HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-10/28/1993 TRUSTEES
John M. Bredemever. III. President
Albert J. Krupski. Jr.. Vice President
Henry P. Smith
John B. Tuthill
William G. Albertson
Telephone (516) 765-1892
Fax (516) 765-1823
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
SUPERVISOR
SCOTT L. HARRIS
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
MINUTES
OCTOBER 28, 1993
PRESENT WERE:
Albert J. Krupski, Vice President
Henry P. Smith, Trustee
William G. Albertson, Trustee
John B. Tuthill, Trustee
Jill M. Doherty, Clerk
ABSENT WAS: John M. Bredemeyer, III, President
WORKSESSION: 6:00 P.M.
CALL MEETING TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: Thursday, Dec. 2, 1993 at 8:00 a~m~
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON moved to approver TRUSTEE TUTHILL seconded.
ALL AYES
NEXT TRUSTEE BOARD MEETING: Monday, Dec. 6, 1993 at 7:00 p.m.
WORKSESSION: 6:00 p.m.
TRUSTEE SMITH moved to approve, TRUSTEE ALBERTSON seconded.
ALL AYES
APPROVE MINUTES:' Regular meeting of September 30, 1993:
TRUSTEE SMITH moved to-~approve, TRUSTEE ALBERTSON seconded.
ALL AYES
.:I; Trustees monthly report for September
1993: A check for $2,136.15 was forwarded to the Supervisor's
Office for the General Fund.
II. PUBLIC NOTICES:
Public notices are posted on the Town Clerk's Bulleting
Board for review.
tit; AFfENDMENTS~WAIVERS/CHANGES:
1. GASTON CRIBLEZ requests an Amendment to his Storm Damage
Permit ~81-3-2 to replace bulkhead with 18" instead of
Board of Trustees 2 October 28, 1993
inkind/inplace. Applicant has DEC Permit to replace within
18". Applicant also requests a waiver of fees as this was storm
damage. Located Robinson Road, Southold.
TRUSTEE SMITH moved to approve the Amendment and waiver the fee,
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES
2~ JON KERBS requests an Amendment to Permit ~1951 to add a
4' X 48' float in an "L" shape to the existing 30' X 30' catwalk
leading to 8' X 30' ramp to 67' X 4' float. Located Riley Ave.,
Mattituck.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to table until Dec. 2, TRUSTEE TUTHILL
seconded. ALL AYES
3. Karen Oxholm on behalf of SELMA JACOBSON requests a Waiver
to construct a ramp leading to house as per plan. Located Lake
Drive, Southold.
TRUSTEE SMITH moved to table due to non-inspection, TRUSTEE
ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES
4. En-Consultants on behalf of S. HAEGAN BAYLES requests a
Waiver to construct secondary retaining wall at the base of the
bluff as per map dated 9/22/93. Located Nassau Point Road,
Cutchogue.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to approve the Waiver, TRUSTEE ALBERTSON
seconded. ALL AYES
5.~CAROL FOEHR~equests a Waiver to place fence on property
line down to water. Located Smith Road, Southold.
TRUSTEE SMITH moved to table until a survey is obtained, TRUSTEE
ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES
V,~-AS'SESSgiENTS/ENVIRONMENTAL DEOLARATIONS:
1. J.M.O. Consulting on behalf of W.L~ LYONS BROWN, III
requests permit for construction of a 4' X 100' dock to be
constructed 4' above grade. Applicant also requests a statement
of jurisdiction under Chapters 97 & 37 to construct a one family
dwelling, sanitary system, garage, driveway, retaining wall,
patio, stonewall, pool and decking as per map of Chandler,
Palmer & King survey dated 9/29/93.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to table until inspection of Board,
TRUSTEE SMITH seconded. ALL AYES
2. J.M.O. Consulting on behal, f Of~ E~IS~?TO~EE~ ETrAL
requests a permit tO install a "boulder barrier'' appr°x. 1'20'
in length along shoreline damaged during the storm of DeC.
1992. Boulders shall be placed on filter fabric along the
bottom of the eroded bank at a point approx. 6' landward of
MHW line and, if possible, continuous and contiguous with
neighbor to south. As per plans dated 3/29/93.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved for a Negative Declaration, TRUSTEE SMITH
seconded. ALL AYES
Board of Trustees 3 October 28, 1993
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON moved to go off the regular agenda, TRUSTEE
TUTHILL seconded. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON moved to go on Public Hearings, TRUSTEE
TUTHILL seconded. ALL AYES
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
THIS IS A PUBLIC HEkRING 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 AND AN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION FROM THE LONG
ISLAND TRAVELER-WATCHFzAN. PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE MAY BE READ
PRIOR TO ASKING FOR COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC.
PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMmOn, TS ORGANIZED AND BRIEF:
FIVE I5) MINUTES OR LESS~IF POSSIBLE
7:20 p~m. - In the matter of Eh-COnsultants on behalf of BARBARA
eI~PLINSKI %0 construct a timber dock consisting of a 4' X
100' fixed elev. (3' X 6" above ~rade of marsh) walkway; a 3'
X 16~ ramp and a 6' X 20' float secured by (2) 9' pilings.
Located Orchard Lane, Southold.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do I have anyone here who is in favor of the
project? Do I have anyone who would like to speak against the
project? Does the Board haVe any comments?
BRUCE LOUCKA: You have comments from the CAC, we Ok'd it
with some stipulations on it.
TRUSTEE KEUPSKI: Let me read them. "Recommend approval with
stipulations. CAC recoum~ends approval provided the project
does not block the navigation of adjacent neighbors and the
walkway is elev. 4' above grade of marsh". I don't think that
would be a problem there. If there are no further co~m~ents do I
have a motion to close the hearing?
TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do I have a motion on the application?
TRUSTEE SMITH: I make a motion that we approve this application
with the stipulations of the CAC.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
7:21 In the matter of En-Consultants on behalf of~.RUSSELL
i! approx. 2,000 c.y. of fill, concrete and
other debris dumped in marsh by previous owner. Present owner
seeks to restore disturbed area to former condition as a marsh
and to re-establish tidal flow via presently blocked drains to
marsh to east. Located New Suffolk Ave., New Suffolk.
