HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-04/27/1995 )fdbert J. Krupski, President Town Hall
John Hotzapfel, Vice President 53095 Main Road
William G. Albertson P.O. Box 1179
Martin H. Garrell Southold, New York 11971
Peter Wenczel Telephone (516) 765-1892
Fax (516) 765-1823
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MINUTES
APRIL 27, 1995
PRESENT WERE: Albert J. Krupski, President
John Holzapfel, Vice-President
William G. Albertson, Trustee
Peter Wenczel, Trustee
Martin G. Garrell, Trustee
Diane J. Herbert, Clerk
CALL MEETING TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
I. RESOLUTIONS:
1. Board to set Public Hearings for the May 25, 1995 regular
meeting for those applications that have received a Negative
Declaration and the following applications which are Type II
actions:
a) Costello Marine Contracting Co., on behalf of DORIS
COSGROVE requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4' X 40'
catwalk, a 3' X 18' aluminum ramp and a 6' X 20' float and (2)
2-pile dolphins. Located Indian Neck Lane, Southold. SCTM
#86-5-9.4
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL moved to approve, TRUSTEE GARRELL seconded.
ALL AYES
2. Mark Schwartz on behalf of JOSEPH MASCIA requests a
Grand'fat~er,Pe~mit for an existing 3' X 6' catwalk, a 5' X 11'
dock and reinstall a 3' X 14' ramp and 2 floats each 6' X
20' that were previously used at this site. Located 1600 Deep
Hole Drive., Mattituck. SCTM #115-12-22
TRUSTEE GARRELL moved to approve the Grandfather Permit, TRUSTEE
HOLZAPFEL seconded. ALL AYES
3. Land Use Co., on behalf of ROBERT MELCHIONE requests a
Grandfather Permit to reconstruct approx. 80 1.f. of existing
timber retaining wall. Located Oak Ave., Southold. SCTM ~77-1-8
.... TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL moved to approve the Grandfather Permit,
~ ~ TRUSTEE ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES
4. J.M.O. Consulting on behalf of JUNE DUFFNER requests a
Grandfather Permit to remove and replace 3' X 34' fixed dock,
reconstruct an existing 3' X 12' ramp and install existing 6' X
20' float. Located 915 Bungalow Lane, Mattituck. SCTM
~123-3-11.1
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to approve the Grandfather Permit with
condition to upgrade height of catwalk, TRUSTEE WENCZEL
seconded. ALL AYES
5. J.M.O. Consulting on behalf of JOHN A. MC GUIRE
requests a Grandfather Permit to reconstruct inkind an existing
12' X 30' timber ramp, place 55 c.¥. of upland fill on eroded
bank which was lost during 12/24/95 storm, install a 12' X 6' X
1' gabion mat and a 3' X 3' X 12' gabion cage at toe of
timber ramp, install a 10' X 22' X 1' reno mat on eroded bank
west of timber ramp, install two-high 3' X 3' X 6' gabion
cages on western return and install a 21' X 6' X 1' reno mat
and two-high 3' X 3' X 21' gabion cages extending in a
westerly direction from western return. Located: 3630 North
Sea Drive, Orient. SCTM ~t5-1-1
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL moved to table the Grandfather Permit until
applicant gets pez~L~ission from neighbor to put structure on
their property, TRUSTEE ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES
6. Board to rescind Emergency Storm Damage Permit'for 12/24/94
storm regarding JOSEPH CITARDI to construct 93 1.f. of
bulkhead with (2) 16' returns as per DEC approved plan dated
3/6/95. Located: 56225 County Road 48, Southold. SCTM
~44-1-22 (New plans described in Public Hearing)
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL moved to approve the rescinded permit, TRUSTEE
WENCZEL seconded. ALL AYES
7. Costello Marine Contracting Co., on behalf of SUSAN NORRIS
requests a Grandfather Pe£mit to reconstruct rock & timber
jetties. Located 2790 New Suffolk'Ave., Mattituck. SCTM
~123-9-1
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to approve the Grandfather Permit, TRUSTEE
ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES
II. 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
7:17 p.m. - In the matter of Peconic Associates on behalf of
NARROW RIVER MARINA requests a Wetland Permit to reinstall Coast
Guard approved channel markers as per maps dated April 21,
1995. Located: Narrow River Road, Orient. SCTM ~27-2-4
TRUSTEE~ KRU~SKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak
in favor of this application?
JOE LAUBER: I live in Orient (could not hear him due to
shuffling o~ papers)...I have been boating out of that marina
for about 15 years and the last 7 or 8 with the present owners.
I can only ~y that what they have done in the last 7 or 8 years
is ~mprove he quality of boating by improving the marina and
the service Specifically, to the issue at hand. In the first
12 years, I was using that south channel. I can show you the
calendars or my garage wall. that channel is very shallow
especially ~t low tide. In the last 3 years I guess the markers
on the north channel were marked on one side. It really does
improve the quality of boating. The last thing I want to say is
that I have heard that one of the objections is to the current
markers is ~s that that will lead to larger vessels coming into
Narrow River to Hallocks. The markers have been up for three
years and ag I said, I have been boating there for 15 years and
I have not teen anything in the way of size or the number of
vesselsl increasing coming into that end there.
BILL L~THAM: I live in Orient and use Narrow River for 8 years,
and what these fellows have done to improve the quality of
boatinq is antastic. I feel that the way they have it marked,
the channel , does no damage what-so-ever. No impact on the
environment. It's a no-wake zone, and the Bay itself is
impossible ~o navigate without these markers. It's totally
impossible. Hallock's Bay is one of the most beautiful
pristine BaS's on Long island. I think we all agree on that.
And this hag no detrimental affect at all.
