Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-10/19/1989 TRUSTEES John M. Bredemeyer, III, President Henry P. Smith, Vice President Albert J. Krupski, Jr. John L. Bednoski, Jr. John B. Tuthill Telephone (516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ScoTr L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 Minutes October 19, 1989 PRESENT WERE: Frank A. Kujawski~ Jr., President Albert J. Krupski, Jrt, Trustee J. Bredemeyer, III, Trustee Henry P. Smith, Trustee John L. Bednoski, Jr., Trustee Joan Schneider, Clerk Jane Blados, Clerk Work Session: 6:00PM Discussion held on the following: Dr. John Hansen as Environmental Consultant for Board A1 Koke dredging project Richard Snow regarding registration of gazebo, etc. James Bitses, Narrow River Project Majors Terrace (Latham) on R.O.W. Critical Environmental Areas (Jay to submit new list and have maps available. Next Board Meeting: at 6:00PM. Field Inspections: November 16,1989 at 7:00PM, Work Session November 14, 1989 at l:00PM Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Approval of August 24, 1989 minutes: Albert Krupski moved to approve, second by Henry Smith. ALL AYES. I. MONTHLY REPORT: The Trustee monthly report for September, 1989, a check for $3,461.00 was issued to the Supervisor's Office for deposit in the General Fund. II. PUBLIC NOTICES: Public Notices are posted on the Town Clerk's Bulletin Board for review. III. COMMUNICATIONS: Board of Trustees 2 October 19, 1989 1. Donald Dzenkowski, Senior Bay Constable on definition of Little Neck Clams,(clam is to be 1"-1 9/16"in thickness), adding that they should be kept from rest of the clams when taken for commercial purposes. Resolved, motion by Albert Krupski, second by John Bednoski. ALL AYES Resolved that Conditional Shellfishing area will be operated during hours of 8:00AM and 4:00PM. Moved by Henry Smith, second by Albert Krupski. ALL AYES Resolved that 400'x400' area in Jockey Creek off Lighthouse Manor will be set aside for the purpose of starting a Spawner Sanctuary. Moved by Frank Kujawski to approve, second by Albert Krupski. ALL AYES FRANK KUJAWSKI: While we're discussing with the Bay Constable, we received this today. It's not part of the co~t~L~unications, but I think we could add it in that Don is advising us, that as of this date, the Marine Division is equipped to handle the containment of oil spills and the the following equipment will be carried in the bay constables vehicles: oil absorbent pads, oil absorbent pillows, two 25' patrol vessels shall carry 40' of oil containment boom, oil absorbent pads, and the pillows. 2. Christopher F. Smith, Cornell Cooperative Extension Marine Program regarding dredging information. Letter read and filed in dredging file in Trustees Office. Jay Bredemeyer and Chris will be working to get together some information. Notify CAC when information is sent to us. IV. ASSESSMENTS: J. John H. Geideman in behalf of Robert Keith re: a revised application for catwalk, ramp and floating dock. FRANK KUJAWSKI: First assessment is in behalf of Robert Keith. There's a revised application now on the catwalk moving it to the location we had in mind, the ramp and the floating dock. I believe there's less dock and more float. Does anyone have any comments on the assessment of this project? ALBERT KRUPSKI: I think if you!re satisfied with it, Frank, you are the most familiar with the area. FRANK KUJAWSKI: I'm much more satisfied. ALBERT KRUPSKI: They included the wood walk. also? FRANK KUJAWSKI: Yes, I'll pass this down. I'll be glad to offer a motion to give it a negative declaration. ALBERT KRUPSKI: I'll second it. ALL AYES 2o J.M.O. Consulting on behalf of Robert Searle, Fishers Island FRANK Kujawski: The second is J. M. O. Consulting in behalf of Robert Searle of Fishers Island construct a single family dwelling with associated sanitary system, gravel driveway on property located across from Barlow Pond. Albert, Henry and myself visited there last Tuesday. We had a discussion with Glen on this piece of property and there are problems. I think the applicant recognizes that, and not only that, but Fishers Board of Trustees 3 October 19, 1989 Island is going to be entering the CEA classification, so considering all of that, would someone like to make a motion regarding a Type I or a positive declaration? ALBERT KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to make this a positive declaration. HENRY SMITH: I have a problem giving it a complete positive dec. I think these're a few areas we addressed, but all out in a positive dec, I don't think it's necessary. FRANK KUJAWSKI: I think regarding the CEA area, I read where the Suffolk County Legislature has already approved that. I think regardless of the fact, that maybe a Type I would be more in order and then we can decide on how extensive a review we need. ALBERT KRUPSKI: I think so, because you could possibly jeopardize the drinking water supply. HENRY SMITH: All right, I'll second that. FRANK KUJAWSKI: You'll modify that to a Type I? AL: All right. FRANK: Changing it to a Type I, and it's seconded by Henry. Before we vote on the motion, Glen do you have any comments? GLEN JUST: I'd like to know exactly what you mean by a Type I. Is it going to be a SEQRA Type I that will not have a significant effect on the environment? Frank: No, it may possibly have a significant effect on the environment. What do we do for the next step? FRANK KUJAWSKI: I think we should sit down and decide what the concerns are of this Board, possibly scope it with the conservancy group over there. HENRY SMITH: I talked to that...I asked that lady what their main concern was over there. Their main concern was the drinking water in Barlow Pond. FRANK KUJAWSKI: That's basically my major concern. HENRY SMITH: Right, I think we just address that... FRANK KUJAWSKI: Are we scoping it now or...Well, I was surprised to see the CEA designation had already been granted. I thought the Town was going ahead with that. SPEAKER: That is not