HomeMy WebLinkAboutRerisi, Gail James F. King, President
Jill M. Doherty, Vice-President
Peggy A. Dickerson
Dave Bergen
Bob Ghosio, Jr.
Town Hall
53095 Route 25
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971-0959
Telephone (631) 765-1892
Fax (631) 765-6641
October 15, 2008
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Mr. James E. Fitzgerald, Jr.
Proper-T Permit Services
P.O. Box 617
Cutchogue, NY 11935
RE:
GAlL RERISI
497 PRIVATE RD. #22, SOUTHOLD
SCTM#76-1-15.3
Dear Mr. Fitzgerald:
The Board of Town Trustees took the following action during its regular meeting held on
Wed., October 15, 2008 regarding the above matter:
WHEREAS, Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of GAlL RERISI applied to the
Southold Town Trustees for an amendment to a permit under the provisions of Chapter
275 of the Southold Town Code, the Wetland Ordinance, application dated September
24, 2008, and,
WHEREAS, said application was referred to the Southold Town Conservation Advisory
Council and to the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator for their findings
and recommendations, and,
WHEREAS, the LWRP Coordinator recommended that the proposed application be
found Inconsistent with the LWRP, and specifically Inconsistent with the following
coastal policies: Policy 9 - Provide for public access to, and recreational use of, coastal
waters, public/ands, and public resources of the Town of Southold, Policy 9.4 - Assure
public access to public trust lands and navigable waters, Policy 6 - Protect and restore
the quality and function of the Town of Southold ecosystem, Policy 6.3 - Protect and
restore tidal and freshwater wetlands, and,
WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held by the Town Trustees with respect to said
application on October 15, 2008, at which time all interested persons were given an
opportunity to be heard, and,
WHEREAS, the Board members have personally viewed and are familiar with the
premises in question and the surrounding area, and,
WHEREAS, the Board has considered all the testimony and documentation submitted
concerning this application, and,
WHEREAS, the structure, as applied for, does not comply with the standards set forth in
Chapter 275 of the Southold Town Code, and,
WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the structure, as applied for, will have a
detrimental effect upon the health, safety and general welfare of the people of the town,
and,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT,
RESOLVED, for the foregoing reasons, and based upon the application's failure to meet
the standards contained in Chapter 275 of the Town Code, that the Board of Trustees
deems the proposed project to be Inconsistent with the Local Waterfront Revitalization
Program pursuant to Chapter 268-5 of the Southold Town Code, based on the
inadequate water depths, and,
BE IT FUTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees DISAPPROVES the application of GAlL
RERISl to Amend Permit #6173 to construct a fixed open walkway 4'X 107' with
decking a min. of 3.5' above vegetated grade, hinged ramp 3'X 10', and floating dock
5'X 20', and install two 6" dia. piles to secure the floating dock, and as depicted on the
hydrographic map prepared by Sea Level Mapping last dated September 15, 2008.
This is not a determination from any other agency.
Very truly yours,
I1~. Doherty~dent
/~l~oa rd of Trustees
JMD:lms
Donald Wilder, Chairman
Lauren Standish, Secretary
Town Hall, 53095 Main Rd.
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
Telephone (631 ) 765-1892
Fax (631) 765-6641
Conservation Advisory Council
Town of Southold
At the meeting of the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council held Wed., October
8, 2008, the following recommendation was made:
Moved by Doug Hardy, seconded by Peter Young, it was
RESOLVED to SUPPORT the application of GAlL RERISl to Amend Permit #6173 to
construct a fixed open walkway 4'X 107' with decking a min. of 3.5' above vegetated
grade, hinged ramp 3'X 10', and floating dock 5'X 20', and install two 6" dia. piles to
secure the floating dock.
Located: 497 Private Rd. #22, Southold. SCTM#76-1-15.3
Inspected by: Doug Hardy
The CAC Supports the application with the Condition public access is provided.
Vote of Council: Ayes: All
Motion Carried
James F. King, President
Jill M. Doherty, Vice-President
Peggy A. Dickerson
Dave Bergen
Bob Ghosio, Jr.
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
Telephone (631 ) 765-1892
Fax (631) 765-6641
Southold Town Board of Trustees
Field Inspection/Worksession Report
Date/Time: Ih- {~[~ ~
GAlL RERISI requests an Amendment to Permit #6173 to construct a fixed
open walkway 4'X 107' with decking a min. of 3.5' above vegetated grade,
hinged ramp 3'X 10', and floating dock 5'X 20', and install two 6" dia. piles
to secure the floating dock. Located: 497 Private Rd. #22, Southold.
SCTM#76-1-15.3
T~sealOf area to be impacted:
twaterWetland Freshwater Wetland Sound __Bay
Distance of proposed work to edge of wetland
~Chaf Town Code proposed work falls under:
pt.275 Chapt. 111 other
Type of Application: C/Wetland __Coastal Erosion __Amendment
__Administrative__Emergency Pre-Submission Violation
Info needed:
Modifications:
Conditions:
Present Were: ~J.King L'~J.Doherty __P.Dickerson ~D. Bergen__ B.Ghosio,
__ D. Dzenkowski Mark Terry__other
Form filled out in the field by
Mailed/Faxed to:
Date:
Environmental Technician Review-
James F. King, President
Jill M. Doherty, Vice-President
Pegg~ A. Dickerson
Dave Bergen
John HoLzapfcl
Town Hall
53095 Route 25
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971-0959
Telephone (631) 765-1892
Fax (631) 765-6641
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
#_ 0151C
Dme~2006
The certificate is issued to
aforesaid property.