IAN MC LAUG}.LIN: I would like to concur with these
gentlemen a,.d I'll keep this brief. I've been a customer of
Narrow Rive~ Marina for about 5 years now. Since the
installatior of the permanent Channel markers I have not run
aground once. Prior to that it was a regular occurrence at low
tide. Anybc~dy who boats in that vicinity would probably tell
you the sam9 thing. I'd also like to say that the Dacimo's
have run an absolutely environmentally conscious pristine,
family Oriented facility and the removal of those channel
markers wil~ impact on their economic viability as a marina in
the negativ~ and they have done nothing but improve the
facility. ~ can't see why the removal of these markers would in
any way enh~nce the environmental in Hallocks Bay. Boating
cannot be .... except for very shallow draft vessels, cannot be
increased b the presence of these markers. I think there is
very little evidence to show that this reinstaltation of these
markers wou .d have any negative impact on the environment.
DR. BILL WEi~SSINGER: I'd like to agree with those past
gentlemen h~ve said. I had my boat at that marina for about 8
or 10 years or so and have really enjoyed that a~ea. The
problem is ~hat the south channel doesn't have 4' of water at
low tide and will run aground time after time. When that north
chan~el is ~arked appropriately there is really no problem. And
that s for ~ears I guess, with the rock bottom there where it
been deep and always will be.
ED BEHRENS: I came from HicksvilIe this evening. I've been
with these olks...I guess this is the second season. As far as
the marina s concerned, I've been on many marina's on the south
shore and t e north shore, and these folks really run a good
operation. It's clean and pristine. Without the aids to
navigation ~t would be very difficult. Even with the markers in
there, at times, it can still be difficult. I spent last year
of boat season .... and I really haven't noticed any increased
activity. ~he people that I have seen use it, are the people
who are mooI~d on the mushroom anchors off shore. A few
occasional ~ople use that ramp, the Town 'of Southold ramp., and
the boats ir the marina. I think it has to be.
JIM MC NAME~ I just started in this marina last year, and
I'm reasonably new out here. You people talk about a south
channel, I on't know what a south channel is. So without those
markers, I on't get out. The few times I tried to get in, I
ran aground ~oing in there. There wasn't any good markers
there. I r~lly think, just for safety factors.
VINCENT DAC]~O: I'd just like to say that we do need the
fixed markeIs. We discussed this before. The Coast Guard
agrees with us. Without the fixed markers it would hurt our
business without a doubt. As we discussed with the swinging of
the tides, the length of chain, would cause a problem with
boating and )robably cause a serious injury eventually. By
going to th~ north channel it reduces the exposure of the Bay to
the boaters- :o a certain extent and keeps the environment as
sound as we possibly can.
LARRY TUTHIIL: I installed the markers originally. My
grandfather installed them back in the 1900's. There were about
300 markers at that time. This is a stone lined channel. If
you get off the channel or so your into the rocks. It is very
important t~t it be-marked so. and if it isn't marked as so
you've got 0 go to the south channel. So it would be dangerous
to operate boat in this area.
TRUSTEE KRU~$KI: Is there anyone here who is against the
app!ication~
STEVE LATSO~: I'm secretary to the Baymen's Association. I
.wrote you a letter, and the Baymen voted Unanimously that we
favor the s(uthern channel. And the reason is that's the one we
all prefer ~.o choose. We've never had any problem even without
markers, o%~r main concern is with Hallock's is it's a
significant habitat. We don't want to see dredging in
Hatlock's B~. Since Mr. Dacimo's come in there, there
already has been dredging. I really think the consensus is have
a feeling ti[at down the road your gonna see more and more
requests to dredge that particular channel. ~eani~g the north
channel. E~:pecially where it crosses the flat because that area
naturally f~.lls in. We really don't want to see that. The
south chann~l has stayed consistent, certainly in the last 20
years. My ~oat draws 3' and I have no problem getting in and
out, even ii October when you get some really low tides. The
real issue ]~ere is Hallock's B~y and the habitat area. I
really thin][ the concept of having a channel deeper than the
natural cha]~nel is a potential threat. I've already seen this
become a potential threat. And that's what bothers us. Next
thing you k]~ow, "well the bar out front, we can't quite get in
there, mayb~ we should dredge that". "Hay,,it keeps spilling in
right here, where we already dredged, we need to dredge this
again." Ant! then your gonna have a maintenance dredge every
couple of y.~ars. None of the Baymen have any trouble, with the
channels wh~re they are. I think overall if you look at an
economic pi~:ture I think Hallocks Bay from a shellfish
standpoint .s a lot more valuable than a marina. We're getting
kicked out )f Town already. It's one of our last footholds. I
really thin[ you have to look at this a lot more carefully than
what's prop~)sed. I have been involved in this issue all along
and originai.ty when they wanted to dredge they wanted to dredge
out Narrow Liver several different areas of Hallocks and we
squashed al of that, but they keep coming back. It's a really
scary thing I understand the need for safe navigation there,
but that's ~'hy we use the south channel and you don't need
markers. B~t if you want to put a couple of temporary markers
then that's fine. I think part of the adventure of Hallocks
Bay is to e:[plore it. The reason you go out in the water, is to
investigate explore, to see what's there. That's why I like
going in th~ water. That's why I chose that occupation. This
concept tha~ everything has to be dredged out, so you could go
50 miles an hour, I feel is an erroneous concept. Once you get
out in the ~)pen Bay, go ahead.