TRUSTEE KEUPSKI: Do I have anyone here who would like to
coLm,ent in favor of this application? Do I have anyone here who
would like to speak against the application?
BRUCE~LOUCKA: We. OK'd it but we requested that he have somebody
like ..... we talked about that at the assessment.
Board of Trustees 4 October 28, 1993
TRUSTEE F~RUPSKI: "CAC recommends tO consult the Cornell
Cooperative Extension or an environmental consultant to provide
assistance and knowledge to reestablish the marsh quickly and in
an environmentally sound way". I did speak with Mrs. Mc Call
Whose son bought the property and is the applicant and they do
want to do it properly. I think this is a worthy project. This
is a real problem there. It was filled in years ago, in fact,
there were culverts underneath that road, they rotted out, to
service the marsh to the east. So if I have no further comments
from the Board or the audience, I'll entertain a motion to close
the hearing.
TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved.
TRUSTEE TUTHILL: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll take a motion on the project.
TRUSTEE S~ITH: I make a motion we approve the project as per
CAC recommendations.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
7:23 p.m. - In the matter of En-Consultants on behalf o~ FRANCIS
~ SMITH~requests a permit to construct a stairway on face of
bluff over bulkhead and outer beach. It will consist of a 4' X
8' platform, 4' X 25' steps, a 4' X 8' walkway and a 5' X 5'
platform with 3' X 8' steps. Located 1315 North Parish Drive,
Southotd.
TRUSTEE'KRUPSKI: Do I have anyone here who would like to
comment on the application? Does the Board have any comment?
CAC recommended the approval without any further co~m,ent. If
there's no further comments, I'll take a motion to close the
hearing.
TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do I have a motion on the application?
TRUSTEE SMITH: I make a motion we approve as per applicants
request.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
7:25 p.m. - In the matter of En-Consultants on behalf of JOYCE
a permit to extend existing southerly
10', construct new 20' northerly return, replace
tie-rods and deadmen in existing bulkhead and backfill with 25
+/- c.y. of clean sand fill to be trucked in from upland source
and delivered over owner's property. Also remove and replace an
existing 4' X 8' staircase. Locate 2625 Bayshore Road,
Greenport.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do I have any comment in favor of this
application? Do I have anyone here to speak against the
application? "CAC recommends approval provided a 10' native
vegetative buffer be maintained". If there are no further
comments I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing.
TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would someone like to make a motion?
TRUSTEE SMITH: I make a motion we approve WITH CAC comments.
TRUSTEE TUTHILL: Second. ALL AYES
Board of Trustees 5 October 28, 1993
7:27 p.m. - In the matter of Costello Marine on behalf of MARY
LAND BAIZ requests permit to resheath approx. 102' of
existing timber jetty, extend inshore 24' landward and backfill
scoured void area with approx. 64 c.y. of clean fill from
approved source. Located Bay Home Road, Southold.
T~USTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak
in favor of this application?
~EORGE COSTELLO: It's pretty much an inshore continuing of an
existing jetty. If you made an inspection you would see at the
last couple of high tides it was washed out around the back side
af it. She just wants to retain the upland section.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Can I ask you a question? What's an approved
source of clean fill?
MR. COSTELLO: Upland source, landfill or just plain sand. It's
j~st got to be approved by DEC.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: OK. Thanks. Is there anyone here to speak
against the application? CAC "reco~=uendedapproval without
comment. Does the Board have any other comment? Can I have a
motion to close the hearing?
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: So moved.
TRUSTEE TUTHILL: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Motion on the application?
TRUSTEE SMITH: I make a motion we approve the application.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
In of on behalf of
to construct a timber
170 +/. tlf. overall (including returns)
generally at or above line of apparent high water and backfill
with 170 +/- c.y. of clean sand to be trucked in from upland
source. Wall is necessary to prevent further loss of land and
protect road lying close to eroded bank whiCh provides access to
marina and beach for m~rs of the association. Existing docks
will be unusable due to loss of fill and shoaling of dockage
area. Located Wampum Way, Southold.
TRUSTEE KRUPSK~: Do I have anyone here to speak in favor of
this application?
ED DE REEDER: I represent the committee in charge of this
thing. There are COnSultants here that can handle technical
questions that you may have. These are neighbors and property
owners here to answer any questions.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Is there anyone here who would
like to speak against this application?
BRUCE LOUCKA: You have comments on that.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: CAC recommended appro%~t. Does the Board
have any co~,~ents on that?
TRUSTEE SMITH: I recommend we close the hearing.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Motion?
TRUSTEE SMITH: I make a motion we approve the application.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
Board of Trustees 6 October 28, 1993
7:31 p.m. - In the matter of GOLDSMITH'S MARINA (held over from
last month's meeting). Permit for a temporary sea plane ramp as
per drawing.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: CAC recommends approval only for a temporary
Permit~of two years since the applicant describes the project as
temporary, the permit should only reflect the approval only for
a limited time. If after the two year period the applicant
still wishes to have the ramp available he would have to reapply
for a permanent permit. We have the drawing we asked for with
the site plan with the location and diagram. Do I have anyone
here to speak in favor of the ramp? Do I have anyone here to
speak against the ramp? I'd just like to add some col~m,ent and
for discussion of the Board. My personal feeling on this
is .... I don't understand the nauure of a temporary ramp when
it's probably gonna be in place for a long enough period to
kill the marine vegetation underneath it. To me if your gonna
grant something like this you might as well make it a permanent
structure. I don't understand the need for something that's
temporary. I would much rather see something like that fabric.
I think a copy of the fabric manufacturer "G~o Web"... I would
much rather see something like that placed in there on a
permanent basis where the marsh could grow~ through. And if the
ramp is used once or twice a year, it wouldn't damage the marsh
at all. And at least he would have use of the ramp but it
wouldn'.t mean any loss of the wetland and he wouldn't have that
Structure sitting there.
BRUcE LOUCKA: T~at's pretty much what we decided. It's there
and yet something temporary would cover up.
TRUS~EE~! KRUPSKI: I don't know if the rest of the Board approves.
