HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-02/25/1998Albert J. Krupski, President
James King, Vice-President
Henry Smith
Arkie Foster
Ken Poliwoda
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1882
Fax [516) 765-1823
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MINUTES
FEBRUARY 25, 1998
PRESENT WERE:
ABSENT:
Albert J. Krupski, Jr. President
James King, Vice-President
Artie Foster, Member
Ken Poliwoda, Member
Jill Doherty, Clerk
Henry P. Smith, Member
CAI.I. MEETING TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: March 20, 1998 12:00
NEXT TRUSTEE BOARD MEETING: Wed. March 25, 1998 7P.M.
WORKSESSION: 6:00 p.m.
APPROVE MINUTES: Approve minutes of January 1998 regular meeting
A motion was made by TRUSTEE FOSTER and seconded by TRUSTEE KING to
approve minutes. ALL AYES.
I. MONTHLY REPORT: The Trustees monthly report for January 1998: A
check for $ 5,908.40 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. AMENDMENTS/WAIVERS/CHANGES:
1. WILLIAM PROVENCHER requests that the permit for Helmut Haas
dated 1954 for a dock be transferred to him as per information in the
file. Applicant would like to reconstruct dock. Located Beverly Road,
Southold. Off Rt. 25. SCTM #52-2-18. Trustees read through deed and
feel that Mr. Provencher owns ROW.
A motion was made by TRUSTEE KRUPSKI and seconded by TRUSTEE KING to
approve the transfer of the permit to read as follows: to construct a
4' X 15' fixed dock only perpendicular to property line.
ALL AYES.
' Board of Trustees ~' 2 ~'~ February 25, 1998
2. Environment East on behalf of RUTH MILLER requests a Waiver to
construct an addition to existing house as per survey. Located Indian
Neck Road, Southold. SCTM %86-7-2.2.
A motion was made by TRUSTEE KRUPSKI and seconded by TRUSTEE KING to
approve waiver to construct an addition to existing house with the
condition that there be a staked row of haybales at the top of bluff
during construction. ALL AYES.
3. Jim Mc Garry on behalf of SEAN HALLAHAN requests a Waiver to
repair and replace roof and windows on existing garage. Gutters and
leaders will be added to contain runoff. Also to replace wood cap on
top of concrete retaining wall. Located Sailor's Needle Road,
Mattituck. SCTM #144-5-25.1.
A motion was made TRUSTEE KING and seconded by TRUSTEE POLIWODA to
approve the waiver. ALL AYES.
4. JOHN PRIZEMAN requests a waiver to construct driveway leading to
proposed house that is out of Trustees jurisdiction. Located Bay
Ave., Mattituck. SCTM ~1000-144-3-40.4.
A motion was made by TRUSTEE KRUPSKI and seconded by TRUSTEE KING to
approve waiver for driveway as per plans submitted.
Ayes: Krupski, King, Poliwoda. Abstain: Foster.
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
1. MARIA PROIS requests a Wetland Permit to construct a second
story addition to existing dwelling with gutters and leaders into
drywells, an existing 8' X 10' deck attached to house and a detached
garage as shown. Also requests a permit for existing 40' retaining
wall with 3' and 6' returns and a 39' retaining wall with 3' and 6'
returns, a 3' X 15' stair case as shown on updated survey dated Jan.
8, 1998. Existing structures where built prior to 1971. Located
Bayview Ave., Southold. SCTM ~52-5-12.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak on
behalf of the application? (Prois' are in audience).
Is there anyone here who would like to speak against this application?
CLERK: We got two letters.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: A letter from the neighbor. "I understand this
application for a permit was triggered by a retaining wall on the
property. I would be interested in being kept inform with the Boards
inspection and review process in the hopes that what ever work that
may be contemplated by owners and whatever work may have already been
preformed there, complements and enhances the delicate resources.
CLERK: There is another letter from a neighbor just mentioning that
it would block his view from across the street.
Board of Trustees .... 3
February 25, 1998
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: O.K. The CAC recommends approval with a non-turf
buffer at retaining wall.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I reviewed this application on Tuesday. The stairs
are pretty much gone, but there are some remnants of them. The walls
are there. There is not reason not to approve.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Are there plans for everything?
MR. PROIS: Do you want to see the plans?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Please.
MR. PROIS: Right now it is just a one story and we are just adding a
second story.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Same location?
MR. PROIS: Same Location.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And not expansion?
MR. PROIS: Except for the garage.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The garage is out of our jurisdiction. If there were
some expansion to the footprint, it is not that we would object to
it. We would normally require a row of.haybales to keep the sediment
from washing into the creek.
MR. PROIS: The foot print will be exactly the same.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. The retaining wall are O.K.?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Yes. A non-turf buffer would be a good idea. There
is one and a tier up is a second one. A non-turf buffer in between
them.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What is there now?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Dirt and grass.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What we normally recommend is a non-turf buffer
upland of the retaining wall or bulkhead. That keeps all the
nutrients from the lawn and any kind of sediment from washing into
the creek.
MRS. PROIS: We don't put anything on the lawn.
MR. PROIS: If it can't grow, it doesn't deserve to be there. That is
my attitude.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: That is what it looks like.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: O.K. Mostly we recommend that you plant it with
native species, put Rosa Ragosa or something in, let it naturalize
and it will hold the bank in better. Grass doesn't hold it in that
well. Is there any other comment on this application? Do I have a
motion to close this hearing?
TRUSTEE KING: So moved.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Second. ALL AYES.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I will make a motion to approve this application as
applied for plus non-turf buffer on first tier.
TRUSTEE KING: Second. ALL AYES.
2. Chris Pickerell on behalf of PECONIC LAND TRUST requests a
Wetland Permit to restore salt marsh as detailed in file. Located
Albertson lane and Hashamomaque Pond, Southold. SCTM #52-5-59.9.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in
favor of or against the application? Are there CAC comments?
SCOTT HILARY: We recommended approval.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It is a pretty impressive project. What it is, is
that an area that had been dredge by the County in Hashamomaque. They
use the dredge spoil to fill in marsh land. This is a project that is
going to remove the dredge spoil, which is this case is mostly case,
off of the marsh. They are going to excavate down .the old bog and
Board of Trustees ~j 4 February 25, 1998
hopefully the marsh will re-establish it self. It is a worthy
project. Any other Board comments? Do I have a motion to close the
hearing.
TRUSTEE KING: So moved.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Second. ALL AYES.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I make a motion that we approve the application of
Chris Pickerell on behalf of Peconic Land Trust.
TRUSTEE KING: Second. ALL AYES.
3. Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of BENJAMIN SUGLIA requests a
Wetland Permit to construct a 4' X 40' fixed open walkway, a 4' X 16'
hinged ramp and two floats, one 8' X 10' and one 4'6" X 10'. Located
4639 Stillwater Drive, Cutchogue. SCTM %137-3-7.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in
favor of the application?
MR. FITZGERALD: Yes. If you recall we went over this at the last
meeting. You approve the permit for the house. The dock was
considered to be to long. Ken and I, mostly Ken, arrived at a more
suitable length and that is what we are proposing now.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: O.K. So this is the adjusted length?
MR. FITZGERALD: Yes.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Anyone else like to comment on the application? Do
we have new CAC comments?
CLERK: No.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: CAC recommended approval. So I am assuming they
would recommend approval of the smaller one. Do I have a motion to
close the hearing?
TRUSTEE KING: So moved.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second. ALL AYES.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I will make a motion to approve the Wetland Permit
for Benjamin Suglia as amended above.
TRUSTEE KING: Second. ALL AYES.
4. Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of ROBERT DI DOMENICO
requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4' X 30' fixed walkway, 4' X
16' hinged ramp and a 6' X 20' 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 here who would like to speak in
favor of the application?
MR. FITZGERALD: Yes. All the words that I just said about Suglia
apply to DiDomenico also.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Is there any other comment? do I have a
motion to close the hearing?
TRUSTEE FOSTER: I will make a motion to close the hearing.
TRUSTEE KING: Second.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I will make a motion to approve the application as
amended.
TRUSTEE KING: Second. ALL AYES.
5. Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of ROBERT D'URSO requests a
Wetland Permit to construct a one-family private residence with
private sewage disposal system and private well. Located Orchard
Lane, Southold. SCTM ~89-2-8.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in
favor of the application?
Board of Trustees<-j
February 25, 1998
MR. FITZGERALD: The application says it all. I would have thought
that it might have been subject to a waiver, including the well, it
is more that 75' from the wetlands.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We just didn't see how you can put a row of haybales
up and then construct a house inside that. It didn't seem physically
possible. You know moving dirt around and construct a foundation and
whatnot. I think here we would be a little more lenient on the line
of haybales. I think what is submitted isn't realistic as far as
moving the soil around in putting the foundation in. The hay bales
here show a 75' setback. I think if you went with a 40' setback, it
would give the applicant 35' around the house to work. The 40' would
be an undisturbed buffer area where we wouldn't want any equipment in
and only hand clearing for a view within the 40'
TRUSTEE FOSTER: I had some questions about it, because this is what I
do. To me it seemly impossible to get in there and do any excavation
in that close an area. Is this house going to be on pilings?
MR. FITZGERALD: We don't have the plans yet.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: That would make a big difference if is actually going
to be elevated, there is really no dirt to move area. If it is going
to be a foundation, you have at least 3' below grade, which means
there has to be some excavation and you are going to have to have
some place to move it to.
MR. FITZGERALD: ...move them to.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: That is basically what A1 is saying to give yourself
a little more room to do this with. As the way it is laid out now, it
is almost an impossibility.
SCOTT HILARY: The CAC felt that the staked off area for the home was
much closer than proposed on the plan.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We measured it.
MR. FITZGERALD: The Chuck Bowman did the wetlands line and the
surveyor did the rest of it. I did not myself pace it off and measure
it.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: It is near impossible to walk through there it is so
thick. I thought we taped that off.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: From Driads basin we did.
SCOTT HILARY: Not from the water itself. From any wetland plant
boundaries. It is pretty wet in there to the south east side.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes. It definitely is. But on that the lot, I think
the house is well sited as far as protecting the encroachment on the
Driads basin also.
SCOTT HILARY: Can it be moved back to the southwest?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No not really. They are right up against that. They
don't have a lot of room to work with.
LADY IN AUDIENCE: I know Driads basin. I live in The Cove. If you put
a building with foundation with room than you have. The building next
to me, the sump pump is going continuously. I think you are asking
for trouble~ They never should have put that building up. I think we
have something to protect and be careful with.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I agree. On the north side there is a pretty high
lot they have elevation of 7' I am guessing they put the foundation,
like Artie said, about 3' down.