TRUSTEE KRU]~SKI: Anyone else against the application? I would
like to rea(! the comments of the CAC. They recommend approval
with condit~.ons to mark the channel, however, the Council
recommends ~:hat the sites of the permanent markers be replaced
with floati~g seasonal buoys. And I'd like to answer that. We
met with th~ Coast Guard and they felt that some of the
locations, ])ecause of the narrowness of the channel, floating
buoys.would not be safe, because of the swing of the chain. The
last change would only leave 4 permanent markers. Two of then
at the rock pile at the entrance and then two right next to
those, the rest were changed to floating seasonal markers.
Those are f,)r the 8" new piles. That doesn't inClude the permit
for the two permanent piles at the mouth of it that mark the
entrance to the Bay. To answer a couple of the other comments,
one gentlem,~n didn't know what the south channel was. The south
channel, if you come into the Bay, your facing east. And if you
-continue on to the east, that's basically the south cha~nel.
That runs i about half the Bay. Because of the incredible
amount of c)ntroversy surrounding this, this application has
really been before the Board since about 1990. This isn't
something n~w. The Board went out. We did a survey this
winter. We went out.when the wind was blowing out of the
northwest f)r a day. It was extremely low water, we had a
measuring szick. We measured the south channel. Without the
markers, thD north channel was innavigable because of the low
water the r~cks would have been a foot of the surface. The Bay
Constable t~ok us out. He also uses the south channel. As a
result of o~r survey, we tried to promote the south channel as
the safest channel because of the lack of the rocks. We're
going to hat the south channel marked also as an alternative
channel to b used when your coming into Hallocks Bay.
Because the oard feels that it's safer. It's straight, no
rocks and we feel overall it's much broader than the north
channel. As far as the request for dredging, I don't think this
Board would De inclined to dredge. We don't have any request
before us. ~owever, what Mr. Latson says is absolutely true.
The value of the shellfish there .... not only the shellfish that
exist there, but also the fact that it is really the only place
in Southold own that scallops survived the "Brown Tide", make
it invaluabl and that outweighs any private operation.
Because that is the whole health of the skellfish industry
there. We had many discussions with the Dacimo's and their
agents and I think it is the feeling of some of the Board
members that if they~want to put the markers out in the north
channel it's more or less the same as if someone wants to put a
dock over puDlic bottom, they're gonna monopolize that area of
public bottom. The Board didn't request it, but it's their
choice, and it's our obligation to entertain the application.
Because it's not something that we're asking for. It's not
something that we recommend they use. However, it's a
legitimate rsquest because it's not different than any other
dock, catwalk, or any other private project over public bottom.
TRUSTEE GARRELL: I think one of the most impressive things was
the conference with the Coast Guard. We tried to map out what
seemed to be a solution that would work for everybody's
benefit. I think that went very welt. That's what A1 has
outlined at this point.
TRUSTEE KRU~SKI: We did over the years accomplished the large
permanent m~rkers which would have been a hazard to ice
boating, t~at was one of our major concerns. They have been
large eliminated from the inside of Hallocks Bay. The only
one's being/applied for here are the ones near the mouth that
the applicant and the Coast Guard feel are absolutely
necessary. They cannot be floating aids to navigation. Any
other comment by the Board?
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I'm sure the Board is aware that I don't think
that markinc the north channel is appropriate. I don't think
that if is arked I don't think permanent markers are
appropriate. We have been over and oven that and I don't want
to beat it ~eath, and I think most everybody 'has plenty of time
to considerlwhere they stand on it. One point I would like to
make is if ~he Board see fit.to grant this plan as it has been
submitted, ~hat the location of the junction buoy I don't think
is correct./ I think that the final ptace for that buoy Should
be based on|the Bay Constable recommendation to site that buoy.
Because wheze it is will take you up on the flat right now.
TRUSTEE KRUtSKI: Would someone like to make a motion?
TRUSTEE HOL~APFEL: Move to close the hearing.
TRUSTEE' ALB~RT$ON:~ Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE HOL~APFEL: I'll make a motion to approve the permit
based on th~ Bay Constable place the junction buoy.
TRUSTEE GAR}~ELL: Second.
TRUSTEE WEN(IZEL: Nay
7:40 p.m. - In the matter of Prop-T Services on behalf of
MICHAEL SLADE requests a Wetland Permit to construct approx.
135' of new bulkhead joining two existing bulkhead structures,
excavate and dredge small area adjacent to new bulkhead, using
spoil to backfill bulkhead. Located: 1435 West Road,
Cutchogue. SCTM ~110-7-26
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak in
favor of the application? Would anyone like to speak against
the application?
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: Move to close the hearing.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The CAC recommends disapproval of the dredging~
and the reason is .....
MR. ANGELL: We didn't feel it was necessary to have that.
There's a nice beach there.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: How about that one dock that is high and dry
now.
MR. ANGELL: We think if the property is zoned residential
then there"s no need. If it's M-1 then we think the dredging
would be ~ppropriate, but not for residential.
MR. FITZGERALD: It's zoned Residential. '
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think when we looked at it we looked at it
as a private enterprise and the fact also that it has filled
in. There was water there before. It's sort of a maintenance
operation.
TRUSTEE HqLZAPFEL: Does he plan to keep his boat in that spot?
MR. FITZGERALD: He would like to be able to.
TRUSTEE HaLZAPFEL: He doesn't have another dock.
MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, he does.
TRUSTEE K~UpSKI: He owns all these. (indicating on map)
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: I thought all those docks were part of the
M-1. They're not part of the M-l?
MR. FITZGERALD: No, all of that property is his and he has
access dock it for 4 boats which is the Town's policy.
TRUSTEE W~NCZEL: When was that dredged last?
MR. FITZGERALD: I don't know. Not in recent years.
