HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-01/28/1998Albert J. Krupski, President
James King, Vice-President
Henry Smith
Artie Foster
Ken Poliwoda
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1892
Fax (516) 765-1823
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MINUTES
JANUARY 28, 1998
PRESENT WERE:
Albert J. Krupski, President
James King, Vice-President
Artie Foster, Trustee
~en Poliwoda, Trustee
Henry Smith, Trustee
Diane J. Herbert, Clerk
CALL MEETING TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: Wednesday, February 18, 1998 at 12 noon
TRUSTEE KING moved to approve, TRUSTEE SMITH seconded. ALL AYES
NEXT TRUSTEE MEETING: Wednesday, February 25, 1998 at 7:00 pm
TRUSTEE KING moved to approve, TRUSTEE FOSTER seconded. ALL AYES
APPROVE MINUTES: Approved minutes of November 18, & December
17, 1997 meeting:
TRUSTEE SMITH moved to approve, TRUSTEE KING seconded.
I. MONTHLY REPORT: The Trustees monthly report for December
1997: A check for $10,652.57 was forwarded to the Supervisor's
Office for the General Fund.
1. Costello Marine on behalf o~i{~!~i~~ requests an
Amendment to Permit ~359 to change an existing "T" dock to an
"L" by installing existing 6' X 16' float on north side in an
"L" configuration, install existing 4' X 14' ramp to access
float from dock with 3- 2 pile dolphins, as per new drawings and
plans submitted and received January 27, 1998. Located: 60
Harbor Lights Drive, Southold. SCTM #71-2-11.3
TRUSTEE SMITH moved to approve, TRUSTEE FOSTER seconded· ALL
AYES
2 Costello Marine on behalf of
requests an ~mendment to Permit #4596 to construct a 62'
interlocking retaining wall approx.
return on the south side 91.5' from the corner of the decking as
indicated on the enclosed plans, which is 26' landward of the
south side of the surveyor's stake, and on the north side at the
existing property monument. Located: 765 West Cedar Beach
Drive, Southold. SCTM ~90-1-6
TRUSTEE SMITH moved to approve, TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES
an install splash board system with
2" spacing. Located: off Maple Lane, Orient Harbor. SCTM
9381-1 to 22
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to recess this application until February,
TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES
~ ..... David River~ on behalf of~ -~?~ requests
~i~45~8 to replace an existing piling, and add two
standoff piles. Located: off "The Gloaming", Fishers Island.
SCTM ~10-9-15.4
TRUSTEE KING moved to approve, TRUSTEE SMITH seconded. ALL AYES
5. ~ ~:~equests ~-~r~o install a split rail
fence around property, relocate outdoor shower and extend
existing porch as per survey. Located: Richmond Road East,
Southold. SCTM 953-5-12.6
TRUSTEE KING moved to approve, TRUSTEE SMITH seconded. ALL AYES
6. ~equests ~s~'~' .........
o build a 12' X 16'
shed. Located: 3537 Paradise Point Road, Southold. SCTM
~81-1-16.3
TRUSTEE SMITH moved to approve, TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES
7. ~requests a~ ii~o repair the foundation,
replace decking, replace stairs and replace the roof of the
porch attached to existing house. Located: 4605 Stillwater
Ave., Cutchogue. SCTM $137-3-5
TRUSTEE SMITH moved to approve, TRUSTEE FOSTER seconded. ALL
AYES
8. Diane Herold on behalf of CK~-C~8~RT: requests a
~~for chain link fences along property constructed prior to
1991. Located: 2950 Park Ave., Mattituck. SCTM ~123-8-18
TRUSTEES SMITH moved to approve, TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES
~.~}~,P-~i~N[~ES~ Public Notices are posted on the Town
Clerk's Bulletin Board for review.
TRUSTEE KING moved to go off the regular meeting and go onto the
Public Hearings, TRUSTEE SMITH seconded. ALL AYES
THIS IS A PUBLICHEARING 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. ~ ~j,~QSE~P5I request a 15 '
wide passageway to beach 250' long, with .e ~retaining
wall. Located: 1100 Back Land & Munn Lane, Orient. SCTM
$17-2-15.4
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll move to recess this until next month as
per the request of the applicant.
2. Joe Fischetti onbehalf~ .~..9~ : i~&(i; 1~
~requeSts a ~ to install a 90' block
retaining wall 3 1/2' to 5' high with 2- 6' returns and backfill
with approx. 30 c.y. of clean sand. Located: 50 Cleaves Point
SCTM 938-2-31
Is there anyone here who would like to speak
in favor of or against this application? The CAC recon. L,ended
approval. We were at the site twice and we spoke with the
consultants .and we tabled it for questions. Does the Board have
any comment on it?
~R~E~ That was a change to go from an 8" footing down
to 24".
.~~%~.~q~: He has erosion there. It will be interesting
to see whether he loOses his beach like the neighbors or whether
he is gonna ..... it depends on whether he gets the right
storm. Any other comment?
~~: I'll make a motion to close the hearing.
~4~E~E~N~: Second. ALL AYES
~~~: I' 11 m~e a motion we approve this application.
~~~ Second. ALL AYES
: Before we vote, behind a regular bulkhead like
that we would re~ire a non-t~f buffer. So we could put in a
10' non-turf buffer behind the .... because it will be dug up
there'. We don't want the la~ to run right up to the edge of
the pin and drop off so whatever the disturbance that they re-do
it.
~~~: How about if they put a dr~ell in away from
the bulkhead',
~S~E~-EE~ We could go with that but if the water comes
~~~~e turf doesn't give yo~ much holding power.
Usually it gets washed out. If he puts some sort of bush in it
wi h ~d it,
.~~,~S~E~ If I reme~er that was all sand out there
wasn't it?
~.$~ :~P:S~ Right He doesn't really have a lawn there
now.
4~¢~,~ Someone might want to, for an aesthetic reason,
they might want a lawn up there, but if they put in a dry well
that~ ~ht work out ~tter than a non-vegetated buffer.
" ':: , But he can come in and ~end it though. So
we'll make the provision for a 10' buffer. ALL AYES
3. U. A. Retirement Communities on behalf of~ L~NDIN~
requests a ~ ~i~ for the construction of residential
li~e care c~y~c~plex buildings consisting of 118 single
family detached cottages, 132 apartment units, a 24 unit
assisted living center and a 32 bed skilled care center, and
expansion of existing ponds, construct new ponds, construct a
storm water detention pond/wetland and bio-filtration system
for mitigation of water pollution due to storm water runoff.
Located: north side of Main Road approx. 1,100 feet east of
~?~n~ ~oad,~ LILCO pole $47-53, Greenport. SCTM 935-1-25
~E~PS~I. Is there anyone here who would like to speak on
behalf ~? this application~
T~ I believe we made our initial application back
in November 1997, since that time there is, I believe on Jan.