FRAN TRAPLINSKI: I have the home right next to this one that you are
talking about. We have been there all this week, with the high tide,
we have had no water in the basement at all. I have received a copy
of the plan. Where it says septic detail, it says proposed dwelling.
There is a notation that says pile foundation.
Board of Trustees
February 25, 1998
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. We hadn't picked that up.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: O.K. A finished floor elevation of 15. So he is going
to be up in the air.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So he is basically going to start from ground level.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: If it is on pilings, yea. He is really not going to
disturb anything. They are not going to any excavating under there at
all.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Then the haybale line is feasible. Is Mr. D'Urso
going to be living there?
MR. FITZGERALD: No, he will be selling the property.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I wouldn't put any clearing on there for a view. I
would let the new owners speak to us first as to what they can and
cannot do. I am not going to put that they are allowed to clear
anything.
MR. FITZGERALD: I am in contact with the new owners.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well, when they decide to build, they can give us a
call. That is the best way. Any other comment? Board?
TRUSTEE FOSTER: If they don't need to move the haybales, then we
should leave them where they have submitted them.
TRUSTEE RRUPSKI: Can I have a motion to close the hearing?
TRUSTEE KING: So moved.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second. ALL AYES.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I will make a motion to approve the application of
Robert D'Urso with no clearing within the 75' set back.
TRUSTEE KING: Second. ALL AYES.
6. Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of FRANK POLACEK requests a
Wetland Permit to construct a 12' section of bulkhead to close
opening of boat ramp in existing bulkhead; remove existing sidewalls
of boat ramp; fill area of existing boat ramp behind new bulkhead
with approx. 25 c.y. of clean fill from an appropriate upland source.
Located 1085 Westview Drive, Mattituck. SCTM #139-1-3.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of
the application?
MR. FITZGERALD: I would be happy to answer any questions you might
have. All the information is the application. It seems straight
forward.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there any other comment? Jim, did you take a
look at this?
TRUSTEE KING: It is a sandy area down to the water. It is bulkheaded.
About in the center of the bulkhead there is a small ramp with sides
on it. It is starting to gave in. He just wants to bulkhead across
the face and remove the two sides and fill with sand. It is fine. It
is a simple thing. It is all just sand in the area.
CLERK: CAC approved.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do I have a motion to close the hearing?
TRUSTEE KING: So moved.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second. ALL AYES.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I will make a motion to approve the application of
Frank Polacek provided that the non-turf buffer be maintained to 20'
TRUSTEE KING: Second. ALL AYES.
7. Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of COVE CONDOMINIUMS
HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION requests a Wetland Permit to Maintenance
dredge to 3' below MLW Approx. 90'c.y. from channel at entrance to
Board of Trustees
February 25, 1998
Homeowners Association docking area; dredge as necessary in the same
area to maintain width and depth of entrance channel on maximum of
three additional occasions during the next ten years. Spoil will be
removed to an approved upland location for deposition. Located off
Main Bayview Road, Southold. $CTM #87-5-20.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in
favor of the application?
MR. FITZGERALD: I would like to ask if the Board could recess the
hearing, after any comments that are made, so that I can have an
opportunity to approach the County to see if they have any objections
to doing the job as submitted.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: O.K~ We have had a problem occasionally, when the
applicant asks for a recess, sometimes it goes on for an unlimited
amount of time. The Board has discuss this and we are going to try to
maintain that you can ask for a recess for a period of one year. At
that point the application is lost.
MR. FITZGERALD: I hope to be back before next month.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Anything can happen. We would only entertain this
for one year. Is there any other comment?
BUD YOUNG: Is dredging boundary going to extend low tide property
line of Cove Condominiums Homeowners Association? Is it going to go
out into the Corey Creek property at all?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No. The reason the applicant requested to recess the
application, is that we spoke to him before the meeting, our concern
on any dredging project. You can't just dredge in a straight line to
whatever depth you want and across your property. Going a step back
further, the reason we entertaining this is because it £s private
property. It is not Town owned property like Corey Creek is.
BUD YOUNG: I believe it will effect the wetlands on the west side of
it.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is what we want to make sure it doesn't. So
when you dredge down a straight line, the area to west is going to
slump into that and it is going to be effected.
BUD YOUNG: I just want to make sure they are not going to put giant
lots in there. There history is, if you notice they have a building
right up to the edge there constructed on tons of landfill. My
perspective of their view of how they phrase it here as the wetland
area in general is kind of...vegetated wetlands. I just don't like
that phrase. As long as somebody monitors them very carefully on
their dredging project. Maybe they would want to have the rest of the
property dredged for bigger boats in the future. I just want to make
sure the County and the Town is properly looking after this.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Where is your property in relation to this?
BUD YOUNG: It is just west of it. I am also worried about the wetland
on the east side. That is probably the County?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is the County. I don't think that will effect
you.
BUD YOUNG: It depends on how much dredging they want to have somebody
do in the future. As long they are doing a little dredging for little
boats and not anything bigger.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Two weeks ago we inspected. It was a very low tide.
The whole flat was exposed and see exactly what they where applying
for. Our feeling is that the channel that existed was sufficient to
allow navigation to those floats. Our environment concern is that
dredging that area would effect ~he adjacent underwater areas. That
is why it is being recessed. Normally we would allow them to dredge,
Board of Trustees .... 8 '
February 25, 1998
you just can't dredge down to the cross, then the neighbors bottom is
going to slump in. We would not allow that to happen. They are going
to have to start at their property lines and come at a 1:3 or 1:4
angle then they can get to the depth that they want. They can't just
come straight down. So there will be an angle of repose, so the
adjacent neighbor isn't going to be effected at all. The adjacent
neighbor in this case is Suffolk County. The applicant has to go to
Suffolk County and seek permission from them to try and encroach
somewhat on their property to enlarge their channel.
BUD YOUNG: I don't believe that there will be a problem with very
large boats getting in there. I don't how many years ago they wanted
to do some major dredging, on the sand bars there so they can have
bigger boats then they have now. There is not much wetlands left
around there. On both sides of Corey Creek it is pretty much built up
to the hilt. I always wondered how the cesspools get cleaned out, as
some of them are right on top of each other. I am would hope the Town
would be on top of that situation. The area is pretty built up.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The project has a limited scope. You are limited out
there as to what is in Corey Creek. There is not dredging in Corey
Creek.
BUD YOUNG: I don't trust anybody any more.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We don't either.
SPEAKER: They have had a trawler in there at high tide. They had to
take it out at high tide.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think there is a physical limit there as to how
far they can go.
SPEAKER: Ideally you would fit the boat to the area instead the area
to boats.
BUD YOUNG: I don't the west side... I think everyone has to be on top
of the situation. We are lucky to get some shellfish back now. At low
tide there is about 18" of water.
SPEAKER: If the Trustees promise to keep there eye on this, I would
respect there good offices.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you but this hearing want be closed tonight,
it will be recessed. We won't be voting on it tonight because of our
concerns of undermining the adjacent land. We wouldn't approve this
project as submitted, because of our concerns. It is up to the
applicant to contact the neighbor, which in this case is Suffolk
County, to get their permission to basically undermine their land to
a certain extent to allow for that channel.
BUD YOUNG: What is the channel for?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: For boats.
BUD YOUNG: Exactly.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The application is for 3' below mean low water. I
think the creek is going to limit the size boat. It was last dredged
in 1984.
BUD YOUNG: We need a little protection there. Any storm tides that
come in, it would be nice to have some shellfish around there. It is
a nice Cozy Cove.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We had a shellfish advisory committee meeting last
night and we are going to try to do some rehabilitation of the
shellfish'beds in Corey Creek this year. Which is not related to this
project. Any other comment? I will make a motion to recess this
hearing until our regular meeting which will be March 25th. It will
come up automatically on that night.
TRUSTEE KING: Second. ALL AYES.
Board of Trustees
February 25, 1998
8. En-Consultants on behalf of LOUIS AND LUBA CORSO requests a
Wetland Permit and Coastal Erosion Permit to construct 415+/-' of
timber retaining wall to be tied into existing retaining wall to the
east; construct 10' return on west end of structure. Backfill with
approx. 300 c.y. of clean sand to be trucked in from an upland
source. Bluff slope will be planted (6" 1' on center) with
Ammophila breviligulata. Site to be accessed by Duck Pond Road.
Located ROW off Oregon Road, Cutchogue. SCTM #83-2-11.4.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak on
behalf of this application?
ROB HERMAN: Rob Herman of En-Consultants. I am here on behalf of Luba
and Louis Corso. As at least one board member will remember, this is
an area up on the sound which En-Consultants represented the Corso's
several years ago. It was work that was done by James H. Rambo. I
visited the site with the Corso's contact us. They have purchased the
lot adjacent to the west of the ones that are existing in there name,
for which we had the last project. I was extremely impressed on how
that project turned out. The retaining wall on the sound was planted
the bluff has been terraced and the property actually stand out quite
a bit. It is the one green section of bluff along there. The beach
grass has done fairly well. Essentially extending the project further
to the west. The only part of the project which was not successful
was the placement of the several hundred cubic yards of sand. It
actually became a fairly nice beach nourishment project funded by the
Corso's. There had actually been some extensive discussion between
the DEC and the Southold Trustees at the time of what would be done
there. I would like to plant beach grass and pass on the dumping of
sand there. That is all I have.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there any other comment on this application in
favor or against this application? You are certain about passing on
covering with sand this time?
ROB HERMAN: I am certain. As are the Corso's.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't think that we can apologize for that. We
tried set policy, we tried to do the best we could.
ROB HERMAN: All the parties involved went into that project with the
understanding that it might or might not work in all aspects. The
part that was most effective was the plantings. I think it looks
great.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We visited the site last week and we did so with
what we were looking at was the beach and to see how a structure that
size effected the beach and how the whole area was effect by the
structure and how the beach was effected. We couldn't see any
difference.
ROB HERMAN: It seems like often in those areas where the shore line
is not eroding as quickly, it is almost touch and go with what sites
tend to get impacted and what sites don't. It think this wall was
constructed very well, in terms of the retaining walls and how they
have tide back into the bluff and again the plantings and everything.
It has really held up there quite well.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there any mention of armoring the toe with stone.
Is the DEC still require that.
ROB HERMAN: The DEC seems to be veering back away from that. I think
that what is happening in many cases is the rock is simply sinking
itself and eventually have a vertical face wall anyway as the rock
tends to sink into the sand and the beach elevation changes. So, it
is another situation where they are requiring that a lot of times and
Board of Trustees .... 10 ~-~ February 25, 1998
it is a very expensive addition to the project and it turned out just
like the sand. It would disappear, only rather down the beach below
it. They have not been requiring that. I don't know if they will on
this project or not. We have certainly seen it a lot less.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: O.K.