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: Peter, in 1980 the beach goes right up to
that corner, so there was no sand in there at all in 1980.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I think the Board was viewing this as a
maintenance dredge operation.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We're also gonna recommend a replanting of
the beach with spartina alternaftora. MR. T. SAMUELS:
Local knowledge. The former Mayor of Rockville Center owned
that property and he owned the boat yard. That goes back at
least 35 years. He had those slips all along there and whether
he rented them or not, I'm not sure. So he did ha~e a'
pre-existing non-conformance on those slips, and there was
water there. Right up to the corner.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do I have a motion to close the hearing?
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: So moved.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: I'll make a motion that we approve with
condition that the planting of spartina alternaflora on
south side on 18" centers.
TRUSTEE GARRELL: Second. ALL AYES
7:44 p.m. - In the matter of Eh-COnsultants Inc., on behalf of
SALLY HAEFFNER requests a Wetland Pe~Lit to construct a one
family dwelling, sanitary system, well, bluestone driveway,
underground utilities and approx. 175 c.y. of clean fill will be
trucked in from upland source. Located: 1950 Clearview Ave.,
Southold. SCTM 970-10-26
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Anyone want to speak in favor of the
application?
ELLEN LATSON: It doesn't say how many feet set back from ....
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: The deck is 75' from the edge of the
wetlands.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It was one of those that required a full
permit.
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: They asked for a letter of non-jurisdiction
but we presumed that it was 75' and they would interfere into.
We asked for a full application.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The CAC just had some questions about the
wetland line. I think it might be a distance of about 5 or 8
feet probably that you are arguing about and since that they
already have the permit and it's 75' it isn't an issue that
needs to be addressed.
ROB HERRMANN: The wetland line was delineated by us and
corroborated by the DEC which issued the permit.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Then I think the way to ..... If we want a
buffer zone I think if the wetland line is in contentionhere .....
You think it's accurate?
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: It's within 3 or 4 feet at the most.
ROB: It's really a 50' buffer zone that's required addition by
the DEC.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Because if it wasn't condensed we could
certainly make the buffer zone start from the deck instead of
the wetland. We could make it 20' Do I have a motion to close
the hearing?
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: So moved.
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: I'll make a motion that we approve the
application.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
7:47 p.m. - In the matter of Land Use Co., on behalf of ROBERT
MELCHIONE requests a Wetland Permit to enlarge living area of
two-story dwelling by constructing a framed addition that will
extend the length and width of house. Located: 1130 Oak Ave.,
Southold. SCTM ~77-1-8
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Anyone here who would like to speak in favor
of the application?
MR. BOWMAN: I am here if you have any questions.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: .Is there anyone here who would like to speak
against this application. CAC recommends disapproval on the
retaining wall portion and approval of the building.
Disapproval of the proposed applicant to construct approx. 80
1.f. of existing timber retaining wall which has been damaged.
proposed reconstruction would require removing the timber poles
which make up the existing wall in order to construct a smooth
face timber retaining wall in same location. Materials will
include CCA sheathing, pressure treated timber sheathing.
whalers, galvanized tie rods. The purpose of the replacement is
to prevent any further erosion during storm surges. The Council
recommends disapproval because there is no need shown, the area
does not show an erosion problem, the current structure is not
functioning in an erosion prevention capacity. Applicant should
plant spartina to prevent any possible erosion, that
recommendation could certainly be entertained by the applicant.
MR. BOWMAN: Sure. I think this issue of ..... (could not hear
him) I have an aerial photograph here from 1976 which shows in
fact in place in 1976.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't think anyone doubts that it's in
place. I think what they're asking is the necessity of it.
MR. BOWb{AN: If you look all along there everybody has concrete
sea walls or retaining walls. There is health spartina
marshes, no doubt about that. But even this wall during the
1992 storms, was ripped out. It seems to me to separate the
lawn the beach area, and I think they want to maintain that
separation since it's already there right now.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I looked at it. This is kind of a technical
question, and I guess I don't have the answer to. When you put
in a new septic system, does the Health Dept. have to approve.
MR. BOWMAN: Absolutely, in fact we're in the process of
applying to the Health Dept. because of the well setback and
again they are going to look at it as an improvement as well.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: What are you gonna do with the old pools?
MR. BOWMAN:. We're gonna remove them.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: They gonna be filled in?
MR. BOWMAN: Probably.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What about the retaining wall?
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: The retaining wall is a couple of telephone
poles. I think the Board would certainly want to entertain-the
idea to the extent of having a non-turf buffer on the lawn side
of the retaining wall. I guess I have a problem with being
marked on the survey as a bulkhead. I would like to see that
amended so it's described accurately for the future.
MR. BOWMAN: We had a discussion with the surveyor about that.
Your right. It'~s not a bulkhead.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Because what happens is 15 years they want to
replace inkind/inplace their bulkhead and all of a sudden
there's a bulkhead.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What does the beach consist of. ~Is there any
wetland vegetation?
MR. BOWMAN: Vegetation on the side, sand.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Why isn't there wetland vegetation over the
entire beach?
MR. BOWMAN: I think it was just the Melchione's over the
years using the beach. They have an actual bulkhead in some
places and neighbors using it.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Motion to close the hearing?
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: So moved.
TRUSTEE GARRELL: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I'll make a motion to approve the application
for this application with condition that there is an upgrade of
the septic system, a 20' non-turf buffer behind retaining wall,
roof run-off be contained in drl~4ells & an amended survey to
show it is not a bulkhead but a retaining wall.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL A~ES
7;19 p.m. - In the matter of JOHN H. MULHOLLAND & MICHAEL P.
~ONTJE requests a Wetland Permit to maintenance dredge 400
yards to 3' below MLW on Mulholland & Brontje parcels
(privately owned bottom), remove 200 yards each for 400 yards
total, dispose on Mulholland parcel above above mean spring
high water, (existing landscaped lawn area), add and restore a
3' X 30' open pile dock to Mulholland and twin pilings to each
on remnant piles near waters edge of Mulholland property,
haybales or wood chips placed and a 20' buffer landward.
