in every year. Then I said do you mean the pilings. The catwalk and pilings the whole thing and that is what they meant. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is only from the high water out. In some places the last one is Goose Creek. Most of those catwalks come out every year. That is not a requirement. That is what they do there. DOUG RYAN: I know they take float. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No everything comes out. DOUG RYAN: But would you not have to go in there with heavy equipment? To get these pilings out. I do not know how you do it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We have not seen too many of them. But just to put this into prospective. We were out with Rob Herrmann, I think for months at a time. To try to work on one application that we are going to work on again tonight. So it is not that we are trying to single you out. DOUG RYAN: No I understand. Board of Trustees 14 July 19, 2000 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: As long as you understand that. Because some of these are difficult and define a spot. We are willing to work with you. We will go next month and we will meet with you. DOUG RYAN: I will be glad to be there with a little boat and I thank you for your time and again I just want you to know. All I want is a little day boat, with an out drive that goes up and down. I am not looking to put the Queen Mary there. Thank you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I will make a motion to table this application. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES 6. Gary Olsen, Esq. on behalf of NEIL SChq3$$EL requests a Wetland Permit to merge land into one lot, instead of two, for construction of a single-family dwelling. LOCATED: Stillwater Avenue, Cutchogue SCTM~36-2-7&8 GARY OLSEN: Two lots merged into one. We had a meeting last time on June 21. The Board suggested that we come back with revised site plan for the house. Which I brought to your office this afternoon. The new plans were prepared by Young and Young. The house has been moved over to the southeast, Giving us a set back from the wetlands line of 41 feet. The northwest corner and the northeast corner. This is a wooded piece of property. I do not think granting this application is in any way going to adversely affect any wetlands and would be in keeping with the standards set forth in Article 97. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: There is a question on the cesspool location? We think that this is a more appropriate location from the house. It does give more separation from the wetlands. GARY OLSEN: The well and cesspool issue are a health department issue. We first have to get past the trustee's on there approval to have a house where we are suggesting. The other issues we have to take up with other agencies. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: See we have a problem with the septic system. The house location is to the site, to me anyway, seems appropriate. We have been to the site a number of times. Is there any other comments? CARL VAIL: My name is Carl Vail. I am a neighbor to this property. I had no opportunity to examine this site plan. As it was delivered to you this afternoon and the site itself has not been staked and inspected as was requested last meeting. So I cannot comment on this site plan. I am not looking at. But I have a third comment that I would like to make. I realize that you guys are trying to remediate this situation for Mr. Olsen. But he does have available to him a remediation is that his client owns the adjacent property. His client's family. So he is trying to place a home on an undersized parcel. But he has the adjacent property as well to work with. He is not doing that. Thank you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. This is a single separate parcel. TRUSTEE SMITH: Sir, could you have your client stake the four corners of the house for us. Board of Trustees July 19, 2000 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And the septic system. TRUSTEE SMITH: The septic system they do not know where they are going to put it. That is just drawn on there as a septic system. That is not on their by the board of health. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But their options are limited. GARY OLSEN: Did you want the surveyor to go and stake the new location. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right. GARY OLSEN: You want an overlay so you see. In the additional survey they did not stake it out. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We saw the initial staking. We would like to see it staked out in the field. Septic system also. GARY OLSEN: Unfortunately the survey was delayed and was done at 2 o'clock this afternoon. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The inspection is the 16th of August. Thank you. Any other comments? We will make a motion to table this application. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES 7. Land Use Ecological Services, Inc. on behalf of JAMES DONOhN3E requests a Wetland Permit to construct a Timber Dock Facility/Boat Lift proposed facility is to consist of a 4'x20' fixed CCA Timber Dock with stairs, 3'x30' ramp, and 6'x20' float. The proposed fixed dock is proposed to be raised a minimum of 3.5' above grade and supported by (10) 4'x4' posts. (3) proposed 6'x6' piles are proposed to support the float. Proposed boat lift to be adjacent to the float and proposed to be supported by (6) 8" DIA CCA Timber piles with a depth of penetration of 10'x+/-o A proposed 4' wide natural wood chip access path is proposed from the lawn area to the proposed facility. Located: 230 Willis Creek Drive, Mattituck $CTM~115-17-17.9 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there any one who would like to speak on behalf of the application? CHARLES BOWMAN: Charles Bowman representing Mr. Donohue. I will keep this brief I know it is late. Mr. Donohue would like to take advantage' to keep the dock against the east side of the creek as much as possible. It seems to be the best location. It still would allow for navigation of the creek. This is at the northern end of the creek anyway. I do not think that it would be infringing upon any of the other docks on the other side of the creek. I think we have given line on the plan that shows the seaward extent of the dock on the other side. If you have any questions I will be happy to answer them. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We have questions. Let me get these copies past out. We met with the applicant three or four months ago. We are familiar with the sight. We have been there twice. We have a number of concerns about this. Ken you want to start and explain. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: If you look around the surrounding area. Across the creek the people probably have a 20 foot or maybe a 4x10 or 4x16 float each. Directly across. That is probably what the area could handle. What you are asking for here is Board of Trustees ~/~ 16 ~/ July 19, 2000 substantial. It probably be a construction project that would likely be in the bay. Not up the canal. CHARLES BOWMAN: He has good water for the 6x20 float. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: But there is no channel left. CHARLES BOWMAN: It still leaves, if you have a 6x20 float. You still have 30 feet. If you go across the creek that 4 foot water depth basically goes to where those people have docks. They may have a narrower boat dock is what you are saying. But the water depth is certainly still there. The board's position on a 6x20 is standard float to have. Now I understand if we were up the lot, up the creek, but she does have an indention. The creek is wider at this point. On the indentation of his property. I would not see any reason why that 6x20 float could not fit there in his case. If it was the lot to the south or to the north. I agree with you. Because it does not have the indentation. He has an extra 20 feet in the creek. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We were there. We were there twice. There is also the issue of the lift itself taking a tremendous amount of area. We have a policy the boat and structure cannot extend more 1/3 away across the channel. That is for navigational purposes. It seemed like an awfully big structure for that part of the creek. Even with the indentation that is there. CHARLES BOWMAN: I certainly can talk to Mr. Donohue about the lift. I anticipated that there be questions about the lift. I think the float does met the 1/3 criteria. In his particular section there. Even if we went down to the south. The measurement that we had was about 75 feet, from the creek it would be 25 feet. So I think that we are very close there. He ends up with 25 feet in the middle. So I think that we are very very close there. He even has these indentations. The only other potential we have also is twisting the float dock. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Did you hear what Henry said? TRUSTEE SMITH: I think you got to draw a straight line across his property there. Disregard that indentation for the 1/3 distance. CHARLES BOWMAN: What can I do. I have no problem in tabling this. Actually stretching tape across in that area. That we took this measurement near the boat ramp. I certainly have no problem in doing that. Henry you want us to draw a straighter line across to meet the 25%. We can see how that goes. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: You can focus on the ramp and float and put a stake. Where the slope (cannot understand). CHARLES BOWMAN: That is fine. I have no problem with that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there any other comment on this application? Another one for Lauren. We do not have a problem with him putting in a catwalk, ramp, float. Put something to put a boat there. It is not impossible. But it has to be done so that it does not impede the navigation. CHARLES BOWMAN: I will check on the measurements. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Do I have a motion to table this hearing. TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES Board of Trustees .~.j/ 17 ...... July 19, 2000 8. Peconic Associates, Inc. on behalf of DOUGLAS DE FEIS requests a Wetland Permit to replace existing residential dwelling on same foundation with a two story dwelling. Building footprint to be identical to existing. Located: Cedar Point Drive West, Southold. SCTM~90-01-03 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of the application? DOUGLAS DE FEIS: My name is Douglas De Feis, I am the owner and petitioner of the said property. It is basically a bungalow upgrade. The structure was built pre-1969 and has unsafe standards, faulty wiring. We basically want to do an upgrade. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any other comments? Do I have a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES TRUSTEE SMITH: I will make a motion to Approve. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES 9. Proper-T-Permit Services on behalf of ROBERT DI DOMENICO requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 1-family dwelling, garage, deck & sanitary system. Construct a 4'x30' fixed walkway, 4'x16' hinged ramp and a 6'x20' floating dock, install two piles to secure floating dock. Located: 2725 Pine Tree Road, Cutchogue. SCTM~104-3-5.1&5.2 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of the application? JIM FITZGERALD: Yes, Jim Fitzgerald, for Mr. DiDomenico. This application is the same as the information that was submitted two years and three or four months ago. Which the trustee's approved and do to a combination of circumstances. The length of the time taken on the project it expired. Here we are back again. Everything is the same. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: While we are reviewing the file. Is there any other comment? We reinspected it last week as a board. The last permit issued says: "Construct a one family dwelling, garage, deck and sanitary system. All approved subject to condition that no clearing of land be done 35 feet from the house to the wetlands. Only hand pruning of land be done, place haybales during construction". It is not the best definition is it? JIM FITZGERALD: I am sorry I was not listening. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I do not think the way we did that was very clear. I think we want to say: "Is that we want a 35 foot buffer between the wetlands and construction". Make it a little clearer. Any other comments? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: No TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do I have a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES Board of Trustees~'~/ 18 July 19, 2000 I will make a motion to Approve the application. With a change in the wording that there be no disturbance 35 feet from the wetlands towards the construction. Or upland from the wetland be a 35 foot buffer, non disturbance. With the exception of a 4 foot path to access the walkway. JIM FITZGERALD: On another matter. While I am standing here. This policy change, or what appears to be a policy change. Not here but with the DEC. This is just for my information. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Can we finish this first. JIM FITZGERALD: I am sorry. Yes please. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do I have a second. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES Go ahead. I thought it pertained to this. Before we vote. JIM FITZGERALD: It would seem to me. That it would be that kind of thing being based upon new data, or new studies or something of that sought. Are you aware of anything that the DEC has done or read in the journals. Or anything like that. Suddenly make it necessary to have four feet of water. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I would assume it is something that has involved over time. Over the course of there reviewing project. Then seeing them built and then you go out and look at what was built. I do not know. ROB HERRMANN: I know that you are assuming that. But that is not right. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is how this board involved in the decision that way. Somethings are approved and you go out and look at it again and you want to hide. So you try to change the way you conduct yourself as a board. To avoid those things in the future. Now I do not know why the DEC changed their minds. 10. Proper-T-Permit Services on behalf of C&D REALTY requests a Wetland Permit to construct a single-family dwelling with private well and on-site sewage disposal system. Located: 3640 Cox Neck Rd. Mattituck. SCTM#ll3-4-1 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No JIM FITZGERALD: That was postponed. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That will be postponed. Thank you. 11. En-Consultants Inc. on behalf of LISA ED$ON requests a Wetland permit to construct on pilings a one'family, two story dwelling, deck, and swimming pool, install a pervious driveway and sanitary system, place approximately 850 cubic yards of sand fill, establish a 30' non-disturbance buffer adjacent to the tidal wetland boundary; and connect to public water and other utilities, all as depicted on the site plan. Located: 9326 Main Bayview Road, Southold. SCTM#87-5-25. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: En-Consultants Inc. on behalf of Lisa Edson will be postponed. Until we get some facts on it. ROB HERRMANN: Let me just submit the postings. I just wanted to make sure. That my letter that I submitted with the request to postpone. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The CAC recommended disapproval. Board of Trustees '~ 19 "~ July 19, 2000 ROB HERRMANN: Not as far as I am obviously not going to discuss the substance of the project with you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I do not want to discuss it either. But I am just commenting that they recommend disapproval. ROB HERRMAN: The board last time announced that the property be staked and in the meantime we had switched surveyors and had the property staked. I was forwarded a staking plans by Youngs Geiger. That means that it was staked, but the board did not find the stakes. So my fear is that either you could not find the stakes or obviously, the stakes walked. If that happens with the DEC after it is staked. This project will never get reviewed. By either agencies. So what Chris Arfsten had suggested that he would contact Ingegno's office a day or so before he goes out and would hope to arrange. I discussed with Mr. Ingegno and he said it was fine. He would send a crew out and stake it during the inspection. So if I could give you or anyone the board a day or so notice. I would like to get out and have it staked proposed and then review the site with yourselves and the DEC. Hopefully have a little more efficient and effective review. Otherwise we are going to keep staking it. The stakes are going to be disappearing and the house will never get built at all. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: There is also a problem with the vegetation. It is about chest high. If you put a stake in this tall. ROB HERRMANN: I know. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We were guessing the approximate house site. But it is thick brush and we are looking for a stake this tall. We are assuming that it is not there. We have been there four times. We really think we know where the house is. ROB HERRMANN: It really has grown in, but we will accomplish that to. They could come down and we could paths right to the stake. I also disgusted with Chris. The wetlands that existdown there. It is very obviously wet to the side of the berm.. But I do not believe that there is title indication that high up. So we need to square away with the State. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: On the other side of the berm.. ROB HERRMANN: On the other side of the berm,, that is where we disguised also. Chris wants to look also, I think it makes sense for all of us to do it in one shot. So I hate to say that I am going to call you a day or so in advance. But if we could make some effort to meet out there. It may save you another half dozen visits. Instead of going out and finding nothing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We can try. I do suggest that we just had this last week field inspection. We went out on an inspection. It was chest high weeds going into the heavy brush, going into the woods. Nothing was staked it was impossible from a survey on a three acre lot to realize where you were. They did enough clearing for us to get a path in. The house was staked. We were able to locate the house, locate the wetlands. You will have to do some clearing so that we can actually. Henry has no problem driving in there. But we need a path to the stakes. So you can see the layout of the property. Board of Trustees 20 July 19, 2000 ROB HERRMANN: That is what we liked to do. So I will contact your office and try to get in touch with you directly. To see if we can meet out there with Chris. Thanks. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Did we make a motion to Table that? No it is just postponed. TRUSTEE SMITH: I will make a motion. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there a seconded. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES 12. En-Consultants Inc. on behalf of MICHAEL BRAUN requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4'x68' fixed timber catwalk with a 4'x9' inclined ramp and 4'x5' stairs at the landward and seaward ends, respectively. Construct a 10'x15' first story addition. Located: 650 Spring Lane, Peconic SCTM~86-5-6. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of the application? ROB HERRMANN: I am Rob Herrmann of En-Consultants on behalf of the applicant, Michael Braun. The application consists of two parts. One is straight forward. One room addition to the existing dwelling. The other is a catwalk similar to that. That was approved by this board and the DEC for Roland & Karen Grant. Two properties to the south. Since I did get a chance to speak with board after your inspection about reducing the length of the catwalk. The plan that I just handed to you. Reduces the overall length of the catwalk by 12 feet. The Grant catwalk t~hat was approved at the end was 21 feet seaward of low water. The slight variation and the site conditions here is. That the edge of the marsh and low water do not exactly coinside here. So the problem is. If we reduce the extension of the catwalk anymore. We basically still be on dry ground another ten inches. So it goes out 6 more feet. In total length than the Grant's but actually extends out not as far from low water. That extra six or seven feet get us basically from ground zero. Up to almoSt 12 inches. That is about the minimum I think that we are go!lng to able to be use. Hopefully the 12 foot cutback will s~tiSfy you. TRUSTEE KRUPiSKI: Sure. ROB HERRMANN: We have the revised specks on the plan. It reduces the catwalk to 56 feet, plus the stairs and the ramp up those ha~e not changed. TRUSTEE KRUPiSKI: Thank you. Any other comment. TRUSTEE SMITH: I will make a motion to Approve. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there a seconded. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES 13. En-Consultants Inc. on behalf of EDNA RICHARDS requests a Wetland Permit to construct a fixed timber dock, consisting of a 4'x58' fixed catwalk elev. 3.5' above marsh, a 3'x14' ramp and a 6'x20' float secured with (2) 8" diameter pilings, and steps 2'x4' landward of existing stone wall. Located: 2300 Broadwaters Rd. Cutchogue SCTM#lll-i-1 Board of Trustees ~/ ~ 21 July 19, 2000 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would anyone like to precede with this on behalf of this applicant? ROB HERRFLANN: I am Rob Herrmann of En-Consultants on behalf of applicant Edna Richards. This of course is the application. You had referred to before. In terms of the number of months we have been at it. What you have in front of you now is a revised dock plan. Pursuant to our field inspection of the property on July 10th. Upon drafting the plan I noticed one final catch. It would be to easy to close this. Although I discussed with Jim King many times there are a couple of different ways that these riparian extended property lines are worked. Whether they go out at right angle to the shore line. Or whether you do an extension straight out. Jim has expressed to me that it would make more sense to go out at right angle. I agree with him. Unfortunately the Department of State and the Corp. and the DEC do not do that yet. They just extend the property lines out. So although at the properties. What you have in front of you looks like a good idea I think. It seems to be a grand improvement from what Ken had concerns about with the dock on the other side of the property. But I believe that we might have to get some sought of written consent from the Oiestads. I do not know what this board's position is in terms of the property line extension. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We have been through this a number of times. Well Kenny says it is town property. So it does not matter to the Oiestads. The Oiestads also have a dock permit. So they are not being shut out. If this was going to accomplish keeping them from having a dock we would not allow it. This does not do that. The way we have been told according to the extension lines. If you draw a straight line across. TRUSTEE KING: If there is a channel in front of it. Perpendicular to the channel. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is what we would like to do. TRUSTEE KING: We have gotten some information from the Town Attorney now that there is a case law. Where this has gone to Court. It was the Grover Shipyard request. I have it. If you want to look at it and take it to the DEC and show them° There are case laws that are held by the courts. This is the way it is suppose to be done. ROB HERRMANN: Okay. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I believe Oiestads is straight out. Perpendicular to the shoreline. ROB HERRMANN: I think it was. It is a little confusing because when you are down there. The site conditions make a lot of sense. Then you look at the survey and the way the lots are carved out. You suddenly get very confused. In terms of your barring. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Because you say here is the corner. ROB HERRMANN: You look out and you ordinarily go straight out. That is where we measured the water depth. So I was consistent with the field work that we did. So the dock would be consistent of what we found. Just again I want to do at least put the ball in the Board's court. On that issue because I just happen to notice in drafting it. Board of Trustees ~J 22 ~J~ July 19, 2000 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So we would not need the neighbor's consent. This is strictly our decision. ROB HERRMANN: That is fine. That makes my life easier I just did not want it to be one of these things. Oh, why did you never bring this up. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Although, maybe we should, we can condition it that it does not affect the Oiestads. Just to make sure. We do not have that file with us now. ROB HERRMANN: Well I have a copy of the dock plan and their survey. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The Oiestads. ROB HERRMANN: Yes, we had represented them. Of course looking at what it looks like I did not quite realize (cannot understand). Although I probably meant to. It did not seem complicated until I represented the neighbor. If you walk down there it is obvious that these two docks can be constructed with no problems with one interfering with the other. TRUSTEE SMITH: We saw that on our field inspection. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You think. TRUSTEE SMITH: Well the way it is drawn there it does. But on our field inspection there dock went straight out from the shoreline. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No there is no dock built here. They only have a permit. TRUSTEE SMITH: I was under the impression that they had a dock here. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is the neighbor's dock. There is no dock at the Oiestads property. TRUSTEE SMITH: That is the next neighbor's over. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: When was the Oiestads permit issued. ROB HERRMANN: It was issued in probably 1998 but I think renewed. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It was renewed. ROB HERRMANN: Not too many months ago. Yes, it is an issue with an 8 foot wide float and renewed with a 6 foot wide float. I would be willing to bet that when it is built it will be built perpendicular to the shore line. TRUSTEE SMITH: Why not send a copy of this to the Oiestads. Tell them that. ROB HERRMANN: That is what I meant to do. I would not design a dock across your property. I think it is just a case of losing one's bearing in terms of imagine the property either at right angle to the shoreline. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Can we go out next month? See what the scale one inch to three thousand feet. ROB HERRMANN: No that is the hedge. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Well we give you the permit. Tell them to build it tomorrow. What happens it has to work around that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Because we already have given Oiested the permit. TRUSTEE SMITH: How does their permit read? ROB HERRMANN: It just reads by the specks of the dock. That is why I am saying my assumption is that someone goes out to build that dock. They are not going to build at an angle through the Board of Trustees 23 July 19, 2000 marsh. They are going to build it at a right angle to the shoreline No body is going to go down there and looking at the survey and get confused. They are just logically do whatever dock builder does. They are going to build perpendicular to the shoreline and go straight out. TRUSTEE SMITH: Why not send a letter to the neighbor there and tell them in reviewing their permit. We noticed that their dock is shown on an angle. It is going to have to go straight out. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: To accommodate the neighbors. I assume that they will be coming in for another extension. TRUSTEE SMITH: Just send a letter that we found an error on their plans. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I do not feel comfortable with this. So I think that we should condition this permit based on working it out with the neighbors. So that even though the Richards are not going to build this next week. ROB HERRMANN: I do not know when they are. They had planned to build for the summer. That is obviously gone. I cannot answer you. But I would be surprised if they were planning on building it this season. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The Oiestads could build it there. At that angle with their permits and then we would have a problem. We have to ask them to change their permit to a reflect that. ROB HERRMANN: That is the only issue that if the Oiestads erect theirs. It is going to run into there neighbor to the north. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do you have the DEC permit on this? Of course not. ROB HERRMANN: For Oiestads? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No. ROB HERRMANN: For Richards. Yes, but I have it for the original location. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Okay. ROB HERRMANN: I have to go back to the State. With this plan anyway. Because we are changing the location of the dock. I have to go back to the DEC. I do not think they will object to it. Because it is going to still maintain the same 4 foot water depth. The only thing is that they are then likely to ask me about getting some sort of written authorization from Oiestads. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We own the land. We can give them the authorization. I do not mind approving this tonight. With the condition that we can work this out with Oiestads. So that there is no navigational hazards. Which there should not be. If they have not built anything. So it should not be a problem. ROB HERRMANN: I do not disagree with you. If they build two dock down there. That are running into each other. I designed them both. So it is not good for my reputation either. It is in my interest to get it fixed. As I said these lots as we have seen them on the sound. They just get wacky. Because the property lines are drawn with these angles to the shoreline. It is easy to get mixed. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right. Any other comment on this? We have your copy of Oiestads.. TRUSTEE KING: You want that back? Board of Trustees 24 July 19, 2000 ROB HERRMANN: Yes. TRUSTEE SMITH: I will make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there a seconded? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES (Tape change) ROB HERRMANN: With a slight bend in Oiestads. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Let us just table it and resolve it. Because it is irresponsible of us to just to say see what happens. TRUSTEE SMITH: You can fix it Rob. ROB HERRMANN: Well I can only fix it though. If Oiestads retains me to fix it. TRUSTEE SMITH: I do not think that there will be a problem. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I will call them tomorrow actually. Tell them about the problem. I do not see where it will be a problem, because he has not built lt. It is a paper change. ROB HERRMANN: Yes. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I do not think that we will make it better for Oiestads, but we will waive our fees. Because we want to accommodate this other person. ROB HERRMANN: What will you be looking for. Just some sought of plan change that shows that going out more. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Perpendicular, more perpendicular so that you can draw both plans up with the same scale. So you can actually know the distance between the docks. ROB HERRMANN: All right. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Henry made a motion to table. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES 14. J.M.O. Environmental Consulting on behalf of FISHERS ISLAI~D COUNTRY CLUB requests a Wetland Permit to install a 6'x+/-560' gravel golf cart path at the 18th Green. Located: East End Rd. 18th Green at Golf Course, Fishers Island SCTM~i-i-3.13 POSTPONED UNTIL NEXT MONTH 15. J.M.O. Environmental Consulting on behalf of LAWRENCE G. CREEL requests a Wetland Permit to construct a single family dwelling, sanitary system, driveway, decking, gazebo, pool, pool fence, pool back-wash, public water hook-up and to install and maintain continuous erosion control barrier throughout construction. Located: Cresent Avenue, Fishers Island SCTM~6-1-4.3 POSTPONED UNTIL NEXT MONTH 16. J.M.O. Envirlonmental Consulting on behalf of BELVEDERE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LLC requests a Wetland Permit to construct a principal building (28'x48') to be used as an office above garage/storage area as part of a "Private Ferry Terminal" The proposed building shall be located +/-60.12' landward of the Tidal Wetlands Line. To install an associated sanitary system by installing +/- 176' of concrete retaining wall and +/- 225 c.y. of clean sand. To construct +/- 123' of rock revetment consisting of 1-1/2'-2-1/2' ton rock with an 18' return at the Board of Trustees '~/ 25 ~<~ July 19, 2000 northern terminus. To place +/- 70 c.y. of clean sand atop revetment creating a sand dune and planting with American Cape Beachgrass (Ammophia breviligulata) and Rugose Rose (Rosa Rugosa). The area between the revetment/dune and parking area shall be planted with American Cape Beachgrass (Ammophila breviligulata). To remove +/- 200' of jetty and reconstruct in kind in place with vinyl and a timber jetty, To install two 9-pile marker dolphins. To reconstruct in kind in place +/-487' of timber bulkhead with vinyl and timber bulkhead and backfilling structure with +/- 200 c.y. of clean sand. To remove +/-345' of dilapidated timber bulkhead and install in kind in place +/- 345' of low profile vinyl and timber bulkhead. To construct 8'x62' boardwalk, to maintain existing 4'x20' ramp and 8'x123' float dock, to install an additional 8'x65' float , to remove (8) existing piles, to relocate (2) existing piles, to construct a 10'xl0' captain's security shed, to install a new 70'x20' concrete and rubber ramp for landing craft. To remove assorted debris (piles, rock, concrete slabs) from an existing +/-60'x+/- 140' area and then replanting area with both high marsh vegetation (spartina patens) and intertidal marsh vegetation (Spartina alerniflora). To expand existing sand dune located at the southern section of the property by +/-800 s.f. and plantings with American Cape Beachgrass (Ammophila breviligulata) and Rugose Rose (Rose rugosa), etc. To install a stormwater retention system utilizing a catch basin, 12'x50' corrugated pipe with flap gate. Located: First Street and Jackson Street, New Suffolk SCTM~l17-8-19&20 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of the application? GLENN JUST: Good evening I am Glenn Just of J.M.O. Consultants on behalf of the applicant. Here are some postings. Tonight I have the applicant's attorney Mr. Kevin Law here. Who would like to give you a quick introduction as far as we have gone so far with the project. Mr. Margarete is the surveyor and engineer for the project and has prepared the plans. George Costello, Costello Marine Contracting, hopefully will answer any questions pertaining to this project. If you will let Kevin give you a little preview and introduction. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Sure. KEVIN LAW: Kevin Law from Nickson Peabody in Garden City for the applicant. I will be brief. The applicant for your information purposes. Mr. Bacon acquired these two parcels on the main land when he acquired Robins Island. They are all part of the same deed. He transferred title to those properties to a holding company. Robins Island holds and that is the owner of the property. Belvedere Property Management LLC is the manager of the property who the applicant is. What we are looking to do. Is to clean up and improve the two lots that he owns on the main land lots 19 and 20. The focus of most of the activities to date have been on Robins Island. Most of those activities are no w completed. Now the focus is shifting to New Suffolk and we are looking to improve those two parcels. We are looking to construct a building, lack of better words, the town code only requires. They have a description of a ferry terminal. For Board of Trustees ~ 26 '~ July 19, 2000 lack of better words that is what it is called. Essentially what we are using the property for is a staging area. We have already acquired all of our approvals from the zoning board. We had a public hearing with them. Some members of the community expressed their concerns. We went back to the drawing board and tried to address as many of the concerns that we could. We reduced the size of the building. Scaled it back, from 30x60 to 28x48 feet and we also reduced the heilght. We also have applications pending before the Planning Board and the Trustee's and also applications pending before the Suffolk County Health Department. But everything to date has gone fine. We have addressed all the agencies concerned and our propose use will be consistent with the other marine uses in the neighborhood. I think you all know that one of the lots which is subject to the application used to be the site of a former oyster factory. Again I think you all have been down there. You know that we are looking to improve and beautify the area. As well as to make it more functional as a staging area for the activities that go on at Robins Island. With that I will sit down and m0aybe will have Glenn come back and answer another questions on the actual activities that we will be doing there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. KEVIN LAW: Thank you. TRUSTEE SMITH: Glenn, have you discussed any of the drainage problems, road run off. Anything like that with the town engineer. GLENN JUST: Yes, it is shown on the plan. You can see on page 3. It shows it for a drainage pipe and a corrugated pipe storm retention system. TRUSTEE SMITH: You have the blessings of the highway department on this? MR. MARGARETE: I had an on site inspection with Ray Jacobs twice. Prior to even drawing up these plans and I had a discussion.with Chuck Hamilton on how best to handle the storm water and how to prevent it from coming up the beach. There were two issues. One being the north lot, Ray's concern was that we keep our water on the lot itself. On lot two over where the landing craft is because the road is the lowest right at that point. He wanted a salt water run-off drain put in. Spoke to Mr. Halpern about it. He came up with the drawings on this plan. At that time we were happy with that content. TRUSTEE SMITH: I did not want to see this project built. Then all of a sudden. You got these big water problems. MR. MARGARETE: I went to Ray and Chuck right off the bat. GLENN JUST: You know the shack where the girl sits for the parking. It basically a chamber that when the water gets up to a certain level. Then it gets the out call, it will have a flapper bell. So that the water does not come back up. TRUSTEE SMITH: That is the only concern I had with it. far as the beautification. I know there representation has been very good. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The only additional thing that I was not aware of. This extra float on the end of the old oyster house here. Board of Trustees 27 July 19, 2000 MR. MARGARETE: Yes that was giving them more area to dock. They were having a little problem with the landing craft and the boat sort of docking side by side. Depending on the wind condition. Sometimes it is a lot easier from the land out there and then bring the boat around and tie it up for the night. That was the reason for the extra float out in front. Right now I have dolphins out there. Where they land there because it was safer but they were kind of crashing into the old bulkhead and whatever else. So we decided to put a float out there and rubberize it. Give them something a little safer to land on. Then they can come around and land on the main float. TRUSTEE SMITH: Whatever they want to do in their own confined area. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We own the bottom there. MR. MARGARETE: It is more of landing site. Then a tieing up site. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right and take the new piles out in the bay. Is there any other comments on this application? Do I have a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES TRUSTEE SMITH: I will make a motion to Approve the application of J.M.O. Consultants to build. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there a second. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES 17. LAWRENCE M. TUTHIIJ. requests a Wetland Permit to remove all second growth trees, to fill and grade property to level, grade pave roadway, to plant grass and erect fences. Located: 945 Orchard St. New Suffolk. SCTM~l17-5-46.4 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It is going to be postponed. We do not have a plan from him. I spoke to him yesterday. He is trying to get his facts between our board and the planning board. Whether they are going to require road width and what not. So he does not want to apply to us with one thing and then have to go back to them for something different. He wants to get everything straightened out on paper before he actually applies. Which make sense. Because you have to go to the planning board anyway. So you might as well incorporate all there requirements into our permit. So that is postponed at the applicants request. 18. BARBARA BRUNJES requests a Wetland Permit to repair existing bulkhead, remove existing 14 1.f. bulkhead return and 14 1.f. of retaining wall and reconstruct with timber bulkhead. Located:. 975 Arshamomaque Avenue, Southold SCTM~66-3-5. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak on behalf of this application? CAC recommends approval. JOHN LOPER: Yes John Loper representing Barbara Brunjes. She is not present. If you have any questions please feel free. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Who inspected this? Ken, TRUSTEE POLIWODA: No TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Henry Board of Trustees ~' 28 ~ July 19, 2000 TRUSTEE SMITH: No.TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I know this one I gave to someone. Because I thought I gave it to Ken. But I guess I did not. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Could it have been done two or three months ago. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No this is brand new. Wait here is a picture. Here is what it is. Maybe you can explain this to us. JOHN LOPER: The bulkhead itself is kind of in hard shape. It has to be every bit of forty years old. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The bulkhead are you going to repair it or replace it? JOHN LOPER: The main bulkhead itself. I am not doing anything to. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The corner here. JOHN LOPER: Where are we at? The main bulkhead runs along here. This is the return 14 feet comes back. This retaining wall here, what they have in there. This return is actually taken down in the mud. The stringer on it. The termites have eaten it apart and it sank. They are loosing some of their lawn area. Around here it is getting washed overboard. The retaining wall here has rotten out on the bottom. I told her what I can do in the way of repairing it. It really is not much. So they want me to go ahead. Rebuild this and this and I do not have any access to heavy equipment. It is going to be a shovel out by hand job. It not a big deal at all. The main bulkhead is not getting touched. Just this little notch at the end here. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The CAC has required a 10 foot non-turf buffer. Since we do not require that on that. Is there any fill? JOHN LOPER: I am not even planning on digging that much out. Probably three feet enough to work in. Couple of rods and that is it. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I do not have a problem with that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Pretty straight forward. Thank you. Is there any other comment? TRUSTEE SMITH: I will make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: So moved. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES TRUSTEE SMITH: I will make a motion to Approve. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Second. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do you want a buffer, with a 10 foot non-turf buffer only in the disturbed area. Where you going to dig up behind there. Any new bulkhead reconstruction like this. We require a ten foot, because it is all disturbed. That is the time to require the 10 foot non-turf buffer behind it. We are not going to require a 10 foot non-turf buffer behind the main bulkhead because it is not going to be disturbed. So we are just requiring it behind the new construction. JOHN LOPER: I am not even planning digging up 10 feet. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Go 8 feet or 6 feet there. She can put in gravel or something. Most people put gravel down. JOHN LOPER: Eight feet around it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes. Do I have a motion. Board of Trustees July 19, 2000 TRUSTEE SMITH: He can plant shrubs. We do not want grass, because they fertilizer it and runs over into the creek. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Are all in favor. ALL AYES 19. BOBETTE SU~ER requests a Wetland Permit for a 4'x38' dock, 3.6'x16' ramp and 6'x16' float, & 2 pilings. Located: 855 Fishermens Beach Road, Cutchogue. SCTM#111-01-20 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here to speak on this application? BOBETTE SUTER: Me, I am Bobette Suter. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We went out to the site. We measured the dock and it is actually. What we would like to do in cases like this. Is to keep the dock in line with all the neighbors and you are actually a little blt further out than all the neighbors. Because one goes out further and then the next one further, and then it becomes a problem. BOBETTE SUTER: Did you see the letters. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: From Dr. Samuels. That is in the file, from July 10th. There is one from James Carmen. BOBETTE SUTER: I brought some pictures for you also. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Saying that it existed. Who placed the mooring piles there in the early seventies. There was an existing dock. In the reference property in 1959. Jim Holman it says: I will attest that the structure there has been there before on or before 1959. Which his arrival, in its concurrent figuration. Which I certainly believe after looking at the dock. BOBETTE SUTER: I have some pictures. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is fine. We were there. The only other thing besides the length. Was that it is a 3 foot wide dock, and you applied for a 4 foot wide. We measured it. BOBETTE SUTER: It really is not that either. This is a drawing with the revisions and this is a picture that you can see how it is narrow and wide and all over the place. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But the wide part is the new part. The only other problem that we have is that the town attorney recommended that since you still have the outstanding violation. We not act on this until that is completed. BOBETTE SUTER: They said they can. The assistant town attorney, after tonight she wanted you to contact her and then I probably would have to go to Court for a violation. TRUSTEE KRUPiSKI: That is what we thought. TRUSTEE KING: But we are going around in circles. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We are going around in circles. This is about the fourth or fifth one that we are going around in circles on. BOBETTE SUTER: She told me to go to you tonight. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I spoke to the Town Attorney this evening before the meeting. He asked us not to act on the violations. It does not create a hardship for you. You have the use of the dock. So if it goes for another month. It is not going to affect you. BOBETTE SUTER: So what you are saying that I have to come back. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I will talk to the Town Attorney again tomorrow. Board of Trustees ~<J 30 July 19, 2000 BOBETTE SUTER: It was the assistant, the Assistant Town Attorney. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So we are going to table this. BOBETTE SUTER: It probably has something to do with my neighbor. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No we have a list of violations that we did not act on tonight. No it is nothing to do with neighbors. Believe me. BOBETTE SUTER: I have a picture for you. I have a very interesting picture for you. I have no problem with this. I did not speak to the Town Attorney, I spoke to TRUSTEE SMITH: BOBETTE SUTER: the assistant. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: BOBETTE SUTER: back. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But they should be on the same page. She said that I probably would have to come We will not have a problem with the dock. But we are going to table your application. Because we were asked to by the Town Attorney. You will not have to come back to us. Once we get the violation cleared up. You do not have to come back here. We can vote on this next month. Because we do not have a problem with dock. The dock obviously needs a little care. It is not going to last another 50 years. BOBETTE SUTER: One of the problems is we did work on the dock because it got destroyed in the ice storm. We went to use it last summer and it was not floating. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I bet. BOBETTE SUTER: So we worked on the dock. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So I think that we would give you a permit to be in line with the neighbors. $o that when you did repair it in the future. You are going to need professional help. That it be put back in line with the neighbors. BOBETTE SUTER: When we do a repair. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right. That is fair. So Charlotte will contact you. I will make a motion to Table. Charlotte will get in contact with you to let you know what status of the whole thing is. BOBETTE SUTER: Here are the mailings. Two out three I got back. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do I have a seconded on it. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES 20. MANZI HOMES INC. (Contract Vendee) requests a Wetland Permit for a 1 family dwelling, deck in rear, septic & cesspool in 75' area. Located: 10505 Soundview Avenue, Southold. SCTM%54-5-37,2 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to comment on behalf of the application? JOHN GUIDO: Yes, John Guido from Manzi Homes. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Go ahead. JOHN GUIDO: The application was submitted and that the survey be noted that the house and the deck are at 75 feet. The only thing that is accroaching on there is the septic. I think you did a field inspection on July 10th and I had everything staked out. Board of Trustees 31 July 19, 2000 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Why could you not put the septic back. Flip the septic. JOHN GUIDO: Well the next door neighbor. Where his septic is as you see on the survey. That was data from the Health Department. Based upon his approval. So they tend to put the septic together. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No I mean flip it like this. Up towards Soundview Avenue more. JOHN GUIDO: Because he was trying to keep a maximum of a minimum of 100 feet from the well. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes I see the well is all the way up in the corner. Is there any other comment? If we have questions we will ask you. Any other comment? MARY ANN MURTAUGH: My name is Mary Ann Murtaugh I live across the street from the property in question. First of all the wetlands north of Soundview Avenue, which extends between Great Pond west of Kenny's to Lily Pond which is west of Horton. I played there as a child. The property in question is wetlands. Just a few remembrances. I remember basically vaguely, but I do remember the Hurricane of 1938. When the sound came up to Soundview Avenue and filled in that wetland with salt water. You know the wetland has high bush. It has peepers, it has frogs and toads and it has tons of mosquitos. I have no idea why someone would want to put a house there. I recommend that the hearing on this land impacts number 1000-54-5-37.2 be kept opened with no wetland permit granted until further study of the land being carried out. I further recommend that if the Board does eventually give a Wetland Permit that it also establish a covenant to protect and the perpetuity a buffer area from all human activities. This covenant should accompany the deed to the land. Recently my mother died. I have not had much time to work on this. But I have looked at the subdivision map in the planning department. That land at one time belonged to my family. It was eventually divided. I believe in 1976 from two parcels down to three. I found what I consider inaccuracies of basically around the position of the wetland boundaries. They all seem to be focused on the fact that from the time of subdivision all the way up to