ROB HERMAN: If they do require it, we will have to do it. But, we are
trying to keep away from that.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think that was our only question here. Is there
any other comments?
DR. SAMUELS: They should armor the west return.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: Historically they seem to be the only areas that seem
to wash out, right around the corner.
DR. SAMUELS: I know Mr. Corso would agree to that.
ROB HERMAN: Would you want me to make some sort of notation on that
plan or resubmit another sketch?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, you can do it right now. It doesn't seem that it
had any effect to the property to the west.
(Rob Herman changed drawing) Do I have a motion to close the'hearing?
TRUSTEE KING: So moved.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second. ALL AYES.
TRUSTEE KING: I will make a motion that we approve the Wetland Permit
of Louis and Luba Corso as written with the addition that the western
return be armored with stone.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Second. ALL AYES.
9. En-Consultants on behalf of SPYRIDON & LETTA KOUZIOS requests a
Wetland Permit to remove an existing 4' X 10' ramp, 4' X 16' dock, 3'
X 12' ramp and a 6' X 10' float. Replace existing dock structures
with a 4' X 42' fixed pier, 3' X 14' ramp and a 6' X 30' float.
Install (2) two-pile dolphins to secure float. Also add a 12' X 12'
extension to existing deck on house. Located Takaposa Road, Southold.
SCTM #87-6-4.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in
favor of this application?
ROB HERMAN: Rob Herman from En-Consultants on behalf of Mr. & Mrs.
Kouzios. As the Board is well aware at this point there are several
aspects of this project including new unanticipated ones. Actually we
met both with the contractor and with Jim King at this site last
week. I will try to address each aspect quickly and then whatever
questions the Board has. We obviously have a little bit to work out
on this application. The application was initially to extend an
existing dock. The dock at low tide right now is essentially on the
bottom. In fact it is on the bottom. Which will serve any craft to be
dock there. It is certainly against the regulations of the DEC to
have a float and/or vessel on the bottom at low.tide. The application
is to extend the application to extend the dock out about 35'. Most
of that length will be gained by the proposed 6' X 30' float which is
intended to serve the 27' boat that Kouzios' own and would like to
moor there. In terms of the deck, it is just an extension of the
water side deck by a 12' X 12' section. When I met with Jim on site,
A1 I think you had spoken to Mrs. Kouzios in the over the past
several days. A couple things stand out on this property. The
Kouzios' just bought this a couple months ago. You can.tell from the
inter-tidal marsh that exist along the entire shoreline , except in
front of this lot, that some time ago all of the inter-tidal marsh
grass had been cleared from the front of this lot . There has been
Board of Trustees 11 ~ February 25, 1998
recently some question as to some more clearing that has occurred on
the up land along the the west side of the property. It was pretty
striking to look at when I met with Jim there was bacharous or marsh
elder which is marking the edge of the tidal wetlands there and then
into some smaller red ceders just landward of that that had been cut.
Mrs. Kouzios explained that that area was not cleared by them
recently. But also had also been cleared by the prior owner. She has
told me that she had photos that prove that. The only evidence that I
can offer that situation, is the contractor had explained that the
prior owner used to store various dock parts up in that area. I can't
say whether they have or have not taken out a couple more bushes but
that section has not all been freshly cleared. In the most part to me
looks like an existing situation. In any event, the point is to
remedy it at this point in time, which I know has become also kind of
a confusing situation because I know Mr. Blocker, owner of the
property, was the one that was noticed by the Town for the clearing.
The Board can tell me what they would like to see at this point. What
I would suggest, which is what I have discussed with Mrs. Kouzios, is
to either let the area just re-vegetate or she could actually plant
it in part with Bachorous and red cedar.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Does she own that property?
ROB HERMAN: She does not own that property. It is Mr. Blockers
property. It is doubtful that Mr. Blocker is going to submit an
application and take the expense of planting that area. I don't know
how the Board is going to handle that. The point is, if you let her
do it on some kind of informal basis, it will get replanted. If you
leave it up to Mr. Blocker, it won't. It is really at the Board's
discretion what they want to see there. Bottom line is that she
understands that she is not to touch it, she is not to clear it, she
is not seed it with grass. She is basically to leave it alone, unless
it is something the Board has directed.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So Mr. Blocker owned the house originally?
ROB HERMAN: No, Mr. Blocker owns the adjacent property to the west.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: O.K. So he is not responsible for clearing the
vegetative wetlands in front of the bulkhead then?
ROB HERMAN: No.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And neither are the Kouzios'?
ROB HERMAN: Right. That is obviously a pre-existing condition from
some time ago. As is that stone. We discussed with Jim. Apparently
there is some old stone that goes out. I am not sure what really what
purpose it serves. Maybe someone thought it would serve as a groin,
but it doesn't. I discussed it with her and she says I don't want to
touch it. She is shell shocked from this whole thing. She is willing
to do what ever the board wants her to do.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And there is also that ramp there.
ROB HERMAN: Yes. Jim discussed it Steve Powlack is going to remove
that ramp in any event.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Apparently there is no permit for the dock? Is that
correct?
ROB HERMAN: Yes. There is not existing records for any existing
items. They want to modify and legalize what is there.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: O.K. That is only part of the problem. I don't what
the board's feeling is on the rock. I was under the impression that
Mrs. Kouzios had done all this originally. I didn't know the property
had just changed hands. I was speaking to her on the phone the other
day, I was not aware. I thought she was the cause to all of this.
Board of Trustees
12 ~ February 25, 1998
ROB HERMAN: Right. That is what she told me. She said I spoke to Mr.
Krupski and he got me all upset thinking that I had put the rock
there. That I guaranty that they did not do. The clearing is
difficult to tell.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Another problem there is the dock. When we went out
there that day it was very low tide. And you can see out easily 50'
It is a flat. If they go out another 100' they are not going to get
any more water for their boat.
ROB HERMAN: I think what we better do there then is to take soundings
done at low tide to see if there is going to be any change. I
understand that it is flat. They can't any shallower at low tide.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yeah,but even at 35' out they are going to gain
maybe an inch or two.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I would like to make a comment. It is a policy that
we do not allow dock to go beyond their neighbors docks. In that area
that is the only existing dock. Maybe that was a mistake to put that
dock there because it is a flat.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It never had a permit. It could have been prior to
74'
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: As a Trustee I reserve the right to deny that
permit.
ROB HERMAN: Legally that structure is grandfathered and the Kouzios
have the right to access the water.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: At the very least not extend it beyond what it is.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We couldn't really see any benefit to go out any
further. They are really not going to get into any deep water.
ROB HERMAN: I hear what you are saying. I am just saying for no other
reason the to have it on paper. I don't think the board can just
arbitrarily say you are not going to gain anything.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You can do that. But the board was there on site on
field inspection. It was day that it was ideally suited to view it.
AUDIENCE: I live on Corey Creek on that Cove. I have only lived there
9 years. Prior to that I lived over on Paradise Point Road, up until
the time husband past away. But I whaler tide up at that dock over
there, which would be an appropriate kind of boat. It looked to me
that it was only 20'. What do these people want? If they have an
illegal dock, why shouldn't they be satisfied with what they have?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: The property's east and west of there may apply for
an permits in the future and if we allow them to extend their dock,
now when we are faced with a new permit, the homeowners have every
right extend their docks.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If you look at this dock, we have been provided with
pictures, if there was a normal fringe going across there, this ramp
and float only extend past the end of the fringe, that is about what
you would approve here. That is about the limit of it. It wouldn't
serve and purpose to go out any further.
ROB HERMAN: If the soundings show that they would gain 6"- a foot by
extending out say half that distance, would the board consider that
one?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We would entertain it. I don't know if it would show
that.
ROB HERMAN: I think what I am asking is the board objecting to the
idea of the extension just flat out or is the board objecting to the
idea of the extension based on the conclusion that you won't get any
water depth?
Board of Trustees ~i 13 --~ February 25, 1998
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Both. I think it is a matter of bottom coverage. It
is a combination of both.
ROB HERMAN: The float is a few inches seaward of low water, which
means that float at a lot of low tides is going to be on the bottom.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: You mention the DEC says it is against the law to
have a float laying on the bottom, but the float is laying on the
bottom and it is not legally there. Maybe they should remove the
float and go to an off shore mooring stake to the dock and pull the
boat in and out. Then there will be no float.
ROB HERMAN: Kenny, I understand your paint and some people would like
to see that house removed too and have it replaced with marsh. We
have to deal with what is now. The house has been there the structure
has been there. It is a legal structure, it is grandfathered in. I am
trying to resolved the issue that is before the board now. Not what
maybe should have been 30 years ago. That is just spinning wheels.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Like I said, we where out there, we took a look at
it. It was ideal conditions for look at it, looking at the water
depth. You can bring the soundings in and based on what we saw, we
may have to go out there together.
ROB HERMAN: If you are not going to gain anything, then I would
completely agree with you. I am not going to stand here and say well
I think we should get one foot of water 50' into the creek as apposed
to one foot water here. All I am saying is that in order for me to
explain to the Kouzios and from a legal stand point for the board to
explain to them why their permit has been denied, you have to have
some kind of record of physically what is there. If you are correct,
then I would agree with you that they are not going to gain any
thing.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Then you recommend that we recess the hearing until
we get more information?
ROB HERMAN: I think that is what we have to do.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think that another thing we are looking at here in
this application is, who is replanting the spartina at 18" centers. I
don't think the bulkhead was on here. You should include it in this
application. Mrs. Kouzios mention replanting some of the upland
plantings. Especially where it is not on her property. I think it
would better for her own property protection if she planting the
spartina in front of her own bulkhead.
ROB HERMAN: O.K. If the board denies any extension of the dock, then
what is that planting going to be connected to.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: She has no permit for the do~k, she has no permit
for the bulkhead. She has no permit that ramp we want removed. She
needs a permit for the deck that she wants to build. She has got a
pretty full plate. There is a lot of activity that has take place
without a permit.
ROB HERMAN: But not by her.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: She owns the property. Usually when someone sells
the property they transfer the permits from one party to the other,
that did not take place. She should get permits on that.
ROB HERMAN: O.K. Does the board have any feeling on the deck.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is one thing we don't have a problem with is
the deck. It is one of those properties that have a lot of problems.
ROB HERMAN: Right.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: How far towards the water are going to have them
replant?
Board of Trustees
14
February 25, 1998
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: To the extent of what would be the natural vegetated
area.