THIS CERTIFIES that the fixed walkway with steos to ~rade
At 497 Private Rd. #22, Southold ,
Suffolk County Tax Map # 76-1-15.3
Conforms to the application for a Trustees Permit heretofore filed in this office
Dated May 31, 2005 pursuant to which Trustees Permit # 6173 Dated July 20, 2005
Was issued, and conforms to all of the requirements and conditions of the applicable
provisions of law. The project for which this certificate is being issued
is for a fixed walkway with steps to grade
GAIL RERISI owner of the
Authorized Signature
Board Of $outhold 'Town Trustees
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
SCTM#76-1-15.3
PERMIT NO ..... ~g~ ! ~.~ .... DATE:
GAIL RERISI
ISSUED TO ......................................... : .......................................................................................
utt rizatiun ·
Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 6t$ of the laws
the State of New York, 1893; and C~apter 404 of the ,1~, ws of the
· State of New York 19~2; and the Southold Tov~n Ordinance
titled ."REGULATING .AND THE. PLACING OF OBSTRUCTLC)HS
IN AND ON TOWN WATERS AND PUBLIC LANDS and the
REMOVAL OF SAND, GRAVEL'OR OTHER MATERIALS.R[LOM
LANDS .UNDER TOWN WATERS;..?. and in accordance with 'the
Resolution of 11~e Board adopted at a meeting held cm ...~l..y..~.~..0..~ ....
- 2~.°.-5.'.., and in consideration of the sum of $...2~.~.~..P~ .... paid by
Gall Rerisi .......................................................
of ................ ~T.~ ........................................... N. Y. and. subjed to the
Terms and Conditions listed on the reverse slde hereof,
of Southold Town' Trustees authorizes and permits the followlng:
Wetland Permit to construct a 4'X 65' fixed'walkway with steps
to grade, and as depicted on the p~an prepared by P~oper-T
Permit Services dated May 2~, 2005 and hydrographic survey
prepare, d by Sea Level Mapping last revised August 5, 2005.
al in accordance with the detai~ed spe~ificatlons as presented in
· the odglnatlng apl~tkm. ..
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, T~e said Board Of Trustees here-
~ causes ifs C~afe. Seal fo be affixed, and these ~'.ese~ts
subscribed by ~'malorfly of the said Board as of this daf~.
Hydrographic
Surveyed: 02-0305
Amended: 05-28-05
07-114)5, 08.05-05
SCT;~s 1000-76-1-15.3
& 1000-76-1-15.6
Situate: Goose Creek
Town: ~outhold
Suffolk Ooun~, NY
Datum: M.LW.
Tide Range: 2.5' +/-
Survey
APPROVF~
BOARD OF
TOWN OF
['
.... ,.xT. / ~/~/~3~
Board of Trustees
59
July 20, 2005
on this application?
MR. ANDERSON: Bruce Anderson of Suffolk Environmental
Consulting for the applicants.
As you know, what we're planning is a standard
access stairway, it's a Iow impact situation, I don1 think
there's any outstanding issues with this application, but
I'm here to answer any questions you may have.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I don't know if you heard before on the
Kartsonis property, which neighbors this one, LWRP was
not-
MR. ANDERSON: I heard.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: So therefore, we tabled that, and are
likely to table this one as well.
MR. ANDERSON: Why don1 we simply close the hearing and
we'll await it. if complications arise we'll deal with it
then.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Table it. Bruce, if you have any problems
with the LWRP contact the LWRP coordinator not our office.
MR. ANDERSON: Years ago we were all concerned that the LWRP
business would bootstrap the Trustees, and when I worked for
you, going back ten or 15 years ago, we were opposed to it
at that time. We felt that LWRP would dilute the power of
the Trustees. It was enacted by the Town Board either with
or without your support.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Without.
MR. ANDERSON: Now what's occurred is you find yourself with
a bureaucratic process that gets in the way of serving the
people. I'd rather close the hearing so I don't have to
come back and charge a client unnecessarily.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We can't.
MR. ANDERSON: So I have to come back again?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We cant close it because wa need the
recommendations.
MR. ANDERSON: I will talk to Mark tomorrow.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Make a motion to table the hearing.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: All in favor?. ALL AYES.
27. Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of GAlL
RERISI requests a Wetland Permit to construct a fixed open
walkway 4' by 110', hinged ramp, 4' by 12', and a floating
dock 6' by 20', and install two spiles to secure a floating
dock.
Located: 497 Private Road 22, Southold.
SCTM#76-1-15.3
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Is there anyone who would like to comment
Board of Trustees 60
July 20, 2005
on this application?
MR. FITZGERALD: This is a schematic of the LWRP. Jim
Fitzgerald for the applicant. What I have just given you is
a copy of the existing survey with the changes that we are
proposing resulting from your inspection last week,
annotated in red.