official yet, Frank, until Governor Cuomo signs it. FRANK: You sure ~hout that. GLEN: That's the law. FRANK: Did you do a full environmental assessment when you filed it? GLEN: Yes, I did. FRANK KUJAWSKI: We haven't voted on this motion, so..if that's the case, maybe the next step would be to vote down the motion that Albert made and I seconded, and we can table the assessment on this until we sit down and look at the rest of it. ALBERT KRUPSKI: Sit down with Glen and the applicant or? GLEN: Bring the engineer to the worksession. ALBERT KRUPSKI: Well, that might be good, to bring the engineer, especially if he's going to have to do... Brief discussion followed on whether or not to have engineer present. Board of Trustees 4 October 19, 1989 FRANK KUJAWSKI: OK, we'll set that up for 6:00 o'clock, then on the next November meeting. I'd like to vote the motion down now, everyone agrees nay on the motion? I make a motion to table the assessment on this application until we have met with the applicant and other concerned parties. ALBERT KRUPSKI: Second. Frank: All in favor? All Ayes FRANK KUJAWSKI: OK, it's t~hled. A motion to recess the meeting go begin our hearings. ALBERT KRUPSKI: So moved. HENRY SMITH: Second ALL AYES V. HEARINGS: 7:35PM 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 AND AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION FROM THE SUFFOLK TIMES AND AND AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION FROM THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELERWATCHMAN. PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE MAY BE READ PRIOR TO ASKING FOR COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. FRANK KUJAWSKI: The first hearing is in the matter of Land Use Company on the behalf of Vera Cusumano to construct a 4'x42' catwalk, a 3'x15' ramp, 5'x30' float, on property off of Briarwood Lane in Cutchogue. Is there anyone here to speak in favor of this application? CHUCK BOWMAN, Land Use Co.: I'll be happy to answer any q~estions if you have any. FRANK: I don't think there were any major concerns. This was approved by the CAC as s~bmitted and I don't believe any of the Board members had any problems with it. Is there anyone here to speak in opposition to this application? Seeing no one, thank YOU, Chuck, I make a motion to close ..well, I don't think I can just close the hearing. No, I need a motion to close the hearing. JOHN BEDNOSKI: Second, ALL AYES. HENRY: You want to vote on it right away, Frank? FRANK KUJAWSKI: Let's go through these. We only have a few, unless you want to. We'll go through them and then we'll come back. 7:36PM: FRANK KUJAWSKI: The second hearing is in the matter of En-Consultants on behalf of Gus Wade to construct a 4'x47'fixed dock, a 4'x14' ramp, and a 5'x30' float at property located on East Creek at the end of East Road, Cutchogue, NY. Is there anyone here to speak in favor' of this application? GUS WADE: Roy Haje is at the Town of Southampton tonight at ten. I am here on my own behalf. Are there any questions the audience might have, that might want answers, I'll be more than happy to answer them. Board of Trustees 5 October 19, 1989 FRANK KUJAWSKI: I had one question that I want to bring up..30' float,.. SPEAKER: 40', 35' FRANK: It's supposed to be 40' ALBERT: 40' on the survey. HENRY: 30' on the Public Hearing... FRANK KUJAWSKI: I think your closest neighbor has got a 20' float. Was there a purpose for the 40' float..are you trying to reach a certain depth of water or... GUS WADE: At low tide, there's only like about a foot of water so it slopes off towards Mr. Nicole's house and at which point, if I didn't go out that distance, the boat would hang up and be sitting up on dry land. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Is it 40 or 30? .... 40? GUS WADE: I believe .... SPEAKER: Including the other notices, it says 30. HENRY SMITH: What does it say on the application? FRANK KUJAWSKI: The applications says 40. HENRY: All right, it's 40 feet, then. GUS WADE: Yeah, because what happens is at low tide we've got to go out about 40 feet to get two feet of water, and I've got a 20' Roballo and it draws about 18" of water. If we didn't go that distance, it would be hanging up. I didn't want to go for a dredging permit. JOHN BREDEMEYER: You didn't think to run the fixed portion further out, fixed dock out further or was that going to be... GUS WADE: Roy Haje and I discussed that. We went there at low tide a couple of times, measured the depth~of the water, figured it was the easiest way. FRANK KUJAWSKI: OK ALBERT KRUPSKI: What is the distance to.., who's the closest neighbor there., to their dock? .... Inaudible... I think, 300 feet..200 feet... GUS WADE: If you want to make a survey, I could dredge it out, but then I've got to go for a dredging permit. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Let's see if anyone is objecting to the length of it, all right? Maybe we don't have a problem or maybe we do. Is there anyone who would like to speak in objection to this application? Mr. Nowacheck.. Thanks, Mr. President. I know every time you see me you think it's trouble, but that's not true. I'm here representing the attorney for Fleets Neck Property Owners Association. I'm very familiar to the Board. Speaking in their behalf, we have no objection whatsoever, to any property owner utilizing their property for the purposes allowed and permitted by any particular law statute. We have no objection, either,to put that land use with any facility upon it, to utilize it in conformity with any existing regulations, laws, and so on. I just want to, historically look back two things for you. Number one: There was an attempt, in this particular case, to get a R.O.W. over your property to construct a dwelling, and that was over an easement up by way of a deed of getting your property. And there was another endeavor to get an easement by way of Board of Trustees 6 October 19, 1989 construction of a bridge over your property, on the Town's