14, we had a joint discussion with the members of the Board of
Trustees as well as members of the Conservation Advisory Council
and the NYSDEC. This is tidal wetlands. There was no one there
at that joint discussion from the fresh water wetlands as we had
expected. Several days following that joint discussion I
submitted an amended project description because I think that at
the last meeting that we had there was some confusion as to
Whether or not the proposed action was within (could not hear,
shuffling of papers) and the answer to that is most definitely
yes. There will be some clearing and grading and some
excavation and what you refer to as the north wetlands and the
south wetlands. The two wetlands are the same project and I
think they each have particular characteristics that should be
considered when you evaluate out proposal to do this. The north
wetland is sometimes inundated by tidalwaters makes it
different that the south wetland which is mostly a percolated
wetland. We are here to answer any questions that the Board may
have, and the CAC, and if I may depending on the nature of the
~es~ig~s 1I ~ill refer to the appropriate person.
~.T-'~..~S~ER~. Tom, you have made changes? This plan is
i~J{]~RiER~ No, I submitted a week ago or twoweeks ago, an
amended project description which was a little more definitive
when we talk about the line of material where we are excavating
and the area of land that we were looking to do with the labor.
Our proposal is to excavate approx. 20,000 c.y. to create a new
pondwhich is southerly of the existing pond. And also that
north wetland we're talking about regrading about a third of an
acre. Our idea is to enhance these wetlan8~ to make it more
productive. We'd like to go in there and remove the
phragmites and we can talk about the value of doing this.
When we talk about excavating approx. 12,000 c.y. to create a
new pond southerly of the existing pond. And associate the
regrading of about 1/2 acre. The third pond, which is really a
pond that we are creating is the bio-filtration system. The
old method of dealing with storm water drainage was oppose
leaching pools where it stops. But we'd like to take this
project into the next century using state of the art and best
available technology.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Actually we've seen some sumps in town that
have turned into some very nice fresh water wetlands. So it is
possible.
~M~t~ERTi~ I don't doubt that that happens but I think with
our proposal it will happen sooner because we are going to
a wetland.
Do you have anything on a little bit different
scale here because it's really ...... when you get the project
description here it's really general. And then when you see
this i~'s~ery general.
~i~E~R~ I have a smaller map of the two wetland areas
that may be helpful. This map shows the flagging that we have
dR,~~,~red stakes that might be useful.
~~ii : The topography here is the existing grade is
it .... what would the final grade be, like in the new wetland
area?
~~~ We are gonna actually create a fresh water
p0~d ~ic~ will be 6 to 8 feet in depth of standing water.
~~ t~ No, I mean in the new wetland area.
~t will be approx. (could not hear him)
~.~~~K~£: And currently the area is phra~ltes?
4~i~ ~ Your looking at the north wetlands now?
~! I~ I am.
~i '~e significant portion of the northerly wetland
i~i~r~es partic61arly the southerly half of that.
ii~~: Is the phrag]~,ites area definedasthe new
wetlands?-~hat the limit~of the phragmites to the south or
is that .... does the phra~,ites continue on to the south?
~I~~I believe the map that you are looking at show
£~'~i,i~i% of the existing wetlands. And we would be looking to
expand that.
~~!~ : Into the area that's phragmites.
~!~~ ~' And beyond.
~: The phragmites exist within the wetland
b6un~aries as well as ..... just slightly beyond that wetland
boundary because that particular species will grow actually
above anywhere of a depth of about 4 feet below the surface
water e~evatio~..
~~ That's what ....... but there is a boundary.
-Bu~'~'~{~at's what I want to know in respect to your new wetland
boUndary. Where is the phragmitY boundary and I see where the
topography is it looks like it comes up very steeply. Is there
a clearly defined line where the phragmites stops there?
~i~ ~ Yes, there's a clear line where the
phra~'~-"~%op, but when you do a wetland restoration that
requires excavation of phragmites it is strongly suggested
that we cut your new wetland edge beyond the existing edge
because of the rise zone direction that might be running upland
of the phragmites. So we'll have to over excavate then come
back and backfill to a suitable elevation with appropriate
soil. Soil that will support wetland species.
~U~_~UPSKI% Again, the description is very general. There
was a project, and I am not exactly sure if it was similar in
scope to this or not, down on Robin Island a few years ago,
where there was a wetland comprised entirely of phragmites.
It was restores. The phragmites were completely removed, the
pond was re-excavated and it was completely restored to a fresh
water wetland. They did a beautiful job. I don't know if you
are aware of that project. It was very successful. It was very
similar, fresh water, but it was really adjacent to the bay as
this is adjacent to the sound.
in the back who might put some light on this. how is that pond
going ~he south end of Robins Island?
~.~i~ :~ I t ' s
~ ~ And that is our intent to enhance the wetland
that is there and end up with a wetland that would be more
product~ve~
~~: Now I don't know what the State requires as
far as (changed tape) the removal of the phragmities. It
seems like we could get a more descriptive in the description as
far as exactly how your gonna do it. This is really general.
. We received a letter from the DEC that typically
requested.that we not advance to a planting plan until they had
an opportunity to verify our delineation lines. I apologize, at
the last hearing I was scheduled to attend the field meeting and
Mr. Wolpert attended in my place. The fresh water wetland
biologist I had expected would Verify my line did not
participate and he would really be the one I would expect to
coordinate both the final grading and plan selection of where.
We have a letter here that asks us not to go too much farther.
We can address all the co£~ents in that much detail without some
of the States input.
MR. WOLPERT: What we are trying to do here is to gather input
from this Board as well as the tidal wetlands and New York
State, Public Environmental Conservation and then deal with
other co~m~ents.
: I think that's my comment that we need a lot
more ~n~orma~n. I think what it means is a more comprehensive
on-site inspection with the appropriate people from the State
and then we csn make those determinations on the site and then
we can have a better picture of not only what's gonna be done
but how it's gonna be done.
.~1i~!~,~i.~ We could probably answer some of the questions
U~yp~c~l cross section and a typical planting plan that
would give you some quantity and species types of what we would
typically select. There are two complications with t~at. One
is that would still require the States input and wetland
planting schemes as yo~ have probably learned from the Robins
Island experiment that you not always lend yourselves to purely
to a design plan. It's a little touchy feel artist, what else
do you find there that was or was not growing, certain soil
characteristics regarding compassion, bulk density and this type
of thing, that you really have to fiddle with. I don't think we
are prepared to do this. That would really go more towards
construction plan type work. So I think though we could provide
you with some d~tail of what we would like to do
~~t~UPSKI: Yes, I think that would be a good place to
start. Plant list and also you said general cross section about
how~our gonna proceed. And I understand what your saying.how
it's~,~nna be cut and dry because the area is so variable.
!~I,~~ We also don t know until
we
actually
get
some
specific localized soil information what we have to do to adjust
the Slopes to make sure that that water line will wet those
species ~ut at not run into a clay layer that's gonna isolate
th~, ~ ~,~.~ ....
I~.~'?~UPSK~,~ When would you do that~
~]~l~~ I guess we're in between 'the chicken and the
eg~"i' I~ don't~know if we can do anything within 100' of wetland
~li~e~itho~t~ approval.