Both of the Redsi docks are on this one drawing, as
they were in the original application. The one that we're
looking at now is the one that's at the top of the page, and
it's the longer dock, and it's the one that you, Al, felt
was too long, or the three of you felt was too long. We
reduced the overall length to 100 feet, which is the
regulatory maximum in the Town and eliminated the ramp and
the float and put a set of steps at the end of the dock.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there any other comment on this
application? We don't have an LWRP. Do we have the CAC
comments?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Yes. Resolve to recommend to the
Southold Town Board of Trustees disapproval of the Wetland
Permit application of Gall Redsi to construct a fixed open
walkway 4' by 100', hinged ramp 4' by 12' and the floating
dock 6' by 12' and install two spiles to secure floating
dock. The CAC recommends disapproval of the application
because the proposed deck was not staked. The CAC further
recommends an onshore/off-shore stake because of the well
water depth in the area.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKh LWRP says that it's inconsistent, and
I'll skip to the back - the action as proposed -- and for
the record, this action has changed, the applicant has
submitted a new plan so what I'm reading from the LWRP is in
response to the original submission. The action as proposed
is inconsistent with the LWRP. Also known as the Local
Waterfront Revitalization Program, it is recommended that
the Board of Trustees consider the below information and
require the following outstanding items to better assess the
action, the policies and the intent of the LWRP. One, the
proposed scale of the dock is excessive and inconsistent
with the existing docks to the west and opposite the
property. You can feel frae to address these as we go along
if you want, but I think what you have submitted hera
addresses some of that, dght?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: How does that work? He's going to
submit this, shouldn't our LWRP coordinator review for
consistency or do we become the coordinators and say now
it's consistent? Why doesn't everyone come in with something
big and then come in with a secondary drawing and say okay --
Board of Trustees 61
July 20, 2005
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: They all do that.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: You know what I'm saying.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If we go back and he assesses this,
then -
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: How do we know this is consistent and not
this one?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: He can't say 20 feet. Then he might as
well write the permit, You can still, Ken, amend this and
change this as a Board, but we can~ let him do that then we
might as well go home.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I agree with you but if that is going to
be a common practica of putting the floating dock right
across the whole creek and coming in with the secondary plan and
saying, oh, okay, yes, that was inconsistent and here I
addressed it.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You can still change it though, it doesn't
matter. In this case pretend it doesnl exist.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: You and I can make it consistent. We
know what's consistent.
MR. FITZGERALD: Let me make a bold and innovative
suggestion, you could apply common sense, someone else
fooling around with the process, you can say, I'm sorry,
forget about it.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Number 2, Goose Creek is a listed Critical
Environmental area by the New York State DEC, which entitles
the area to a heightened level of protection. That's a
fact, I don't know how you can address that.
MR. FITZGERALD: I can explain it, and that most of the
creeks in Southold town, if not all of them, are listed as
I'm not sure the word "critical" is correct, but is listed
on that list, whatever it is. And the DEC has never
required special treatment for any permits on any of the
town's creeks and that includes providing a long
environmental assessment form, which we have talked about
last time.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Three, the proposed use of the dock has
not been identified?
MR. FITZGERALD: What?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The proposed use of the dock has not been
identified.
MR. FITZGERALD: The dock will be used for accessing the
water.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thankyou. Four, the proposed elevations
of the dock have not been identified.
MR. FITZGERALD: The elevation of the dock will be in
accordance with established procedures by the Town Trustees
Board of Trustees
62
July 20, 2005
and one of the statements in the LWRP indicates that all
applicable government regulations will be followed.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Five, the proposed construction methods
and the materials have not been identified.
MR. FITZGERALD: The methods and the materials will be the
standard good management, good construction procedures which
are used throughout the industry and throughout the town and
have been used and approved by the Trustees for many years
in the past.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Six, the proposal does not propose
mitigation to the areas impacted due to the construction of
the dock or construction best management practices to
minimize adverse impacts.
MR. FITZGERALD: It does.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Are there any other comments?
MR. JOHNSTON: Is there no diagram?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Did you submit a cross-section?
MR. FITZGERALD: No.
MR. JOHNSTON: A diagram?
MR. FITZGERALD: No.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Does the Board have any questions?
MR. JOHNSTON: How can you inspect it if you don~t have the
document?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We inspected the location.
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Is it required by the permit, that you
need a cross-section?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKh The application?
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: That's what I thought you were looking
at.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKh While they're looking that up, we have a
letter from a neighbor Margaret E. Bushing, in reference to
the two applications protesting as it will destroy the
natural wetlands that harbor wild fowl and deer.
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: You have to read the last line.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes, I still use a typewriter as you can
see.
MR. JOHNSTON: Peggy, to answer your question, number two in
the requirements is a schedule of the proposed activities
with the completion date; three, the purpose of the proposed
operation, which was why he asked to do what he asked; four,
the amount of the material proposed and/or the type, size,
location of the any proposed structure.
MR. FITZGERALD: What are you reading from?
MR. JOHNSTON: 97-21 application, what should be in an
application, which is in response to Peggy's question of
what are we requesting. And among other things, description
Board of Trustees 63 July 20, 2005
of the area. I don't know whether you would deem that to be
the type, size, location of any proposed structure. I would
think that somehow you would have to have a diagram of it,
but that's up to the five of you.
MP,. FITZGERALD: What?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKh On most docks we require a cross-section
showing the structure.
MR. FITZGERALD: Okay. This being a walkway, which has a
faidy well-defined and well-understood cross-section, it
starts here and it goes there, and it ends, and it's
supported by piles, I didnt feel that it was necessary.
I'd be more than happy to provide you with a cross-section
before the close of business tomorrow.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Peggy, what are your concems?
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I have a major concern about the
critical environmental areas because the marsh area is so
pristine, and also it's very shallow, that was the
Conservation Advisory Council's concern.
MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, as Rob mentioned before and I would
like to repeat is the alternative is having people walk
through the marsh area not necessarily in the same area, and
dragging their boats through it to get it from here to
there, and I think in the long run, we're better off with a
walkway as Rob indicated.
MS. TETRAULT: What's the square footage?
MR. JOHNSTON: 4' by 82'.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Are you finished?
MP,. FITZGERALD: Yes.
TRUSTEE KP,UPSKI: Ken, do you have any concems?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: No, if we're allowed to act, that's fine
by me.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any concerns about the dock size?
TP,USTEE POLIWODA: Shorten up.
TRUSTEE KP, UPSKI: When we acted on that Mitchell one that
was deemed inconsistent, the dock went to Iow water.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Still no good.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Why?.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: It's still too long.
TRUSTEE KP,UPSKI: What would you suggest?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I suggest from the starting point roughly
60 feet.