property. That was denied. You have to remember that going back you revoked a permit and a building permit that was issued by the Department of Buildings, here, because the permit for building was issued with a perfect, unrecognizable factor that access to this property was by water. You must recall, and your lawyer will tell you, that the Town Law mandates that there must be access to property from a public road, a public thoroughfare. Now, I .... with the individual's review, the file and the application here. We're fully familiar with all the proceedings that took place. Cautionary, we want to support the Board, the administration, and the integrity of the Board in performing its jobs in protecting and enforcing the laws and regulations. We also want to make sure that their property rights are not violated by anything that happens. There was an incident on South Fork involving a mansion. A gentleman was given a permit for giving something that he could remodel. What he really did was, he started doing the thing and the Town came along and said you can't do this. This is not what we wanted to give you the right to do, and the result was he said to them it"ll take the Town and the taxpayers and I'll clean out your pocket for all the money I lost doing this thing. I don't want the Board and I just say this in support your integrity and your good intensions and qualifications to the job the way it is, that you shouldn't create an opening, an opening that may be, quote,"access to property". You're talking about the length of a dock 4'x47', a floating dock 6'x40', you could launch a battleship. If it's within your jurisdiction_and the facility is for normal use, for mooring alighting onto, alighting from a boat or a boating facility, I think that's what catwalks, ramps, floating docks are for. But if it's a means of going to the Town Board and saying now to the Town, the Town Law says that you must have access to your property to get a building permit from a public roll. Why? Emergency vehicles must get there, fire trucks, whateVer you have. And then if you gave him that right, assumingly, and he gets this vehicle for transporting construction equipment and it becomes a right of way, on to the doCk, on to the ramp, on to the property. Are you in a position to turn on him and say this is not what we intended to give you the permit for. I look at the application in the file and I found responses to your queries like, I have a DEC approval, I had a DEC permit to build a one f~mily dwelling, I had a permit from the Town of Southold to build a house, and it was revoked. Gentlemen, if you look at the underlying applications, make the applicant submit his application to the DEC on the basis of which that DEC said it's ok to build that walk, that ramp, and that dock. Let's see what the intension of the applicant is. I don't say the intension is wrong, I do not. I do say for the integrity of your position, your office and your job, add what you are entrusted to do, don't be led into a situation, unless really, you have full knowledge of all the facts, the underlying applications, and what's stated in those applications, gentlemen. Recall there was a DEC approval to build a home on that thing, the permit was violated, all the conditions were Board of Trustees 7 October 19, 1989 violated, resulted in the prosecution .... you don't want that same repetition. Like I say, Fleets Neck Property Owners does not object to the lawful use of the land, the lawful placement of any facility for the quite, useful, peaceful enjoyment of anybody's land. We certainly don't want a Pandora's box and a lot of problems that will probably be a circumvention of existing laws, rules, regulations within a federal, state or municipal or particular regulation that you people abide by, and I think that before a decision is made, that in~portant fact must be rented very ctearly of what the intended use of that facility is, and I say it behooves everybody that the underlying application for the DEC should be made part of your file, because there was certain representations that are made in that application to the DEC, and unless you know what they are, you may be misled and not fully informed before you make your decision. ALBERT KRUPSKI: I have a comment to make on Mr. Nowacheck's statement to the Board. I wonder if .... we're., got an application for access to his property from Trustee access from Trustee property, but it doesn't create an access from the road, it's only from Trustee property to his property. FRANK KUJAWSKI: There's two points here. We checked into this. First point is that this Board has certain rights and legal means to do things that other boards don't have the ability to, because of our charter and the patent rights granted to us. One of those is, if a permit is granted and the purposes of use of that permit are other than what was granted by this Board, we can revoke that peimit at any time. Second pointwould be that it's customary in this town to grant any citizen the right to traverse Trustee property for purposes of gaining access to moorings that we have in town creeks and so on. So, I don't believe there is anything unusual that is happening here, in my viewpoint...more so than any citizen. Does anyone on the Board have a comment? HENRY SMITH: We have his .... in the past, I know what Mr. Nowacheck was saying with the house, I mean that would be considered a permanent access driveway, wells, electricity and things like that. Temporary access we have granted people in this town to repair bulkheads over Trustee land and to repair bulkheads and docks, and things like that. So, I can't see where there's any connection. FRANK KUJAWSKI: I believe, as a matter of fact, in the laws of the Town, you are allowed to .. you're actually not allowed to build a structure that prevents a horse-drawn cart from being taken through Trustee land for the purposes of gathering salt hay for food for animals,so.. MR. NOWACHECK: May I respond to that? FRANK KUJAWSKI: Well, I would only say, Mr. Wade had his hand up for a few moments and I think it would be his turn to comment. We really need to keep an accurate record of this hearing, so please use the microphone, Mr. Nowachecko MR. WADE: Mr. Chairman, at the same time as we applied to the Trustees for a permit to construct my dock, concurrently, we applied to the DEC. ~Boar~ of Trustees 8 October 19, 1989 FRANK: We have that permit. MR. WADE: Thank you, I just wanted to clarify Mr. Nowacheck, that my permit from the DEC has already been issued along with the Army Corps of Engineers to construct this dock. It is not illegal, immoral or fattening, I would hope. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Nor does it included anything other than the dock. MR. WADE: Exactly!, and I would like to clarify that to this Board, and any time at a later date, I need a permit from this town for anything else, I will apply to the necessary board for whatever permit is necessary to do whatever it is necessary to do. Thank you. FRANK KUJAWSKI: You're welcome. MR. NOWACHECK: I want to respond to that. Mr. Wade, I said nothing about being wrong or anything else. What I said was, personally I looked at the application and I am not to assume, I am just a layman, I'm not a member of The Board of Trustees that actually, the ramp, the dock and the float is for purposes, specifically for what it was applied for. It won't be put to any other use. I didn't say you couldn't walk across Trustees' property. What I'm saying is, nowhere in the application did I say that this is going to be used. The first time I heard it here that a boat was going to be brought to that dock and ramp and the facility was going to be used for that purpose. If that's the purpose, and that's in conformity with what it is, that's fine. What I'm saying is that it should not be converted to use other than the allowable, permissible, intended use and that should be clearly specified not only by~th~ applicant on the application to the DEC for their permit, but to you people as well. I looked at the application, I think, that you have there. You show me one response that says anything but that they want to construct this thing without saying what it was going to be used for. FRANK: Well MR. NOWACHECK: Can I ask you a question, Mr. President? If the use of this floating dock and this ramp, you can tie up seventeen boats to it, nose on. Is that an intended use? HENRY SMITH: It's an illegal use. MR. NOWACHECK: If I was going to say, if he was going to start a boating construction materials into the thing and say now I have a right of way. Is that a use? If I were going to bring in on my boat a little jeep that could draw...take materials constructing something on there, is that a legitimate use? That's all I'm saying. I said nothing about nobody not having the use, temporarily, by right of way to go across your property. What I'm saying is that the use must be specific, defined, allowed for, permissible. FRANK KUJAWSKI: I think that's in the Town Code for vessels, marine vessels. HENRY: That is correct. MR. NOWACHECK: And if that's clear, fine. FRANK KUJAWSKI: It is, I really think it is. I appreciate your concern, I'm sure the Board appreciates it. We duly noted that and it will be part of the record here. Board of Trustees 9 October 19, 1989 MRo NOWACHECK: Speaking for Mr. Nicole, who wasn't here, he's past president of Fleets Neck Property Owners Association ..I mentioned it to him..he would like to, if it's only for that boat facility, that it not interfere, and the Association taking the same thing, with the other users of the creek in the inlet to be able to have ingress and then egress from their facilities because of the extension of the facility that might be granted for similar use to Mr. Wade. HENRY SMITH: You c~n't block off navigation. That's in the ... JOHN BREDEMEYER: If there's a problem, it'll have to be altered. That's standing policy. FRANK KUJAWSKI: We've done that before. We've had docks taken out, we've had docks shortened, and we've had docks altered because it does interfere with navigation. I'm sure Mr. Wade and the construction of this, if you do see a potential problem, would make a modification down and let the Board know. GUS WADE: As I stated earlier, is that to go the extra 10 feet to get into the water deep enough and keep the boat there instead of dredging it out, because going through a dredging permit means whole, big lengthy process, I believe. FRANK KUJAWSKI: It's not something we like to see in an area like that. MR. WADE: Thank you. MR. NOWACHECK: Mr. President, one more thing. The Association is very concerned about..you know, at the foot of the road, from what happened before, there's still that black cinder paved situation, ok, which has been and is a violation of the DEC law because it's within the 75 or 80 feet. Y~know~, and nobody ever did anything about taking that away, and the association is rightfully concerned, now, that anybody could remove that barrier and it's been done and use it for...and so on. What had happened just recently is, and Mr. Vanderbeck, one of the old timers of the association and a former officer, had.called the police one day because what had happened, the barrier was removed and some young people decided with their van and their scuba diving equipment and their barbecue outfits and their boat, they drove right on to that thing and boy, they are going to have a great old time right on your property and everybody elses. FRANK KUJAWSKI: This was since we did. the improvements there? SPEAKER: Well, was it? FROM THE AUDIENCE: We saw it and after... MR. NOWACHECK: It was in the same condition it's in now. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Okay, anybody else? Dr. Heneghan. DR HENEGHAN: If the walk is out 47 feet, wOuldn't that bring it out to the channel? If he wants to keep a boat there, that'll be in the channel. ALBERT KRUPSKI: The walk isn't 47 feet. It starts at the break of the bank, so you have maybe, I don't know, maybe 10 or ~12 feet before you get into tidal area. DR. HENEGHAN: OK ALBERT KRUPSKI: But your considerings are valid. FRANK KUJAWSKI: I just think, in the construction of this, if it becomes apparent that you've got what water you need, you 'Boara of Trustees 10 October 19, 1989 could shorten up. It's to your advantage, anyway, because one good freeze this winter and whatever part of the permanent structure happens to be in water, is going to come out. MR. WADE: The water never freezes there, because the tidal a~tion is so great around my point, that it never freezes there, Frank. FRANK KUJAWSKI: OK. Any other comments regarding this application? ALBERT KRUPSKI: I just have a comment to make about a 4' wide dock. I know I make a comment every time we get a dock over 3 feet wide. I know how the Board feels about this. HENRY SMITH: FoUr feet is the minimum. FRANK: No, three feet was the minimum. HENRY SMITH: I can't see any reason to go less than 4 feet. That's a safe size of the dock. FRANK KUJAWSKI: It's been customary in the past year. Any other comments regarding this application? I'll make a motion tO close the hearing. SECOND, Albert Krupski ALL AYES FRANK KUJAWSKI: The En-Consultants, Inc. James Trentalange to shoreline of Wickham there anyone here to next hearing is in the matter of their application on behalf of Susan and construct a 85' stone rip rap along the Creek to Peconic Bay, Cutchogue, NY. Is speak in favor of this application? Is there anyone here to speak in opposition to this application? T~e only comment that I would have is that the CAC did approved this project as long as the applicant follo~.Hh~ plan submitted and also suggested a natural vegetation buffer, which I think, is a doubly good idea in this particular location. I'll make a motion to close the hearing HENRY SMITH: Second ALL AYES FRANKKUJAWSKI: Next application for a hearing is in the..from Eh-Consultants in behalf of Janet Maddams to construct bulkhead within 18" of existing bulkhead on property located on the ROW off of Oaklawn Ave., Southold, NY. Anyone here to speak in favor of this application? Anyone here to speak in opposition to this application? Anyone on the Board have any comments? RENRY SMITH: Other than we looked at it, and I think ... FRANK: Some unusual circumstances exist there HENRY: We didn't have any problem with it. They wanted 18" in front of... ALBERT KRUPSKI: Wasn't there an opportunity here from the contractor to do a little replanting somewhere else? Wasn't that suggested by the contractor? JOHN HOLZAPFEL: He was willing to go two for one,even, at one point. ALBERT KRUPSKI: Yeah, two foot, which is a small area, but... JOHN HOLZAPFEL: I mean, that's something you could take advantage of. FRANK: Some sea plants... ~Board of Trustees 11 October 19, 1989 ALBERT: That's exactly what I was thinking. Frank and I met down there, Henry just missed us down there at Carl Vail's and Mr. Vail has a problem with some sort of manual devegetation on his property. We thought that that was the basic cause of his erosion. I told him that he had a nude beach down there. There was no vegetation and that...it's like a cover crop, it protects the soil from washing away from the upland and from erosion in the creek itself, and I just want the opportunity to have some grass planted just about directly across the creek to hold his property in. FRANK KUJAWSKI: I think we could make that part of the motion if Dr. Samuels is the contractor° ALBERT KRUPSKI: And we also need the cooperation of Mr. VAil. FRANK: I did promise to get back to Mr. VAil with some suggestions. SPEAKER: Frank, I just think Roy was here that day. If I remember correctly, Roy was the one ..and Samuels just backed up. FRANK: Oh, Roy was the one who made the offer? HENRY & AL: Dr. Samuels made the offer. ALBERT: I don't think it would be really that inconvenient for him to do it. JOHN BREDEMEYER: .... projects at the same time with Dr. Samuels, persuades him to go with him for whatever he's going to put in. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Suppose Mike Mooney gets the job? MIKE MOONEY: Inaudible...change the.. where she's going to go with him because I already gave her a price for a replacement. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Did you really? P~ MIKE: Yes, for what the permit called for. When you rejected it four years ago she told me I gave her that price. Well, he came in and figured he could talk to you ...up front, which he did. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Mike, you're starting to make .... We were told it couldn't be done... MIKE: Well, you listen to Doc Samuels. People told me I couldn't get that wreck off the beach over in the ocean, and I proved them all wrong. HENRY: I think you have to see what the price was four years ago. Maybe the price was prohibited for...I don't know. FR~NK: Was there a major difference in price? MIKE: That I don't know. HENRY: Probably, not after four years, no. I think thatts a major concern, the difference in price ALBERT KRUPSKI: Yeah, but after four years it's probably the same price. HENRY SMITH: Well, four years, I don't think the man's going to do it for the same price as four years ago. ALBERT: No, I'm saying in front, he did it for the same price? HENRY: That I don't know, Albert. FRANK KUJAWSKI: IF Mike did it in kind, in place, we could replant Carl Vail's beach. HENRY SMITH: If he runs out of room to plant this grass, I got room in front of my... Board of Trustees 12 October 19, 1989 FRANK KUJAWSKI: Are there any more comments concerning this application? Motion to close this hearing. SO MOVED, ALBERT ALL AYES. FRANK KUJAWSKI: The last hearing is in the matter of the application of En-Consultants on behalf of Nicholas Theoharides to construct a dock, ramp, float, dredge 30x30 around float to .... (change tape) (not recorded..to 3' below MLW,to construct 4'x70' fixed dock, 4'x16' ramp, and a 6'x16' float, property located at 