TRUSTEE SMITH: I'd like to make a motion we approve it before
this marSh comes back in the spring, that this structure where
the marsh can grown through it, be installed.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: With the same dimensions. Wait, we have to
close the hearing. Is there any further discussion?
MR. FLYNN: In effect, is the Board maintaining that a sea
plane is a boat?
TRUS~TE~E SMITH: A sea plane when it's on the water is a boat.
MR. FLYNN: A sea plane when it's on the water is neither
registered nor documented as a boat. It is s~jected to the
rules of the road. But when one detects the definition of a sea
plane has no correlation to a boat. There were ancient flying
boats which haven't been used in the last'30 or 40 years to my
knoWledge, but by any reasonable definition by inquiries that
I've made a sea ulane does not constitute a boat. And as such
it is not a conforming use as a marina. And further it sets a
very bad precedence for the Town which has already resisted the
construction of one form and in lieu of that looms the potential
for numerous other small airports at the sites of every marina
in this community.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Do we have any other coL~nent?
I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing.
TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved.
TRUSTEE TUTHILL: Second. ALL AYES
Board of Trustees 7 October 28, 1993
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Could we possibly find out from our
attorney on zoning.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What about the M-2 zoning?
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: If there's a question on wether it is a
boat or a plane we'll have an answer.
TRUSTEE SMIT~: It's my understanding that the Coast Guard
recognizes that when it's on the water it's a boat.
TRUSTEE AL~ERTSON: Well let's get it official.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: "The purpose of an M-2 district is to provide
a waterfront location for a wide range of water dependent water
related uses. Which are those uses which require or benefit
from direct access and or location in marine or tidal waterways
in which in general are located on major waterways open bay
fronts or Long Island Sound". That's the definition of the
code. So Bill, you think you have problem with the zoning
matter or you don't want to approve it just as a ramp?
TRUSTEE ~LBERTSON: I'd like to get a little .more
clarification before voting. And if it's not gonna be built
for another month it won't make a difference. Mr. Flynn has
raised a question that I think perhaps we should answer.
TRUSTEE SMITH: My motion stands.
TRUSTEE ~RUPSKI: Do we have a second on Henr~'s motion.
TRUSTEE K~UPSKI: Do they have a regular boat ramp on the site?
TRUSTEE SMITE: No, they have a travel lift, a little thing that
lifts small out of the water. Peter, your a Coast Guardsman,
sea plane, when it's on water, is it a boat or plane?
PETER: Boat.
TRUSTEE SMITH: And it's subject to all Coast Guard
regulations. Speed, lights, safety, life preservers. ThereTs
your answer.
MR. FLYNN: That's exactly what I said. It maneuvers as a
boat on the water but is not classified as a boat. This is
basic English, a sea plane is not a boat by any definition. And
you can look up your definition or you can look up your current
edition of the unexpedited Webster's dictionary and you'll find
that to be the case as your code recommends that you do.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Actually the application doesn't say it's a
boat it says sea plane.
MR. FLYNN: If t~at ramp is actually intended to have an
alternative use for launching boats, than I suggest you make a
survey of that property and find out whether there's sufficient
parking to acco~,~odate both the boats that are on the premises
and those that would be acco~fu~,cdated by that ramp including
double parking for at least for the towing vehicle and the
trailer which would be attended there too.
TR~STEETUT~ILL: He didn't say anything for using it other than
a sea plane.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No it says small boats. But if he's launching
it from his own marina I don't see where he has to provide for
double parking for boats for his own marina. His equipment is
on the marina. Why woUld he have to provide extra parking for
his own equipment.
MR. FLYNN: Well first of all the code provides for it and
secondly it's a practical matter. Those people who are
Board of Trustees 8 October 2B, 1993
launching boats in and out typically have a trailer with them.
o as a result of that is you need at least two parking plaCes
or every boat launched.
TRUSTEE S~ITH: This is not a public boat ramp.
MR. FLYNN: I know it isn't.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: He's got his equipment on the property. Why
would he need additional parking for that equipment?
MR. FLYNN: I think you misunderstand me. I'm not talking
about his equipment. I'm taking about the trailers that would
be attended to the c~stomers coming in to launch boats from the
~ite. It w6uld become in effect a off-profit boat launch ramp.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's assuming that's true. But we have no
information to back that charge.
MR. FL~: You merely have the statement that it is to be
used alternatively for launching boats. Now, what boats are
%hey. Is there a facility already on the property.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: There was none on the survey that was provided
us.
TRUSTEE SMITE: I have a motion.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: There ' s no second on the motion. There ' s no
motion. It's lost. Is there another motion?
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Table for one month.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And?
TRUSTEE SMIT~: What are you gonna table for one month for,
Bill?
To answer a couple of questions.
: Which one?
I td like to study it a little bit myself.
I'd take that tape and listen to it m~self.
It's up to you.
If you table it, you have to have to table it
for cific.
TRUSTEE I ' 11 abstain.
TRUSTEE KI~D-PSKI: We have a motion but it was lost. Now I
thought y~u Were in the process of making another motion to look
into something.
TRUSTEE ~LBERTS'ON: I'm not satisfied with the terms.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You're not satisfied with the amount of
information Providedl But why don' t you make a motion to look
into whatever specific area you want to look at? I don t want
to say "OK there's ~some opposition, we' 11 table it". That's not
fair to the applicant.. If there's something specific that's not
adequate on the application, that's fine. Let's look into it,
and then make a decision yes or no.
TRUSTEE TUT~ILL: The thing came up because the question was
whether the sea plane is not a boat or not.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, not whether its a boat or not. I don't
care whether it's a boat, a train or a car. I think the problem
is whether a sea plane is allowed use in a marina. The repair
and maintenance o~ the sea plane.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Mr. Goldsmith doesn't even have that as a
public access to warrant needing two parking places for each?
TRUSTEE SMITH: No that's a zoning matter.
Board of Trustees 9 October 28, 1993
TRUSTEE SMITH: Ail the guy is asking for is ramp to haul the
sea plane out so he could wash it se he doesn't get marine
growth on his plantoons.
TRUSTEE SMITH: I make my motion again, the same motion.