MP,. FITZGERALD: To what point?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I would recommend see where the Iow water
is. The ramp and float, you'll end up right there again,
fourfeet pastthat Iowwater. It's not environmentally
sound to go 30 feet further.
Board of Trustees 64 July 20, 2005
MR. RERISi: My name is Victor Rerisi, Greenport. Basically
I just wanted to hear what was going on because I was
missing it. I really don~t have much to say other than we
met with the Board twice. We're trying to work with the
Board. The Board made some suggestions which we took. We
reduced the length of the dock, they requested steps. They
wanted open grating, which I'm more than willing to do,
changed the location, and we're trying to work with the
Board. I'm not trying to be a pig about this. I'm trying
to be very fair. What I'm really looking for is to make
safe access to the water. There's a lot of mud there. We
want to get over the mud and be able to enjoy water. Not
any more and not any less, and again, this was at your
recommendation.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: I understood we had an understanding.
MR. RERISh We had met and we went over this. We had it
re-staked, then they wanted it brought back, which we did,
and I thought we complied with everything the Board had
asked us to do.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You can see with this LWRP it's not a
smooth process here.
MR. RERISI: I understand. I think what Jim had mentioned
before was I think every area of Southold, all these creeks,
are critical, I appreciate that. It's a concern but
certainly let's not use that as an excuse not to give
access to the water, which I think every landowner who has
waterfront property is entitled to. I'm not looking to put
big docks here, your recommendations were accepted and I
appreciate them. So, whatever you can do, I'm trying to be
fair about this.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Can we end the headng?
MR. FITZGERALD: Al, one more point, please. With regard to
the special exception, the statement was made with the DEC
requirements, there exists in this immediate area six other
docks. Now, in the Department of State discussion of the
vadous policies with regard to consistency, they take into
account previous development, and I think that ought to be
taken into account here. The grass is a pdstine area
because there have been no houses on our side of the creek,
but the creek certainly is not pristine.
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I think I've been there twice. I think
one of the things that's brought up over and over again is
that although people on the other side have their docks and
we should have our docks, and those people that have
property should have access, and, yes, they should but the
resources are the resources of the Town. And I think one of
Board of Trustees 65 July 20, 2005
the things that I was most disturbed at, even though I look
at the docks and I looked at the modifications and the
alteretions, it is still an extremely sensitive area. And
the point being that in our area we are losing and losing
and losing this very, very special ecosystem and you have to
start somewhere. One of the things that I think Heather
could give us more information on is the amount of wetland
loss that these docks, which there's a catwalk down to
the water, that you're losing. Could I have Heather
elaborate on that?
MR. RERISI: I want to elaborate on what you just said. It
is a critical area we're not denying that. One of the
conservations we had when the Board was there about what's
better, having a catwalk or dragging, as Jim had said, kayaks
or boats threugh there or walking through there, more damage
will be done. We're not trying to create a problem here,
we're trying to resolve an issue. People will buy those
homes and they will be going down to the water. We can
control this now, we can1 control it later. It's going to
be a little more difficult.
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Heather, would you just elaborate on
that comment about the amount of square footage?
MS. TETRAULT: The new preposal's 95 feet for Gall Rerisi,
so that's a loss of 380 square feet of wetland, and it's the
incremental loss of our wetland habitat that is causing all
the problems in our estuary that's from the Peconic Estuary
Program's numerous other studies. So that's documented and
these vegetated wetlands are resources of the Town of
Southold. They're not owned by anybody, they're for
everybody. So by placing a permanent structure over them,
you're taking them away from the people of the Town.
Mr. Fitzgerald mentioned six other docks, the more
development there is the more impact there is, that's even
more reason why there's going to be more impact. And
especially in that creek, there have been so many docks
permitted in that creek in the past 10 years, there's been a
lot of loss of wetland.
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: From my perspective we have the
Conservation Advisory Council, we have Mark Terry, the
environmental planner representing the Local Waterfrent
Revitalization Plan and also the Peconic Estuary Pregram all
recommending that this not be done hera.
MR. FITZGERALD: Mark Terry recommended that; is that
correct?
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: He was saying it was inconsistent with
the LWRP.
Board of Trustees 66 July 20, 2005
MR. FITZGERALD: We discussed the points that led to Mark -
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I still agree to it being a critical
environmental area by the New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation.
MR. RERISI: Application 23 was also deemed to be critical.
We're not saying that the wetlands aren't critical. I
just don't understand, and I'm trying to be very fair. I
don't understand how you can deny this application.
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I am one of five.
MR. RERISI: Again, I met with you and I listened to what
you had to say, and I understand, believe me, about the
environment, and again, I don't want to repeat myself, but
we've got to balance the environment with -
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: And we have to balance homeowners with
the public,
MR. RERISh I understand that. I~/e been here since 7:15,
7:30 tonight, there's been 26 applications prior to this
one; this is a very, basic, simple catwalk. Every
application's in a cdtical area.
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I'm one of five, that's my opinion.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Jim?
TRUSTEE KING: I say shorten up just to beyond the Iow water
mark.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Ken?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: If I make a motion for 65 feet of fixed
catwalk, is that consistent?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I think you have to make a motion as a
Trustee and --
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: If I make that motion why would we
need consistency review?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Let me read this again. The action as
proposed is inconsistent with the LWRP. Here's the key
word, it is recommended that the Board consider the below
information and require the following outstanding items to
better assess the action to the policies and intent of the
LWRP, but you're considering something that wasn't
proposed. So I think if you want to make a motion, you have
to do so as a Trustee and you have to go back - if we give
this back to Mark Terry, he's making the decision, he puts a
number on it. We can't let that happen.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: How about 109.5 feet, he said 110 feet is
not consistent.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You can't quantify that, we have to make a
decision like we normally would.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I would say 65 is consistent with what we
would normally give out.