Located: 725 & 802 Island View Lane, 300' east of Bayshore
Dr. Greenport. SCTM ~57-2-23 * 24 (NOTE: Applicant has revised
plans as of 4/13/95 to reduce maintenance dredging areas and
combine to 325 c.y. reduced dock width to 3' and elevated to
3.5' above grade, and include a cross section of fill area with
disposal area expanded to the Bontje parcel with over-flow
area also indicated.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The applicant requested a delay in the
hearing. Since it was published we'll open the hearing tonight
expecting no comment and we'll recess it until the applicant
wishes to open it. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak
either in favor or against this application? I'll make a motion
to recess this hearing until next month.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
The following 8 applications are Emergency Sto£m Damage requests:
7:56 p.m. - In the matter of Costello Marine Contracting on
behalf of ROBERT DIETRICH requests an emergency Storm Damage
Permit to install 5 batter piles, extend easterly return 12'
landward and place 10 c.y. of clean fill, all in accordance with
NYSDEC approved plan dated 2/6/95. Located: 55755 County Road
48, $outhold. SCTM ~44-1-15
7:57 p.m. In the matter of ROSINA CUNNINGHAM requests an
Emergency Storm Damage Permit to fill and re-vegetate bluff to
restore damage by storm of 12/24/94 as per DEC specifications.
Located: 55105 County Road 48, Southold. SCTM ~44-1-7
7:58 p.m. In the matter of DONALD CAVALUZZI requests an
Emergency Storm Damage Permit to construct 60 1.f. of timber
bulkhead with 2- 12' returns and place approx. 100 c.y. of clean
fill, all in accordance with NYSDEC plans dated 1/5/95.
Located: 55355 County Road 48, Southold. SCTM ~44-1-10
7:59 p.m. - In the matter of JOHN A. GOUVEIA requests an
Emergency Storm Permit to reconstruct in same location 43 1.fl
of existing functional bulkhead and extend western return to
10', construct 7 1.f. of bulkhead with a 10' return on eastern
end, and place 100 c.y. of clean backfill, all in accordance
with NYSDEC approved plan dated 1/3/95. Located: 55404 County
Rd. 48, Southold. SCTM ~44-1-11
8:00 p.m. - In the matter of Craig Richter on behalf of
LAZAROS LASKOS requests an Emergency Storm Damage Permit to
temporarily relocated existing single family dwelling to east to
provide new pile structure. Upon completions, relocate dwelling
back to original location, construct 45 1.fo of bulkhead with
approx. 8' angled armored return on west side, construct approx.
45' return along west line and place approx. 162 c.y. of fill,
remaining concrete foundation to be broken up and placed under
final house location, relocate septic system, all work in
accordance with NYSDEC approved plans dated 2/10/95. Located:
55915 County Road 48, Southoid. SCTM ~44-1-t7
8:01 p.m. - In the matter of HIRANT CANDAN requests an
Emergency Storm Damage Permit to remove and replace in same
location 85 1.f. of existing functional bulkhead and place 25
c.y. of backfill, construct 52' of new bulkhead appurtenant to
existing structure, all as per N~SDEC approved plan dated
12/20/94. Located: 55955 County Road 48, Southold. SCTM
~44-1-22
8:02 p.m. - In the matter of JOSEPH F. CITARDI requests an
Emergency Storm Damage Permit to construct rock toe a~mor with a
min. of one ton rock, create a sand dune over rock armor, to
tie into neighbors on both sides all in accordance with NYSDEC
revised plan dated 4/13/95. Located: 56225 County Road 48,
Southold. SCTM ~44-1-22
8:03 p.m. - in the matter of Robert Bohn Contractor on behalf
of MRS. ALPHONSEATWAN requests an Emergency Storm Damage
Permit to reconstruct 6 footings, replace fireplace, repair
skirting and stairs. Located: 56055 County Road 48, Southold.
SCTM ~44-1-20
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would anyone like to make any comments on any
of these applications? The Boards been down there many times.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Motion to close the hearing.
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to approve these Storm
Damaged Permit that the disturbed areas be re-vegetated with a
non-turf, non-fertilizer species.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
8:04 p.m. In the matter of WILLIAM PISARELLI requests a
Wetland Permit to construct a 3' X 20' catwalk with 1 pile.
Located: vacant lot south of Sterling Road, Mudd Creek,
Cutchogue. SCTM ~138-2-26
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak
either in favor or against this application? CAC recommends
approval with stipulations that applicant follow the standard
procedure and install a catwalk, ramp and floating dock in
configuration. The walkway should be elevated at least 3' and
disturbed areas be planted with spartina. CAC realizes this
is a sub-standard lot. The 10' sidelines set back requirement
cannot be followed. Do I have a motion to close the hearing?
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: So moved.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: I'll make a motion to approve the
application based on the amended application of march 22, 1995.
TRUSTEE GARRELL: Second. ALL AYES
8:06 p.m. In the matter of Ural Talgat on behalf of ARTO
KHRIMIAN requests a Wetland Permit to renovate an existing
building which includes a wood structure with a concrete block
foundation and a glass frame structure (qreenhouse) on a
concrete slab. Applicant wishes to renovate the entire
structure which includes encompassing the wood frame structure
and the glass framed structure under one new roof using original
footprint and foundation. The liveable floor area of the
existing building, with the renovations, will not be increased.
Located: 58365 County Road 48, Greenport. SCTM ~44-2-13
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would any one like to speak in favor of this
application?