800 Maple Ave., Southold, NY.) JOHN BREDEMEYER: (Beginning not taped) ..specific projects and I think that was in line with what we discussed when I was in the field with them. What he did say was 3 feet, he didn't expect a problem with it from the engineering aspects nor the slops. He was going to refer to Chris. He didn't feel there was going to be a biological problem, but he was going to refer to him, anyway. He said he did talk it over with Chris, and if anything, there was a concern that they should carry at least the same 3 feet out to constant depth, the main channel, so that the use of an outboard wouldn't be churning the bottom going up into the, you know, to the dock. He felt that environmentally, it would be much more detrimental to be moving silt and other material, and if we're going to give the 3 feet, he felt that should probably go to constant depth, is what he said. And pretty much though, he did defer to Chris and he was under the impression Chris was going to write something specifically on this, and of course, Chris's letter he did de~cide it would be prudent not to, so I say it cautiously, that's what he said. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Anyone have any other comments? John, do you have any comments on this. JOHN HOLZAPFEL: I just thought what Jay said was an interesting addition to the whole thing, you know, that you're not just producing..you know, this guy's going to be running through. I just heard that tonight, right now. I think that's an interesting comment, you know that you're producing every time you draw, you know, every time he pulls that thing in and out, he's going to be cutting up the bottom. I'm not sure, I...you know.. I have to think..I just don't have a feeling..but I think it's an interesting point to note because that water is fairly shallow there, all the way out to the channel, I guess, right? HENRY SMITH: Black mayonnaise. JOHN H. I don't know. FRANK KUJAWSKI: We have mitigated this project, alot from its initial submission. JAY BREDEMEYER: I would say that, with respect, oh we're in a public hearing, I don't want to talk extensively.. FRANK: We are at a public hearing. Jay: I'm just going to make it brief. The scaled back project seems in keeping with what was acceptable to, essentially amounts to, a third opinion, through Sea Grant and my inclination would be ...what we got, but leave it open to amending if additional information we have would seem to make it 'Board of Trustees 13 October 19, 1989 that we should be allowing for the constant depth out to the existing channels. ALBERT KRUPSKI: My only comment in this public hearing is that a ..the Board is so tentative at granting this permit for the dredging and then the Board to pass a ban on dredging in this creek because of its concerns and because of its lack of information on exactly the facts of such dredging. That's my comment. HENRY SMITH: Well, we put a ban on dredging in the creek, but we specifically excluded this application, so that should have no baring on the ..... ALBERT: But it does. HENRY: ..or the effectiveness,..Well, when it was put in, it was..it was not to be... ALBERT: But... HENRY: But, that's the way it was. J. BREDEMEYER: Actually, an additional look, an inquiry with Sea Grant was to ,if you will, .... that this project would not have been detrimental in that context, and I think that's why I,you know, I made the extra effort to get to them on that, also. We did, more or less, to try to effect the moratorium so that it wouldn't affect any existing applications, which we did feel were pretty well mitigated. I'll tell you, Chris and Jay, both didn't feel they had much problem with it. They looked at a map and said you should maintain good flushing, and he went so far as to discuss techniques they are using in Connecticut to reclaim the head waters of creeks using high pressure water hose and actually blowing the silt right out, and. blowing this g~opy stuff, like the mayonnaise, off the base, getting back down to sand and shell base. ALBERT KRUPSKI: Back on the neighbor's side? JAY: Well, yes..neighbors are always amenable to these things. FRANK: Should try that there and all the rain in Henry's channel. HENRY: Well, I'll tell you what.. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Anyone in the audience have any comments regarding this application? Mike, you're going to sit there, huh? MIKE: No. I'm willing, after a year of this, in coming to see your cheerful faces, i'm glad we have this thing hammered out and I can go along with Jay's reasoning there as traverser of all these shallow creeks. I do know that, in the course of doing business, I do have to go in shallow water whether its an outboard, which I can now push around with my barge or with my big Chris Craft, it doesn't matter. You stir it up, and if we can avoid that problem in the long run, do it the one time, the dredging, give them water, it's done with for the course of the project for years down the road instead of having something that's a daily or weekly occurrence. If the problem with stirring the bottom..If it seems to be something that will be avoided, now is the time to take care of it and watch it, and see if it does make a difference. I don't know how we can measure it, it's something that at least, in that channelway that we would put in there, you'd be able to tell, if you scoop -Boar~ of Trustees 14 October 19, 1989 , ~- s~ ~:~3-S,n~z get some growth in there or something that ·N' ~ -~--i~ to make a difference. It would be a good case ~z._=~_ .... project is done, when you approve it tonight, I HENRY SMITH: Well, another thing, too, I think you've got to keep in mind, that the road run off going into this creek from the head land, from the farms..the fa~ers aren't plowing right, they go crossway instead of straight up and down or vise versa. That end of the creek has been filled in. I've talked to Walter Ad,son and Wesley Be~oski when he was still alive, ~d Chet Berry and they said, as