~~~~e ~h~ns~at~ee~e~ s~Ul~um~ta~v~g~n' I
duplicat~ever~thing, we should meet with the State and if you
could have some sPeCifics, like the exploratory areas you want
~to go ~into, and e~avate and what not. And then we could
~dis~c~ss ~ose right on site so we could keep this moving along.
~~~~~:~ ~. You can test bore them.
h ve to do nan that.
~~- Ideally, to get in there with a bac~oe and ia
:open a ~ce trench and we can take a good look and see what's
underneath that layer of the phra~mities. It is important
.that you don't really get to see that in small salt water. It
.do~sn~..~i~e..~ou enough information on the profile of that soil
~~:~ ~ It so, ds reaso~ble, but again, it's better
if ~e States there and we're there and everyone's on the same
page and we t~e it step by step wi~ the State. o~ goals are
gon~a~be~the .s~e as theirs.
:~~: Can we take that then as somewhat as a focal
r~que.st that we can go back to t~ State and advise them that
you would like us get that information as well?
.~~~: I don't see how we could proceed without it
really. ~0~' honest with you. I don t see how we can make a
deciSion on such a general description wi~out really knowing
different things on our agenda for early February. We've quite
a few little meetings going on and it's gonna be hard to date.
Anyone ~lse have any concerns about this?
~ ~ With regard to the removal of some of the other
plantings we did talk about, some of the more important trees
and things, that we would tag where the cut lines would be in
the field so maybe we could do that before the field meeting and
people can see where some of the cutting will take place.
.I~S~: Sure. Again our jurisdiction is only 75' from
~~ S0 a lot of that may be out of our jurisdiction
recess the public hearing.
~: Second. ALL AYES
$. Craig Arm on behalf of ~ $~.Al~i requests a
existing house & decks, construct new roof
accommodate future second floor, remove existing brick
add a new 1 story addition, construct new covered porch
and remove old one, add new stairs on front and west side of
house, parking area to be raised 3.6' with permeable stone to a
new elevation of 6.5', add 44' of new rock retaining wall on
west~'side of property, existing boardwalk to be raised and
covered, existing storage shed to be removed, and existing
abandoned pipe to be removed. Located: 5 Haywaters Road,
CU~cho~e~. SCTM ~111-1-19.1
~: Is there anyone here who would like to speak
on~behal~ ~f?~he application?
~tI~~ The owners are not here to speak so I'm here
to answer any questions. Right now I'm working across the road
and it all seems pretty much in the wetlands. In fact
residences are abutting the creek (cannot hear him, shuffling of
papers) You can see the plans of the house on that and you know
what the house looks like now. To improve the property value,
I've done two house in that area and the only reason I'm here is
because that's (could not hear him), to improve the value of
property and neighborhood and improve the local co~m,dnity.
We're just asking for your support and if there are any
ques%ions as far as the construction I can answer, I will.
~~ : Did you take a look at the property today?
~~~ Yes. I was there about noon and there was 6
inches of water right at the front door.
~: I was there about 11:30 a.m.
~ Was it over the road?
~S~!~I~. It wasn't on the road yet, but it wasn't high
tide.
i~i~ It was right around his whole parking area
and ri~ u~to the steps of his front door.
~~ : Yes, the whole house was surrounded with
water.
~~f~£~ But his parking area is the same elevation.
~: No, ~t s probable a couple of inches higher.
Only half this parking area had some water in it.
~F~~ Obviously something has to be done.
~.~,~.~ ~ ~ It' s
3 a mau~er of ......
~ ~ , Do you know where the septic system is?
~k~l~t~ I don't have a survey.
· ~P2~T~E - I would like to see where the seDtic system is
an~ ~f your gonna add more bathrooms and water usage in this
house ......
~~ ~. The occupancy is gonna remain the same.
?S~_~L~ Your not gonna add any bathrooms?
~ ~ ~ The will be adding a
b .......... second floor, we
athroom.
!3~I]TF~ O.K. then your gonna have more water usage.
There was or looked like the septic system in the wetland area,
which ~ hope is not, but ......
~i~~·. We're willing to accept any advise you have
as to ~he ~e-~esign or whatever.
-R~E~;~U~: That was all covered with water today.
~E3E-~I~? It will never fill up that way. The tide goes
in and the tide goes out.
The only concerns are, and we've been out
there a times, as far as your re-building the house
and raising it, that's not ...... our concern is it's an existing
house already so your not really gonna change much by
re-buildi it and raising it. Our only concern was, and I
think ~g
Artie br0ught it up, is on the driveway, is I guess we
need a cross section on how your gonna put the elevation.
Your gonna raise it up 3.6' because it's such a small area now
and if you raise it to 3.6' your gonna have on spot for one
car it seems like.
If 3.6' is maybe a measure as to how much is
to be ra~Se~ ~p.
~~i~l ~: Again, the cesSPool is a problem also. I
think if you Could put the cesspool in the parking area, since
your gonna raise it that much. I'm not sure what's the best
way to go here. Whether to go to the Health Dept. or just
request tO bring the cesspool back into the parking area and
then raise it up. so that it has at least some distance, right
now the way it looks like it is, today it was completely covered
with water. To the west side. I think we're ready to approve
this but what we need is a cross section of the driveway about
how that's actually gonna be raised. Because he's got so
little and fr~m what it shows here he's oUt ont~ the right of
way road with his cobblestone. So he only owns just a small
.portion. I don't know if their gonna let him fill that road
or just ...... t don't know how it works down there.
~!/Who!s that to be done by? The DEC?
'I don't know know. We don't mind him raising
the driveway/ we just want to make sure it's done so it'.s not
gonna Spill ~ver into the wetlands. He can fill what he's got
to ten feet as~long as he can get up there somehow. Also we
want to see in the new description the old septic system removed
and a new on~ replaced 'in the driveway area.
~~: You gave him pretty much what he wanted.
~~!!i~'~ How are you gonna maintain the elevation of
the drive~ on his property. Does it have a retaining wall?
~{~3~i ~I He was talking about a rock wall.
~~~ I would just like to see a Board of Health
approved septic System. If it's in that wetlands area now, I
don't see how I would vote for it.
~3~H~!~!!!~If this is considered an expansion system or
~het~'"Y~¢~'just a tank than it could be used as an expansion
and the Board of Health (could not hear him).
.~S~S~ER: Henry you'd never meet the present day
criteria. To get the Health Dept. involved, chances are the guy
will never to do any of this.
Well, what we're suggesting though is that
they prgve~hat is there.
~R~T~!~ST~R~ I think to get the septic system out of the
wetlands and get something along the lines of what would be an
approved system, but this is never gonna meet the distances in
that are~. ~,~.~
~~i~ii~ They don't get their water from there, they get
their water 'from way down the street.
~,t~. But your still supposed to be 150 feet from the
wetlands, and he's never gonna get it.
~~f~, But it's an existing house.
-~~!~$Ki~ I don't think the Board of Health could
improve on what we're suggesting.