TRUSTEE TUTHILL: Second.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Abstain.
7:49 p.m. In the matter of BRICK COVE MARINA to modernize and
improve marina operations from 91 previous boat slips to 138
boat slips on site formally known as Young's Marina, 12.5 acres
in size of which 4.2 acres are owned underwater land. Also, the
action includes improvement of parking areas, landscaping,
marina head pump-out facilities, installation of a paved
washdown platfolm with Sediment and oil separation system, a
storm drain interception system for the parking area, and
relocation and improvement of the existing on-site sanitary
system. The improvements to the marina also include dredging of
approx. 2900 c.y., 350 c~bic yards of slope dredging and
approx. 550 c.y. at the basin entrance to the marina inside
the basin. Located Sage Blvd. Southold.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: As a matter of public interest, the majority
of this project is complete. Do I have any comments in favor of
this application?
BILL LEVERAGE: The applicant is here along with his
representatives and have been studying this matter since 1987.
Mr. Wiggin added to your reading material the last few months
very substantially, and this document is heavier than my
lawnmower at home. I'm sure you have it in detail. I'm not
going to stand or add upon that. We're gonna sit on the
DEIS that has been repaired subject to any c~m~nts or
inquiries that maybe made by the audience, since the focus is
to make and take a hard look and do anything to assist in that
process.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Are there any other comments in favor of this
application? Is there anyone here to speak against this
application?
LINDA LEVY: I have read that, and we have, despite the length,
we do have a lot of problems with it. We don't think that the
hard look that is required has happened ~et. I have something
to give you a~d I'll go over it with you briefly. The major
points we had Problems with. Thefirst problem we have has to
do with the aCcess. The site does no~ have from
the Main Road. The right-of-way "is
barely sixteen feet wide. This is not wide enough for two
vehicles to pass each Other. In case of emergency, an ambulance
or fire engine would not be able to safely pass any vehicles
evacuating the site. At sixteen feet, the road is substandard
and could not be taken over by the Town withOutimprovements.
The right-of-way is surrounded on both sides by wetlands.
Therefore, any widening of the road would have a significant
environmental impact ~nd must be addressed. Neither the issue
of access nor the environmental impact of ~ny necessary widening
have been addressed in the DEIS.
Board of Trustees 10 October 28, 1993
In addition, no current traffic study has been submitted of the
impact on the already hazardous Route 25 (Main Road). The fact
that the right-of-way is shared by the Sage property is also not
addressed. This second parcel, .if developed, would add a
significant traffic burden to the right-of-way and therefore the
access to the marina. A traffic study is a necessary part of
this EIS and should be included.
Land Use and Zoning. This site is zoned as Marine II. The
DEIS states (Section IV, P.73) that the use of this site as a
marina "is in conjunction with both the Town Southold Master
Plan, Zoning, and the US/UK Stewardship Program". In fact,
the zoning category of Marine II led to a suit against the
Master Plan and reconsideration of this category is part of the
charge of the US/UK Stewardship Task Force, which has not yet
made its final recoim,,endation.
This particular site is an example of the problems of the Marine
II zone .... all other zoning within a ~arter mile of the site is
either R-40 or R-80. Therefore, the Marine II zoning of this
parcel can be considered spot-zoning. While the existing zoning
allows for this use, the fact that it is currently under
examination for possible cOde changes should be examined and
addressed.
Sanitation System. The applicant states that the ultimate
disposal of the waste removed from boats by the pump-out
stations still to be determined. The "present plan" for which
they are seeking Suffolk County Department of Health Services
approval calls for disposal in the on-site septic systems. The
applicant goes on to state (Section V, p.10), "Neither of the
three disposal methods are regarded as causing potentially large
impacts". This is.a disingenuous statement. Disposal of this
waste in the on-site septic system would certainly have an
impact as it would result in increased nitrogen loading.
(Please also note that as of this date, the Department of Health
has not issued any approvals for the sanitary system).
Impact on Propert~ Values. The applicant maintains that the
site will not affect property vaIues in the surrounding area,
based on a statement from the Town Assessor. This is not the
expert opinion needed for such a statement. Only an independent
appraiser can judge as to the potential impact on proper~¥
values .... rega~dless of whether the Town would change its
assessment of the properties.
I~act on Shellfish. The applicant states that "Impacts to
shellfish are not regarded as significant because the portions
to be dredged do not support important or large concentratiOns
of shellfish". (Section V, p. 13). This is based on examining
the spoil from dredging already completed. However, this spoil
came from an area which had already been disturbed. All that
Board of Trustees 11 October 28, 1993
analysis can tell us is that shellfish are not abundant in areas
that have been developed as marinas.
A "Hard Look". The DEIS is filled with general statements as
to the lack of negative impacts which are not proved in any
way. Examples of such statements: "Negative impacts resulting
from the temporary or permanent placement of dredge spoil are
not important". (Section V, p. 3). "There are no important
negative impacts associated with landscaping". (Section V,
p.5). "The value of vegetation to wildlife is extremely limited
throughout most of the project area". (Section IV, p.40). "The
probability of the impact occurring, as well as its duration is
small". (In reference to storm water runoff, Section V, p.16).
"The potentially small adverse impact is ultimately viewed as
positive". (Section V, p.ll).
Perhaps the attitude of the applicant in taking negative
environmental impacts into account is best stated in the
constantly repeated refrain, "All ~improvements to the present
facility are consider to have positive impacts..." Section V,
p.16). Such generalizations cannot possibly be considered
adequate in an Environmental Impact Statement.
Alternatives. The applicant dismisses alternative designs in
the following manner, "The only practical time to review
alternate boat slip layouts is prior to start of construction".
(Section VIII, p.1). This project is at its present stage of
construction due to permits issued without adequate review.
The applicant is stating that because the work was done before
the completion of an EIS, he should not be asked to look at
alternatives which might be suggested as the result of the
belated EtS. The burden to take a hard look and mitigate
potential adverse impacts remains, regardless of the current
stage of construction.