URAL TALGAT: I'm the architect for my client. As I said in
the letter, we are not increasing the floor area of the
building. We're maintaining that. We're increasing the volume
of space which is completely different. There were some
questions on the terms of that greenhouse structure which is a
glass frame structure. It is part of the habual floor area of
the main portion of the building which is a wood frame portion
of the building. And so we would like to move ahead with that.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone else here who would to comment
on this application? The only comment is that if we permit
something that is on the County highway, we don't want that to
come back and "bite" us. I would recommend to the Board that we
give this a conditional permit based on a written consent from
the Suffolk County Highway Dept. saying that this project has
their complete and total blessing.
MR. TALG~T: I've written a letter to the County and am
waiting for their response from them. Their initial comments
were, "anything can happen". The owner has said if we need to
move it back than move it back. Yes, if we need to move it back
and the County says "no, you can't build on our property'. Then
of course we would move it back, no problem. Even the building
inspector said that.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We just don't want to legitimize'~your
applicant's claim here by granting them a pe£~,Lit where we would
be at odds with another governmental agency. Then it will just
go nowhere.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: My comment is that .... and I guess we discussed
this. The description of the project, I'm sure ...... I guess we
looked at it differently. When I look at that building I see a
bungalow with a greenhouse on one end, which you stated serves
as a living room or sun porch, and when I look at the plans I
see a two story building being placed on the foot print of that
bungalow and greenhouse. I am not gonna deny it or vote to
deny it because of that, but I just wish that we could get an
accurate description on this.
MR. TALGAT: I think the plans indicate a double height space
on the side of the building, and we are applying for a permit
based upon the plans. If at any point the owner goes in there
and changes anything or adds anything he would have to go to
your agency again, also to the Building Dept. to get approval
to do that.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: My concern was that, on this tiny little
postage stamp lot, with a cesspool under the living room, that
if you significantly, and you said over and over that there
would be no significant increase in the living space, that if
you significantly increase the number of people and living space
using it, I think we're asking for trouble. I think it might be
appropriate that that be stipulated in the permit or reinforced
that there be no finishing off of the second floor there.
MR. TALGAT: Fine.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: So moved.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Second.
MR. ANGELL: Our big problem was the septic system. From the
structure you know it's substandard to the size house that is
built here. We have real concerns whether that retaining wall
will hold with the weight of the house, we think the whole
project is very ill-conceived.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Mr. Talgat, is there going to be a
renovation of that septic system?
MR. TALGAT: No. The septic system will remain as is.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't think you could upgrade it.
MR. TALGAT: Right now the septic system, I believe from what
we investigated, there is one ring and that everything goes to.
And that is under the concrete patio that is in front of the
bulkhead. It is under the greenhouse which is basically a
conc=ete patio. It is the living space, what we are planning
on doing, and we have had our engineer look at this, and size
the concrete piers, so that to not disturb the septic system, is
go below the septic system, hit soil and gravel in that case and
bear on that. There is approx. 12 inches or more thick
concrete. And as you know returns on itself back towards the
COunty Road. There is also from what we found, an intermediate
wall right in the middle, between the two walls, right in front
of that bulkhead. Between the two end walls. Going north and
south.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Peter, I think, if we could, ask .~or an
upgrade of the system, we would. But I don't think...on a 25'
wide lot I don't think we're gonna get anywhere.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I know that, but I'm not an engineer and I
don't know what could or couldn't be done .....
MR. TALGAT: Unfortunately the lot is so small, if you try add
a septic system that is going to be completely under the
building and crawl space and that is completely illegal. Right
now the septic system as is, is encased on concrete and what
we're planning on doing is building over that ..... our living
space will be separated from that septic system with air and our
building will be completely enclosed. So no septic acids will
come into our building. It Starts going into the crawl space ....
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: What would you do if it started to back up?
TRUSTEE GARRELL: Is there any other .... you have a ring now that
satisfies the Board of Health and used it for gray water, what
if you looked for some kind of disposal. I'm thinking here's
where you might really be able to deal with a composting
toilet. This is the place where you've got the ring, it's
approved, that would handle the gray water, and now the County
won't say either way, whether you deal with a composting toilet,
that's your business, but it seems that's a natural set up for
it.
MR. TALGAT: That's a good idea.
MR. GARRELL: Because I can see it down the line, is
periodically your gonna have to pump out the septic-system.
MR. TALGAT: There's already a pipe that upsides the building
to do that. So far, during a number of years, that the owner
has owned the building the owner has never had to pump it out.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is it gonna be a seasonal, or a full time
residence?
MR. TALGAT: I think it's a seasonal.
TRUSTEE GARRELL: Yes, but the seasonal has a way of turning
into full time.
MR. TALGAT: I'm not sure you would want to live there.
Basically there is not enough parking space.
MR. ANGELL: If the County comes back and says you have to
move the house back, the whole project gets smaller to fit by 3
feet.
MR. TALGAT: What happens is the house gets smaller by 3 feet
approx.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's what we would condition our permit on.
So that is we grant a permit tonight you just have to come in
for a simple amendment to whatever the County specifications
would be. So that your not going back and forth.
MR. TALGAT: Even the Building Dept. needs that, so we're in
the process of going to the County, getting some kind of
directive, whether they say no, then immediately our drawings
will show that. And I'll take your advise on your toilet and
propose it to the owner.