I would say to do the best you could with it
Motion to close the public hearing.
ALL AYES
I~: Motion to approve subject to changes in survey
showing c~0~s section of driveway and septic system.
~,~~~:~ Second. ALL AYES
5. J.M,O. Consulting on behalf of
~~J~$~ requests a ma~
~re~ge an exzs~zng Du~nnea~ of -3 feet at
ALW. Resultant 900+ c.y. of spoil shall be placed on buried
spoil sites on adjacent upland. (Applicant amended permit to
truck spoil off site to an upland site . Located: Ole Orchard
~~ ~SK~ Is there anyone here who would like to speak
on behalf of the application?
~L~i~ii~ I"m here to answer any questions you might have.
i~ I think the concern we had out there last
month i~ a '~f the canal is fairly deep. Is this to get all
the high spots.
,~;~{~i~!~ I went back out and spoke to Diane last week and she
said you might want some revised steps, so I went out at low
tide and did some soundings. From what I understand in speaking
with Diane and Jill that there was some concerns of whether I
did not get too close to .the bulkhead. If you look at the cross
section we are 5 feet away from the bulkhead at a 5 foot depth
towards the channel.
~.,~.,~,,~ I' 11 move to close the public hearing.
~~~,~ Second. ALL AYES
~ I' 11 make a motion to approve.
~ 'STEE KING: Second. ALL AYES
returns and replace with 285' of rock revetment, fill behind
rock revetment with concrete rubble existing on site and approx.
500 c.y. of clean fill from a suitable upland source. Located:
Sage Blvd., Greenport. SCTM %53-5-12.6
~KR/U~'SK~: Is there anyone here who would like to speak
either for or against this application?
~~: I'm here to represent Mr. Sage.
~I: We were out at the site numerous times. Does
the ~~ any questions? That area juts out. It's not a
straight line bulkhead. Especially on the west side it's got
those massive ..... we had some discussion about trying to bring
it back in line but on the west side it's got those massive old
concrete bulkheads. What I'm looking for is the cross section
Our concern is that it doesn't encroach any further. It started
at the toe of the existing bulkhead.
~F~ : The two drawings show the line of the existing
or where ~t was before it fell down and it is intended that the
tg~a~ z~ent will be that long.
~ ~i~N~ The Sage property has always been my 'pet' as
you know. I made some notes, note one: the five structures is
that the tide gets over 3' above normal high and tends to flood
back here. All the other structures are raised. The one
closest to the little cove, where they dock boats, is raised.
The one where Vera and Charles house as your going south those
cottages from there down are raised. The five houses behind
that bulkhead are all at bulkhead top level. The other cottages
along there are .... the soil goes level without the bulkhead,
they're on like a berm or whatever, so ideally in addition to
doing this the idea to build a berm behind this bulkhead in that
area with wings on both ends so this area couldn't flood like
the Halloween tide that was 5 feet above normal tides. Note
two: I added ,a scale on this drawing and it is 1 inch = 50 feet
to get a perspective of the drawing. 500 cubic yards is a lot
of stuff of clean fill and it doesn't come cheap. I figured if
it's 50 feet wide by 300 feet long which would cover this
expanse by 3 feet deepl The bulkhead all along the Sage
property is really 3 feet above the beach in gravel level. It
is not a high bulkhead. If you look at this bulkhead from the
water you'll see the Sages sold their property and had to take
it back and one of the added is the new bulkhead through most of
their shoreline. With the exception of this one piece here.
Now your looking at stones. The marine species like rocks.
It's really a rock revetment. That's about it.
~..~ii~.'~: i was under the impression they were gonna use
unau concrete r%LDDle.
,~~~' The rock revetment will be a rock revetment.
It will not be a concrete rubble.
~_~~.~: The concrete will be used to fill. That's why
I think there was some discussion out in the field that if they
wanted to pull it back and eliminate a lot of that fill ..... I
don't think anyone has problem with .the plan as it's written.
~:~. I'll make a motion we close the public hearing.
: Second. ALL AYES
!~: I'll make a motion to approve.
~:~iT~R ~ Second. ALL AYES
7. -T Services on behalf of ~!! %requests a
to construct a 14' X 37' wood deck attached to
seaward side of house, renovate an 8' X 13' section on seaward
side of existing house, construct 2 additions on landward side
measuring 6' X 16' & 8' X 13', construct a 4' X 75' fixed open
walkway, a 4' X 16' hinged ramp and 2 floats measuring 8' X 10'
& 4.6' X 10'. Located: 4639 Stillwater Drive, Cutchogue.
SCTM ~137~ ~
?~PSKI. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak
either in favor or against this application?
: Same guy for Mr. Suglia.
: We got the CAC co~ents for approval. The
only questions we had is that we're gonna limit the float
size. The standard float for a single family resident is 6' X
20' and I think we,re gonna try to limit their float size to
that size.
~~Z ~ No specific dimensions for that area.
~ No, because she had existing floats there.
~ ~ These floats exist.
~~ ~ That would be acceptable.
~EE~~~ We measured those to make sure they matched
ones zn tne ~±zcat~on.
The other questionthat we had was apparently
a lot of water there but apparently the channel flows
the shoreline.
Not where I was. Not in there.
If you go to the main channel where we are (could
not hear h~.li~
~K~K~: That's what Mrs. Suglia had said that's where
people go to get out in that end of the creek and we want to
make sure that is not gonna encroach into that because the
water goes down and that's gonna get into the deep water. Is
that the end of the deep water and then the big flat starts. We
don't want to put' the float in the middle of that deep water
section.
~i~Z~: Inthat particular area ther~ are two floats to the
sou~ ~that. My concern is with the 75 plus the 16' plus the
10' or 15' on that float. I'm afraid that this particular dock
is gonna be way out. Even at medium tide we wouldn't get
:k.
We asked Mr. Fitzgerald to somehow mark that
Apparently that was done with some
sort of a red float. The problem was they sunk. Now on some of
those sites we could pull the string in and throw it out and as
the string extends with the weight:we were able to see the end
when it splashed in. But it sunk and in this site we weren't
able to retrieve it because it was~already out into the water.
~,~~~- Only one of them could have sunk. It wasn't
that ~~e the others are solid styrene with a float.
~ I don't think it sunk, I think the string was
too
~~:S~E~: We couldn't see where it was.
a~]~h~l~5~
~1~% '% Ben and I went out to the rowboat at low water
an~ we~e'a'Eu~'eo depth of the line here and our depths that we
measured. We measured the two two foot two feet and that
doesn't seem to be out to the channel.
Board of ~rustees 13 Janu'~ 'y 28, 1998
That's probably it. That's the natural
channel.~eauSe then it comes into that big flat out there.
~ We've been through this before in a number of
creeks where the channel is close to the shoreline and you have
to be careful where you ....... I think we're gonna have to
table this and take a look at it on the site. I've got a
picture showing Annabel's dock with his float passed it. He's
got a mooring out passed that. We'll recess this and put it on
for next months inspection. We'll separate this and approve for
the deck ......