Board of Trustees
67
July 20, 2005
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Artie?
TRUSTEE FOSTER: Couple of things, is 65 feet going to solve
the problem if he only needed 65 and not 95 he wouldn't
apply for 95. Is 65 feet going to get you where you want to
go?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Kenny said for the extra 30 feet you're
gaining five inches of water -- two inches of water.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: Is it critical, could it be shortened up?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Of course it could be shortened.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: And the other thing I kind of thought that
we all made an agreement and here we are at the 11th hour
and we are all here in disagreement,
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It's a public headng.
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I'm giving my opinion.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: I donl have a problem with that. This is
one of the applications this evening that I thought we all
had agreed upon in the field when we were there, and now all
of a sudden we're in disagreement, and I don~ understand
why.
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: What is discussed in the field isn't
always written in stone. We've come in before and altered.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: When other cimumstances lead into
it. Generally when we meet with the applicant, do this,
submit this, submit that, we'll go along with this, and
we'll go along with that, we did that.
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: We didn't have the LWRP in front of
US.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Kenny wasnl there either.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: Ken wasn't there that's true. I'd just
kind of like to know what direction I'm going in. We
hashed this out and talked about it and now we're in
disagreement. I don't have a problem with that if we have a
valid reason for it. But a statement was made earlier we
shouldn't be using this LWRP as one more reason to deny an
application. I agree with that, this is not what this is
intended to be.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'm going to go back two months before the
LWRP, if you're sitting here two months ago, Ken's going to
say it should be shortened to the edge of the marsh with
stairs because you're going to go out another 30 feet to
gain two inches of water.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: We did shorten it in the field and we moved
it to the left so we could shorten it, and now we're going
to shorten it again. If that five inches of water isn't
cdtical and you can shorten it another 30 feet, well, I'm
for that. If it is cdtical with another agency he isn't
Board of Trustees 68 July 20, 2005
going to get his permit, we aren't doing anybody any favors
here.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: There's no float involved here anyway.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: If it works fine. I think we all need to
be on the same page long before we sit up here.
MR. FITZGERALD: The line at the edge of the marsh is not
shown, and I would suggest that without knowing where that
line is that you should not pick a number without being able
to see where the edge of the marsh is because 65 feet may be
in the marsh.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: 65 feet might be too far.
MR. FITZGERALD: It might be too far but it might be too
short.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Low water would normally be beyond the
marsh. You're going to show should mud.
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Mr. Fitzgerald, do you have a number of
pilings?
MR. FITZGERALD: No.
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Estimate, about?
MR. FITZGERALD: I would say two. I think the comments that
Mrs. Tetrault made about the amount or the number of square
feet that are taken up by a particular project, whether it's
this one or the all the others which you approved tonight
which didnl get into the number of the square feet that
were being lost, it's a generalization, and I don1 think
it's the kind of thing that ought to be applied to
individual applications.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Why not?
MR. FITZGERALD: Because everything that came before you
tonight, that statement could have been made with minor
modifications and given as a reason not to approve it,
everything.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Jim, just on the last Cardinale project,
that's just what Jim said. If you eliminate the middle
finger and Peggy said, yeah, because you eliminate the
bottom coverage over that area.
MR. FITZGERALD: If I may, and this is something that has
concerned me for a long period of time --
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It comes up all the time.
MR. FITZGERALD: I'm not aware of any valid studies that
show what it is that we're trying to prevent from happening.
We have the magic phrase, "adverse impact," what does that
mean?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Peggy and I and Artie and Jim and Kenny
can answer that.
MR. FITZGERALD: What does that mean, it kills snails? I
Board of Trustees
69
July 20, 2005
would appreciate knowing where the studies are; I would
appreciate knowing where the studies are about the effect of
the shading on wetland vegetation or any vegetation.
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: We have been working with the Nature
Conservancy over the last three years and there is a
committee called the Peconic Bay National Shoreline Committee.
We had spent one of our workshops completely discussing the
ecological impacts of docks in the estuarian system.
MR. FITZGERALD: Could I have some of those statements?
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I would be happy to give you, i'm not
going to read them now.
MR. FITZGERALD: Put them in the records because there's a
statement made in one of those that says they're not quite
sure that the shading from docks and so forth is
significantly detrimental to wetland vegetation,
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Heather could give you a few soumes of
information.
MS. TETRAULT: There's a Peconic Estuary Program
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: The Nature Conservancy,
MS. TETRAULT: Save the Bay and Rhode Island has some
studies. What all the scientists say is that all the
Peconics are dying, and we have a lot of life. We're very
lucky where we live it's beautiful, and the work that the
Trustees are doing to preserve the resources is critical to
keeping the life in the bay that's there, There are bays
all around the world that are dead and that's what we'll
have if we continue to lose our wetland, Those studies are
documented. Go online. I can look for stuff for you to
read, if you like.
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Thank you.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Ken?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I make a motion to close the public
hearing.
MR. RERISI: I don't want to close the public heating.
MR, FITZGERALD: It is unclear to me why other applications
for exactly the same sort of applicant were approved by the
Board tonight and this one we're having this big brouhaha
about.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's what I'm thinking also. First of
all, every application is looked at on its own merits. We
try to be consistent but every creek is different, There's
different conditions in upland vegetation, wetland
vegetation and water depth. The one that comes to mind,
though, if you want to make a comparison tonight is the
Mitchell one, where the application was for a 4' by 53'
fixed timber catwalk. We had a discussion about narrowing
Board of Trustees 70 July 20, 2005
it to a three foot catwalk; we had that discussion, then we
approved it with 4' by 6' set of stairs at the end of it at
the edge of the vegetated marsh. That's the one that comes
to mind tonight,
MR. FITZGERALD: That's the one that I was talking about.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: That was not the one you wanted to make
narrow, it was a different one.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I thought it was that one.