ROB HERMAN: There is existing marsh up to the property line.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Since that has been removed I have seen the soft
shell clams have established themselves in that area. So I am
thinking maybe it is not a good idea to go all the way equivalent to
east and west to it.
ROB HERMAN: That is up to you.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: We will consider that.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is going to spread in there. It is a natural
habitat for it.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Can I recommendation that they plant from the
hightide line landward and if it does extend down to the low tide.
ROB HERMAN: The high tide line is the bulkhead.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We can have them plant from the bulkhead half way
down. It is not a major thing. You are talking maybe an hours work
for two people. If you like to meet us out there.
ROB HERMAN: I think we better do that. If those are the conditions
(water depth) are correct than can be presented to them, then they
are going to have to figure ou~ an alternative.
TRUSTEE KING: That is a lot of boat for there.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I make a motion that we recess this hearing until
our regular meeting of March 25.
TRUSTEE KING: Second. ALL AYES.
10. En-Consultants on behalf of HENRY MCNEILLY requests a Wetland
Pe~-mit to remove and replace inkind in place, an existing 6' X 10'
platform, 2.5' X 17' ramp and 6' X 44' float. Also reseath approx.
151' of existing timber bulkhead. Proposed sheathing will be placed
landward of existing sheathing. Backfill with approx, fifty (50) c.y.
of clean sand to be trucked in from approved upland source. Located
250 Goose Creek Lane, off N. Bayview Ave., Southold. SCTM ~71-1-42.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak on
behalf of the applicant?
ROB HERMAN: ROb Herman from En-Consultants representing Henry
McNeilly. The application is pretty straight forward. There is an
existing dock down there that is been existing for I don't know how
lOng and the same with that bulkhead. The bulkhead has been proposed
to be reseathed only and on the landward side not on the water side
of it. The floats and ramp are to be replaced.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think the only problem we had is that the float is
huge. It is really more than double of what we normally approve. We
would just like to encourage the applicant to cut back on the length
of the float.
DR. SAMUELS: He is tieing at least two. The father and the son. I
know what you are saying, but they have at least two boats.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It is worth asking. Otherwise we don't have any
problems with it. Is there any other comment? Do I have a motion to
close the hearing?
TRUSTEE KING: So moved.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second. ALL AYES.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: I will make a motion to approve as applied for with a
non-turf buffer, 6-8' buffer.
TRUSTEE KING: Second. ALL AYES.
Board of Trustees 15
February 25, 1998
11. En-Consultants on behalf of NEIL MCGOLDRICK requests a Wetland
Permit to hydraulically dredge an irregular area(+/- 55' Maximum
width) through the inlet of Hall's Creek to a maximum depth of -5' at
MLW, at a 1:3 slope. Approx. 2,000 c.y. of 100% sand spoil to be
pumped 1) up drift of existing 80' groin on subject property; and 2)
down drift of groin at end of Dean Drive to east. Extend existing 70'
groin on west side of inlet by 80' to minimize future shoaling of
creek mouth and inlet. Located Private Road off new Suffolk Ave.,
Mattituck. SCTM #116-4-16.4.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak on
behalf of this application?
ROB HERMAN: Rob Herman from En-Consultants representing Nell
McGoldrick. I know the board does have some concerns and questions
regarding the issuance and the conditions of the past permits several
years. What I would like to do first, before the Board comments, is
present some aspects of this project. I think it is an important
project. It is obviously a major project. I think that the benefits
of it maybe even greater for the Town, then just for Nell McGoldrick.
The Board should have a packet that I prepared entitled proposed
dredging and groin extension of Neil McGoldrick and Halls Creek,
Mattituck NY. In which I have included various correspondence from
En-Consultants, from various agencies, past permit and letters from
near by home owners. Also included in appendix II are various
photographs. Many of them are aerial photographs that where taken
recently, during this Winter. Which pretty much told the hole story
there. There is two aspects of obviously to this permit application.
Just to give a little bit of the reasoning behind the two aspects.
There is obviously a shoaling problem at Halls Creek. The mouth of
that creek shoals up really badly. Essentially what I have proposed
in order to establish essentially a long term management plan, is to
both dredge out the existing shoal and then the extend groin that is
just up drift of that inlet. In order to prevent a problem from
continuously recurring, which it obviously does. In terms of the
dredging aspect of it, the board has certainly in the past, I know A1
you were a part of lengthy discussions over months and months
regarding the potential impacts of the dredging of this creek. I will
briefly reinerate some of the reasons why I think the dredging at the
mouth of Hall's Creek is so important. You have a tidal marsh eco
system there in Hall's Creek. The tidal flushing that had occurred
historically in that creek and if you can keep D~ep Hole Creek as an
analytical eco system. Tidal flushing facilitates various eco system
processes throughout the creek that depend on the ebb and flow of the
tide through that inlet. It transports nutrients from the bay into
the creek and on the flip side is that it flushes contaminants out of
that eco system back into the bay. Also the net effect of title
flushing in this type of eco system is the removal of nitrogen from
the system and also back again in terms of benefiting the bay, there
is a flushing of both dissolved and organic carbon and also larger
plant debris such as spartian alterna flora which provides nutrients
to that eco system for fin fish and shellfish. The inlet also
provides a natural corridor for finfish and shellfish that use the
creek eco system either as a breeding ground or as a sanctuary from
the bay. I think that the Town of Southold considered all these
reasons during the last application process which ultimately lead up
to the board approving the permit to dredge the creek. At that time
the dredging was much more extensive. As it had not been done for
Board of Trustees -~ 16
February 25, 1998
decades and the entire creek was shoaled up. There were areas of it
which where completely above water, even at high water. The dredging
that was done two years ago. Is that accurate Tom, or less than that?
DR. SAMUELS: One year.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What was the date of the dredging?
DR. SAMUELS: I guess it was May or June of 97.
ROB HERMAN: The dredging has approved quite successful through most
of the interior of the creek, water depths in there have maintain
themselves and it has remained as I said quite deep. However, the
mouth and the inlet through into that creek has continued to shoal
quite badly and there is really two processes that are contributing
to that. The first is that the predominant literal drift there is
from west to east. You have a constant transport of sand into the
mouth of that creek. That I believe is acerbated in the Winter when
you get some times a shift in the drift there, especially with
northeast storms. You get almost a cape that is forming outside of
the inlet of that creek. You can see that really clear on the aerial
photographs. There is a huge shoal just down drift of the creek and
coming out of the mouth of it and extending out into the bay. So,
what I have proposed in addition to having initial dredging to clear
the inlet again and hopefully get a maintenance dredge permit. The
Point is not to have to rely on dredging here. None of the agencies
like to see constant dredging. It looks like as the conditions exist
now, you would almost have to go in there and maintenance dredge that
creek every single year. Which I don't think is really desirable to
any of the agencies at that rate. I am proposing is the extension of
the up drift groin. This was proposed last time. It was denied by the
Trustees and it was objected to also by the NYSDEC. I know that the
Board has a general policy against groins, against new groins,
against the extension of existing groins. I have listened to those
arguments and I have also listened to people come up and approach the
board and tell you that such a groin will not have any impact on the
down drift beach. 90 percent of the time that is not true, it will.
It is a very common process. It is called a groin effect as the board
knows. But for the record, the groin extends out typically seaward of
MLW. The purpose of the groin is to trap literally transported sand.
In the case of Hall's Creek it is trapping sand that is traveling
west to east through the literal system. If the groin is successful,
if it functions, if its doing what it is supposed to do, it is going
to build up the beach on the up drift side. By the laws of logic or
physics, which ever you are more comfortable with, that means that
less sand is going to go down to the down drift beach. That is what
is called the groin effect. If you are gaining sand on the up drift
side, you have to loose it on the down drift side. That is almost
always the case. It is almost always the case because almost every
literal transport system that we see is either lacking in sand supply
or has a typical sand supply. Hall's Creek is, however, the exception
to this rule. I think that the aerial photograph's are clear and
demonstrative example of it. There is so much sand in this system
that you got a sand bar and a sand shoal that is forming out into the
bay and down drift of Hall's Creek. You have got every pocket in that
groin field, every cell filled to its capacity. If you look at the
subject groin that we are talking about, the beach is actually built
outward or seaward beyond that groin. I can't claim that I can
explain the genisis of that sand ~upply, but it obviously exists. The
fact that that creek had shoaled up for so long is a testament to
Board of Trustees ~ 17 ~J February 25, 1998
that. And the fact that you are looking at what you are looking at
now is testament to that.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What is the date on those pictures?
ROB HEPu~AN: It was the end Of November of 97. I am going by the bill.
I don't have the exact date.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: O.K. It is roughly that time.
ROB HERMAN: It was late Fall for shore. I just want to read into the
regard of just a couple of paragraphs that you see in appendix 3 and
4 of the packet. The first one is written by Donald Sutter, President
of the Beachwood Homeowners Association. The letter is dated August
14, 1996 and it was addressed to Richard LaValle, who was then
Principal Civil Engineer Dept. Public Works, Division of Water Ways
for Suffolk County. In the letter he describes that recently that the
County dredged Deep Hole Creek and placed some of the sand east of
the creek. This is the first time in over 20 years that sand pump to
the east side of Deep Hole Creek. We assume that the reason that you
pumped it the sand on the east side was to replace the sand that had
moved west and that is now clogging Hall's Creek. However, without a
new or repaired jetty sand moving west to east will continue. We are
concerned that this additional sand will completely close off the
entrance to Hall's Creek and thereby destroy the plant, fish and
animal life in the creek. The first house's in the association where
built along Hall's Creek in the 1920's and we have thoroughly enjoyed
many years of fishing clamming and wild life observation. In fact we
continue to find many Indian arrow heads along the beach. Meaning the
Indians from Fort Corchouge also called an open free flowing Hall's
Creek Home. The association registers a formal complaint with you
about the sand pumped onto the east side of Deep Hole Creek. We think
this action Will cause an environmental, disaster for Hall's Creek.
I will just read again an excerpt from the response from Dick
LaValle. The primary function of dredging action is to provide a
navigation channel. The placement of the surplus material in the past
to the west was to replenish the heavily eroded beach in that area.
However, the NYSDEC has in recent years has insisted that dredge
material be placed exclusively on the down drift side of entrances of
water ways requiring maintenance dredging. The last permit amendment
required that all the material dredged from Deep Hole be placed east
of the entrance. Reclosing will remain whether or not additional sand
is placed into the literal system . However, the interchange of tidal
waters to the Hall's Creek entrance should be sufficient to maintain
a certain amount of flushing action.