kids, we used to run an outboard up there all the time, and now you can't row a boat there at low tide, so historically, it's filled in with the runoff from the roads. MIKE MOONEY: If you would take into consideration, people raking~n~- ...... leaves down the side of the road o~~ ~_~ ~ ~ ~er e~e of ~ .... M~n~, you've got the f~renuus~, a~ that runoff even up to the railroad track on x= comes dowm uha= road. All those leaves have been ~a~e ..... years would develop in the area. You've got them fiiiin~ in~ My perfuse budget dredging like something Jay just said ===~==3 ...... ~= doing in Co~ecticut, starting to open up a channel~ maybe help carry some of these new ...out...to help the shell .... ... fxsn and the fish HE~Y ~ .... o~,~z~n~ Right at Ulhrich's Marine, the State goes in there every year and dig that out because it fills in right there, so a~-s historic, the problem that was. created by the road runoff. T~he State put in that great big draining project back in *~ =n,s ........ ~at's what happens now. Everything runs into the creeks. MI~ MOONEY: Hopefully, we can, you know, this will answer an~ore problems we have with this progr~. Hopefully, we'll resolve it tonight. F~{K KUJAWSKI: OK, are there an~ore coE~ents. A motion to close this hearing? ~NRY SMITH: i make a motion to close this hearing. A~=z ~ Krupski Second, '~ ALL AYES. F~VK KUJA%~SKI: is there a motion in the matter of Cus~ano? ALBERT KRUPSKi: i make a motion to approve. Seconded ~ ~= John Bednoski. ALL AYES FR~{K: In ~= ...... ~u==r of Gus Wade ALBERT: %~at were the CAC comments on that? JO~ HOLZAPFEL: We didn't have any, because what happened was, we didn't have a position, no I'll tell you what happened. ?wo mon=~, ~.=neve~ we got it, there was no position of the dock on the -- ~4~. *~-~, app~a~io~ so I know I went back last month to our meeting and said t~hat he presented the diagram and I just vocally said we have all seen the place a hundred times. This is what he wants to ~o, he wants to put in a dock, but we di~t fo~aiiy take a mou~u~ on it. But our feeling, I think, is what your feeling_ ~o~ ~ it's a dock, you know, it's~o ~ =n~r~r~e~.~a~y~ "' ~ ~ ~ Board of Trustees 15 October 19, 1989 harming than any other dock in Southold Town. The one concern, after tonight, is that it is a segmentation, if it is in reality, and I don't think... FRANK KUJAWSKI: Well, I tried to follow that avenue and it doesn't lead anywhere, because it's a "supposa". JOHN HOLZAPFEL: Oh yeah, that's what I say. You can't base decisions on it, but when it does come back, you can at least say that he segmented the.., if it ever does.. JOHN BREDEMEYER: You won't be able to do anything with it, either. I brought it up,too,...then you go segmented what. It wasn't like he's segmented to subvert the intent. It's not like a dock wouldn't ordinarily be approved. JOHN HOLZAPFEL: That's why we don't have any environmental concerns about the dock. HENRY SMITH: I make a motion that we approve the dock application of Gus Wade. Seconded by John Bednoski ALL AYES. JOHN BREDEMEYER: Could I just add...should we just run this across the desk of the Town Attorney if wants to tack some language on with the codes or anything..in other words .. N~mber of voices in opposition.. JOHN BREDEMEYER: Don't make problems, don't make waves, ok. HENRY: Leave it alone. FRANK KUJAWSKI: I think the motion was to approve the application to construct the dock, ramp and the float for the purposes of tying up a boat, a recreational boat. This is one of those cases where I would like to put a time limit on this. We have a right to do that. I don't want this, five years from now, to come up again or construction to start. JAY BREDEMEYER: Make the permit run for two years with no extension? FRANK: Who made the original motion? HENRY: I did. FRANK: So, Henry, will you make that as part of the original motion? HENRY: NO, because we historically, if someone's come back for an extension...one, one extension we have granted before, so I don't think it will..if we do this, I don't think it will hold up in court. I would say, give him a one year ...... FRANK: It's part of Chapter 97. The Trustees have a right to put a time limit on a permit and it's something we should have exercised in cases of..oI'll give you an example of the Kramer property in Mattituck, I was told. If we'd put a time limit on that, then maybe we would forced somebodyto build a house, ok, but on the other hand, we wouldn't still be looking at a cleared lot with a potential ..ah..ten years, right now. In other words, it's being jockeyed around for the price going up. Every time it trades hands, the price goes up another twenty thousand dollars or hundred thousand dollars, or whatever. HENRY: Don't get me wrong. I don't want this to go on forever, but I want to have something we can sink our teeth into. ~Board of Trustees 16 October 19, 1989 FRANK KUJAWSKI: Let's vote,then, on Henry's motion and ah; we'll have to make another motion for those of us that want..permits are two years. HERNRY: Permits. are two years. FRANK: What we're saying, this particular application to be valid would have to be constructed within two years, no extensions. You go along with that? HENRY: I'll go along with that, sure. FRANK: Seconded by John Bednoski, All in favor? ALL AYES FRANK KUJAWSKI: Is there a motion in the matter of Susan and James Trentalange? I'll make a motion to approve that. ALBERT KRUPSKI: Second ALL AYES FRANK KUJAWSKI: Is there a motion in the matter of Janet Maddams? Move to approve: John Bednoski Henry Smith: I'll second it with the stipulation that we get the contractoro.that he is going to replace the area of the marsh destroyed on a two to one basis and it will be planted to.. FRANK KUJAWSKI: At the discretion of the Board the location will be decided by the Board. Henry: Correct, second. All in favor? Four ayes, one nay. FRANK KUJAWSKI: The last one is in the matter of Nicholas Theoharides. Come on, Henry. HENRY SMITH: I make a motion we approve the.:~pplication of Nicholas Thoeharides, my neighbor. JOHN BREDEMEYER: Second. FRANK KUJAWSKI: What we're approving in this motion, if it carries is,..