Finally, we are concerned that the SEQR process has been
violated in the continued granting of permits and ongoing
construction of this project. In Section 617.3 (a) (2), the law
clearly states that the applicant may not" .... coim~.ence the
action unless and until ail requirements of this Part have been
fulfilled". The New York State Supreme Court has ruled that
SEQR requirements have not been fulfilled; therefore no
construction should have been permitted to 'proceed.
This DEIS was ordered by the NYS Supreme Court to provide a
"hard look" as required by the laws of our State. The document
now submitted is woefully inad~,ate. We respectfully request
that the Southold Trustees not accept this Draft Environmental
Impact Statement until these inadequacies are properly
addressed. Sincerely, Linda Levy, Southold Coordinator, North
Fork Environmental Council.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Does anyone else have any comments?
FRANK FLYNN: I have some comments to make which are
uncharacteristically succinct. I had originally tended to be
Board of Trustees 12 October 28, 1993
represented by my attorney and consultant at tonight's hearing,
however, my most recent conference resulted in their convincing
me that there appearance before this tribunal would be a waste
of their time and my money. I consider an appearance before
this Board constitutes nothing less than star chamber
proCeeding. A proceeding designed, to masquerade as impartial
but merely going through the actions toward a foreordained
conclusion. ~ my opinion this Boards decisions have been
politically mdtivated rather than based upon the concerns of the
environment or the law. This Board consistently demonstrated
its bias in favor of the applicant by actions which are in
conflict with iSEQRA,' DEC regulation, and Southold's own code.
Among its most ~bVious transgressions the Board has permitted
the applicant to flout regulations by operating the fully
~xPanded marina~ or at least the last two seasons without a
epartment of R~alth Pell~lit. contrast this if you will, with
the treatment a~corded the typical residential property owner.
A more resent ~trage is the Trustees role, in permitting
extensive dredging'outside the applicants property boundaries
and on the landI of others. This without public notice, or
hearing based upon a disingenuous statement by the applicant.
The owner Of record of the property for the last 23 years that
he has discovered the shoal. Rather than recite a whole
list of all known and condoned by the Trustees, I
shall rely attorney to continue his preparation of a
reco enable me to pursue all matter of legal
recourse In conclusion I echo the time honored
Phrase. "I will see you in court!"
RUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any other comments against the application?
o we have.any Other c~ents from the audience?
~R. TOHILL: Getting to the particulars of whatMs. Levy has
~ead, the ~irst issue that she raised was you, as the Trustees,
should somehow ~ecome involved in the question of access for the
Main Road dowh ~o the marina. The marina by the way, has been
there for 43 years which may exceed the age of Ms. L~vy. Z
don't know, and I don't.expect her to agree or disagree on that
but it may exceed h~r a~e. That issue has been raised I think 3
times nowby ~r. FlYnn through his attorney in the Supreme
Court. It~haS n~t been successful so far in any of those three
efforts and · ~hink (coUld not hear him due to ~nterference of
noise) none the less that issue relates to'the section of the
New York Town Law or Kinny's Town Law which is SeCtion 280A
and if anyone reads it, and I know their counsel has because
they said it3 times in court proceedings, the only board that
has jurisdiction with respect to that issue is its own Board of
Appeals of this Town. This Board has no jurisdiction. So you
can rest free of any claim that you have done something
despicable by not impounding an actual issue. As a practical
matter the applicant plans no widened road way from the Main
Road to this property so there's no need to worry about
disturbing wetlands if there is ...... 'cause in our lifetime
neither Mr. Zehner nor anyone else that's here is gonna
widen the road, we'll never ask to do that. With respect to
traffic study there is an existing use as I've mentioned has
Board of Trustees 13 October 28, 1993
been there for 43 years, there is no existing traffic problem
that has been raised ever in this building or from any of the
board in the last 6 years administrative or regulatory review
with respect to that roadway or cars or trucks that are using
that roadway. We are not planning to change the use or
expressly permitted of the zoning ordinance when that use was
expressly permitted ordinance and the Board has to~ have a suit.
We have to assume that they knew what they were doing. To the
extend that anyone knows of anything wrong with the traffic and
nothing was dealt t mean specifically then you're not at fault
and we are not at fault if we don~t .... (interference of noise)
On the issue of spot zoning, again, you know, .and everybody here
knows~ that spot zoning is not one of the sins that you can be
accused of committing. If someone wants to argue that they can
go to the Town Boardr and in fact I think they didr and they have
even gone to court. On the sanitary System, ~he C~mplaint was
that the applicant is going to change the existing sanitary
system, relocate it landward away from its p~esenttrouhlesome
location and then, cause all of the boat owners t~ use it at the
place for locating any sanitary waste. Now, I heard that
"criticism" not certain how this Board'shOU~'~r~ If the
complainant wants us not to get the Heal approval
whiCh has been pending all the time the ~has been
going on, then I'm afraid we are not ~ her. We
intend to get Health Dept. approval for the sanitary system.
If she is proposiDg that we leave what'~s which might
be considered tro~teS°~e, we're not
We are going to r~loc~%e landward,
system. If she says that we should sanitary system
in order to act as a pump out facilit~ sa~ree with her
again. We intend to use it as a pump o~t facJ intend
to do exa~tlywhat this Board once as a condition of
permit approval with th~ litigation. In I don't
know what the point was, I lost tract of it she said "and
with respect tO the Sanitary system" because ~made any
sense. I'd like to turn the floor over to
MR. WIGGIN: One problem with the was the
relocation of the existing sanitary system feet more away
from the existin~ surface waters. This has been proven
wonderful. This is On the same basis if everybody does this as
well if you want the whole basin~approved. Some of these
surface water tests or water quality exists on the west 'side of
the basin are a problem and not a problem on the east side 'of
the basin. Another comment was made about the disturbed site.
The whole site.was disturbed. That was a mining operation for
clay for brick. It's all been disturbed over that period of
time.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Anyone else?
MR. ~ZEHNER: I'm the owner of the property. I would like to
take note that we received a total of 14 permits since 1987 plus
5 additional work amendments to those permits and from 6
different government agencies. All these government agencies
are project and approved those pezmits. (Shuffling of papers,
cannot hear Mr. Zehner) We did outside studies on plant and
Board of Trustees 14 October 28, 1993
wildlife. And we found no significant impact by our outside
agencies on wildlife or plant life. Last item. We could have
gone for a much more expansion than we did for our project.