I think that is true right, but it certainly was not true a few years
ago when you saw that system was completely closed off. YOu recall we
had some discussion with the shellfish people at DEC. Who in fact
continued to down grade Hall's Creek for shellfishing over the years.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I do agree with Mr. LaValle on no matter where they
but that amount of spoil from Deep Hole. Kenny pointed out on field
inspection that there is a huge flat out there. No matter how much
you dredge out in front in the bay that is going to fill without a
major storm event, within weeks. I don't know how long it took this
time. How long did it take to fill in this time?
DR. SAMUELS: It was essentially closed off except for a narrow inlet
in September/October.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think that is because there is such a large sand
source and the prevailing wind is from the southwest. It is just
Board of Trustees
18
February 25, 1998
going to move that Sand right into that little scrape and that big
bay is not very significant.
DR. SAMUELS: If I could speak for a minute. I don't how many people
remember A1 Smith who owned McGoldricks house and also owned a lot of
stuff out here. Suffolk County used to dredge this every year when
they did Deep Hole. Deep Hole has a similar problem of to what you
are talking about. In fact the hole shoreline from New Suffolk to
Flanders is shoal. We sail boat race there all the time. You can't
get within a mile and a half of the beach if you have a four foot
draft keel boat. Historically from what the old, old timers tell me,
I am getting to one of them, it never was so shoaled up to Mattituck.
But over the years it has continued to shoal. I think you can see
from the aerial photographs where we started the outer channel as per
the permit. That held pretty well. The problem was a predictable
problem. I predicated it. I predicated to the DEC also, was that the
groin wasn't long enough to do this job. The hole question is, is the
eco system of Hall's Creek worth keeping open. That is it. To my
mind, that drive along New Suffolk Ave. has the finest wetlands in
the Town with the possible exception of Orient. You can see them a
lot better on that stretch between Mattituck and New Suffolk. Here
you have a body of water which, this should be terrific shellfish
grounds. I have a vested interest. There is no question about it. He
is my customer and he is my friend. He is willing to spend the money
to do this. He spent a lot of money last time, as you know. The
problem of the inlets closing in $outhold Town is a consistent
problem that the County just appropriated $525,000 for dredging in
Peconic Bay. The reason that the County will no longer dredge Hall's
Creek according to them is that there are no public boat ramps. I am
not sure, this application was five years. I know Jay was still on
the board. For some reason it seems to bother you a lot. It bothered
the DEC a lot. I never quite understood it. Ever since I have been in
the business the protection of wetlands and the nourishing of
wetlands. I hear it in every application that you talk about. Kenny
you certainly have as much knowledge about this as anybody. Is that
we would want to keep the wetlands. We want to keep viable and
valuable. Here is a man who is willing to spend his private funds.
The only shot he has at keeping it open for a reasonable length of
time, is the groin. If he has the groin with grain dredging
inexpensively and with very little environmental impact. It is so bad
now, it will have to be done hydraulically. My intent and what I
would like to do is to pump to way up toward Dean Drive, where there
is an erosion problem beyond that part.
ROB HERMAN: That is the one cell just down drift of Dean Drive groin
that is lacking.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: That is quite a ways to the east?
DR. SAMUELS: Yeah, It is going to cost him more money to do it but he
is willing to do it. If we go to the west with it and we can go to
the west with beyond the middle groin on McGoldrick's property. That
one groin that was no repaired. And go up to Deep Hole Creek, we can
do that. The County dredges Deep Hole every year. This year they had
a piping Plover war. They finally got it done July 4th, much to the
tax payers interests to Deep Hole Creek. So it would seem to me, in
the interest of the environment, that a project like this should be
encouraged. If you look at the aerials and go down and look at the
site, it is very hard for me to see if there is going to be any down
drift effect. In point of fact, there is a good question as to
Board of Trustees ~ 19 .... February 25, 1998
whether there is some shoaling from the east. When an easterly storm,
the ninth of which we have been through this year. I don't know what
it looks like now. I haven't been down there in a month. I think it
is project in the public interest, in the environmental interest and
in the Towns interest. To me it is a no brainer. If my grandchildren
are being taught in New Suffolk School about value of tidal wetlands
and we allow this creek utrafy, that makes no sense at all.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I wish it were that simple. But when we approved
this, we did so agreeing with that argument that wouldn't it be
better to approve water quality in this area. Even though it was
basically Mr. McGoldricks will to get boat access to his house. That
was the main reason. As public benefit, wouldn't be nice if we
approve water quality in the creek. To that end the Board of Trustees
required that Mr. McGoldrick do water quality sampling before the
project started and then afterwards, to see if it in fact would
accomplish this. I don't see any water quality data from before the
project was preformed. Without that it is pretty impossible to say
that conclusively that yeah the coliform level of the dissolved
oxygen or something has improved here. Without that, which was in the
permit, which we talked about at nauseam, how many years did you say?
It was painful. We put it in the permit and it wasn't done. So we
can't say yea it is going to improve water quality for everyone in
town. We can't say that.
DR. SAMUELS: I was not aware that the water quality samples had not
been taken. Rob let me know that the Trustees has just one sample and
I called Mr. McGoldrick and I said are there more samples? And he
says yeah. GNS and has gone down and taken samples and sent them to
H2M. He said he tried to call you several times, you personally, this
Summer. He has the worst case of Lymes decease I have ever seen. He
has been on intervenes/ antibiotics for months. More or less confined
to his home in Garden City. Maybe that had something to do with the
fact that they weren't getting to him. They should have been sent
directly to the Trustees. Instead they were sent to his house.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We don't have anything from before the dredging.
DR. SAMUELS: Right. I think we have to go back to stage one, take
some now and go through the process. That was not done. I can't take
the blame for that.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I am not saying you are responsible.
DR. SAMUELS: It wasn't done. I believe it was also part of the state
permit. If it is done properly.., you will assume the responsibility
for making sure the testing is done?
ROB HERMAN: As long as he retains me to do so.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Could you say that again?
ROB HERMAN: I said as long as he retains me to do so.
DR. SAMUELS: I will state without equivocation that he will retain
En-Con. to do it.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: There is no argument that the water quality was good.
DR. SAMUELS: We haven't any proof of what we are saying, is what you
are saying.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We are frustrated, because we wanted to see
something.
DR. SAMUELS: We understand your...
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I am not trying to beat you up with it. I
frustrated, because we wanted to see this.
DR. SAMUELS: You are absolutely right.
Board of Trustees .... 20 ~ February 25, 1998
ROB HERMA/~: It is doubly frustrating for me. I you know was at
En-Consultants several years ago and was at the tail end of this hole
experience. I was then of course down at Duke for two years and
abound my return found out that this project was reigniting itself
again. It is frustrating that the samples weren't done. The only
thing that I would reiterate, is that you may not be able to draw a
conclusion about whether dissolved oxygen or fecal coliform levels
changed. You can make the statement that is entire inlet is just
allow to close, that it will ultimately change this eco system. It is
a tidal creek eco system. If you remove the tidal part of it, it is
no longer a tidal creek eco system, which you can say.
DR. SAMUELS: Ken, what do you say?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I think that it is common sense that if we open
that up, I am fully for opening that up, it would improve the water
quality. Obviously you have better water quality outside than inside
as of right now. I wish I had a big screen projector to put the
second picture up. Common sense without any education or anything,
and just looking at the picture, were does the shoaling occur. It is
next to the groin. Down drift of the groin. You want to extend that
groin, you might cause a larger shoaling effect.
ROB HERMAN: No, it is bypassing.
DR. SAMUELS: It is bYPassing the end of the groin and it was from the
day we finished dredging and started.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I am just making my point by observation. Looking
at that the shoaling is occurring down drift of that groin in the
channel. It is also shoaling out there.
ROB HERMAN: Two comments to make to that. One is that the beach has
accreted seaward of that groin and has by passing it and moving
around into that creek. I think what exacerbates that, is if you get
that accumulation of sand, if you can't a northeasterly storm, it
probably reverses the sill there and you almost get a cape like shoal
on the down drift side. Just as a last thing, what you are alluding
to in this picture is the very reason, and A1 I know you laugh
because it is often well, isn't this convenient that this is the
exception, but it really is. There is so much sand in this system and
so much sand down drift. It is one of the only times where you would
ever get a situation where you could say that extending the groin or
building a groin is not going to have the deleterious effect of down
drift beach, because there is so much sand in that system.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: This brings me back to my great studies, many years
ago. I am looking at the picture again. The latest shoaling would be
the darker shades.
ROB HERMAN: Correct.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: The beginning of shoaling would be the lighter
shade. So what you are saying is true. It is presently shoaling
further east. What happened after the groin was built? That was the
original place for shoaling. Obviously, that built to the point where
water...
ROB HERMAN: That is immediately down drift.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: That is what is presently shoaling. What I am
saying...
ROB HERMAN: Both of these shoals are down drift. This is a newer
shoal.which I think is forming from the north east storms from the
Winter.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Before this one began shoaling, the channel was
open. By looking at the height of the shoal here, this originally
Board of Trustees
21
February 25, 1998
shoaled after the project. It built up to a level where the flow
couldn't over run it. Now it started forming a flow here. Now this is
the present shoaling. It can't shoal any more.
ROB HERMAN: That is correct. To prevent this original shoaling you
have to prevent this sand. The predominant drift is in this
direction, which is what I am saying. If you extend this ou= it
blocks off this original shoaling. You got a natural sand bypass
system around this groin.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: You think so?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yeah, but what is 80'. 80' is only going to be to
here and your problem is going to be 80' further out.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Five years from now you'll have this out here. And
this will re-shoal.
DR. SAMUELS: This stuff is going that a way. That is not going to
come this way. The last permit...
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It is still going to come from west to east.
DR. SAMUELS: You are going to have to maintenance dredge it. If you
can get a way without moving a hydraulic pipe line and a...
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't see where that is going to give you that.
That sand is still going to want to push to the east. It is going to
shoal to the east no matter what. If you make that groin 1000' out,
eventually it will bypass the groin and shoal.
DR. SAMUELS: There is no point in making it excessively long. Our
experience with Deep Hole is very interesting. We do it for the
County. We either do Ut with a crane or with a hydraulic dredge.
Depending on the extent of the shoaling. If you can get it quick
enough, if the legislator funds it early enough, if you don't need
certificates of necessity by the County executive, you can go in
there with a drag line and do that project very inexpensively, very
quickly. The problem is that if you allow it to accumulate to the
point where you get so much material that you can't move it
economically with a payloader up the beach, over groins up to Park
Ave., then you have to move in a dredge. Then you are talking about
26,000.00 dollars just to mobilize. To set up your pipeline. You have
stay on top of it. It is a difficult shore line. Again, is the eco
system worth the effort. That is the hole question. It is not whether
Nell can get his boat to his dock. That is his motivation for doing
it.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: How often will this dredging take place?
