Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-06/23/1999Albert J. Krupski, President James King, Vice-President Henry Smith Artie Foster Ken Poliwoda Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-18~2 Fax (516} 765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MINUTES June 23,1999 PRESENT WERE: Albert J. Krupski, President James King, Vice President Artie Foster, Trustee Henry Smith, Trustee Kenneth Poliwoda, Trustee Richard Smith. CAC Member Diane Herbert, Clerk CALL MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE NEXT FIELD iNSPECTION: Wednesday, July 14, 1999 at 12:00 noon. TRUSTEE SMITH moved to Approve, TRUSTEE FOSTER seconded. ALL AYES NEXT TRUSTEE MEETING: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 at 7:00 PM WORKSESSION: 6:00 PM TRUSTEE SMITH moved to Approve, TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES APPROVE MINUTES: Approve Minutes of May 26, 1999 Regular Meeting. Postponed Until July I. MONTHLY REPORT: The Trustees monthly report for May 1999. A check for $2,718.32 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. 1. AMENDMENTS/WAIVERS/CHANGES: LESLIE GAZZOLA & CltERYL HANSEN request an Amendment to Permit #4960 and ~4961 for dredging and removal of spoil; to recoup soil and restore to depth of 4 ft. below mean low water, not greater than 10 ft. from bulkheads. Spoil to be removed from boat basin to an average depth of 4 ft. below mean low water and placed upland. Amount of spoil to be removed will be approx. 100 c.y. for each parcel. Located: Elizabeth Lane, Southold. SCTM#78-5-2 & #78-5-3 TRUSTEE SMITH moved to Approve the application, TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES J.M.O. Consulting on behalf of LOUIS SIRCUSANO requests an Amendment to Permit #4957 to allow for the construction of a 12' return at the western terminus of the bulkhead and the construction ora 4'X 5' platform off the newly constructed bulkhead with a 3'X 5' set of stairs for beach access. Located: 895 No. Parish Dr., Southold. SCTM#71-1-9 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We all took a look at this also. They never sent in the planting plan? DIANE HERBERT: No, I don't see it. It's not here. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any comment on this? TRUSTEE SMITH: Well he really didn't follow the permit procedure that we wanted recommer/ded. They wanted to do it this way to start with and'we said no, you know, and they went, ahead and did it anyway. RICHARD SMITH: As stated on the Permit, was it allowable to have the return? Was it open-ended, the Permit? TRUSTEE SMITH: Well it was supposed to go right into the bank. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI. Right, we didn t ... RICHARD SMITH: Oh you did not approve a return anyway. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We specifically dldn t approve a retu RICHARD SMITH: Therefore, has a violation been issued at this point? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No. Nothing has been issued. DIANE HERBERT: We told him to come .in for an Amendment. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right. That's what he had in the field that day. He had the DEC Permit which showed what he built. What's your pleasure? TRUSTF, F, KING: I'd hate to approve something that's been done. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Especially since we made a big effort here have it constructed the way k was supposed to be constructed. It wasn't just like it happened, casually. We'll can Deny it. TRUSTEE POLlWODA: I'll make a motion to Deny it. DIANE HERBERT: And then what does he do if it's already built? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: He has to remove it. DIANE HERBERT: The return? TRUSTEE KR~SKI: Yes. Do I have a second on that? TRUSTEE KING: I'll second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: There's no planting plan in here either. Alright Diane, you'll have to notify the Bay Constable and he should issue a violation. DIANE HERBERT: Okay. HOWARD & VALERIE MICHELSEN request a Waiver to construct a 4'X 12.5' entrance-way on the front of the house. Located: 860 Rabbit Lane, East Marion. SCTM#31-18-18. TRUSTEE POLIWODA moved to Approve the application, TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES LESTER EISENBERG requests a one-year extension to Permit #4730 to construct a 4'X 10' fixed dock, 3'X 12' ramp and a 6'X 20' float 15' off property line. Located: 925 Long Creek Dr., Southold. SCTM#55-3-27 Applicant must re-apply for a 4'X 30' catwalk with pole only. WILLIAM WILKE requests a Waiver to construct a 10' X 16' wood deck 65' from the water. Located: 3380 OaklawnAve., Southold. SCTM#70-5-49.4 TRUSTEE POLIWODA moved to Approve the application, TRUSTEE FOSTER seconded. ALL AYES P3/ULA B. PENDERGAST requests a Transfer of Permit g4392 from Jonathon & Ali Raridon to Paula B. Pendergast to construct a house, sankary system, deck, 12" culvert, driveway and freshwater pond. Located: Crescent Ave., Fishers Island. SCTM#006-6- 20.5 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI postponed the application until he talks to Paula Pendergast. TRUSTEE SMITH moved to go offthe Regular Meeting and onto the Public Hearings, TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES 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 ORGACXGIZED AND BRIEF: FIVE (5) MINUTES OR LESS, IF POSSIBLE En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of FRANK P1ROLO requests a Wetland Permit to replace within 18" +/- 123 linear ft. of existing timber bulkhead withC-Loc Vinyl bulkhead. Remove and replace (inkind/inplace) existing cement block wall as necessary. Approx. 60 c.y. of clean sand will be trucked in from an upland source and used as backfill. Located: 525 Lake Dr., Southold. SCTM#80-3-19.1 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would anyone here like to speak in favor of or against the application? ROB HERRMANN: Rob Herrmarm of En-Consultants on behalf of the applicant, Frank Pirolo. I'm here to answer any questions the Board may have. TRUSTEE SMITH: We went out and looked at it and the only thing we had, we wanted removal of that bulkhead, and inkind/inplace. ROB H]ERRMANN: Lucky I should happen to have revised plans prepared. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Well it won't actually be inkind but it will be inplace, because there's different material. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's what we want. And, they're going to keep the cement block wall? ROB HERRMANN: As far as I know. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Aesthetics? ROB HERRMAN: It seems to be popular around that area? RICHARD SMITH: That ties into the bulkhead on both the other property owner's on each side? KOB HERRMANN: Yes, TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there any comment on this application? We'll just put a condition of a non-turf buffer between the cement block wall and... ROB HERRMANN: You'll see that on your cross section. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We're starting offreal smooth here. Any other comment? Do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: So moved. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would someone like to make a motion on this? TRUSTEE SMITH: I'll make a motion that we Approve with the revised set of plans. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of KENNETH & DEBORAH SEIFERTH request a Wetland Permit to construct a fixed timber dock, consisting ora 4'X 120' catwalk; 3'X 14' ramp; and a 6'X 20' float to be secured by (2) 8" diameter pilings. Located: 2000 Nassau~Point Rd., Cutchogue. SCTM#104-10-10 & 11 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Anyone here to speak in favor of the application? ROB HERRMANN: I'm Rob He,, mann of En-Consultants on behalf of Kenneth & Deborah Seiferth. I suspect the Board probably has some comments and unless someone else is going to speak first, you should go ahead and layout your thoughts and I'll try and to respond. TRUSTEE SMITH: You were going to look at this Al. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yeah, I did. I'm waiting for the revised plans. ROB HERRMANN: See what you want. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We didn't have a big problem with the dock. In fact I was going out there, a day or two after inspections, and I saw someone out there with a stick and I thought it was you and I stopped and it was actually the DEC. Chris Arfston. I told him what our concerns were. We just wanted to see it kept in line with the neighbors. That's all~ Whether you want it as a "T" or an "L" or straight out, as long as it's kept in line with the two neighbors. We didn't have a problem with it He had a problem with water depth and I said 'well, there's no deep water unless you go a thousand feet out into the channel." This is pretty much it. And I said, it was low tide and it was a nice day to see it, but I said, "go to the neighbors dock and see what the water is." It was a foot and a half at the neighbor's dock. So, I don't know if... ROB HERRMANN: Well the day that we went out to do the soundings, the neighbor had at the seaward end of the float, 2'. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well he did it right in the middle and it was a 1 ½' ROB HERRMANN: That's probably right. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It was a normal low fide. The wind wasn't blowing out. So I don't know how they're going to handle this. If he isn't happy with the water depth.,..there's no water depth here. You're not going to get any water depth here. ROB HERRMANN: Well that's why we extended what's proposed here. If you were standing at the point that is the seaward edge of the inter-tidal marsh on the plan, and were looking to your left and drewa line just at a fight angle to the neighbor's dock, the seaward terminus of the neighbor's dock is about 60 ft. from the edge of the marsh. The dock that is proposed here is 75'. So, this is about 15' farther out. The reason we went to this point, if you look at our chart that's on the plan, or on the little table, we didn't get 2' of water until 75'. So the way this dock is designed, would give the appliCants 2' of water at low tide on the seaward terminus of the float. Which, is the exact same thing the neighbor has, although the neighbor reaches that depth sooner. It's a little bit deeper in that spot than it is as you start to get closer to Nassau Point Rd. It's about a 15' difference to get to the same depth. So, realizing that this board would probably want to stay as consistent as possible wkh the neighbor, we're again stuck in that catch 22 where if we cut this back to be exactly in line with the neighbors, it would be about where the seaward end of this catwalk is. Which would leave the end of the float in a 1' which would almost guarantee a denial of a dock of any sort from the DEC. They are completely inflexible. If any comes in with that, we don't even get alternatives back anymore. We just get notice of permit denial. If you wish to schedule a public hearing at Stony Brook in front of an administrative law judge, please do so. So, what I was going to suggest would be for this dock, if you all feel you would be somewhat inflexible about going out the additional footage, than maybe you should have communication, not with Chris Arfston, but with Chuck Hamilton, who is ultimately going to be making this decision anyway. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, I don't have any problem with that. I think it's a matter, here, it?s not a matter of water depth, it's a matter of structure size, and I told Chris, he said he's looking for 2 ½' of water, and I said, keep walking, because it's a long way out for 2 ½' of water. ROB HERRMANN: We went out to a 100' from the edge of the marsh and got 2'3", and that wasn't changing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right. That's all there is there. ROB HERRMANN: So basically, it would be an additional 15' of structure in order to pick up 4" but those 4" by the standard may be the difference between getting some seasonal stick dock vs. getting nothing. So, as we still have yet to get out of this back and forth, we tried to propose something that might at least get some kind of approval from the state, but, if you want to.. because you had mentioned, I:think also about the elevation of the catwalk. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well I spoke to Chris Arfston about that also. I said, look at that, he went out and he measured the adjacent one. Well, I think it was close to 2 ½' at the edge of the marsh, and he seemed satisfied with that and with the growth underneath it. Again, that's the conversation we had that day. So, I'd like to approve something like that and be glad to send a letter with that approval to Chuck Hamilton with an explanation and with a phone call because, you know, you put something in there that's in line and in profile with the neighbors, it'll fit in there. They're not going to get their 2 ½' there. But he knows that. He got stuck in the mud. ROB HERRMANN: Yeah, we did it by kayak If that's what the board wants to go with, I'm comfortable wkh the decision like that. If it's just (changed tape) I'd like to get an approval for some sort of facility here and especially at this juncture if it's a type of thing that...because one of the things that the State has asked and most Towns are unwilling to do is that they'll say well if the Town had some position can they give us a letter explaining, and nobody ever wants to do that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well we'll be glad to do that. ROB HERRMANN: If you would do something like that, then it might help. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We'd be glad to do that. I mean, here, it makes sense. We've had that problem where the neighbor has to be further out than the other neighbor and we just leapfrog. The conventional wisdom is to keep the neighbors all in line~ ROB HERRMANN: Well I had said to this Board before that the biggest problem with the elevation over the marsh is the fact that it's a general DEC policy so to ever get relief from that you have to jump over the division of environmental permits and actually get to Chuck or George or somebody that can make the decision on a case by case basis. You get stopped at the core because of the fish and wildlife but I mean, really, you can get that permit. Nobody from the department interior is ever going to show up at one of these sights and say, oh my gosh this wasn't built at 3 ½' and even if they did and they saw growth under that I think they'd be satisfied. So, I mean, wkh all of these changes with the docks, that would probably be one of the more sensible ones to come out of it is to try to reduce the elevation requirement maybe from 3 ½' to 2 ½' because you're getting marsh re-growth under the lower elevation. The docks are twice as un-intrusive and it' s easier for the people that use them. I mean we get clients who complain all the time that they're walking, and if they fall, they're going to drop 6' into the ground as opposed to something that you can't see, it's safer and everything else. But, it's just been a hard to thug to get over bureaucratically. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right. We'll I'll be happy to send a letter and well need a new.., oh and I'd like to act on that tonight. CAC recommends that it be in line with the neighbors. ROB HERRMANN: What about the landward terminus of the catwalk? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI:. We thought it could start a little, further. ROB I-IIERRMANN: I went out tonight, when I went outto get the poster and where the high water line is Showing here is really, and that's where the inter-tidal marsh ends, the high marsh here is pretty dry. It's mostly I was .... some bacharus; there's'...but we coUld probably take at least 20' offthe landward end of it. I mean we woUld have to have some kind of steps or incline ramp leading to the catwalk but the idea would be to start the catwalk a lot closer to the high water mark as opposed to where it's shown now. Again, we designed it that way because typically they want the whole structure up and over the marsh but here I mean there's almost two rows ofbacharas and we show the tidal wetland boundary of the landward row of the bacharas because you have patens in there but in this, where the path is, there's really not much there. It's not wet. I mean it floods often enough that the environment behooves the wetland plants but it's not really like a wet spartina patens high marsh. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, I've seen the neighbor's dock. I've seen that submerged up to it. But, on those days, you're not going to be using your boat. So, I don't think that's a problem. ROB HERRMANN: If we took off20' at the landward end, and took off 15' at the seaward end, you would have the catwalk starting much closer to high water than you would have at the end of the float being in line with the neighbors. So, it would be 35' less. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well you'll have to give us a new set of drawings here. Unless you have those. ROB HERRMANN: If you wanted to make a motion on the specs it would be a 4'X 85' catwalk as opposed to a 4'X 120'_ TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We'll do that. And, we'll put it 2 ½' above grade. If for whatever reason the DEC won't budge on that height, we'll amend this at no charge for you. But, without a problem, but we're going...luckily I caught him in the field, seeing the neighbors, and seeing the growth under the neighbors, was a perfect opportunity to show him that this is fine. ROB HERRMANN: You may have to make a pitch to someone else. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We'll we will. Any other comment on this? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Yeah, construction? The catwalk, no grading, and 6" pilings throughout the whole catwalk. What is 1' spacing? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: 3fi" spacing on the decking? Do I have a motion to close the hearing: TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Kenny do you want to make a motion? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'll make a motion to approve the wetland permit application consisting ofa4'X 85' catwalk, 3'X 14' ramp and a 6'X 20' float secured by (2) 8" diameter pilings on the float with 6" pilings throughout the entire catwalk, structure. And the spacing of 3¼,, between boards on the deck. TRUSTEE KRLrPSKI: And, the structure is to extend no further seaward than, aligned, from the two neighbors, :and that it be 2 ½' above grade. And, subject to a revised set of plans. Do I have a second on that motion? TRUSTEE SMITH: Seconded. ALL AYES En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of BIRCH HILLS PROPERTY OWNER'S ASSOC, requests a Wetland and Coastal Erosion Permit to construct a +/- 122' timber retaining wall to be tied into existing, adjacent retaining walls to east and west. Backfill with approx. 150 c.y. of clean sand to be trucked in from an upland source. Located: Birch Lane / Glen Court, Cutchogue. SCTM#83-1-4 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Anyone here who would like to speak in favor of or against the project. ROB.HERRMANN: Here on behalf of the applicants, Birch Hills Property Owner's Assoc. The trustee's office had notified me just of a concern of where the retaining wall was being proposed. Where it was going to tie-in, I guess on the east Side. Did you get a copy, did you get a copy faxed to you, a letter from RambO, from Tom Samuels? TRUSTEE KRL~SKI: No, not recently. ROB HERRMANN: What I wanted to address on that, well I'll read the very brief letter from Tom, who couldn't be here, who wanted to be here, but can't, I will read his letter into the record. (reading letter) I had discussed this with Tom and we had discussed this originally with the applicants. Just from looking at the site, and especially on the east side, the' retaining wall as it's proposed now would actually be landward of the toe of the bluff. It would cut in and.._ TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We were there. TRUSTFFJ KING: Did you go out and look at it? ROB HERRMANN: I was just looking at this plan. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, we were there last week as a Board. It really, that angle from the east side, Rob; not to interrupt you, but that angle from the east side is really a slight angle. It would not, we understand that you don't want to make a comer, you're not going to make a comer there if you tie in, to the face of the one on the west, tie into the one on the end of the east. You're not going to make an angle. ROB HERRMANN: The landward terminus of the return. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Of the east side. that's right. In the field it's... ROB ItERRMANN: No, I'm just looking at the pictures to refresh my memory because the survey is throwing me off. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The survey is inaccurate, as far as the bottom of the bluff. ROB I-IERRMANN: I really, I hesitate to go along with that only because you can only cause~ a problem, I mean, it can only force us into a situation at some point of needed to put toe armor or something in there, I mean, it's not a right angle comer, like some of the situations we've dealt With where we have no choice. But it is creating a bend in the retaining wall, Fm not sure for what purpose. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, this really, because it would follow, more follow the toe of the bluff there and it wOuld not...if you look at it in the field; if you walk down there and take a look at it, lit's not going to cause a problem there because it's such a :slight angle. ROB ~IERRMANN: What is the Board's objection to going face to face there? TRUSTEE KR~SKI: It's not necessary. Follow the toe of the bluff. It's the lay of the land there. I mean even on the neighboring retaining wall, there is a bend in it. It's not straight across. They tried to follow the toe. The one to the west. ROB HERRMANN: Fmjust thinking in a cost benefit type way. I mean, if you keep a smooth face, you're guaranteed tc not have a problem with any kind of form. I guess what I'm getting at, it'S not really a beach preservation issue, I mean there are retaining walls on either side, so we're really talking about five feet by whatever triangle. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI:. No, I don't think it's a feet preservation issue, its just a basic policy of following thetoe. If you looked on your survey here on the east, there's a pretty severe jog from the next property over, which we don't like to see. However, we did remark in the field, even though that structure is bulkheaded ali the way to the end of the road there, there is nota problem as far as beach elevation or width there and there is certainly didn't appear to be a problem because of that little jog there. But this won't even create a jog like that. There is a very slight angle. TRUSTEE KING: This is totally inaccurate. ROB HERRMANN: You're saying that... TRUSTEE KING: It should be just the opposite. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We didn't see it as being a problem as far as storm scour, and it would just be following the toe, and it would match up with the west. Because, that would cause a considerable angle there. But, from the east, it's not. There's no angle there. ROB HERRMANN: Alright. I had just remembered that return going at least partially into the bluff. TRUSTEE KING: No. ROB HERRMANN: The end is totally exposed. It' s not impossible that it's so much different from when I was there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is that it there? Is right underneath the stairs. And that follows the toe nicely and... ROB HERRMANN: Alright. Let's go with that and if for some reason Tom has some tremendous instruction argument about it...but weql go along with that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We looked at it with those concerns, with the concerns that you mentioned, that he said, I mean we always look at those with that in mind ROB HERRMANN: Well that is the reason why I was saying, is because sometimes you have a situation where if you go face to face, you're going out significantly past where the toe of the bluff is. Whereas here, you really wouldn't be, which is why I was surprised that' you had an objection to it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, looking at it, it seemed like that's the way it should be done. RICHARD SMITH: The toe of the bluff was underneath the end of the stairway down there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes, it's underneath the stairs. RICHARD SMITH: And, the brush pile came out on the other side which was out further. It was kind of opposite. ROB HERRMANN: Maybe that's what they surveyed. RICHARD SMITH: No, it was on the opposite side. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The surveyor has it opposite. Is there any other comment on this application? Do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE SMITH: Moved to close. TRUSTEE K1NG: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE :KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to approve the application for a ...well I'll let you give us a re-drawing of the plans for the length of the retaining wall to start at the western edge of the eastern bulkhead and end up at the face of the western bulkhead. Backfill with appropriate amount of clean sand to safely complete the job and to replant that as necessary. Do I have a second on that? TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of JOItN SKI requests a Wetland Permit and Coastal Erosion Permit to plaCe fill along 93' +/- of eroded shoreline and stabilize it by seeding with a fast-growing rye, and, existing gravel road to be maintained by periodic addition of gravel. Located: Oriental Ave., Fishers Island. SCTM#10-10-8.1 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here to speak in favor of or against the application? ROB HERRMANN: I'm here fi.om En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of the applicant, John Ski. The Board will probably recall this had originally been submitted I think several i0 months ago. The original plan was, well logically wanted to repeat the existing revetment and to finish the rock up around the end because the erosion at that area and also the road. We were advised by the DEC that if we persisted with that application, it would be denied. We all found that a little surprising but in any event, the applicant had agreed to go along with their demanded alternative which was to simply place fill in that area and then for that upgrade by the road, to plant that with some sort of native vegetation. The soil there apparently is probably not conducive to something like beach grass along the side of the road there. It's not sand, it's a heavier soil. So the idea was to put something like rye grass, something that would just grow and quickly stabilize the soil and then just let it vegetate naturally. Probably weeds and whatever native grasses would grow along it, which the applicant agreed to. I mean this was not his plan but he's got to do something. So, that's the alternative and I guess the only proposal in front of this Board as I don't think you ever formally saw the other, or at least didn't treat the other proposal to complete the revetment. TRUSTEE KRI~SKI: What is he matching up to? ROB HERRMANN: What do you mean Al? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: On the other side. I don't know which way I'm looking at here. The side away from the revetment. What do the neighbor's have there...oh, okay. I was just wondering what he was tied into on either side there. Any questions from the Board? Any other comments? Do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do I have a motion on this? TRUSTEE SMITH: I'll make a motion to approve. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES Costello Marine Contracting on behalf of TltOMAS LEWICK requests a Wetland Permit to service small sailfish and dinghy for access to sailboat at offshore mooring. Construct ~a 4'X 6' platform adjoining the existing bulkhead, continuing with a 6'X 20' ramp leading to a level 6'X 40' dock and ending with a 6'X 16' "L" dock. Install a 2-pile dOlPhin 20' off"L" dock and installing a mooting 350' offshore of AMLW. Located: 1315 North Parish Drive, Southold. SCTM#71-1-13 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is that average mean low water? Okay. Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of the application? JOHN COSTELLO: Costello Marine Contracting, I'm the agent and made the application for Mr. Lewick. I'm here to answer any questions the Board may have. (tape changed) JOHN COSTELLO: The line on it was originally was about a 100'. There was a buoy floating at the end. I went back and re-staked it as per Al's request And, I resubmitted photographs. A1 also asked to try to measure the neighboring docks to find the length of them. I didn't go onto the private property, I didn't want to interfere, there was a man there. The adjacent dock is about (can't understand) and the dock that was, the second dock to the east was about 75' in length and started on the beach. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: When you say east, do you mean south? JOHN COSTELLO: Southeast. TRUSTEE FOSTER: I though there was only one dock there. 10 11 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I did to. JOHN COSTELLO: There probably was. There was part of a dock... TRUSTEE FOSTER: And they re-constructed it? JOHN COSTELLO: If you look in the photographs you'll see.. TRUSTEE SMITH: I think so, all the decking was stacked up on the, they had like a two-tier retaining walt there... TRUSTEE FOSTER: Oh, they had a seasonal dock, they're putting back in again. Alright. TRUSTEE SMITH: Yeah, so that's why that wasn't there. The poles were there, by I remember seeing these things stacked up on the first tier of the bulkhead. TRUSTE'F, FOSTER: Yeah, because I know there was only one dock there. JOHN COSTELLO: If you look in a couple of the older photographs, you'I1 some of the older dates, you will see some of the(can't hear)you will also see some on the lawn. I have a couPle comments on the designing of this dock Neither of the neighboring docks ... (can't hear). The DEC had some questions on this dock along with every other dock with this design. They questioned whether or not it needed the "L". IfI said I was going to build a 40' dock, [ should've said 46' out, with a 10' "L". The reason for the "L" at the end, the ends of docks are the most vulnerable to any kind of damage. That's why it's designed that way. I've been in the business for over 36 years. Chris Arfston is against the 'L". He's been in it for 6 months. I don't know why. Every plan that is going in, recently, is being redesigned....we don't want, and the owner of this property does not want to spend anymore than he has to in order to accommodate the dinghy that they have. I've been out there twice, and the one time I was out there, there was 28" of water, length, the other day (can't hear) higher or slightly lower, is 2' of water. The DEC is going! to have some objection to depth of water. Again, Chris Arfston is the one who inspected it and to ~go to obtain 2 ½' of water you might have to go out another 10' or more. When outto the 3' mark, 150'. There was no evidence of eel grass (can't hear). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: A couple of questions for you. One is on the ramp. I think we want to keep providing...the other docks show...you know people can just step on to them and cross them instead of walking on the beach. Yours shows a ramp with rails. JOHN COSTELLO: Let me explain that. The 4' is at beach level. From beach level, there's a ramp, up to the dock. So it is at beach level. Anybody could cross at that point. That's why we started it at beach level. You were at the site and you saw the stairs, the high water to the bulkhead which is probably only about 8' or 10'. The dock at that point would be the lowest elevation. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What's the point of the rail? I mean it's out of character. The other ones are just.., JOHN COSTELLO: That's no problem. The only thing is, instead of putting in piling, the railing would~ve been cheaper, that's all. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And also, the width is objectionable, the 6' wide Width is objectionable. JOHN COSTELLO: It's the open bay. And, you know, [ like to design a dock that will stay. We have a reputation to building the docksthat need less maintenance for that particular reason. If it was in the creek, I would certainly ...(can't hear) 11 12 TRUSTEE ICRUPSKI: I have to ask you, not because I'm deferring to the DEC but because of curiosity. Are they going to approve a 6' wide structure? And, are they going to approve something that's seasonal here? Like they did at Walzog. JOHN COSTELLO: Well I think one of the reasons Walzog, and I'm not even sure ...but in.this location where the shellfishing area is (can't hear) I would hope that I could attempt to persuade the DEC to act. One person at the DEC, Mr. Pensky, told me, that they never, ever, allow a 6' wide dock for residential use. He's been there almost 6 or 8 months. The last two months, I received two permits for 6' wide docks. I can give you the name of the properties. Chris Arfston is so afraid of Chuck Hamilton. It's not in their regulations that a dock has to be a certain feet. In open water, the dock is going to be substantially heavier to remain without damage or maintenance. We're supposed to design any structure, to last approx. 30 years. That's in DEC regulations. Let me tell you, it contradicts some of the policies, and regulations... TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What about the neighboring dock there. We've been going on and on about, but we'd like to keep in form to what.the neighbors have and you have as far as length goes, but as far as the height and the construction standards, can you comment on those? I mean the one way to the south is tucked in, kind of, and yours is out a little more into the water. What about the height of those? Is that going to be similar decking height. JOHN COSTELLO: It will be the same height The only thing is, you will see 8" pilings installed and to make them 6" on the top.., giving the strength so that we could adequately built it so (can't hear) maintenance. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I guess, the questions I have, one at a time, the CAC recommended disapproval based on excessive for current use, width of proposed structure exceeds Trustee guidelines, structure limits public access, and would have potential impact on shellfishing access and productivity. We could take these concerns one at a time, I guess. One, is the length. Does anybody have a problem with the length of this? TRUSTEE SMITH: I don't have a problem with it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It seems to be consistent with the neighbors. TRUSTEE FOSTER: You've got to get out to the water otherwise there's no sense in putting it in. JOHN COSTELLO: If you look at the photographs, I did.take one of~he photographs behind the line by the tree; and you'll see to the east of it, (can'.t hear) because it's on a peninsula. The depth of water, I walked by the end of'the docks, are similar depths of water. I'm afraid that the DEC is going to make (can't hear) another 10' or so. I'm afraid of that. But I can't do an~hing. I can six approvals and one disapproval. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right. What about the...the height is about the same as the neighbors...what about the railings? Those are a concern that I had. Does anybody think that my concern is valid? On the plan here, see how the neighbors just kind of go up, you know, just walk over it. On the plan here, he's leaving a 4' wide walkway against the bulkhead and anybody can walk to the beach, and then he's putting railing on this ramp. JOHN COSTELLO: The owner is here, and he can certainly make the decision for his access... TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well I just wanted to throw it by... it was something I noticed and I just wanted to throw it by the Board, that's all. 12 13 JOHN COSTELLO: Right now there is minimum access to that entire beach, at high water. At low water, there is plenty. RICHARD SMITH: That's some of the reasons why the DEC... TRUSTEE FOSTER: Well the railing is only on the ramp. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well just because the neighbors have a sort of a low profile approach we would like to see that low profile approach because then it's not sticking up. (Trustee talking) RICHARD SMITH: How often have the neighbor's docks been torn out from storms? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't know. The question was, how durable have the neighbor's docks been. JOHN COSTELLO: They take them out. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Yeah, they're seasonal. We'll we commented on that while we were there. It's a pretty wide open area. Remember we were talking about that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yeah, because you're more wide open and that one is more tucked-in. JOHN COSTELLO: (can't hear) TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well I'm taking about during the boating season, when you get prevailing winds, the one to the south is pretty much, you're more or less, tucked-in. JOHN COSTELLO: Absolutely. TRUSTF, E POLIWODA: That's protected. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The one is protected. This one isn't. JOHN COSTELLO: (can't hear) a 6' foot would survive, the 4' foot docks in the Bay, are going to have some severe damage. I've also seen a brand new dock, 6' wide constructed entirely out of oak pilings in Noyac Bay, cut-off, the entire thing because it just happen to be (can't hear). TRUSTEE POLIWODA: The only thing I don't like is sticking a big structure above our specifications in between two seasonal docks. TRUSTEE SMITH: It's not in between. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Well k's right there. Before you know it you'll have a lot of "L's and a lot of big structures 6' wide docks throughout the area. JOHN COSTELLO: Well there are benefits and there are disadvantages. First of all, the benefits are one time cost instead of an annual maintenance fee. (can't hear) There are disadvantages... TRUSTEE FOSTER: You put those pilings in upside down you said? JOHN COSTELLO: We would TRUSTEE FOSTER: Well, it's stronger, I understand that. They're not going to come out either. JOHN COSTELLO: They have the (can't hear) slightly larger at the bottom. TRUSTEE FOSTER: We're just lucky we haven't had the severe winters we used to have when you and I were younger. TRUSTEE SMITH: One of these winters, we're going to find out. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Kenny, what's your thought on the width? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: The DEC will be the one to determine that. TRUSTEE SMITH: Well, I have no problem. TRUSTEE FOSTER: I don't either. 13 14 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Whatever we approve tonight you'll have to come back to us for an Amendment. Next month anyway. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Well, you can't second guess the DEC. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, that's what I'm saying. We should vote on what we think is right and if he has to come back, he has to come back. JOHN COSTELLO: As I said once before, ifI get six approvals and one denial, I have to make these adjustments. RICHARD SMITH: Now are we going to be changing the guidelines of the Trustees with this action and all future docks on the bay. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No. TRUSTF~ FOSTER: Well I think you have to take something like this considering the location on a case by case basis. TRUSTF~ KR~SKI: Yeah but the neighbors.are 4' too. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Well maybe the neighbors can't afford to put a substantial dock in like this. They probably would if they could. RICHARD SMITH: Well they'll probably be back in a couple of months to do that. TRUSTEE SMITH: I think it sometimes does more harm taking these docks out. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Oh no, I'm not questioning...I'm not sold on that either. All that I'm saying is that I just have reservations about a 6' dock, that's all. A residential dock. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: You're asking for a 6' dock for a dinghy. RICHARD SMITH: The CAC thought that was excessive for the use as well. JOHN COSTELLO: I'm asking for a 6' dock because I want it to stay. I wanted less maintenance, that's the basics. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think we have to make it clear though, I do anyway, the concern about the, to Mr. & Mrs. Lewick, the concern about the size, the width, :the length, and all that, is because it's on public property. If this were on your property, it would be a different story, but this is on public property, and, once you put a structure there, basically you monopolize that. That's why we're having all this discussion about the size of any structure that we work on tonight, because it's all on public property. I don't think there's any further discussion. We can close the hearing and have a vote. Any other comments? JOHN COSTELLO: The only other thing is that I hope this Board will be consistent with the DEC ..... (can't hear). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well that's why we looked at each one in the field. JOHN COSTELLO: I didn't want to speak up on the other application on the subject with the return. One of the problems with that particular application right there is, some of the material (can't hear). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well that's a point well taken. But, the survey was not accurate showing the toe of the bluff. We were there. He wasn't there. He's just trying to figure it our from the pictures. The angle was so slight there that k was.., you would have to see it. JOHN COSTELLO: I can't argue., but there are docks, on Robins Island, that are at least 14', it stays, it will stay, it will be there... TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES 14 15 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion, ifk passes, it passes, if it doesn't, we can make another vote. I'll make a motion to approve a dock, 4'X 6' platform adjoining existing bulkhead, following with a 4'X 20' ramp leading to a level 4'X 40' dock and ending with a 4'X 16' "L". Install 2-pile dolphin 20" off"L" dock and a mooring out in the bay we have no jurisdiction over All in favor. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Ney. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What was your objection Kenny? TRUSTF~ POLIWODA: The "L". TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well, if you have any amendments we'd be happen to entertain them with an open mind. There were a lot of different questions on this and I think we looked at...whatever any other permits, as far as putting something in, I think we'll work with the applicant, if necessary. JOHN COSTELLO: I'd just like a minute to speak with the applicants. (Costello speaking with applicants then Trustees). What I'm proposing is to narrow up the dock, the 6' wide dock, to 4' in width out to the existing~proposed "L". Which is 64' out. Offshore 16'. We would like to put in 16' additional feet from that point on, 6' in width. Eliminating the "L", and eliminating the hand rail on the inshore ramp, to provide public access. This Board and their knowledge of Southold Town is the Board that should be in control to have some design destiny (changed tape)... TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But like I said, that's why we had to vote, because we couldn't, we're not going to second guess the DEC. Do you want an approval on this tonight? JOHN COSTELLO: Yes I do because that is going to have some influence on the DEC. You made concessions on eliminating the "L", the depth of water being a problem, I took the width down to 4' ,and provided access. They all have to be favorable conditions for the DEC. Whether it's enough, I don't know. TRUSTEE FOSTER: We'll back it up a little bit and we'll approve it based on the changes we all agreed Upon subject to resubmission of another plan. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: There's the motion, do I have a second? TRUSTEE SMITH: Seconded. ALL AYES J.H. Geideman P.L.S on behatf of RICHAR1) BUTLER requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 100' bulkhead with a 10'return and to backfdl with 40 c.y. of clean sand. Located: 3327 Manhanset Ave., Greenport. SCTM#36-2-23.4 POSTPONED AS PER THE AGENT'S REQUEST HAREORD, KOUZIOS, MCNAMARA, PANELLA & ZANG request a Wetland Permit to install an underground pipe from Main Bayview Rd., along Takaposha Rd. to the applicant's respective homes in order to have useable Water from the SCWA. Installation of the pipe will be in accordance with the specifications provided by SCWA and any other authority providing permits. Located: Takaposha Rd., Southold. SCTM#87-6-2,4,7,9 & 10 POSTPONED AS PER THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST BARBARA CLAPS requests a Wetland Permit to trim phragmites and damaged trees. Located: 2715 Long Creek Dr., Southold. SCTM#52-8-1 TRUSTE, F, KRESS: Kenny had some comments on that. Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of or against the application? 15 16 TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I was concerned that they clear cut the wetlands. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It shows that corner there. TRUSTEE FOSTER: We went and looked at that. We didn't have a problem. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes, well Kenny had some questions. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: For the future, I'd rather not see the clearing within 50' of those wetlands. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well how would you show that on the survey? TRUSTEE SMITH: I don't any problem with the phragmites because they're there.. RICHARD SMITH: CAC requested that an approved vegetation plan be submitted. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well, she did mark it on the survey. RICHARD SMITH: Yeah, but what would be done is the question, really, in the future. What type of activity would be occurring. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: In general, on all properties, the wetland vegetation, it's in the Code actually, it's protected, we wouldn't let you cut in that wetland area that's marked out on the survey at all. BARBARA CLAPS: That wetland, and I don't know who went down there... TRUSTEE FOSTER: We all went. BARBARA CLAPS: You all seem to know where I cut. So my concern is, first of all, we actually cut (can't hear) we cut it down and tried to clean up and we had baskets of old bottles. The phragrnites were trimmed. TRUSTEE SMITH: Those phragmites are tough. BARBARA CLAPS: Yeah, they came back great. They looked dead before. I mean we weren't cutting it down to get rid of it, we were cutting it back to clean up the junk back there. TRUSTEE KRL~SKI: So, do you have any intention of cutting it again. BARBARA CLAPS: I would like to cut it now because I stopped cutting it so I never actually got the bottles out. I was stopped when they told me don't move anything you have there. So I have garbage pails now loaded with bottles and more bottles. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I wondering why they were out there. BARBARA CLAPS: Because we like looking at them. No, ! was told, I guess by the Board here that I was to just stop. So I did. So fight now I have garbage pails out there and that's where I am. I have no intention of filling it in, or dredging .or anything. I just want to cut a few and get it so ... TRUSTEE KRLrPSKI: What's your method of cutting. BARBARA CLAPS: We cut it right down to try and get the bottles out. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: With what? TRUSTEE SMITH: What kind of machine? BARBARA CLAPS: I don't know. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well we wouldn't let you cut in that area that,s marked here on your survey that's wetlands. Obviously you could clean it out but you can't cut the vegetation down in that area. I don't think the Board has a problem with you cutting the phragmites down in the rest of that area. Can I show you? Come take a look here. It comes in like this. If you follow the contour, that's where, I assume, we were out there last week,.., so you couldn't operate in this area here. In this lower corner here. I think you can see that from where we were standing. We walked along here. I don't think the Board has a problem with you cutting phragmites in this area, so it really goes all the way 16 17 up to ...oh, so it would be down here. I don't think the Board has any problem with you cutting the phragmites. Not in the wetland area. We usually let people cut the phragmites to 1' in height. Because sometimes if you suppress, you can't kill the phragmites unfortunately, but mowing them suppresses them. But, if you cut them down to 1' you'll let the native grasses get through and that's going to hold your soil in and you're not going to have an erosion problem. Something is going to grow there. TRUSTEE POL1WODA: That's what raised my attention. Whoever did it, mowed right into the marsh. [fit was upland, it wouldn't have been a problem. Phragmites in this area are no big deal. BARBARA CLAPS: Okay, so what are you telling me I can then. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think the Board wouldn't have a problem with you cutting the pragmites to a 1' height. Let's say this is your fence here. From the front of the fence, not in the wetland area or the wetland fringe, you can't touch that at all, but you can cut the phragmites in this other area here to a 1' height, and thatwill-allow the native wetland plants to come though to grow. BARBARA CLAPS: So, can I do that now? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes. BARBARA CLAPS: Okay, even though I did it already, I can do it again? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes, you can do it basically as needed. BARBARA CLAPS: Oh, so I don't have to keep coming back? TRUSTF, E KRUPSKI: No, as long as you don't operate within the wetland area and along the fringe, you can't mow that or do anything to that area. BARBARA CLAPS: Right. Okay. TRUSTF, F, KRUPSKI: I need a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTF, E FOSTER: So moved. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to allow for the cutting of the phragmites, not in the wetland area but only in the upland area to 1' in height, as needed. TRUSTEE SMITH: Seconded. ALL AYES WILLIAM PISARELLI requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4'X 28' catwalk, 3'X 14' hinged ramp, and a 6'X 20' float. Located: 5810 Skunk Lane, Cutchogue. SCTM# 138-2-26 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would anyone like to speak in favor of or against the application? WILLIAM PISARELLI: Seeing I'm the applicant, I'm also in favor it. What ! did was, I know that there was some concern about the width of the property. I just would like to show the Board, that all the lots on Skunk Lane, facing .'Baldwin Creek, are all the same width, and my lot has a particular advantage in that onthe southern side of my lot is Sterling Rd. where no one owns. So if there's any concern about property usage or anything there, the fact that they're all the same, I'm even a little wider than the other ones, as it shows here. And, what I also did was, I made a representative walk through just like I'm sure the Trustees did, and I saw that there were similar structures on Skunk on similar lots. That's all I can say in support of my application is that I don't want to cut anything down, I don't want to build any walls, all I want to do is I want to put a dock in similar to the ones on either side of me. 17 18 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Alright, I'm the only Board member who was here when you got your Permit originally. And, I remember what took place then. Some of those people that have docks have double lots though. They have 25' wide lots. A lot of them are double lots. Even on the other side of you is a double lot also. WILLIAM PISARELLI: No, I believe it's a single lot. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You think so. Okay. The reason, 4 years ago, we granted you a Permit for a 3'X 20' catwalk with a pile in front of it so you could have a boat on it with a pulley. And the reason we did that is because again, because of the access issue, and I don't know if the Board is going to be inclined to give you anything bigger than that because it's not even a 12' wide lot and if Sterling Rd. is next to you, that's public access and we couldn't do anything to restrict public access. WILLIAM PISARELLI: Right. Could I just point something outto you. It's 12' at the street, but at the high water mark it's 18' wide. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But, our policy is to keep the structures 15' off the property line. So this is really, granting a 3'X 20' four years ago was reallyan e~cception to-that policy. WILLIAM PISARELLI: Could I make a comment on the 3'X 20'? I was pretty naive about as how to go through the Permit process and everything else when I made my initial application. When I want down there, I took a tape, and I said hey 3'X 20'. Well I had two dock builders come give me a price and one of them was Mr. Costello and the other one was a local dock builder and they said, well ifI got a 3'X 20' dock where I wanted it, I could park my car there but I could do anything with a boat, because I wouldn't be in deep enough water to place a boat. So, even ifI had been granted a 3'X 20' at that time, and put it in, it would have been inadequate. I am asking that the Board reconsider, since there are similar structures up and down the line. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't know-, see you're talking about, as far as the length goes, that's an issue but also the width is an issue. That's why we kept it, four years ago, we kept k at three feet. I'm familiar with the area, that's why I remember this application. And, if your neighbor comes in for a dock, if you put that structure in, it would almost be impossible for them to put in the same dock up on their 12' wide piece of property because, and.a boat on either side It would just about be impossible. We felt, the reason why the Board originally granted the 3'X 20' with a pole at the end with a pulley is that it would allow every neighbor to have the same structure and have:some sort of access to the boat. WILLIAM PISARELLI: Right, but again, I can only point out that even though I'm 12', on the street side, down there I'm 18' So if! had a 3' dock, I would still have 15' from the one boundary. IfI hug the side by Bay Ave. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We couldn't let you hug the Sterling Rd. side because that's public access and we couldn't let you block that because anyone could Use that. See we can't let you, we just had a..., we went for months at one atthe end of ldittle Neck Rd. because there wasa public road access and we couldn't let him put a structure near'it. WILLIAM PISARELLI: How about ifI centered it into the property and just changed the width of the dock to 3' from 4' and I still would have my ramp and float. The guy next to me has exactly that. I just don't understand the rational why I can't duplicate that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't think you could duplicate it because then your neighbor's couldn't duplicate it. Once you put more in, you're not going to be able to squeeze that structure in. 18 19 10. 11. WILLIAM PISARELLI: No, bearing in mind your comments, I'm willing to say let me get my structure in 3' wide with my ramp and my dock and my float. TRUSTEE KR~SKI: I still don't see how you could put all that in there and accommodate the neighbor's structures in the future. I think you would be monopolizing that area that they wouldn't be able, (tape broke). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI made a motion to Table the application. Trustees will re-inspect at the July 14th inspection. JOSEPH A. LEE requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4'X 32' catwalk over the wetlands. Located: 1645 Meadow Beach Lane, Mattituck SCTM#116-4-14 TRUSTEE KING moved to Approve the application, TRUSTEE SMITH seconded. ALL AYES. GEORGE TOUMANOFF requests a Wetland Permit to cut back undergrowth between homesite remains and tidal waterfront. Located: 975 East Mill Rd., Mattituck. SCTM#100-3-11.17 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to Deny the application and that no further activity is to take place, TRUSTEE SMITH seconded. ALL AYES. V. RESOLUTIONS: MARIA KATSIGEORGIS requests a Grandfather Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit to repair existing 9'X 30' deck inkind/inplace. Located: 55455 North Rd., Route 48, Southold SCTM#44-1-12 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to Approve the application, TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES THOMAS O'NEILL requests a Grandfather Permit for all changes, improvemems, maintenance and repair done to property in order to protect property from erosion. Located: 1420 Smith Dr., South, Southold. SCTM#76-3-10.1 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to Table the application, TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES VI. MOORINGS: 1. PAUL AllLERS requests an onshore/offshore stake on his property for a 26.5' inboard/outboard. Located: 1905 Gull Pond Lane, Greenport SCTm#35-4-16 TRUSTEE POLIWODA moved to Deny the application because the applicant already has a dock, TRUSTEE FOSTER seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE SMITH moved to close the meeting at 9:45 PM. TRUS~F~~coJt.~]~ Flied BY ALL AYES$1. ~ SOUTHOLD TO%q1%1 CT.F. RK Respectfully submitted, c;~fo, lx~r~ W/9, ~r2c~/~ / DATE Lauren M. Standish, Clerk t,,tffT~t Town Clerk. Town of Sou/hold ][9