MR. RERISI: Are they going to negotiate before they close
the headng?
(Discussion)
TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I agree.
TRUSTEE FOSTER: You agree you can't approve five and then
pick on one.
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: There's not five.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Make a motion to close the public
hearing.
TRUSTEE KING: Second.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: All in favor? ALL AYES
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I make a motion to approve on behalf of
Gall Rerisi a 4' by 65' fixed catwalk, with a five foot set
of stairs down to grade water's edge.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Did you mention the plans, cross-section
plans?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: As well as I'll stipulate we need a
cross-section plan.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Four by four construction?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: All four by four construction, and
pilings,
MR. JOHNSTON: How high above?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Two and a half feet above.
MR. FITZGERALD: Above what?.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Grade.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Above the marsh grade, marsh edge.
Do I have a second?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Second,
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: All in favor?.
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: No, I deny because of the amount of
square foot of the wetland area.
MR. JOHNSTON: Al, because there seems to be a question here
can you do a roll call vote?
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Peggy?
TRUSTEE DICKERSON: No.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Jim?
TRUSTEE KING: Aye.
TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Al?
THE SITE OF THE PROPOSED
PROJECT IS SHADED
LA,
CORPS OF ENGINEERS DATA
PURPOSE: Construct fixed open walkway, hinged
ramp, and floating dock for private recreational
purposes.
DATUM: MLW
IN: Goose Creek AT: Southold
COUNTY: Suffolk STATE: New York
TAX MAP
Application regarding the property of
Gall Rerisi, SCTM #1000-76-1-15.3
Represented by
PROPER-T PERMIT SERVICES
P.O. Box 617, Cutchogue, NY 11935
James E. Fitzgerald, Jr. 631-734-5800
May 27, 2005
OFFICE LOCATION:
Town Hall Annex
54375 State Route 25
Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.
Southold, NY 11971
LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MAILING ADDRESS:
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
Telephone: 631 765-1938
Fax: 631 765-3136
Jim King, President
Town of Southold Board of Trustees
From:
Mark Terry, LWRP Coordinator
Scott A. Hilary, LWRP Coordinator
Date: October 6, 2008
Chapter 268, WATERFRONT CONSISTENCY REVIEW
Requests an Amendment to Wetland Permit #6173 for GAIL RERISI
SCTM#76-1-15.3
GAlL RERISI requests an Amendment to Permit #6173 to construct a fixed open walkway 4'X 107' with decking a min.
of 3.5' above vegetated grade, hinged ramp 3'X 10', and floating dock 5'X 20', and install two 6" dia. piles to secure the
floating dock. Located: 497 Private Rd. #22, Southold. SCTM#76-1-15.3
The proposed action has been reviewed to Chapter 268, Waterfront Consistency Review of the Town of Southold Town
Code and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) Policy Standards. Based upon the information provided
on the LWRP Consistency Assessment Form submitted to this department, as well as the records available to us, it is our
recommendation that the proposed action is INCONSISTENT with LWRP policy standards and therefore is
INCONSISTENT with the LWRP.
Policy 9-Provide for public access to, and recreational use of, coastal waters, public lands, and public resources of
the Town of Southold.
The proposed action is private~ noncommercial and will not support a pattern of development that enhances
community character nor preserves "Public" access or public recreational activities
Policy Standard-9.4 Assure public access to public trust lands and navigable waters.
A. Provide free and substantially unobstructed passage along public trust shorelands.
E. Provide access to, and reasonable recreational use of navigable waters and public trust lands under water.
3. Obstruclion of navigable waters and underwater lands is limited:
b. lo the minimum necessary for access to navigable waters. The minimum is determined by evaluating
the following factors:
(ii) the rangd~lidal water level fluctuation,
The proposed amendment to the existing dock is not suitable in this location due to the limiting water depth {.6 to
1.8 feet). As well~ the Board of Trustees disapproved on July 20~ 2005~ at their regular public hearing the original
request for a longer dock structure because of the limited water depths in this location.
[vid whether or not alternative means to gain access are available.
The applicant currently enioys adequate access to navigable waters via the existing dock structure. The applicant
also has an alternate means of access to Goose Creek via the Town's boat ramp off Gagen's Landing Rd.
Policy 6 Protect and restore the quality and function of the Town of Southold ecosystem.
6.3 Protect and restore tidal and freshwater wetlands.
A. Comply with statutory and regulatory requirements' of the SouthoM Town Board of Trustees laws and
regulations for all Andros Patent and other lands under their jurisdiction
1, Comply with Trustee regulations and recommendations as set forth in Trustee permit conditions.
The proposed action is located in Goose Creek a Critical Environmental Area nominated by the Town of Southold
as worthy of protection (see Critical Environmental Areas § 275-2 Definitions below). Any proposed action in a
Critical Environmental Area may be subiect to more stringent requirements such as denial of certain operations
pursuant to § 275-11 Construction and operation standards.
§ 275-2 Definitions; word usage.
CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS -- All sites previously nominated by the Town of SouthoM and designated by
the New York Sate Department of state as Critical Environmental Areas worthy of protection including: Cutchogue
Harbor Wetlands, Hailock's Bay, Dam Pond, Downs Creek, Orient Creek, West Creek, Richmond Creek and Beach,
Brush's Creek, Cedar Beach Creek, Corey Creek, Deep Hole Creek, Goldsmiths Inlet, Hails Creek, Goose Creek, Little
Creek, Mill Creek and Pipes Cove Creek.