(unable to hear Mr. Zehner).
MR. BILL LEVERAGE: I know you guys are aware of this, but
everybody should be aware that in doing this project, we are
farther behind environmentally now than we would be if Mr.
Flym~ hadn't constantly sued on it. We have gone ahead with
the permit requirements that were put out by you fellows. And
have completed almost all of them on the project, and that the
project is virtually done in the water and the upland portion
remains to be done, the thing that held it up, the part that is
important, the drainage and sewage thing, had been slowed down
by the constant problems that we had in court. Some of the
things that had been done that I think there is no negative
impact and perhaps a positive impact on the area is that the two
areas that were originaily sited as having a problem upland are
cleaned up they're done, shipped out, burned and Whatever they
do with it at a tremendous expense. We put in a new buried
water distribution system, Health Dept. approved so that we
could keep our reqular sanitary facilities open during the
winter. It used to have to be shut down. Now we have year round
sanitary facilities on the property. Portable pump out stations
have, been working for two years. You have been getting your
reports on the fact that we are pumping out. We have gotten
tremendous coopera~tion from the people in the place. All the
heads are sealed off. Last year on a monthly basis we did water
quaIity testing and Mr. Flynn can look at them. For some time
we have used the Southold stop program for all our toxins and
stuff like that. We were probably one of the earlier people to
star~ recycling and again we've gotten good cooperation from the
people who come in. All the waste oil that's on the property is
collected by us and shipped out at our expense to a certified
repr~cess throughout the Island. We don't use any toxic
antifreeze on the place, We use non-formaldehyde head
chemicals. Every b~at in the place has oil ~bsorbent material
in the bilges, so that when you pump the bilge water out the oil
is t~apped in the oil sorbs and the water only comes out. So
basically that's where we stand. If this keeps going on the way
it is, I don't know how long it's gonna be be~°re ws get
everything else done. We're going as fast as we can and we're
sorry that we have this constant Problem with Mr. Flynn and I
think all the environmental groups ought to take a look at
this. I come from 8 years of running a big marina on the
Chesapeake and we went through the Chesapeake Bay Estuary
program down there. It was a very good program and one of the
things that was a key note to that program was that when they
re-align what you could do on property on the water in order to
make it viable they talked in all cases on intensification say
where a location was proper to start with, the operation was
there so you could get the boats out of the creeks into the
marina where the sewage could be properly pumped and oil absorbs
could be put in. I think the environmental groups should think
about that when they constantly try to drag these things out.
Board of Trustees 15 October 28, 1993
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone else who would like to
co,,,ents ?
RICHARD RALYEA: I kept myiboat in the marina for three years
and I'm also a LYCO contract. I've done quite a bit of
contract work there. So from both views as a contractor and
boater they have done a nice job and done nothing but
improvements and the improvements are set all upland and I don't
see how that could do anything but improve the marina and the
environment. They were very careful about the pump outs and
boaters. It's a real nice operation and I think it's good for
Southold. People come from up the Island and even New Jersey to
keep they're boats there. They spend a lot of money, at the
restaurants, wineries, shopping locally. We're a waterfront
co~l,unity so I think it's a very positive environment for
Southold.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Anyone else who would like to speak? Anyone
else who would like to speak.
LINDA LEV~: ~'d just like to point out that the DEIS is to
take a hard i6ok. The NFEC is not saying that they are not
doing nice ~hings over there, that its not a clean operation,
that they're not trying to make some mischief. This is not
about what is there right now, but this about
the DEIS sta charged to take a hard look. When
it is ignored any negative ~,lpact whatsoever, if you
were to this DEIS there is not a single negative thing
that could ever be thought of with conjunction with this
marina. And. Our complaint is with this DEIS that is not
taking a ~harditook and that is what we are expecting to see.
Any one else?
MR. FLYNN: like make a short comment. There was
mention of environmental studies made. ~They were
made on the know if this board is aware that 80%
of land and 20-25 times the area of the upland is
owned by should be ~sidered in te£ms of the
impact. BOth environment and the value of the
sur~ properties. W~at respect to the environment, our
view tY disinterested Pa~ies since t own
the Sage Estate, Conducted an e~viro~a,ental~s the area?
And to their Credit and to their detriment the~ found that the
upland and areas of that and baymans or
whatever You Want to call it of endangered and
threatened species. That's somewhat at DEIS
and I thi~k its a matter well worthy of investigation.
Actually the Trustees have or should have had access to the
harborview study before any of this permits were issued. Now
with respect to permits, there was an original hearing to this
project, then the Trustees amended and increased the operations
without the additional hearings and many of these amendments
were made subsequent to the court decision which required the
DEIS. I hardl~ think that constitutes whatever it may be
argued the marginal legality that such a thing may be; I hardly
think that demonstrates a proper respect for the en,~ironment on
a part of the Trustees. Now in respect to the Depar~:~ent of
Health, it is clear both in the DEC regulations and the Southold
Board of Trustees 16 October 28~ 1993
Town Code, that prior to this expapsion a permit was required of
the Dept. of Health. And the reason has nothing to do, well
it's partially to do, with the fact that the p~sent system is
located within 100 feet of the bulkhead or high water line
whatever you want to define it, bu
required because of the-expansion
very well be that on Aug. 6 the si
average in the neighborhood of 28
that marina includes boars up to 5
project the capacity needed as the
are in doubt when or where any exc
Now this has been going on for ove
t more to the point it's
~f the marina. Now it may
ze of the boats in this marina
~eet, but the docking plan in
5 feet. If you were to
=Dept. of H~lth has, they
uss capacity'~an be located.
two years, fits been stated
that this has quoted by the Dept. Of Health, if there is not a
problem with this property, why ha~n't a permit been granted? I
think that's also a verbal appeal For an by this
Board~ Now your talking in terms ~f road the fact
that they are not required. The iDcreased cap~city of the
marina Certainly is going to dictate addition~ road traffic.