: I'll move to close the hearing.
Second. ALL AYES
!~ I'll move to approve the application for the
deck, renovation and. additions, and recess the portion where the
dock is until next month.
~:~ Second. ALL AYES
8. P~oper-T Services on behalf of ~RTi~D~
requests a~~I~I~it to construct a single family dwelling,
garage, deck & sanitary system, a 4' X 47' fixed walkway, a 4' X
16' r~p and a 6' X 20' float with 2 piles. Located: 2725 Pine
Tree Ro~d, Cutchoque. SCTM $104-3-5 1 & 5.2
~S3T~~ Is there anyone here who would like to speak
onbehalf of the aPplication?
~4~/~~ Yes; I'm here to answer any questions
~~~~ C~C recommended approval. Their concern is
the walkway is raise~d 4' above to grade. Their concern also is
there may be existing moorings or crab pots in the same area as
the proposed dock. We have the same .... again on this house
portion on field inspection the Board felt we could put in
appropriate buffer area of non disturbance and if the house is
nou a problem. It was the dock that ..... again it was a similar
situation where, Ken is familiar with the water and he said the
deep water is right adjacent to the shore line and then it gets
shallower as you go out. So we would rather see the structure
moved back ~ ~
When you say the shoreline what do you mean?
D~. Where the contour depth goes down
.~~~: In all these cases all these people are
interested in doing is getting enough water to put a boat in
there. If indeed it's either projecting into what is commonly
used as a channel in the area we'll shorten it.
~: I've found the length of that dock might be
over building out into the water and there's a mooring field in
there.
~ii~t~R~$~ The fact that people are moored there is I
Gon"t~hIh~¥sOmeth~ng I would preclude the building of the dock.
~IK~: No, but to that length it would though. KEN:
No problem with the shortening up but you would have to find the
soundings again to see how far it is necessary to go out.
~!~~ When we're talking about soundings your talking
about to a f~Iid base or are we talking about to the top of the
silt? If you went out and walked out you would be (could not
understand him) a foot or eighteen inches deep in stuff. So my
Board of Trustees 14 Janu~"y 28, 1998
questionl is when your talking about water depth are you talking
about WhEre your feet are or where the top of the stuff is on
you b00 s?
ItI~D~. In this instance, some tops are completely
shallow~With mud and there is no field, the depth changes. In
this insitance I believe there's a depth incline there very close
to ~the Shore so it wouldn't have to be necessary to put such a
lengthy ~ock there.
~!II~ To answer your questions I think when we mean
~'~'~ings we mean to the bottom whether it be black
mayonnaise or hard bottom, if your feet sink down two feet into
this muck it's still unusable and you have to go from where your
feet sto~ and stick down.
~ ~ And that's the way I have always looked at it
and just, waD,~ ~o be sure that you all think the same way
!!~/~ I think this is another one we have to go out
on, again~~t~y to come up with an,appropriate ......
tlI~~: I really don t think it's necessary once
yo~ find~i ~ ---"where the bank drops off in the water the top part is
about th~ deepest part off the bank when it comes to wetlands, I
don~' think that dock has to extend passed that. it serves no
purpose.
~~ , Thls was my perception of what we needed to get
ad~qu~te ~a~ter to access the water.
~i Il 9N: I have no ob3ectlon to this extending out
and haue no objection to length of the dock either. I crab
ther~ and I have a 32 foot boat and if this was my dock I would
make it 3, foot shorter because it's actually deeper ......
t I'll make a motion we close the public hearing
~ ~econd. ALL AYES
~~ I'll make a motion to approve the application
on behalf of Robert Di Domenico for a single family
dwelling, garage, deck and sanitary system with condition that
there be no clearing closer to the wetlands 35' from the corner
of the easterly corner of the house which gives them about a 40'
buffer zone. I think the Board felt that 35' was enough room to
get equiomen~ around without constricting the construction.
~ There lis no clearing there now.
~ !I{I~E~: No grading. If they would like to do some
hand trimming for a view after the house is constructed they
should just give us a letter requesting that and we will come
down and we' ll give them an idea how to trim it for a view.
that's no problem. When I say no disturbance they can clear 35'
around the Side of the house for a lawn area but no land
clearing further to the east.
~.~,~ } Second. ALL AYES
9. Proper-T Services on behalf of ~~? ~~requests
a ~a~m~ to construct a 4'
~ ~,~ ,~,,,. X'~~v ~ixea~' ~n Walkway, a
4 X Y~ hln~~ ramp and a 8 X 20' float with 2- 2 pile
dolphins. Located: 2305 Park Ave, Mattituck. SCTM #123-3-21
~~,~~, Would anyone here like to speak in favor of
the application?
~ I'm here to answer any questions.
BoArd of Trustees 15 Janu'~"y 28, 1998
'~R~iKRU~SKI: We went out on inspection here ...... did we
~ver get a letter from the neighbor?
~i~~D~ I spoke to Mr. Whelan, he's the neighbor to
the north, and he has essentzally the same concerns that you
have.
~~l~i~ Again, it's the same concern, there's a
shallow channel adjacent to the shore and then it gets shallower.
,~&~ In this case I think the difference is it
doesn't appear to be any way around by shortening the
structure. I looked at the aerial photographs of the area and
you can clearly see the channel that was inshore and it runs
down and gets .... it turns out at just about the-place where the
proposed structure is. If you were to shorten the structure you
would still no~ derive a clear path. So I think it will involve
dred lng ~Q ~en that up somehow.
~~¢~S'E~ You don't have the aerial photograph handy?
~~ I:' have some pictures to get a little bit better
look at it. This is my house here and you can see the channel
going along to my house (indicating on pictures) It will show
you there is an Island out there. I took these Sunday. The
tide was late so it was late in the afternoon. And the tide was
not really'a dead low tide. When you were there that day you
would never know there was an island there.
~/~I]~~ But this is the same as all the other
applications we were talking about tonight, where it's deeper in
one spot and then it gets .... there's a big flat out there. Now
why couldn't you keep it on the edge ...... ~ think it shows just
on the,,edGe of that?
~ ~ But this is looking north here.
this is to~ing right straight out from where...
: On the other hand we can't allow someone to
put something out that w~ll block people s access.
~ ~!~ No, I'm not suggesting that.
,~~ii~ I think if You come up with something that the
Santi~'~ ~o~ld work with that would give them some sort of
access and they could tie a boat to. But very close to the
shoreline. That's the most optimistic picture where they have a
little bit of water in front and not that far.
~ I~ L - ~"i "[F't "!i'j ~ .
t.~,!~,~,,~._,,,. Ofcourse to some extent depending:upon the
kznd of-boat he is thinking about and I believe he's thinking
about some~n~, more than a whaler.
~i~8Kt: I think if he looks at these, this should give
him an idea of what kind of boat to get.
~ ~ Are you saying that if we apply to dredge the
end of that island out of there, that would not meet with favor
with you?