the present. This wetland boundary was not defined at true flagging. I know Chris Pickerall went out there. But he could not flag. He cannot because it is a conflict of interest with his job. He goes out and measures one line. In the case of this particular proposal. He measured the point on the wetlands to northeast corner of the house. Which he assumed was the closest position of the wetlands to the house. But in general there is no flagging done. Apparently it is not done for most properties. The position of the wetland basically was carried over onto this map. On the current map for this proposal. From the original planning map. On the current map as well as on the planning map all this is done by a surveyor. It is not done by an established biologist. Who is competent to flag. The wetland boundary distance from the street on all of these maps including the planning maps going back to 1976. Also on the Prizeman map which is the property adjourning the Manzi property to the Board of Trustees ~ 32 ~J~ July 19, 2000 east. There is no measurement of the distance from the road to the wetlands. I assume that would be there if the wetland was mapped. In addition the wetland boundaries from the initial planning map (tape change). They are calling the edge of the woods the end of the wetlands and they are not the same thing. Also on the current Manzi map and by the way the owner of the property is Barbargiannis it is not Manzi, or Manzi Homes. On the current map for the proposed property that is in question here. There are no contours absolutely no contours on the current map. As far as I know. I assume that the map that was sent to me is the current map. Is that true? JOHN GUIDO: There was one done by today. Which I gave to Charlotte. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: Does it have contours on it? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: One foot contours. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: What I saw in the trustee's office yesterday and today. What I was sent in the mail. Has no contours on it whatsoever. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is this what you have given to me. CHARLOTTE CUNNINGHAM: Yes, he had just gave it to us tonight. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If you would like to take a look at this. It has the one foot contour on it. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: Yes I will take a look at it. Just let me finish. The next point that I would like to make is that I did find. I am no expert. I am looking at the planning map. The subdivision map and I found a discrepancy between the distance. The boundary line between the two properties. The Prizeman property to the east of the Manzi property. I found a discrepancy when I looked at both of there proposals. There distance to the wetlands from the street. Are at the beginning of the property line. I guess, is different. I do not understand that. If someone could look this over and tell me that in fact is the case. Because I have looked it over several times and I also transposed the edge of the wetland line from the original planning map onto both the Prizeman map and~onto the Manzi map and what I found was that the line that I took off that. Taking into consideration the difference scales of the map. As far as I could tell there was a discrepancy from what was on the original planning map. What was on both Prizeman map and the map for the Manzi property. There seems to be a lot of problems. I think we have to look at it more closely. If I am making mistakes it simply because I am not an expert in this. I think somebody has to look it over before they get a wetland permit. TRUSTEE SMITH: You said your family owned it at one time. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: Yes TRUSTEE SMITH: And then they sold it as building lots. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: What happened was my grandfather owned it. We lived across the street and he owned 3-1/2 acres which was those three parcels. When my grandmother died my uncles inherited it . My mother inherited the house and some other properties my grandfather had elsewhere. When they sold it. I have the agreement at home, because I asked my uncle for it over Board of Trustees ~' 33 ~'~-~J July 19, 2000 the weekend. In addition to an assessment that was done by Carl Letter maybe in Cutchogue. This was done in 1970. That sale agreement was contingent on the fact that the new owner would be able to sub-divide into three parcels. That was not done for a few years later. See that was in the agreement of the sale. They would buy it under those circumstances of sale. Rockletter who did the assessment said basically that the property was below road grade, and went down from there. He did not have much to say that was good about it actually. In any case I found discrepancies on the measurement of the line between two parcels 37.2 and 37.3 to the east of it. Which when I say the line I mean the line coming straight to the wetlands. Using there scale and so I kept finding discrepancies. I think it has to be looked at. Also as I started to tell you. On the two maps both the Manzi map and the Prizeman map. I transposed what I conceived as the right edge of the woods quote on quote. That was on the original planning map. So there is a discrepancy there to. I found discrepancies in a lot of places. In addition I found, John Sepenoski gave me this map which is from the national wetlands inventory. What it shows basically what is filled in, in solid is actually regulated by the DEC of New York State. Was just outlined by the way this is Great Pond. This is actually developed land but it is also filled in. You can see that in addition to building land which is regulated by the DEC. The land is just outlined. But also here which is not filled in and not regulated by the DEC this is right on top of those three parcels. Apparently the National Wetland Institute has done these and they have come off the computers today. So I would like to say that given. What I consider these apparent extraordinary mistake or discrepancies. I recommend that flagging on this wetland be done. True flagging. That both the Manzi and the Prizeman proposal which by the way received his permit already. His wetland permit in January. Should be reviewed carefully. I have heard just today or yesterday I guess that 100 foot jurisdiction has been proposed and now being discussed for a wetland. To give an added protection. Compare to the 75 foot jurisdiction which is now in effect. TRUSTEE SMITH: That would not pertain to this piece of property. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: Well I sure would like to recommend that the Board of Trustee's place a moratorium on granting all wet land permits like this. Until the new jurisdiction is in place. We owe this to the people of Southold. These fragile lands in our community which are being destroyed little by little by the current weak tax code. Southold should quickly follow the example of Southampton and East Hampton revising the code. TRUSTEE SMITH: The one hundred foot thing, is just something that we are talking about. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: I know. TRUSTEE SMITH: We are not sure if we are going to do it. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: Our tax code is as weak as anything. Variances are given on a weak tax code. You look at the wetlands section of the tax code in Southampton and your eyes would be opened. I have a copy of it. It is allot difference from ours. I think we should make changes very soon. Because Board of Trustees ~J 34 '~-/ July 19, 2000 we are going to loose everything if we do not. I will be happy to show you what I have done. What I think needs to be done. The numbers to be gone over to make sure that they are really right. This is my copy of the Manzi proposal. You can see that he has drawn a wetland vegetation line which basically a ruler line. It is not a straight line. I transposed it to the scale from the planning map to this map. This as I see it is where the wetland is. It is this line from this border to the wetlands that I found different on this map as opposed to the Prizeman map. This is the Prizeman, This is half the size of this map. But this is the wetlands as he drew it. This is the wetland that I transposed from the planning department map. This is the one that I found to be different as measured on this map. I think it should all be reviewed very carefully. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: I suggest that we hold off from giving permits. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Just not to answer certainly all your questions. But we have been out here at least twice. We did meet with Chris Pickerall one of the times. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: I talked to Chris several times in the last few days. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: To get an idea of the extent of the wetland vegetation. Thank you. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: You said you measured it. The one distance from the northeast corner of the house. What you conceive as the closest point of the wetlands. Put he did not flag. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right but we were out there in the field with him. So we saw what he saw. Thank you. Yes a brief comment. JOHN GUIDO: I just wanted to say that the vegetation grew from the original wetland mark. That is why we hired En-Consultants to do that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: She has not seen it. Take a look at this please. They actually put them on a surveyor's mark. It is right on the survey. Take a look at it while we discuss it. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: Okay. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The CAC recommended approval. With a 50 foot non-disturbance buffer. They wanted hay bales and no clearing at all in that area. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: These are not true copies. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: This is pretty much what we saw. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: I thought you had to show curves. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Not if it is straight. Seems like a gradual decline to me. The land seems to fall away pretty regular basics from the road. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: At some point there is a drop. TRUSTEE SMITH: Make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there a seconded. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES MARY ANN MURTAUGH: You are not going to reconsider this? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well we have been out there twice. We have reviewed it a number of times. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: Did you look over the numbers though? Board of Trustees '<~'" 35 '~'3 July 19, 2000 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think we are satisfied with it from the survey. The survey that was submitted. It is a licensed surveyor it should be accurate. We are not going to go by this one that says Lily Pond. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: I do not think that it is accurate. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It is a licensed land surveyor. It should be accurate. TRUSTEE SMITH: No it is a licensed surveyor. Nobody is going to put their stamp on false information. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It looks accurate. Compare to what we saw in the field also. A lot of times we see something that looks like a discrepancy. When we get into the field and it does not look right. In this case it looks accurate from what we saw twice in the field. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: The North Fork Environmental Council said they would be happy to go over this (cannot understand). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well they should be here tonight if they are interested. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: They have a board meeting tonight. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well that is their meeting. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: I have had not much time myself. Since my Mom just died. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I am sorry to hear that. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: I would like more time myself. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But everyone was noticed. If they wanted to commented. They could have commented. We do have the comments from the CAC recommending approval with a non-disturbance buffer. MARY ANN MUJRTAUGH: I was wondering how much of a buffer? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Fifty feet. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: Is that after construction or is that during construction? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That would be. There is a problem with 50 feet from the wetland line. Because everyone is going to say it is a different wetland line. So what you do is make the buffer from the corner of the house. Then you can measure from the corner house. Everyone is going to see different wetland lines. But you cannot see a different corner of the house. So you give them a 2.0 foot buffer from the corner of the house. They cannot disturb pass that. They have to put hay bales in place. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: That is only during construction. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No it can be permanent. TRUSTEE SMITH: Not the haybales? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The hay bales can be permanent. They will blend right into the woods there. You will not see them. It will protect it. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: Twenty feet. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Twenty feet from the house, so that will be 55 feet from the wetlands. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: Part of the house is beyond 75 feet marsh. The deck is within the 75 feet. TRUISTEE KRUPSKI: That is why I am going to this other survey to see. It shows 76 feet. TRUSTEE SMITH: It shows 75 feet from the corner of the deck. Board of Trustees '~'~ 36 '~-~ July 19, 2000 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It is 75 feet. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: That wetland mark line is not accurate. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is why you put the buffer from the edge of the deck in this case. Because then you can measure from the edge of the deck. You cannot measure from the wetland line. Because everyone is going to say different wetland line. You measure from the edge of the deck 20 feet. You can measure that every time. You cannot mistake that. Is that fair. Would anyone like to make a motion. TRUSTEE SMITH: I will make a motion to Approve with the CAC recommendation. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Let us put the hay bales. TRUSTEE SMITH: Hay bales twenty feet from the corner of the house and the corner of the deck. Be left in place. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: What about a restricting fence (cannot understand) TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well the hay bales will cover that. They will be left in place permanently. So any kind of run-off from the lawn area will be blocked. To slow down. It gives them a 55 foot non-disturbance buffer and that should be plenty. Unfortunately most of the houses in town they run directly into the wetlands. If everyone had a 55 foot buffer the wetlands would be a lot healthier. MARY ANN MURTAUGH: This is the first houses that the family built there. Most of the houses in there predate the environmental laws of the late 1950 and early 1970. All of the houses are very old some of it is summer housing. This is the first time that houses are being put there. This is the first. On these particular wetlands. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Kenny there is second. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Take that back, thanks. All in favor. ALL AYES. Did you get all that Charlotte. About the buffer off of the deck 40 foot clearing off the deck. Now I need a motion to go back to the regular meeting. TRUSTEE SMITH: I make a motion to go off the public hearings and back to our regular meeting. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: All in favor. ALL AYES V. RESOLUTIONS: 1. J. Kevin McLaughlin, Esq. on behalf of JAMES I. ISBISTER, AS EXECUTOR OF MORA B. ISBISTER requests a Grandfather Permit for existing bulkhead. Located: 180 Knoll Circle, East Marion. SCTM~037-5-17 TRUSTEE SMITH moved to Approve the application. TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES 2. GENEE WICI~4AN requests a Grandfather Permit to repair/maintain present bulkhead, including the existing bulkhead around entire property. Located: 1200 First Street, New Suffolk SCTM#117-07-30 Board of Trustee~~ 37 ~ ' July 19, 2000 TRUSTEE SMITH moved to Approve the application subject to TRUSTEE POLIWODA looking at it. TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES. 3. PENINAH NEIMARK requests a Grandfather Permit for the retaining wall structure installed at the time the house was constructed in 1969. Located: 575 Hoey Lane, Southoldo SCTM~66-1-5 TRUSTEE SMITH moved to Approve the application subject to my looking at it. TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES V. MOORINGS 1. PRICIrJ.A PYNN requests an offshore stake with pulley to onshore stake in Ashamomaque Pond. Located: 595 North Road, Southold SCTM#135-3-4 ACCESS: Private TRUSTEE POLIWODA moved to Approve off shore/ on shore stake. TRUSTEE SMITH seconded. ALL AYES Meeting adjourned at: 10:45 PM Respectfully submitted, oarG of Town Trustees RECEIVED AND FILED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK Town C~er~, Town o~ Soul,old