The primary owner the theme owner is this prOPerty is the Sage
Estate. What has happened here is that this ~ina has grown
from its original 14 boat capacity to the present capacity which
is state~ as 138 boats. That's a 10 boat increase. The fact of
the m~t~er is that the Sage proper~y would'be having eventual
develoPment of the Sage property which certain~y would be
adverSel~ affected financially by ~he,expansi°~of this marina
but it would also be affected bY the 0ve~burde~ing of this
right-of~waY. Now with respect to this right-of-way and it
should be a matter of prime concern to this board is the health,
safety and welfare of the communzty. I don t know whether you
are aware of it or not but New Y~rk State vehicles 8
1/2 feet in width without any requirement It is
obvious that two vehicles of that Width on a
right-of-way which is only 16 feet in width, it constitutes
the equivalent of a house or a driveway 740 feet in length with
no cross roads or turnouts. So access to what is potentially a
dangerous Site in terms of ..... you must be aware of marina fires
and that result there from. Thequestion of p~lic vehicles,
safety vehicles, fire department, police
etc .... despite their casual response to the I suggest
they might not even be aware of th~ the
Transportation Dept. ~or width of vehicles, not
safely pass on. that right-of,waY.~lAnd were be a
problem the prime owner of this right-of,way wo~ld be cut off
from access to Route 25. The total development of 'this property
is also a matter to be considered. Were you to think in terms
of the Sage property, I don't know what the ultimat~ development
would be but it would certainly be several houses. But more to
the point the question of perhaps the indicated load from the
marina could be adduced from an analysis f~omthe Dept. of
Health's figures. The Dept. of Health in computing their
sanitary requirements figures two persons per boat, 138 boats,
276 people. An no question about that they told me themselves.
Were to use LILCO's figures where they compute somewhere over
3 persons per household, you would have an equivalent of
Board of Trustees 17 October 28, 1993
approx. 90 households in this ratio. Added to that is the
Sage property. For the life of me I can't see how this question
of access could be dismissed lightly because even in the
smallest of the major subdivisions approved in this Town, there
has to be an alternative means of access. There is none for
this property, nor is there for the Sage property, which in
effect is a dead end. With further respect to the road studies
there was reference and reliance placed, I believe, on the
previous road study that was done in 1986. I suggest if you
will that you examine this. Because that study indicated that
there would be road movements, vehicular movements over a 24
hour period at approx, intervals of 37 seconds. Now if that
is not overburdening the right-of-way, I don't know what
possibly could. One further reference is~absolut~ly factual.
The selective method of supplying the appendices to this study
is hardly forthright. There's a reference made there to close
studies conducted. Again I think it was 1986. The quote is
that they have only selected Section 6 as a s~ary. Were the
actual s~ary to be read, and I think it is advisable under the
circumstances you do so, it says that the study was only
conducted on two days. It was conducted during a period when
the winds were prevailing from the north and the northwest and
there were no winds at all. And finally that it was
non-determinative. That they made recor~mendations for additional
studies to be conducted that were never conducted. So in effect
there is a quotation, as I recall it in I think appendix 2,
where Mr. Bredemeyer made co~m~ent to the effect that he was not
impressed by the size or the weight of the submission. I
believe at that time it was our submission.. I submit that that
statement prevails in spades with respect to this DEIS.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would anyone else like to comment on the
DEIS. Would the Board like to make a comment? I'll entertain
a motion to close the hearing~
TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved.
TRUSTEE TUTHILL: Second. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll entertain a motion to go off the public
hearings.
TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES
Recessed for 5 minutes
V. ~S~SESSMEN~$/~IRONMENTALDE~TIONS~
1. J.M.O. Consulting on behalf of
request permit for construction of a 4' to be
constructed 4' above grade. Applicant also re~dests a statement
of jurisdiction under Chapter 97 & 37 to construct a one family
dwelling, sanitary system, garage, driveway, retaining wall,
patio, stonewall, pool and decking as per map Chandler, Palmer &
King survey dated 9/29/93.
TRUSTEE SMITH moved to table, TRUSTEE ALBERTSON seconded. ALL
AYES
Board of Trustees 18 October 28, 1993
2. J.M.O. Consulting on behalf of ELOISE TORRANCEET-AL
requests a peLl~it to install a "boulder barrier" approx. 120'
in length along shoreline damaged during the storm of Dec.
1992. Boulders shall be placed on filter fabric along the
bottom of the eroded bank at a point approx. 6' landward of
MHW line and, if possible, continuous with neighbor to south.
As per plans dated 3/29/93.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved for a Negative Declaration, TRUSTEE SMITH
seconded. ALL AYES
3. Peconic Associates on behalf of NARROW'RIVER MARINk~requests
a permit to replace 83' of bulkhead and extend bulkhead 34'
Extend floating dock to new bulkhead location, remove damaged
bulkhead and fill to water depth of 4' Relocate existing
floating docks and pilings. Replace and relocate 30' of wave
break and replace 50' of bulkhead (wave break). Install 1 1/2'
X 8' finger piers. Note: Reconfigured layout e~,~ls 12 slips,
replacing existing 14 slips all per survey and plan dated
January 18, 1993. Located Narrow River Road, Orient.
TRUSTEE SMITH moved for a Negative Declaration, TRUSTEE TUTHILL
seconded. ALL AYES
4. Proper-T Services on behalf of JANET T. SWANSON requests a
permit to construct 61' overall by 3' wide stairs with landing
at top and l~nding in middle section; to replace, in new
location, storm-damaged existing stairs. Located 1995 Ryder
Farm Lane, Orient.
TRUSTEE TUTHILL moved for a Negative Decla~ation, TRUSTEE
ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES
5. Costello Marine on behalf of-DAVID FRENCH requests a
permit for a 4' X 100' fixed timber dock and (4) 2-pile
dolphins. Located Willow Terrace Lane, Orient.
TRUSTEE TUTHILL moved for a Negative Declaration, TRUSTEE
ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES
6. ~ANGEL~.RADOVIC~!requests a permit to construct earth berm
and place new lawn as per plan of Doroski Nursery, Inc.,
received October 21, 1993. Located 2060 Clearview Ave.,
Southotd.