· , -~ .~- - [:.~ ~
?._K~_~p~KI. probably not.
B~ard of Trustees 16 Janv~'y 28, 1998
'- ~ ......... - How come?
~;: Because Chapter 97-28 in the code would
pr~obably prevent that. Plus the DEC code would prevent it
also. SO you pretty much have what he's got, is pretty much
What he s got. You could have a modest structure to tie a small
boat to. But it's got to ~ limited and pressed right against
the shore.
~.~$~j.~. The end where the stakes 15 feet from
th"e property line. Would you be willing to leave it closer to
the ~pr~pert~ line9
· : The general board policy is that no structure
should be no closer than 15 feet to the property line. To give
people access. In this case I think we would waiver that policy
that, with moving it over towards the bulkhead.
: t still don't think there's gonna be enough room
even i~ ~ mOves it over.
~~!E~K_~ No, ~ust a modest structure like you have 3ust
to get him out into the water. And also Mr. santigate has the
grass mowed. That's not allowed.
~!~ : I mentioned that to him.
~~fl{ ~: So if you could design something there with
that in mind. T6~'~eep a small structure and put it up in that
east corner it would allow Mr. Whelan to get past it.
.~k%~,~lj~: I'll make a motion to recess the public
hearing.
~~~ Second. ALL AYES
10. Proper-T Services on behalf of requests a
~l~ht~t to construct a fixed open 125' a
ni~ged ramp-:~ X' 16~ and a floating dock 6' X 20' with 2- 2 pile
dolphins. LOcated: 855 Knollwood Lane, Mattituck. SCTM
~10~-6-5
~_~,~.~ii~~ Is there anyone here on behalf of this
application?
-~¢~E~ ~ ~ ~ Yes, me.
~~f{~G: 'Move to close the hearing.
Second. AYeS
~~,l~: ~ove to approve the application.
~ ~¢~8~. Second. ALL AYES
11. En-ConsultantS Inc., on behalf of ~ii~i,%as
Contract vendee requeSts a, ~!i~t t°~'~ a fixed
"T" shaped' timber' dock con~istY~'~%'g X 24' catwalk,
(elev. min. of 3.5' above marsh) a 3' X 12' ramp and a 6' X
16' float secured by 2- 2 pile dolphins. Located: 2400 Glenn
Road SCTM ~78-2-41
Is there anyone here who wishes to speak in
of the ap~ .on?
I represent the applicant.
B~ard of Trustees 17 Janu'~'~¥ 28, 1998
~EE~i~ CAC recommends approval. CAC also had
comments regarding the clearing near the wetlands and we also
wanted to mention that even though they ...... all the proposed
structures are well outside our jurisdiction. Our concern is
that it doesn't get cleared within our jurisdiction. I don't
know what the applicant has ....... the building is well outside.
Even the garage is the closest structure is 88 feet. We just
want to make sure that this isn't gonna be a completely
str~pped ....
~ From what I understand there's essentially a building
setback that is sketched on there by Joe Ignego. We wouldn't
be able to clear that out anyway.
~!.~$~: Well that's a building setback, not a clearing
setback ~q~
~ From what I understand his intended feeling is up in that
area. If it was going to extend further seaward you would need
to get a permit from the DEC and then we would need to get one
from you.
~i.~i ~!?~[~! ~ ~ No, I just wanted to make that clear and that
zt doesn t get lost zn the shuffle. As far trimming for a view
goes we don't have a problem with that. We don't want to see it
during the course of construction. Everything just gets pushed
into a pile and pushed over the edge.
ROB: I think what he will be'il do is basically clear to some
extent a four foot wide path with an access with that and the
dock. Anything g~eater that that we would advise him that he
would have to come back to this board.
Motion to close the hearing.
: Second. ALL AYES
"~-~-~l I'll make a motion we approve with condition
that no clearing take place oUtside of building setback.
i'i~~ Second. ALL AYES
12. En-Consultants Inc., on behalf of ~ requests
a ~ i,~i~- ~ ~o construct fixed of
a 4' X 66' catwalk, a 4' X 14' ramp at landward end, a 4' X 12'
hinged ramp and an 8' X 20' float secured by 2- 8" pilings.
Located: 2200 Broadwater Road,~ Cutchogue. SCTM ~104-9-4
~~~i: Is there anyone here who would like to speak
on behalf of the application?
~: I'm representing the applicant. I know that the Board
requested on site that you wanted to cut the catwalk back by
8'. (changed tape) issued permits plans for the plan originally
shown. Mr. Oiestad amended that as long as the Board was in
keeping (could not understand him) on site that it's still back
to these dimensions that is to propose that the Board would be
able to issue kind of a speedier permit in order to extend the
additional 10 feet of dock if necessary. We of course don't
need to go back to the DEC or the Corps right now if the dock is
built with less expensive specifications than what they have
permitted. That is all I have. The dock is designed basically
in conformance with the dock i,,,aediately to the north. But that
dock does reach fairly shallow water and so the point of the
proposal is to get out a bit further than that dock to the
B~ard of Trustees 18 Janu/'~y 28, 1998
east. Basically to expedite the process I have revised the
plans upon the Boards suggestions and faxed it over to you
I don't know if you heard all the prior public
hearings but it's been ...... the deeper water is closer to the
shore there. When you get further out your gonna hit the
flat. We just wanted to make sure that structure isn't in the
deeper water and that restricts the boating flow along the
shoreline.
~~S~!~ I respect that. But during construction you can
save me from having pulling a crew off and then go do the whole
permit process again. And then I end up at the end 56 feet in
the muck at low tide, can I call somebody to come look at this
and I can tell the crew to go ahead and work.
~ · Any other comment?
~: I'll make a motion to close the public hearing.
~.~.~k~ Second. ALL AYES
~.~;~~: I'll make a motion to approve the amended plan.
~ Second. ALL AYES
13.~ En,Consu~tants Inc., on behalf of~ ~a~.ii~LLkN a ~
~requests a to construct a 4' X,
20' catwalk including steps, a and a 6' X 14'
float secured by 2- 8" pilings. Located: Private Road off Route
~ Cu~chogue. SCTM $97-6-2
~~: Is there anyone here who would like to speak
on behalf of the application?
$~ I'm here to speak on behalf of the application. The dock
~as been designed ..... as the Boar~ is aware, there are two
properties up in the corner there that his parents own. The
dock has been designed basically to allow him to moor two very
small crafts. It's fairly shallow water. And although the tax
map and survey might read otherwise, that channel is really so
deep there. It's a navigable in fact channel that goes up there
and closes up pretty quickly at the north end and becomes fairly
immence wetlands.
I trust the Board will be amendable of the proposal. It's a
fairly large lot and you know he has a pretty humble cottage and
pretty expansive wetlands on that lot and is just looking for a
small dock.
~ Our only question is there is a pole there
Is that the e~tent of the project?
~ No. I do know what your talking about because I recall
seeing it. I wondered about the same thing. I think that is a
remnant of some other kind of structure made some time ago.