DR. SAMUELS: Until I can see results of the 80' groin, I can't tell
you. I told Lou Chiarella at the DEC and I told the Trustees at the
time that this was done that this permit would be excepted because we
had to try it. There was not other way that the permit was going to
be issued. It went on for years. But it was predictable what
happened, hapPened. Because the DEC said O.K. your spoil area Us to
the west. The drift is from west to east. It is not rocket science.
There is fifteen baymen that you know that can tell you exactly what
is going to happen there Ken. Fifteen. You know it. You have all the
old dock builders Harry Tuthill, Larry Tuthill with the groins off
New Suffolk. They can all tell you the same thing. Old man Rambo told
me the same thing. If you are going to put sand up drift, right back
at you. It makes not sense. I will let you argue with the Dept. of
State and the DEC. Who now have dictated to the Suffolk County Dept.
of Public Works that they put sand to the west. All they are doing is
closing off Hall's Creek.
Board of Trustees ~ 22
February 25, 1998
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I get the picture in my mind, alright you get 80'
groin, you add it on. In you mind that would require less dredging?
DR. S/LMUEL: Probably, crane dredging once a year. Just like Deep Hole.
ROB HERMAN: The thing is Kenny, it is a problem.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: My recommendation would be just to continuously
maintenance dredge. It might cost a little bit, but it is a lot
cheaper then establishing 26,000.00 dollars worth of groin.
ROB HERMAN: What I am saying is the point of the management plan that
I am proposing is, what is the point of continuously just trying to
eliminate the problem after it has occurred rather than also trying
to minimize the problem in the first place. If you put the groin up,
I am not saying it is a cure all. It is not going to go in as great a
volume or as rapid a pace requiring as much dredging. It is awfully
expensive to be forced to hydraulic dredge every year. So I all I am
saying... My point Ken is that if extending that groin could possible
minimize some of the sand that is going in there and minimize the
amount of times that'you have to dredge there is no reason not to do
it endless it is going to have an adverse impact down drift. I think
that you would recognized, in fact you have pointed out without my
coaxing, how much sand shoals down drift and are in those down drift
cells. That groin is not going to negatively impact down drift beach.
It can't. There is to much sand in the system. So there is no reason
to not extend the groin. There is no reason to not do it.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If we look at those pictures here, and you look at
the ones, figure 4, and you look out the hole groin field towards the
east and towards Downs Creek. If you extend that groin 80' out, you
know you are going to have a response from the people to the east on
Dean Drive to want to extend there groins.
DR. SAMUELS: No. Absolutely not.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Let me finish. I don't see where extending that
groin, there is so much sand there to the east and of course we know
about the sand to the west. I don't see where extending that groin is
going to, it is still going fill up. If you want to maintenance
dredge it as it is, then he has to to come every month in the Summer
when the winds going to fill it in. But just to put another structure
there to have to do the same thing, to me doesn't make any sense. You
are throwing a variable in there that no one can really answer.
DR. SAMUELS: It isn't a variable that no one can answer. I can answer
it. In good conscience, I would not hydraulically dredge this thing
again and have him spend all that money and not get one year out of
it.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Why wouldn't you dredge it now hydraulically and
then maintain with a drag line or some other more economical way as
needed.
ROB HERMAN: Why not limit the as needed?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't think you will do that with a...
ROB HERMAN: You can't not Al. Look how much sand is bypassing that
groin.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It is not going to stabilize itself.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: Once the groin fills up the same thing is going to
happen at the 80' line.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It is still going to move.
DR. SAMUELS: The' spoil is going in the other direction this time. As
far as this is concerned. As far as what the County does with Deep
Hole Creek.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We are talking about the sand in the system.
Board of Trustees 23
February 25, 1998
ROB HERMAN: Naturally it is going to bypass where ever it is. Right
now where you are having it bypass is in the mouth of the creek. That
is all I am saying. If you can minimize. It is the same concept
behind every groin and every jetty.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I wish I had the Coast Guard current book here to
show the direction and speed of the current at different times of the
tide out in front of that entrance.
DR. SAMUELS: That is what defines literal drift.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It is to bad, you spoke about the flushing action to
improve water quality of the eco system of that creek. If we had the
numbers here to back that up, then couldn't we go to the County and
ask the County to dredge that on a regular basis?
DR. SAMUELS: They won't.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If you had hard numbers that said, you can improve
the water quality in this creek, which will be a benefit to everyone
in $outhold Town. Maintenance dredge this for us, like you do Deep
Hole.
DR. SAMUELS: They won't do it. They are strictly navigation. Tax
payer access to the bay. That is what they are interested in. They
are not going to get into these other projects.
ROB HERMAN: I am trying not to get bogged down. I think the numbers
provide the answer. Again, it is not just looking at those specific
numbers. You are looking to maintain an eco system. The tidal flux of
a tidal eco system defines that eco system. What I am saying with the
groin is that this project differentiates itself. It so clearing
differentiates itself. This doesn't mean that now everyone else is
going to come in and say look you have extended this groin. Not
everybody else has the property on Hall's Creek that is closing to
the detriment of the public benefit. How many groins fields really
look like this? Every one of these groins, every cell is filled. This
one is being completely bypassed. You can't possible look at these
pictures and come to the conclusion that extending this groin will
not at least mitigate the amount of sand going in. Yes it will push
it out. Yes it bypass eventually.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Temporary.
DR. SAMUELS: Everything is temporary. But, if you can hold it down,
if you can keep it so that it is moderate. Lets face it, if the
County could they would put jetties on every inlet that they dredge
every year. Because they are spending literally millions of dollars
keeping creeks open. Southampton has six they would like to jetty.
They can't get the permits for. I don't want to get into jetties,
because everything is site specific.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We have to.
DR. SAMUELS: That is why we are here on site specific. I live in the
town and to me the wetlands are critical. You know where I live. I
look at wetlands every morning when I drive out of my driveway. Some
how you have to look at the benefits of it.
ROB HERMAN: You can't identify any adverse impact to extending that
groin.
DR. SAMUELS: My I make a suggestion? Would the Board consider Mr.
McGoldrick posting on bond on the water testing or better yet the
groin?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, because he couldn't put that much money up? As
far as the water quality testing is a violation of the permit. It
leaves us in a position of nothing to go on here as far as water
quality improvement.
Board of Trustees
24
February 25, 1998
DR. SAMUELS: I have never been able to understand.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That was in the permit. It was black and white in
the permit.
DRo SAMUELS: I understand that and I understand your being upset
about it. I understand the DEC position on the hole thing. But why
there has been opposition to saving this creek in the Trustees and
the DEC is something I will never understand. Because everything that
I have been taught, everything I have been told to save is right in
Hall's Creek. You are telling me that you don't want to take a chance
on an 80' groin or you are so angry that you didn't get the water
testing, that you don't want to consider it. That doesn't make sense
to me.
If the wetlands are worth anything to us, then this is a~good
project. If they aren't then forget.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The water testing isn't related to do with the groin.
DR. SAMUELS: I can't in good conscience go dredge that thing again
and have the man not even get a summer out of it.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Can we make some kind of motion to have a
stipulation that alright we allow him to put 80' groin and in one
years time. Take the soundings now and take the soundings one year
later. If there is a problem, force them to pull that groin out.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Fat chance.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: They will put it out another 80'
DR. SAMUELS: There is no need to put it out another 80'
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think the water quality is something that was
disappointing, because you can say it all you want, but you can't
prove it. And it should have been proven. We should be sitting here
saying, yeah it filled in but look at the benefits we got. Now we can
say nothing.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: That was one of the main reasons for doing.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I should have been done.
ROB HERMAN: Al, I here what you are saying. It is very rare that I
get the opportunity to back a project like this. I am looking at this
from a coastal management perspective and saying that they are trying
to remove the problem and then help to eliminate the extent of that
problem in the future. It is no brainer.
DR. SAMUELS: It is a not brainer.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well we must have not brains then.
DR. SAMUELS: No that is not what I mean.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't think that you have convinced the board that
an additional 80' on this groin is going to solve the problem...
ROB HERMAN: It is not a matter of solving the problem. It is
minimizing the problem in the long run.
DR. SAMUELS: It is mitigating the problem. There is not solution to
shoaling of inlets.
ROB HERMAN: If we just went and tore this timber out, do you think
that this shoal would, that this sand would go into this inlet the
same rate or faster and more. If you completely took out the groin.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But ideally you would have bulkheads on either side
and the creek would keep itself open naturally like it had since the
last ten thousand years since the glacier receded. We don't have an
ideal situation. You have what you have.
DR. SAMUELS: You have no bulkhead on McGoldricks property. On the
inside.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI.: That is what I mean on the inside. The channel can't
move naturally. It can't keep it self open. That is my point.
Board of Trustees'~
25
February 25, 1998
ROB HERMAN: If you removed everything that has to do with
developement, eventually the creek would just continue to move down
the beach.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is what kept it open. Know that you have put
bulkheads on the other side you are constricting it. You are trying
to fight Mother Nature every step of the way.
DR. SAMUELS: We are living with nature. That is the problem we have.
Baldwins Harbor, Wickhams Creek is dredged almost every year.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You have to convince us that 80' additional groin is
some how going to mitigate the problem more then doing the dredging
project again, this time knowing how fast it is going to fill in and
keeping on top of it. I don't understand that if you put the 80' out,
when that fills in how that sand isn't going to bypass that and fill
it in 80' out. Because there is some much sand to the east there...
ROB HERMAN: Eventually it will but if you move the sand further away
from the main flow of were the water is splurging out of that inlet.
First of all it is not coming out with as much force and second of
all it takes a higher volume of sand to fill the cell. It is not
solving. It is not a cure all. It is just mitigating it. Even if you
are saying the board can't be guaranteed that it is going to mitigate
it, why not do it experimentally, because you know that it is not
going to cause any damage.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We are not assuming that to start with that it is
not going to cause any damage.
ROB HERMAN: Well, where is the damage.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If the water velocity is going to less 80' out,
isn't that going to deposit the sand at a greater rate.
ROB HERMAN: It is depositing up drift of the groin. That is the hole
purpose of the groin.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But it is going to deposit it faster, because the
water velocity is less. It is not going to carry the sand.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Increased flow will cause increased silting.
ROB HERMAN: The longer the groin is the more up drift sand it traps.
That is just common sense until it is full. What I am saying is there
where no groin here, it would close completely. Now it helps the
groin that is there capture some of the sand. But now the groin has
become insufficient for the amount of sand there. The beach has
acreeded. This groin was not built 15 or 25' short of low water, it
was built beyond that and now the beach has acreeded.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't see where 80' is going to solve that. You
can make it 1000'. That would eventually fill in and it will bypass
it.