The existing dock structure has already resulted in the destruction of and prevented the growth of vegetated
wetlands {see Figure #1 below). Therefore~ the construction and operation standards pursuant to § 275-11 have
not been met.
§ 275-11 Construction and operation standards.
C. In water. The following standards are required for ail in-water operations adjacent to residential properties.
Operations conducted on properties zoned MI or M2 may be given greater flexibility in these requirements given the
water-dependent nature of their use.
(2) Docks.
Review and approval of dock applications. Before issuing a permit for a dock structure, the Trustees shall
consider whether the dock will have any of the following harmful effects:
[U
Whether the dock will impair navigation or be located in areas of high vessel traffic or vessel congestion;
Whether the dock will unduly interfere with the public use of waterways for swimming, boating, .fishing,
shell, fishing, walerskiing and other water-dependant activities;
Whether the dock will unduly interfere with transit by the public along the public beaches or foreshore;
Whether the dock will significantly impair the use or value of waterfront property adjacent to or near the dock;
Whether the dock will cause degradation of surface water quality and natural resources;
Whether the dock will cause habitat fragmentation and loss of signi, ficant coastal fish and wildlife habitats;
The proposed action if approved will result in continued habitat destruction and impairment with the
physical loss of fish and wildlife habitat within a Critical Environmental Area.
]7] IVhether the docl~ will result itidhe destruction of or prevent the growth. ~l~getated wetlands, seagrasses
including eelgrass (Zostera I~na) and widgeon grass (Ruppia mariti~r shellfish;
[8] Whether the dock will unduly restrict tidal flow or water circulation;
[9] Whether the dock will be safe when constructe&
[10] Whether the dock will adversely affect views, viewsheds and vistas important to the community;
[11] Whether the cumulative impacts of a residential and commercial dock will change the waterway or the
environment and whether alternate design, construction, and location of the dock will minimize cumulative
impacts; and
[12J Whether adequate facilities are available to boat owners and/or operators for fueling, discharge of waste and
rubbish, electrical service and water service.
Figure #1 Existing dock causing the destruction of and preventing the growth of vegetated wetlands.
The following best management practice is recommended:
1) Require that the applicant replace the wood plank decking with grid decking having greater than 50%
light penetration to the substrate.
If the Agency, Board of Trustees makes a contrary determination of consistency~ the Agency shall elaborate in
writinil the basis for its disagreement with their recommendations Pursuant to Chapter 268 Waterfront
Consistency Review.
§ 268-5. Review of actions.
In the event the LWRP Coordinator's recommendation is that the action is inconsistent with the LWRP, and the
agency makes a contrary determination of consistency, the agency shall elaborate in writing the basis' for its
disagreement with the recommendation and state the manner and extent to which the action is consistent with the
L WRP policy standards.
Pursuant to Chapter 268, the Board of Trustees shall consider this recommendation in preparing its written
determination regarding the consistency of the proposed action.
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
TO THE SOUTHOLD BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF:
Gail Rerisi, SCTM # 1000-76-1-15.3
STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
James E. Fitzgerald, Jr., residing at 385 Haywaters Drive, Cutchogue, NY 11935, being duly
sworn, deposes and says that on the 7t~ day of October, 2008, deponent mailed a true copy of the
Notice set forth in the Board of Trustees Application, directed to each of the named persons at the
addresses set opposite their respective names; that the addresses set opposite the names of said
persons are the addresses of said persons as shown in the current assessment roll of the Town of
Southold; that said Notices were mailed at the United States Post Office at Cutchogue, NY 11935,
that said Notices were mailed to each of said persons by Certified Mail/Return Receipt Re-
quested.
Sworn to before me this 15th
day of October, 2008.
CAROl. HYOELL
NOTARY PUBLIC o STATE OF NEW YORK
NO. 01HY6189695
QUALIFIED IN SUFFOLK COUNTY ~
COMMISSION EXPIRES o6J3o/2o.L~-.,,
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
TO THE SOUTHOLD BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF:
Gail Rerisi, SCTM #1000-76-1-15.3
STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
I, James E. Fitzgerald, Jr., residing at 385 Haywaters Drive, Cutehogue, NY 11935, being duly
sworn, depose and say that on the 7* day of October, 2008, I personally posted the property
known as ff497 Private Road #22, Southold, by placing the Board of Trustees' official poster
where it can easily be seen, and that I have checked to be sure the poster has remained in place for
eight days prior to the date of the public hearing, which date is noted thereon to be Wednesday,
October 15, 2008 at or about 6:00 PM.
itzgerald, Jr.~/~/ ~ 7~'
Sworn to before me this 15th
day of October, 2008.
Notary Public v /
NOTARY PUBLIC . STATE OF NEW YORK
NO. 01HY6189695
QUALIFIED IN SUFFOLK COUN?Y.~
COMMISSION EY, PIRE$ {]6/30120.~...~'~
TO:
Date: October 7, 2008
Adjacent Property Owners
(Names and addresses are listed on the attached sheet.)
BOARD OF TRUSTEES, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
NOTICE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
In the matter of: Gall Rerisi; SCTM #1000-76-1-15.3
YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE THAT:
1. An application is being submitted to the Board of Trustees for a permit to:
Extend existing permitted fixed walkway 45', add 3' x 10' hinged ramp and 5'
x 20' float at seaward end, install two 6" d. (nominal) piles to secure floating
dock.
The project described above is proposed on property adjacent to yours. The street ad-
dress of that property is as follows:
I497 Private Road #22, Southold, [
NY
1
1971
The project, which is subject to Environmental Review under Chapters 275 of the Town
Code, is open to public comment. A public hearing will be held at Town Hall, 53095 Main
Road, Southold, New York 11971 at or about 6:00 PM on Wednesday, October 15, 2008.