~]~~: But what is that, just s a reference, does it
go further'~h~h that?
~ No. The inside of the float is a little less than 8 feet
seaward of the marsh. It's pretty close.
It is definitely not a navigable channel for
the last peo~ there on the very end.
ROB: This dock location might as well be the head of that.
Do they own all the way to the main road or is
that someone
B~ard of Trustees 19 Janu~ ~y 28f 1998
~ No, actually I believe John's parents just bought that
lot. There is another 3 acre lot just north of that. There's a
house similar and painted the same color and just a little bit
~arger than that. They are single separate lots.
~t-.~ I just wondered because this is a side bar
that the State was supposedly doing a road runoff project and
that's an ideal location where that water runs down there from
the corner, just w~ndered who owned that.
The CAC recommended approval provided the
walkway is elevated 4 feet above the marsh. I think you have it
3 1/2.
~ We always design it 3 1/2 feet because that is the DEC
requirement. It's kind of a "catch 22" situation because there
is some government that tried to eliminate the elevation so
we're stuck trying to get it above marsh and between the State
to keep it low for aesthetics for the Town. If this Board is
comfortable in the difference of 6 inches it will probably make
life .~asier for me.
~U~:~ That' s fine.
~: I' 11 make a motion to close the hearing.
~ Second. ALL AYES
~~!~!~I!~ I '11 make a motion to approve the application.
~E K~N~: Second. ALL AYES
1~. En-Co~sul~ants Inc., on behalf of
requests a ~i~a~hd Re~mli~ to extend an
approx. 16' and armor with 1-3 ton stone placed on filter cloth
and backfill with approx. 5 c.y. of clean sand from upland
source. Located: ROW off Oregon Road, Cutchogue. SCTM
~j~i~i~U~K~: Anyone here who would like to speak in favor
of the application?
~ I'm here to represent Linda Dambassis. Someone kind of
Played a joke on the property lines a long time ago. It was
something that didn't even catch our eye. Rather that extending
to the water, this property line suddenly angles in which means
the entire section of bulkhead and return is actually on
property owned by Diane Smith and not Linda Dambassis. It's a
pretty strange situation. I spoke with Par Moore, Diane's
attorney. Ms. Smith apparently for a couple of justifiable
reasons which I don't care to get into right now, is resistant
to the idea of this 1 signing a letter of consent to allow Ms.
p~b~ssi~ to do this.
.I~k~U~J~]~~ It's actually easier than that. What we
requzre on the sound is, and it's been our policy since we took
on Coastal Erosion, is if a structure is on someone else's
property they are gonna have to get their own permit for it.
So you say Ms. Smith owns it?
owns that small track of land.
So Mrs. Smith, and what's happed in the
passed, telling you to do this, she would just pay to
have the permits done for Mrs. Smith. But it would be in Mrs.
Smith's name. So Mrs. Smith would actually own the structure
but it would be put in place at the request of Mrs.
B6ard of Trustees 20 JanC ~y 28, 1998
Da~.~bassis. We would allow that because physically it is one
str~cture. So that's been our policy.
~1. The only problem with it is, and just put yourself in the
po~iition of the neighbor, the structure protecting the integrity
off'the Dambassis property. There's no real self motivation
for the neighbor to do that.
~: I understand, but it's still a structure on
someone else's property. That's the bottom line.
~i~ There's always cases where erosion control structures are
built a long time ago without due regard to property line.
Sometimes there's gonna be a case where there are several
inches of a structure will cross. Your saying even in that case
it somebody else to apply for a permit to own a foot?
Well it's never come down to a foot but it's
come down to 8 feet or 10 feet, sure. The reality is that
eventually that neighbor is gonna want a structure also. And
it's all gonna tie in. And again, you shouldn't put a
structure on someone else's property because then the property
is gonna change hands and then it gets .....
~ That's her feeling. I think what might happen here
ideally is there may be a transfer of ownership of that triangle
of .land. Which would also resolve any future structure that
would be on Angela's property. In this case, that's probably
the way this is gonna get resolved. All I could.ask you to do
is hold it over, because we are not stepped in the attorney game
to see how this is gonna work out.
: We're trying to work out a policy of tabling
would rather not let it go for more than a
year than not to apply. This might be a year. If they're
gonna try to transfer that little triangle. That's why it's
been easier to just have the applicant pay for the permit
p~ocess and pay for the structure in the other persons name.
~ It would be quicker that way and I'll raise it to her
attorney.
~i : I did speak to Pat Moore about this. I
explained to her our policy and how it's worked in the past.
~.~ Was it her sense that that might be an option. That's the
impression I've got. I will let you know and I-'m hoping that
within a month or two we will at least get ab idea of where we
are gonna go. If it looks like it's gonna be a long drawn
out thing, I'll withdrawn the applicant.
~I~ Was there any intent to do anything on the west
Of him.
~ Not right now.
~l~ Because there is no return there right now. We
talked ~ ~ neighbor and he had questions wether they were
gonna do anything there. I thought they were gonna put in a
return on that end too. But evidently not. Just the east end
that we will worry about.
~ ~: There's not way that they can angle it back.
~B.~ We looked at that but if you look at the survey there is
so much room there that it's impossible. Anything in that whole
section of property is not owned by them. It's not a property
B6ard of Trustees 21 Jan¥~ y 28, 1998
line complication, it's a totally bizarre property line
configur~t~Q~., I don't know how this every got.
1 No, we've seen them like that where the
property lines angle instead of perpendicular. So that the
place in front of your property is not yours. It's the
neighbors. It makes it very difficult when someone is gonna
do anything.
: I think the reco~LuHendations in looking at
this property iine she. can go where the property line
exists ......
~ Yes, that's the other option, that would be the other
alternative. The only problem with that is I would have
to .... if you start cutting into that bluff ....... well in any
event these are types of thing we talked about.
~ ~: I'll make a motion to table this application.
~. Second. ALL AYES
15. Diane behalf of as contract
vendee' requests to house tO
the north side of ion and place on piles,
construct a roofed porch on south side, a 12' X 38' deck and a
deck and addition on north side. Existing garage to be rebuilt
and reloCate existing walkway. Located; 220 Park Ave., LILCO
p~.~3~,~!~attituck. SCTM ~123-8-26.1
~.~ ~ Is there anyone here who would like to speak
o~ ~t~e application.
~{~D: I represent the applicant vendee.
~~~~: Will this be a completely new house?
~~: ~, '"~ because (could not hear her)
I think they were concerned about 2 or 3 feet. You might want
to take a look at this letter.
~~ I have a small problem. I have to deal with
zoning, so I have to move the house, so I have to go to them.
(Could n~t ~hear her too much shuffling of papers).
~~~: ~e only other questions we had was that the
wo~ walkway going over the road.
.~j~~: That's gone. We spoke to Diane and she mention~
that you were concerned with that. We are going to have a
couple of d~psters there and we could certainly take that
part out.
$~NB~: And also the catwalk is .... the existing
catwalk ~f ~:~: there, is that gonna be ch~ged in an~ay?