~RUSTEE ALBERTSON: Move to close the hearing.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to approve the application
provided we get a letter from the County permitting them
permission to build in that area and with the suggestion that
Mr. Khrimian that we explore and utilize a compostihg toilet
as a means to reduce his total viable weight.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
8:15 p.m. In the matter of En-Consultants Inc., on behalf of
ROBERT & PH~LLIS MALLGRAF requests a Wetland Permit to remove
and replace 75 1.f. of existing, bulkhead which will attach to
and be same height as new bulkhead to each, backfill with 15
c.y. of clean fill to be trucked in from upland source, repair
- an existing 9' X 12' deck by replacing decking, & railing as
needed, remove existing deteriorated 3' X 32' fixed pier and
replace with a 3' X 25' fixed section (4' above grade), a 3' X
12' hinged ramp and a 6' X 16' float secured by (2) pilings.
Located 500 Goose Creek Lane, Southold. SCTM ~79-1-4
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak
in favor of this application?
ROB: We are here if you have any questions.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The only think we would require is that a
step-down bulkhead and the part that is disturbed be non-turf.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Motion to close the hearing.
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: I'll make a motion that we approve this as
stated that a non-turf buffer be in disturbed area between the
retaining wall and new bulkhead, based on CAC recommendations.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Second. ALL AYES
8:20 p.m. - In the matter of En-Consultants Inc., on behalf of
DR. MELVIN MORRELL requests a Coastal Erosion & Wetland Permit
to extend easterly return by 20' and backfill with 20+ c.y. of
clean sand to be trucked in from upland via Bailie Beach Road
to west. Return will be armored with 1-ton stone on filter
cloth as is the remainder of the wall. Located Lloyd's Lane,
Mattituck. SCTM ~99-3-4.6
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to comment
on the application?
TRUSTEE GARRELL: I had no problem with this one. It's clear
that your coming with that stone on a filter that is already
there. Move that the hearing be closed.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE GARRELL: Move to approve.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
8:21 p.m. In the matter of ANDREW T. FOHRKOLB requests a
Wetland Permit to construct a 3' X 26' catwalk, a 2'6" X 6' ramp
and a 5' X 25' float. Located: 670 Holden Ave., Cutchogue.
SCTM ~137-4-30
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I looked at it and what I have a problem with
here is the length of the catwalk. The floats an odd size.
Instead of a 6' X 20', it's a 5' X 25' and I really don't have a
problem with that.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I think if we're gonna act on it I think
we're forced to ask for a modification to the float size.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The problem I have is the length. 26' doesn't
seem like that far and yet it depends from where it starts, it
also seems to go out pretty far into the channel.' He says on
the application it's. 10' from the channel. If you put this i0'
from the channel and you put a boat on the end of it, it seems
like it would be awfully close. And there are no similar
structures in the. area. I really don't want to modify it
without the applicant's input.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Is this stairway pre-existing?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The stairway is sort of a crude ladder set up
that's being used as a stairway now. No landings, any kind of
structure there would be a hugh improvement. It looks like
someone has been clawing their way up the bank. The CAC
recommends approval provided the stairway is elevated 3' and
replant with spartina at the base of the bluff. I think we're
gonna table the application until we can contact the applicant.
I'll make a motion to recess the hearing.
TRUSTEE GARRELL: Second. ALL AYES
8:26 p.m. - In the matter of Susan Tarshis on behalf of STEVEN
GREENBAUM requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4' X 100'
dock with 2 elevator lifts, a 3' X 20' ramp and a 7' X 30' float
with 4-float piles and 4 mooring piles. Located 1073 Bay Home
Extension, Southold. SCTM ~56-5-38
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: This one was a clerical error. I didn't
inspect it because it was clearly not gonna be .....
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to recess the hearing until
the Board can properly inspect and assess the project.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
8:30 p.m. In the matter of Eh-COnsultants Inc., on behalf of
JOSEPH ST. PIERRE requests a Wetland Permit to remove & replace
(inkind/inplace) 92 1.f. of existing timber bulkhead, backfill
with 10 c.y. of spoil to be taken from an area up to 10' off
bulkhead and a max. depth of 3' below MLW. Two existing
timber groins (west 8' east 12') will be refaced with new
sheathing without alterations of overall lengths, remove
(without replacement) of existing platform and stairs, install a
3' X 12' hinged ramp off an existing walkway on top of westerly
groin, and a 6' X 16' float with ramp resting upon it and
secured by slides and rings to bulkhead. Located 370 Goose
Creek Lane, Southold. SCTM ~79-1-6
(Malfunctioned tape, did not get to record this part of meeting.)
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Move to close the hearing.
TRUSTEE GARRELL: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE GARRELL: I'll move to approve the application with
stipulation that a 20' non-turf buffer be placed landward of
bulkhead, and that the peamit reflect that the Board no see any
new dredging only what is needed and incidental to the project.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
8:36 p.m. - In the matter of JOHN F. PETERSEN requests a
Wetland Permit to enlarge 2nd floor living space. Located 970
Truman's Path, East Marion. SCTM ~31-I2-5.2
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Move to close the hearing.
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: I'll move to approve the application with
condition that haybales and drywells be placed.
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: Second. ALL AYES
8:39 p.m. - In the matter of En-Consultants Inc., on behalf of
MICHAEL KEELY requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 75+
1.f. of timber retaining wall with (2) 8' returns. Approx. 50
c.y. of screened clean sand will be trucked in and used as
backfill, and a 3' X 28' fixed Catwalk, a 3' X 12' ramp and a 6'
X 16' float to be secured by (2) 8' pilings and a 10' wide
vegetated buffer zone (non-fertilizer dependent) as per amended
survey dated 3/1/95.