~ HENRY SMITH: Well, the way I look at it here, it's just the way it is written here, a 4'x76' dock, a'4x'16 ramp to a 6'xl6'float, and dredge it 30 by 30' area around float to 3' below MLW. The property is located at 800 Maple Ave.,Southold, NY. FRANK KUJAWSKI: The motion has been made and seconded. Four AMes, on nay. FRANK KUJAWSKI: OK, I'm going to page two, number 3, under assessments..I have to tell the Board that, I know I had called of you, and asked if you would make a settlement With Mr. Geraghty on his violation and approve what he had there, if it were reseeded° Since then, on October 6, we got another letter, after I told them we would go along with this, and you ought to make your own decision. (Letter read, in fileo..proposed to place a maximum of approximately 1000 yards of spoil on existing filled areas). Well, that's not what I described to all of you. JOHN BREDEMEYER: Why don't we make him survey it, stake it, so we could see how the 7' grade would come out. ..put it on field survey. Boar~ of Trustees 17 October 19, 1989 FRANK KUJAWSKI: So,is it the consensus to table the assessment of this to re~aest the applicant to stake the property where the fill will be placed and graded, and the Board will re-inspect. ALBERT KRUPSKI: How will we know what the elevation of 7' will be? How are you going to do that? Speakers: Mark it on the stake. JOHN BREDEMEYER: A licensed surveyor.. FRANK KUJAWSKI: I'll make that motion. JOHN BREDEMEYER: Second ALL AYES. FRANK KUJAWSKI: That takes care of the assessments, that takes care of hearings... Mr. Spitaliere.. Is there a motion in the matter of A1 Koke's application for maintenance dredging? HENRY SMITH: I make a motion that we give it a negative dec. Second: John Bednoski ALL AYES FRANK KUJAWSKI: We need to send a letter to DEC that we have ended the SEQRA process and that..ah...review. VI. AMENDMENTS: FRANK KUJAWSKI: Mr. Spitaliere would like to transfer his permit ~3741 from his name to Charles Bleifeld, who is the new owner of the property for which the permit was originally issued. I'll make a motion to approve that transfer. Second: A1 KrupSki John Bredemeyer: Are they transferable? FRANK KUJAWSKI: By resolution of the Board. ALL AYES. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Number two is Richard Bozsnyak 6425 Skunk Lane to amend permit to include a 12' addition to a fixed dock and to reposition the existing ramp and float. AL KRUPSKI: I was there checking it out and I don't think you'll have a problem with it. There's a little contour in the creek, if he stuck out another 12' he'd only be out 2 or 3 feet past his neighbor to the north. FRANK: No interference? AL KRUPSKI: No interference at all. I'll make a motion to grant this amendment. Second: Frank Kujawski ALL AYES: VII. WAIVERS: 1. En-Consultants in behalf of Russell Ireland, Peconic Bay Blvd, Laurel, NY to remove and replace in same configuration, 30'timber groin located in Peconic Bay. A motion by Frank Kujawski to deny the waiver, requesting the review of this application as a full permit, seconded by John Bednoski. All in favor. 2. John Gutleber, 1325 Lupton's Point Road, Mattituck, NY for the construction of deck to existing single family dwelling, located on Deep Hole Creek. Frank Kujawski made a motion to grant the waiver, seconded by Henry Smith. ALL AYES. ~oard of Trustees 18 October 19, 1989 3. Environment East in behalf of Richard Anderson R.O.W. off Wunneweta Road, Cutchogue, NY to construct accessory building 75'from Wunneweta Pond. ALBERT KRUPSKI: I make a motion to grant him the waiver. HENRY SMITH: I'll second it. ALL AYES 4. Margaret McGwire for a waiver to construct accessory building on property located on Campfire Lane, Peconic, NY. Frank Kujawski made a motion to grant the waiver, seconded by A1 Krupski. ALL AYES. 5. Alan Cardinale, waiver for construction of single family dwelling with associated sanitary system and swimming pool. Property located on R.O.W. off Main Road, Mattituck, NY on James Creek. Frank Kujawski made a motion to table, seconded by John Bredemeyer. Board to inspect. John Hotzapfel of CAC commented. ALL AYES. 6. Valerie Kramer to construct a single family dwelling within 21' of bulkhead on Sterling Creek. Property located between Robinson Road and Manhanset Ave., Greenport, NY. John Bredemeyer, who inspected the project, made a motion to waive, seconded byA1 Krupski. A~L AYES. 7. Edson and Bruer in behalf of Michael and Judi Fouchet, to construct a single family dwelling on Seawood Drive, Southold, NY. John Bednoski made a motion to grant waiver, with stipulation that hay bales be used to contain run-off. Frank Kujawski seconded this motion. ALL AYES IX. GRANDFATHER PERMITS: 1. Robert and Rita Wieczorek, corner of Oak and Pine Ave., Goose Bay Estates, Southold, NY., permit for existing dock. Motion by Henry Smith to grant Grandfather, seconded by John Bednoski. ALL AYES. ((Henry Smith to make sketch) X. MOORINGS: Approval of renewing November renewals, motion by Frank Kujawski to approve, a second by A1 Krupski. ALL AYES. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Is there any business the Board members have to bring up? JOHN BREDEMEYER: I did a field inspection, which was a Planning Board referral for Henry Ra!rnor, for a map in Orient. (Major's Terrace) My only comment was ..with the pond, I grew up almost in the same spot. They are proposing a 10' R.O.W. right at the shoreline of the pond,, and that's right at the vegetation, there's about 25' of vegetation. I recommend that the R.O.W. be moved so it's at least landward of the buffer which puts it somewhere above the 10' contour line; no, no, we can't do it that way. Make it 75' from the waters edge. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Motion to adjourn? HENRY SMITH: So moved. AL KRUPSKI: Second. MEETING ADJOURNED Blados, Clerk