TRUSTEE SMITH moved for a Negative Declaration, TRUSTEE
ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES
7. Costelto Marine on behalf
requests a permit to extend existing bulkhead return 10'
landward and fill void with 3-4 c.y. of clean fill. Located 85
Waters Edge Way, Southold.
TRUSTEE' ALBERTSON moved for a Negative Declaration, TRUSTEE
TUTHILL seconded. ALL AYES
8. young and Young Land Surveyors on behalf of FREDEriCK W.
COLLIGAN requests a permit to raise the existing bungalow
approx. 3 and securing ~t to a new p~le foundation. Located
520 Park Ave. Ext., Mattituck.
Board of Trustees 19 October 28, 1993
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON moved for a Negative Declaration, TRUSTEE
TUTHILL seconded. ALL AYES
9. STEPHEN BUCZAK~requests a permit to construct a one family
dwelling Wfth associated sanitary system and pool with a 40'
buffer. Located Willis Creek Drive, Mattituck.
TRUSTEE SMITH moved for a Negative Declaration, TRUSTEE TUTHILL
seconded. ALL AYES
10. Ford Swick on behalf of SUZANNE SWICK requests a permit
to construct a one family dwelling as per survey dated March 15,
1993. Located Route 25, East Marion.
TRUSTEE SMITH moved to table until Dec. inspection, TRUSTEE
ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES
VI. RESOLUTIONS:
i. Board to set public hearings for the Dec. 6, 1993 regular
meeting for those applications that are Type II and/or have
received a negative declaration.
TRUSTEE TUTHILL moved to approve, TRUSTEE SMITH seconded. ALL
AYES
2~ JOHNGANTLY requests an extension on permit ~3943 to
replace existing bulkhead to expire Sept. 6, 1994. Located 9680
Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue.
TRUSTEE TUTHILLmoved to approve the extension, TRUSTEE SMITH
seconded. ALL AYES
5. PAULINE ISRAEL requests an extension on pe~L,it $3952 to
construct dock to expire Oct. 4, 1994. Located Gull Pond,
Greenport.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON moved to approve the extension, TRUSTEE
TUTHILL seconded. ALL AYES
4. Richard Lark on behalf of JOHN CONFORTI~requests a
grandfather permit for a 5' X 70' dock with a 3' X 16' ramp in
Mattituck Creek.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON moved to approve the grandfather pezmit,
TRUSTEE TUTHILL seconded. ALL AYES
5. CostelloMarine on behalf of'~BRU
requests a grandfather pez~,it to replace 2 1/2' X 30' ~d
timber :dock, a 30' X 14' ramp, a 6' X 20' floating dock with
pipe support pilings. Located 1750 Beebe Drive, Cutchogue.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to approve the grandfather pez~it, TRUSTEE
SMITH SECONDED. ALL AYES
6. ROBERT.~GUARR~ELLO requests a Grandfather Permit to replace
inkind/inplace i30' +/- of bulkhead. Located Budd's Pond
Road, Southold.
TRUSTEE SMITH moved to approve Grandfather Permit, TRUSTEE
TUTHILL seconded. ALL AYES
Board of Trustees 20 October 28, 1993
7. Eh-Consultants on behalf of'GUS WADE.to construct a one
familydwelling. Findings and decision on the final
EnvirgnmentaI Impact Statement. Located East Road, Cutchogue.
TRUSTE~ KRUPSKI read resolution:
was taken by the Southold Town Board of
Trustees on ~, October 28, 1993:
WHERE~ ~, Draft Environmental Impact Statement was prepared for
an act Lon know as Gustave Wade ("Action") and was accepted by
the Sc thold Board of Trustees ("Trustees"), AND
WHERE~ S, a p~,hlic hsaring was conducted on the Action, AND
WHERE~ S, a Final Envirornnental Impact Statement was prepared and
accep~sd by the Trustees, AND
WHERE~S, the Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS") revealed
that ~h~ environmental impacts ste~,ing from the proposed septic
system will have an undue adverse environmental impact upon
wetlands and surface waters of Eugene's Creek and will preclude
the T~ustees fr~om restoring their adjacent lands to~heir
origihal condition, AND
WHEREAS, the E1s revealed that the mobilization and.
demobilization cf heavy equipment will adversely' effect tidal
wetlands the Action will adversely effect Shellfish, other
beneficial marine organisms, aquatic wildlife and vegetation and
the natural habitats thereof, AND
WHEREAS, the EIS revealed that adequate fire protection to the
proposed dwelli~g is impossible and therefore, the p~oposed
project will adversely affect the health, safety and general
welfare of the applicant and any future inhabitants; AND
WHEREAS, a Findings Statement has been prepared in accordance
with the provisions of the State Environmental Quality Review
Act and is consistent with the standards set forth in Chapter 97
of the'Town Code, NOW BE IT
resolved, that the Findings Statement is hereby accepted,. AND BE
IT FURTHER
RESOLVED, that the Findings Statement be filed with all Involved
Agencies and the Applicant, AN~ BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED,that the Southold Town Board of Trustees Den~ the
application of Gustave Wade without prejudice".
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Motion was made that the Southold Trustees
deny without prejudice the application, TRUSTEE TD~HILL
seconded. ALL AYES
8 !EER~S.~=LBoard to reduce catwalk by one set of
doCk at the present length blocks passage for any
other boat. Located North Bayview Road, Southold.
TRUSTEE SMITH moved to meet with Mr. Fergus to inspect,
TRUSTEE TUTHILL seconded. ALL AYES
9. PLOCK.PROPERTY- Report from Chris Pickerill - Approve
plan for replanting.
TRUSTEE ALBERTSON moved to approve, TRUSTEE TUTHILL
seconded. ALL AYES
10. DON~J=D TUTHILL - 45' buffer fzom top of bank
Board of Trustees 21 October 28, 1993
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to approve, TRUSTEE ALBERTSON
seconded. ALL AYES
TRUSTEE SMITH moved to adjourn at 10:10 p.m. TRUSTEE
ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES
Respectfully Submitted By:
Diane J. Herbert
Clerk, Board of Trustees
RECEIVED AND FILED BY
THE SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK
Town_ Clerk, Town of Southold