(At this point defective tape was replaced with new tape)
ROB: But I think we have it far enough back now and with the
slope there that if you plant it and get by without any real
serious storms it should take and it doesn't serve any other
purpose. It will certainly help the buffer, that big
a!ternaflora band there also.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think we might add something on to this. I
think that if it does get washed out by some sort of freak storm
before it's established that it be replanted within the same
year. Also we will as we have with the other applications along
that area and all other retaining wall applications, request a
20' non-turf area, but that that area, because that wall has a
potential to being overtopped, you plant something there that's
going to have a significant via-mass, like Rosa Ragosa and
when it's overtopped, it's not gonna just chew it all out,
it's gonna hold the soil there, so you won't have any more
damage.
ROB: That was what I put when you asked me to put the 10'
buffer. I put 'vegetated with non-fertilizer dependent
species,' so that it wasn't a matter of loam but he could at
least through the permit be allowed to vegetate the area with
salt tolerant species to hold the fill from spilling back.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Could we have a motion to close this hearing?
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: So moved.
TRUSTEE GARRELL: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE GARRELL: I'll move to approve subject to new
description and also that if there should be a severe storm that
wipes out the patents that it be replanted and that a 20'
non-turf buffer of salt tolerant species put in.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
7:40 p.m. - In the matter of FRANK ZIMMER requests a Wetland
Permit to clear a 4' wide path. Located Main Road, Orient,
across from Rose's Airport. SCTM ~19-1-18.2 & 20-3-1.2
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Anyone like to comment either in favor or
against this application? My comments on this is that .... let me
read CAC comments first. The CAC recommend approval with
stipulations the pathway be allowed for human foot access only,
the pathway be restored and limited to a 3' wide width and the
dike repaired. The Council has concerns that the conditional
nature of Hallocks Bay in the threat of horses and therefore
suggest that no horses be allowed over the dike to the
Hallocks Bay section. The Council also suggests th~ Trustee
levy a fine for actions taken without obtaining permits. My
comment is this whole thing is that I agree with the CAC as far
as we did on our inspection.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Did they say to repair it.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: They said repair, but I want to be more
specific. The dike has to be restored to its original height, a
staked row of haybales be placed at the Hallocks Bay side
permanently and that the area be reseeded. As far as dike
maintenance goes, he should clear cut the dike and let it
vegetate with vines and lower growth because the trees represent
a threat and during a storm event they could topple over and
leave a high hole. so as far as leaving a 3' wide path, I
really don't agree with that. I recommend it to Mr. Zimmer
that he clean the dike up to maintain it better.
MR. ANGELL: The reason we want a dike, a small path is
because the access is limited then to people not horse.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think the Board is inclined to recommend
that or condition that anyway, that no horses cross the dike.
If he clear cuts it you could never stop .... it will be 2 miles
wide, if he maintains it properly it's all gonna be a path
over the dike.- I'm looking for...during the public hearing, for
the reasons behind this. So we all have it on the record very
clear.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: The reason behind it is that Hallocks Bay is
a significant shellfish habitat, that parts of Little Bay, which
borders on the south side of the property are already closed
because of high coliform content, parts of the creek on the
north side of the property is closed, and that any additional
inputs of fecal material would be devastating to that area and
result in additional shellfish closures. We cannot tolerate any
large animals like horses leaving their manure, or any place
there that might wash into the waters of Hallocks Bay.
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: I don't think any person has the right to
walk all over the marsh. I think that a continuous walking in a
path establishes paths in the marsh and will destroy it. It's
happened at the landing in Narrow River Marina. If you go
there, there area paths through the marsh that have been
destroyed now because Trustees have allowed onshore/offshore
stakes there. Andhalf of the marsh has been destroyed. We're
saying that any activity within 75' has to be monitored.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It's the state's rights, not ours.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: The reason we grant catwalks is to avoid that
kind of damage.
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: Just as a point, DEC doesn't own the actual
wetlands, they bought the upland surrounding it. The Town still
has a right to the wetlands. I know DEC bought the wetlands in
orient.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, don't they own between the dike and the
water. What did they buy then?
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: I'm not sure.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: They bought the wetlands didn't they? I don't
know if the wetlands are privately held.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Sure they were. They bought between the dike
and the water.
TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: The wetlands in Orient were privately held?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's what they DEC bought. They didn't buy
upland. They bought wetlands.
CLERK: He claims.he has a permit to have Recreation Access.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But not from us. Because even though the
state owns the Wetlands we still have jurisdiction, so we have
the right to deny the use of horses on that land.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: You need a Wetland access permit from the
State to go on those wetlands.
CLERK: I believe he says he has it.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: He says he has it but he doesn't have a copy
of it.
TRUSTEE GARRELL: Those wetlands passes are obtainable as a
matter of routine. We do it all the time with oyster planting
so whoever uses those wetlands would have a permit from DEC but
horses wouldn't be on the map.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It makes no mention of horses on his waterway
access pe£mit.
TRUSTEE GARRELL: Move to close.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to approve the requests
which was a result of the wetland violation and applicant is
going to have a permit to restore the dike to its original
height in the violated area, to place a row of haybales in the
disturbed area on the Hallocks or south side of dike, stake
row of haybales to be left there pe~faanently, reseed the area
within 30 days of issuance of pe&mit, and condition that no
equine species crossing the dike.
III. MOORINGS:
1. Dr. Joann F. Young requests a mooring in Mudd Creek for
a 14' sailboat with a 150 lb. mushroom. ACCESS: Private.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: There is already a number of moorings in that
spot. There's probably room in Mudd Creek but as far as
directly in front of that property there's a number of boats
moored right at the very end of it. I'll make a motion to
approve the two applications based on a revisit from the Baymen.
2. Donald Young requests a mooring in Mudd Creek for a 16'
outboard with a 150 lb. mushroom. ACCESS: Private.
TRUSTEE GARRELL moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:10 p.m.
TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Second. ALL AYES
Diane _:.J. Herbert
Clerk. Board of Trustees