DR. SAMUELS: Of course it will.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Than what is the point of building?
ROB HERMAN: Because it mitigates the amount of times you have to
dredge.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No it doesn't.
DR. SAMUELS: Let me take you scenario. I come in there before the DEC
window closes. Before March 15th or April 15th and do the hydraulic
job. I am sure you know that I can't do one other thing in that creek
until after September 15th. That is the environmental window. I can't
even do what you are suggesting, legally.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Isn't that going to be the same once you put 80'?
DR. SAMUELS: Absolutely not.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It is still going to fill in and bypass and you will
still have that window to deal with.
Board of Trustees
26
February 25, 1998
ROB HERMAN: Not as quickly.
DR. SAMUELS: Not as quickly and throws the sand further out into this
outer channel where it is more easily handled.
ROB HERMAN: It is high sand supply.
DR. SAMIIELS: Look at Shinnecock Inlet or look at Shinnecock jetties
on the bay or go look at Mattituck.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: There is a difference. They have deep water.
DR. SAMUELS: You are getting bypassed at Mattituck right now.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: The problem is that there is two feet of water all
the way out half mile out into the bay. Where Shinnecock and the rest
of...
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The sand can't go anywhere. It has to just build up
there.
DR. SAMUELS: O.K. Lets let Hall's Creek go down the tubes. That is
the only alternative. You can either try and make something work or
the creek isn't important.
ROB HERMAN: That is what I don't understand, the boards resistance to
trying the groin. Look at that system. Where is going to be the
adverse impact. It is shorter than every groin in the field.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You still haven't convinced me. I am not trying to
give you a hard time with this.
ROB HERMAN: The board still hasn't convinced me and hasn't suggested
one adverse impact in this groin. Other than that your contention you
will eventually have the same problem in the creek. But what is the
adverse impact.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We haven't even gotten that far yet. The point is
that you wouldn't but something up that is not going to be functional.
DR. SAMUELS: It is going to be functional.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: For a limited amount of time. Until it fills. Does
anyone else see my point. That that is going to fill and that is
going to bypass it and you will have the same scenario.
TRUSTEE KING: When was the 70' groin built?
DR. SAMUELS: Two winters ago it was replaced inkind.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't think you have a problem with maintenance
dredging for whatever time period is necessary. That is not the
problem.
DR. SAMUELS: You can't do it every year. It might be acceptable if
you can do it with a crane. If you have to bring hydraulic dredges
and equipment in there you are talking about County budget numbers.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't think we are going to come to any kind of
agreement here tonight.
MR. MCGOLDRICK: Sorry I am late. This is a project that I worked long
and hard on with these gentlemen and the research that I did myself.
I am under the impression that this dredging would last me a couple
of years. I never would have done this project in the first place. I
didn't have more than a couple of months before that started to come
back in right back where we started from. I have driven around with
Tom Samuels and seen other projects where there has been groins
extended and they have certainly seem to help. I don't understand why
we can't go ahead and proceed with this. It seems to me like an
environmentally sound project.
DR. SAMUELS: Some of the ones that I have shown Neil, for example
Brushes Creek, the groin is out in front of Ziedlers, Memough. Those
are two that the County do.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I am not moving to deny this tonight. Maybe you are
getting the wrong impression. But I am not moving to approve it
Board of Trustees 27 ~-
February 25, 1998
either, without having. I think you are going to have to convince the
board that this is going to actually...
ROB HERMAN: If I can just make one last comment Al? The boards are
arguing two things at once. I have listened to this board for the
three years of my employment at En-Consultants explain that you can't
put up new groins and you can't extend groins because it keeps all of
the literally transported sand from making it down drift. Now we are
asking to extend a groin and the board is saying well what is the
point because all the sand is going to go down drift anyway. It can't
be both. It can't not make it down drift and cause a negative impact
and it can't also make it down drift and make a negative impact. I
think that there is so much sand in this system that yes eventually
it will bypass even an extended groin. But it will push the sand
further off shore. All of the arguments that people typically use
against groins will happen here. The difference the groin effect is
not going to occur. You are not going to see a situation where the
sand we are keeping up drift is going to cause a problem because
there is already so much sand down drift. That is normally the boards
argument, the states arguments. Every bodies arguments. The groin
traps sand up drift. It doesn't make it down drift. Usually that is a
problem. If it is a low to average sand supply system. This is
obviously an excessively high sand supply system. It is not going to
cause an impact down drift. Yes, eventually you are still going to
have to dredge. But the two practical reason are you have a cost to
Mr. McGoldrick and then you have an environmental interest typically
from this board and always from the State to try to minimize the
number of times you have to maintenance dredge. If extending that
groin will help to some degree in limiting the number of times you
have to dredge, extending the amount of time before you have to
dredge again, thus lowering its frequency. And can change the
dredging from hydraulic to doing if physically by crane or backhoe or
whatever Tom describes what he can use. I think it is a project worth
undertaking as long as it doesn't deprive the down drift properties.
The down drift properties in the case, obviously by the pictures, is
not a problem.
TRUSTEE KING: How long do you think it would take to fill that up?
ROB HERMAN: I don't know. Right now it is occurring in five or six
months. It depends on how much sand is actually in that system. If
there is so much sand in that system, then maybe you can at least
triple that time to a year and a half. To maybe do it every two years.
TRUSTEE KING: I meant to fill the new groin the new extension.
DR. SAMUELS: First of all you are not going to put any sand up drift.
I would like to think a couple of years. You know making predictions
like this, where there is no preexisting structure is one tough thing
to do. Why does' the County put sand to the east.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: The Board at one point gave you one groin and it
didn't work, so know.
DR. SAMUELS: No, you didn't give us one groin. It was an existing
structure. It was an existing structure.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Somebody put it in at some point and it doesn't
work.
ROB HERMAN: It is obviously not long enough for that system.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I am just saying there is no proof of that.
ROB HERMAN: Well, then every time the board says you can't build a
new groin because it will trap sand down drift, I will say you have
Board of Trustees~J 28 ~ February 25, 1998
now proof. Because that is your argument right now. What you are
telling me is that a groin does not trap sand up drift.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: O.K. I think the horse is getting beat up to much
here. I think we have obviously have other concerns which is the
effect on Downs Creek. Long term effect. My other question is, if you
built this in a year and you come back a year later and it is filled
in again, then were do you go from there? Do you go for another 80'?
ROB HERMAN: No. Then it doesn't work. Extending the groin. But you
haven't done any harm.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Suppose it does effect some property that you
couldn't have foreseen. That is our job. We are elected everyone not
just to say...
DR. SAMUELS: The neighbors are the leading supporters of keeping open.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: On Dean Drive?
DR. SAMUELS: On Dean Drive. Everyone of them. I have spoken to every
single one of them.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Keeping it open. But are they in support of the
groin. I know they where in support of the last project and I
acknowledge that. Would they be supportive of an 80' groin there that
might effect them.
MR. McGoldrick: What they told me was that they were very
disappointed when they saw Tom's crew stop where they did. They were
disappointed. They say we should have went out further.
ROB HERMAN: Normally when we would have this conversation you would
say well how much sand is in the system? How much sand is down drift?
What is the situation down there? If the situation down drift is if
you have an extensive groin field where every cell is filled or
filled and being bypass. You have so much sand there that you can
double that beach. Those are huge beautiful live beaches because of
the amount of sand there.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Until you reach Down's Creek.
ROB HERMAN: All of this sand..oI am trying to look at all of these
things. If you take each thing out of context, you can sit and beat
it to death all night.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I didn't come here to beat it to death. I am trying
to get our concerns answered. That is our job. We .can't just say yes
this will accomplish Mr. McGolkrick's project for a year.
DR. SAMUELS: Why isn't that wetland important?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It is.
DR. SAMUELS: No it isn't, because the benefits. Its his cost and it
is the Town's benefit.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We don't know that. We don't know if it is a
benefit. We didn't get any numbers.
ROB HERMAN: But A1 you do.
DR. SAMUELS: You have a board member, fortunately, who decided to run
for Trustee who has the education and the expertise who said no more
than a half an hour ago that there is no question that tidal flushing
is a benefit to a wetlands. The testing wasn't done in time. The
testing was late, whatever. I am sure Mr. McGoldrick will bond it. If
chooses not to bond the testing, I will bond it personally. That is
how important I think maintaining wetlands are. I will get it done. I
will give you that in writing.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Why isn't the testing being done now, so you can
come in and say it is closed.
DR. SAMUELS: It is essentially closed. You can't even get a boat into
the creek now.
Board of Trustees 29 -- February 25, 1998
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Exactly. It is similar to before it was dredged a
year ago. Would you agree to that?
DR. SAMUELS: No. It is not similar to that, because we went all the
way up. It is just the mouth that shoaled. We got good water all the
way in the back. You got plenty of room for movement. The amazing
thing that happened once it was opened, is that there was a bar just
inside the inlet. You couldn't go straight in. The DEC in their
infinite wisdom made us make a left turn and go up towards Nell's
house. In a fifty foot radius to turn an hydraulic dredge. Once we
had it opened up the water created another channel by itself from
Hall's Creek straight out the inlet. If you look at your aerials, you
will see exactly where that inlet is. Look at 6359. That did not
exist before we dredged last time. So you are not only getting tidal
inter change from the west towards Nell's house, you are getting to
the other side where people had nothing for years. It is a no
brainer. If you can't take a chance on a project like this, I don't
where we are going next.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Let me ask you a question? Did you come here tonight
with the expectation of receiving a permit?
DR. SAMUELS: Of course.
ROB HERMAN: That is my expectation with everything.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Let us go over our concerns so you can get back to
us and we can keep this moving along. I think what we need is that if
you can do up a map, Rob, showing the groin field from Deep Hole to
Downs in scale. It doesn't have to be a survey. Then give us, I don't
how often, you know at what frequency you want to do some soundings
in that area at certain intervals out.
DR. SAMUELS: You are talking about the outer channel?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No I am talking about the depth of water from Deep
Hole to Downs Creek maybe at low water at 100' out and 200' out at
every couple hundred feet along the shoreline. To give us an idea of
the water depths.
DR. SAMUELS: Parallel to the shore?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes. That is not that extensive, I don't think. We
are talking about soundings not a survey. We are not interested in
accurate water depth, we are interested in relative water depth here.
DR. SAMUELS: I have a boat in the water.
ROB HERMAN: How far off shore do you want to go?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Half mile.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: How often should they do it? So we get a good
representation of what the bottom is like.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I honestly don't think the soundings are going to
change out there. It has been the same depth within an inch or two.