ED - No.
~,~SL~!: Because there's an older one and a newer one
We weren't sure which one belongs to the property.
The old one. We' 11 prob~ly put some new boards
~~' it's worn. I don't think you could even walk on that
at this point.
t: It's a plus to move it back from the beach.
~re is ~'~eptic system?
D: I knew you were gonna bring that up. I'd like
to expi~i~n. The current owners had this in the f~ily so they
B6ard of Trustees 22 JanuS"7 28, 1998
have quite a few people using that house. There are 5 bedrooms
in that house right now. We're gonna have 3 bedrooms (could
not hear' her). To answer your ~. estion, there is a sanitary
system that is off the south east corner which is gonna be
a~andoned because it's definitely on the beach. T~e other one
is gonna be underneath the building in a cement mound. We
would be willing to put in a sanitary system and we discussed it
in an earlier application with She Board of Health. We would
probably .end up with a concrete retaining walls and the system
would be much greater than what's ever been there now. We would
~reciate it if we didn't have to do that.
~! Do you have a~y suggestions? The one that's
unCtlo~l~ng now is gonna be underneath where the house is
) ~ ~ ~rel6cated? [
~: It would be under he front deck.
~i{~I: See, I 'm not Sure once you get back towards
}e .roa~ o~e north szde of the house the elevation drops Off
t~ere ~oesn't it?
~~~I~ ~ '~'~ ~: So that wouldn't be the best place either.
~e Iealth Dept. requires something like a foot and a half or
~!~,~t~ o ~i..~.~ ~ ~ ~°f clean, sand separating it from ground water.
~t~ It s two feet.
i~ ~~: It's three now.~
~tt~ ~/~"~he DEC requires more. The Board of Health
acce ~ts th~ septic tank in the ~ater, they don't care. It's the
leaching tanks, and they would be two feet deep and two feet
a~bove gro~und water, so I would have to have (could not hear her)
~~ti~~i: Do you have a~y suggestion as to where they
would go? ~.....
~1~~ The neighbor has a single well so I wouldn't have
a proble~ there. It would be spread out along the west side.
That~$r~e ~y greatest elevation is.
~B.~P~: Now the Building Dept., are they gonna make
you upgrade the system~
.~i : That I haven't discussed with them. I did forget
to teii ~ou One thing. When I spoke to them about the garage in
the previous permit the new garage will be smaller than the
original.
~~~ If you say these pools were underneath where the
proposed porch is ~gonna be, I wouldn't have a problem if you
just went outside' that area to the property line. It would be
definitely ...... your not making matters any better or worse from
what I could see.
~ ~ Is the house gonna be on pilings?
~~~: Yes.
~E~ ~ You could get a septic system in there.
~! : We're gonna approve this probably with a
condlfi~~'~'~your gonna have to put the Septic system on the
survey. Even .if that takes another month.
~;j:~ I might make~ o~e suggestion to you That you
put the septic system an before you move the house.
B~ard of Trustees ~ 23 Janv~'~y 28, 1998
~i~: I would say approve this thing tonight with
condition we get a survey showing the septic system. I'll move
to close the hearing.
Second. ALL AYES
,: I'll make a motion approve with condition
hat s~J~tzc s~stem is shown on new or updated survey.
~ i~~ Second. ALL AYES
16. requests repair
existing bulkhead using standard industry and construct
a 6' X 10' floating dock and a 4' X 14' ramp. Located: 8500
Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue. SCTM $118-5-4.t
~-i~ Is there anyone here who would like to speak
in favor of the application?
I' 11 answer any questions you might have.
: I took a look at it today and it's about 6
inches underwater. It's pretty straight forward. But we
suggest here where you have wetlands all around it, is that when
it's built where it requires where you take the poles out and
build it right up against the old one. So they don't go out as
far. So it will go out 8" instead of 18". And you have to get
a letter from Mr. Burrell who owns the underwater property.
~- ~ ~.~A~_~-~_~.~.!N~?.I~? We spoke with Mr. Burrell and for liability
reasons, he would rather deed me a piece of the bottom. Another
thing is I'd like to apply for a 6' X 20' float instead of a 6'
X 10' float.
~.~_-~ Do you want to table this and we can vote on
the bulkhead tonight?
~. I' 11 move to close the public hearing.
~~ Second. ALL AYES
~~% I' 11 make a motion we approve repair of the
bulkhead provided the poles removed first and then the new
bul~e~d p~ced right up against the old bulkhead.
~ Second. ALL AYES
17. John Hatlihan on behalf of
requests re new
bulkhead, widen lift slip 7', replace existing
west and south sides Of travel lift with 48' of new bulkhead,
install dry well catch basin in haul-out apron and a 2' wide
pervious buffer on north and south sides of travel lift slip,
and maintenance dredge in travel slip area to 4' below MLW.
Located: end of west Mitl Road, on west side of Mattituck
Creek. SCTM $106-6-t3.3
~~'~!i~?'..! .i. : ~ ~e anyone who would like to speak in
~ppli~t~ Would it make anysense for him to
pull the piles out and put the bulkhead right against it and
give ~im a little more room?
~I think he s gonna(could not hear him)
: CAC recommended approval.
~: Motion to close the hearing.
~ ~,~ Second. ALL AYES
~KTN.~:~ I'll make a motion to approve the application.
B~ard of Trustees ~ 24 Janv/'~y 28, 1998
Second. ALL AYES
18. Bruce Anderson on behalf contract
vendee, requests ruct a single family
dwelling with attached garage, porch, driveway, well and septic
system. Applicant also wishes to transfer permit %3734 from
Walter L. Fink to ken Swanson. Located: 1390 Willow Terrace
Lane, Orient~ SCTM 926-1-25
~ Is there anyone here who would like to speak
on behalf of the application?
~ I'll answer any questions you might have.
~ I'll make a motion to close the p,,blic hearing./
Second. ALL AYES
~I~$~ I'll make a motion to approve the application of
Ken Swanson as contract vendee for the house, garage, porch,
driveway, well & septic system and recommend haybales along top
of bluff during construction, drywells and maintain buffer zone.
. Second. ALL AYES
~.~.~!~moved to go back to regular meeting, TRUSTEE KING
seconded. ALL AYES
1. William Witzke on behalf of ~N~requests a
Grandfather Permit for an existing 4' X 55' catwalk with a 4' X
12' ramp attached to a 6' X 21' float attached to a 6' X 225'
floating dock with 8 finger floats measuring 6' X 27' Located:
Route 25 between Bay Home Road & Port of Egypt. SCTM 956-6-2.3,
3.2 & 3.3
oved to approve the Grandfather Permit, TRUSTEE
nded. ALL AYES
1 ~requests a~g in Goose Creek for a 15'
outboard with a 150 lb. mushroom. ACCESS: Public.
-moved to approve the mooring subject to
mooring code, TRUSTEE SMITH seconded. ALL AYES
Meeting Adjourned at: 9:50 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted By:
Diane J. Herbert
Clerk, Board of Trustees