It is a flat that goes approximately between a quarter of a mile and
a half a mile out up and down the hole beach. East and West.
DR. SAMUELS: That hole shore from new Suffolk to Flanders.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Just give us soundings that will proof that.
DR. SAMUELS: I think that coast and geodedic maps are very accurate
about it. But we will do what you want.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: There is no point in them going that far out?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: No. What are you going to try to prove? HOw much
flow of sand will fill in their channel.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Just so we have a better base of information to make
a decision on it.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I picture just a massive amount of sand out there
and they are trying to cut a channel across it. It is just a matter
Board of Trustees
30
February 25, 1998
of time before that falls in with southwest wind in the Summer. I
don't know where you are going with it.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So we have it writing so we can say we approved it
because of that or we denied because of that. So we have the
information in the record.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: O.K. I would say go 1000' out every 200'.
DR. SAMUELS: I will do my best to guesstimate it.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't think the tide matters. I think it is a
matter of relative depth.
DR. SAMUELS: I can't get close enough at low tide anyway.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right. That channel that was dug out there, did that
fill in significantlY?
DR. SAMUELS: The outer channel? That is in pretty good shape.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: O.K.
DR. SAMUELS: The outer channel has held very well. Which is the
encouraging part about this. I have been in the business a long time.
We have been dredging for the County for 20 years. Frankly, it is
embarrassing how rapidly that filled up. The problem was we couldn't
get this board to budge on the length of the groin and we couldn't
get the DEC to budge on the length of the groin. Ultimately, what it
came down to was excepting the permits and taking the risk. Which he
was prepared to take. We thought it wouldn't as bad that you had to
do it hydraulically. We thought we Could knock it off with a clam
shell bucket after the window opened up in the fall. From his side or
from the other side. As it turned out by October it was rivulet there.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do we need any other information?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: The depth of the channel you dredged out, I am
surprised that didn't fill in. With some much flat and all the sand
moving around out there with the southwest wind in the Summer. I am
surprised that didn't fill right in.
DR. SAMUELS: That is what gives us hope that the 80' groin will work.
Otherwise there is not solution.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do the water testing also. I don't know how many
stations we have.
DR. SAMUELS: That is the problem, we can't get a boat in there. How
are we do we get the guy around to test four spots? Or just take them
from shoreline where ever we can?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You can't get a canoe in there and test them?
DR. SAMUELS: The fact is you have to have a third party take the
samples.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yeah, but you run into a raccoon dropping on the
shoreline, its not good. The water depth didn't change inside the
creek.
MR. MCGOLDRICK: My boat was in the creek. Now' it is in a marina. I
can't get it back in.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I see. You can't take a row boat? It is a small body
of water.
MR. MCGOLDRICK: I could, but I don't think water tester would get in
it with me.
DR. SAMUELS: Some how we will get it done.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: One set of test for three station would be fine.
DR. SAMUELS: O.K.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there any other comments or things we need to
know?
TRUSTEE FOSTER: I have been listening and I have everything up here I
need to know. One thing you have to understand is that I haven't been
Board of Trustees
31
February 25, 1998
here through this long process of years before. My interest in
improving the water quality and salvaging the wetlands. But there are
other concerns.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Is there a way to engineer exactly to pick a number
of feet that groin needs to be extended?
DR. SA/~UELS: According the Corpo of Engineers hand book will have an
effect two and half times its length. In other words if you look at
the drawings in here and you see the long scalloped up drift side of
the groin, that will extend two and half times the length of the
groin. So if you have an 80' groin, 80 X 2 is 160 and 40 is 200'. So
you should have the scalloped line back 200' which is still on Mr.
McGoldrick's property. If you had 180' groin than you would get up to
Deep Hole Creek.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think we need to see that scaled out so we can see
what it looks like~. So that we don't plug up Deep Hole Creek.
I make a motion that we recess until March 25th.
TRUSTEE KING: I seconded it. ALL AYES.
12. WILLIAM AND MILLICENT TUFANO requests a Wetland Permit to
construct a house as per plans dated January 29, 1998. Located 2482
Camp Mineola Road, Mattituck. SCTM 9122-9-7.6.
Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of or against
the application? Mr. Tufano did not notice the neighbors in a timely
fashion. So we will recess this hearing until next month. I will make
a motion to recess.
TRUSTEE KING: Second. All Ayes.
13. Proper-T Permit services on behalf of MARIA E. SANTIGATE
requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4' X 40' catwalk, 4' X 16'
ramp, and 6' X 20' float, install two 2-pile dolphins to secure
floating dock. Located 2305 Park Ave., Mattituck. SCTM#123-3-21.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: This is a new drawing that would allow Mr. Whalen to
access the new channel.
MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Santigate and Mr. Whalen got together and What
you have is my perception of what would work. We move it to five feet
from the property line instead of fifteen. Both Mr. Whalen and Mr.
Santigate are here. I would like to here there comments.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The hole board was out there on field inspection. We
would allow you to put a structure out for boat access, but we
wouldn't allow you. When we saw the pictures that Mr. Whalen gave us
that really dramatically show the channel that he uses to access his
dock.
MR. SANTIGATE: Yes. I am aware of that.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: O.K. We woUldn't allow you to put something out that
would block his access. It is just a matter of kind of squeezing
yours in so everyone has access.
MR. SANTIGATE: Mr. Whalen is a wonderful neighbor and I have said
right from the beginning that I would never do anything that would
infringe upon his movement in and out of that creek. Whether granted
legally or not, I still have a moral right to my neighbor, who I am
very found of. I think Pete is well aware that I wouldn't do anything
that would get in his way.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well that is the first time anyone ever said
anything good about their neighbor at a public hearing. Is this
acceptable to everyone, this drawing?
Board of Trustees
32
February 25, 1998
MR. SANTIGATE: At this point we are acceptable to the fact that it
may have to be somewhat adjusted. So maybe it is not out as far.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You can always turn float afterwords to. Which would
bring it in additional ten feet without a big deal.
MR. SANTIGATE: Whatever is not in Pete's way. I am not going to allow
myself to build something that is...
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We would let you turn your float to.the neighbor to
the east side. They already have their dock. Turning the float that
way.
MR. FITZGERALD: Across the property line?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes. Well, it is our property. Normally we make the
structure say 15' off the property line. It is a good policy. But we
good approve this and if it is a problem then next year you can swing
the float. Just come to us for an amendment if you have to change it.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: The ideal situation for this dock would be to get
the inside float on the edge right where it begins to brake. So you
are as tight has possible to the shoreline.
MR. SANTIGATE: That is what I figured would be the best thing to do.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: We went there hoping to see that shoaled area, but
because of the wind and the extremely high-tide, it didn't go out
like we anticipated. Even though it was a full moon, it was deep. We
didn't get to see it. But you could see through the darkness and the
lightness of the water, where the shoaling area was. Moving the dock
over towards the property line more would definitely would solve
probably 90% of the problem and bringing it back in a little bit
would leave the channel open.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Why don't we approve it as planned subject to the
float placement once it is built. Then you can get out at the end of
it. Then you will know. You can put the float straight out or as "L"
or as a "T". Then all you need to do is give us a new set of plans
that reflect that. We won't charge you an amendment fee.
TRUSTEE KING: I move to close the hearing.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second. ALL AYES.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I make a motion to approve it subject to the float
placement and if changes from plan submitted we would need a new plan
showing final construction.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second. ALL AYES.
V. RESOLUTIONS:
1. JAMES AND FLORENCE COPE requests a Grandfather Permit for an
existing bulkhead approx. 68' with a 5' return on east side. Bulkhead
was bu±lt prior to 1971. Located 1390 Bayview Ave., East Marion.
SCTM937-5-22.
A motion was made by TRUSTEE FOSTER and seconded by TRUSTEE POLIWODA
to approve Grandfather Permit. ALL AYES.
2. BARBARA A. CALIGNINI requests a Grandfather Permit for an
existing bulkhead approx. 64'. Located 50 Knollwood Circle, East
Marion. SCTM #37-5-21.
A motion was made by TRUSTEE FOSTER and seconded by TRUSTEE KING to
approve the Grandfather Permit. ALL AYES.
Board of Trustees ~ 33 ~-~
February 25, 1998
3. Rita Gallo on behalf of SALVATORE J. GALLO requests a
Grandfather Permit for an existing 57' bulkhead. Located Sun Lane,
Southold. SCTM #76-1-13.
A motion was made by TRUSTEE POLIWODA and seconded by TRUSTEE KING to
approve the Grandfather Permit with a 10' non-turf buffer. ALL AYES.
4. En-Consultants on behalf of DENNIS & CYNTHIA O'LEARY requests a
Grandfather Permit to remove and replace (in place)+/-92' of existing
+/- 117' timber groin, with low-profile groin, seaward most +/-25'
section of existing groin is non-functional and will be removed.
Located 280 Park Ave., Mattituck. SCTM #123-7-7.3.
A motion was made by TRUSTEE KING and seconded by TRUSTEE FOSTER to
approve as applied for. ALL AYES.
5. Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of VIVIEN SOO requests an
extension on Permit 94558 to construct a house to expire February 28,
1999. This will be the last extension. Located 265 Cedar Point Drive
East, Southold. SCTM 990-3-9.
A motion was made by TRUSTEE KRUPSKI and seconded by TRUSTEE FOSTER
to approve this extension. This will be the final extension. ALL AYES.
6. Board to refund the application fee for Peconic Land Trust
$150.00 as they are a non-for profit agency.
A.motion was made by TRUSTEE KRUPSKI and seconded by TRUSTEE POLIWODA
to refund the application fee. ALL AYES.
7. Board to refund the application fee of Fishers Island Ferry
District $100.00 as they are a tax exempt agency. A motion was made
by TRUSTEE KRUPSKI and seconded by TRUSTEE POLIWODA to deny the
waiver of fee. ALL AYES.
8. Board to refund the application fee of Susan Tasker $10.00 for
an extension as she has already had two extensions.
A motion was made by TRUSTEE KRUPSKI and seconded by TRUSTEE KING to
approve refund. ALL AYES.
VI. MOORINGS:
1. PAUL SAVAGE requests a mooring in Goose Creek for a 17' Grady~
White with public access with for and aft anchors.
A motion was made by TRUSTEE POLIWODA and seconded by TRUSTEE FOSTER
to approve as marked in file. ALL AYES.
Meeting Adjourned at: 9:45
spectfully submitted by:
/~ill M. Doherty/~lerk
~oard of Trustees
kECEIVED AND FILED BY
Town Clerk, Town of ~outho!d