You may contact the Trustees Office at 631-765-1892 or in writing if you wish to comment
The project described above will be reviewed by the Board of Trustees of the Town of
Southold. The project may require independent review and approval by other agencies of
the Town, State, or Federal governments.
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
PHONE NO.:
Gall Rerisi
5 Bethpage Road
Hicksville, New York 11801
516-939-0669
A copy of a sketch or plan showing the proposed project is enclosed for your convenience.P
October 7, 2008
GAIL RERISI: ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
NOTICE NOT SENT
(PROPERTY OWNER)
1000-76-1-15.3
Vincent Matassa and Gail Refisi
5 Bethpage Road
Hicksville, New York 11801
NOTICE SENT
1000-76-1-15.1
Vincent Matassa and others
5 Bethpage Road
Hicksville, New York 11801
1000-76-1 - 15.5
Victor Rerisi and Deborah Matassa
5 Bethpage Road
Hicksville, New York 11801
1000-76-1-14
Arthur and Mary Jane Gross
Post Office Box 812
Southold, New York 11971
1000-76-1-12.1
Ruth Stapleton
53 Link Avenue
Hicksville, New York 11801
Hydrogra
Measured Site: 02-03-05
Local~d New Docks: 09-12-08
Map/~mended: 05-28-05.
07-11-05, O8-05-O5, 09-16-08
SCT#'s 1000-76-1-15.3
& 1(X)0-76-1-15.6
Situate: Goose Creek
Town: Southold
Suffolk County, NY
Batum: Low Water
N
SEA
LEVEL
MAPPING
P.O. Box366
Aquebogue, NY 11931
Proper-T Permit Service
POST OFFICE BOX 617, CUTCHOGUE, NEW YORK 11935-0617
(631) 734-5800
Presidem
Southold Board of Town Trustees
Post Office Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
September 22. 2008
Re: Amendmem to Permit No. 6173; Gall Rerisi, SCTM #1000-76-1-15.3 ~--:z~~
Dear Sir:
The property owner, Gail Rerisi, wishes to amend the referenced permit as follows:
The length of the fixed open walkway is increased from 62' to 107', and a hinged ramp and
float are added at the seaward end. The amended project description therefore is:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct fixed open walkway 4'x 107' with decking a minimum
of 3.5' above vegetated grade, hinged ramp 3'x 10', and floating dock 5'x 20'; install two 6"
d. (nominal) piles to secure floating dock.
The structure "designed" and permitted by the Trustees and NYSDEC has proven impractical and
unsatisfactory. It ends at the edge of the marsh with steps to grade, and at even ordinary low tides
there is no water at the end of the steps.
Four copies of a new drawing (Hydrographic Map, last revised 9/15/08) showing the proposed
changes are enclosed, as is a check in the amount of $50.
If there are any questions, or if additional information is needed, please call me.
Sincerely,
a subsidiary of
THE PECONIC EASTERN CORPORATION
LWRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM
SCTM~, 1 o00- 76-1-15.3
PROJECT 1NA_ME GAIL RERISI
DOCK EXTENSION
The Application has been submitted to (check appropriate response):
TownBoard ~] PlsnnlngBoard~] Building Dept. ~ BoardofTrustees
1. Category of Town of Southold agency action (check appropriate'response):
(a)
Action undertaken directly by' Town agency (e.g. capital
conslmction, planning activity, agency regulation, land transaction)
CO) F~nan¢ial assistance (e.g. grant, loan, ,subsidy)
(c) Permit, approval, license, certification:
Nature and extent of action:
Extend existing dock~ add ramp and float
Location of acfion: 497 Private Road #22; Goose Creek
0.77 acres
Site acreage:.
Present !and use: S ingle- family re s id eric e
R-40,
Present zoning classification:
If an application for the proposed action has been filed with the Town of Southold agency,
the following information shall be provided:
(a) Name of applicant:
Gail Rerisi
Co) M~ilingaddress: PO Box 112. Bayville NY 11709
(c) Telephone number: Area Code ( ) 51 6- 628 - 115 0
(d) Application number, if any:. ---
Will ~on be directly undertaken, require funding, or approval by a state or federal agency?
Yes I~1 NoN Ifyes, which state or fedcralagency? NYSDEC
APPLICANT: GAlL RERISI
SCTM #: 1000-76-1-15.3
LWRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM
Policy 1
[] YES
Foster a pattern of development in the Town of Southold that enhances
community character, preserves open space, makes efficient use of
infrastructure, makes beneficial use of a coastal location, and minimizes
adverse effects of development.
~NO [] NOT APPLICABLE
The extension to increase the length of a small private-use dock in order to access
usable water depths, and the addition of a hinged ramp and a float, is consistent
with the character of the waterfront community, and because of the intent and
nature of the project it is felt that there is no adverse impact on the desired
preservation of open space. Infrastructure use is not a factor since the project is
accessory to and accessed from private property. The project is certainly a
beneficial use of the coastal location, and the incremental increase in development
in the area is insignificant.
Policy 2 Preserve historic resources of the Town of Southold.
[] [] NOT APPLICABLE
There is no evidence to indicate that the immediate area of the project includes
historic features, and it is to be expected that the mainly intertidal nature of the
project area is unlikely to have been the site of recoverable artifacts of past
civilizations.
Policy 3
[]
Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of
Southold.
~NO [] NOT APPLICABLE
The structure, both existing and proposed, is low profile and will be inconspicuous
in the proposed location. It is compatible with many other existing shoreline
structures in the area, and will not adversely affect the dynamic landscape elements
(tidal fluctuations, seasonal vegetation changes; seasonal/diurnal changes in
ambient light) which might contribute to ephemeral visual qualities.
Policy 4
[] YES
Minimize loss of life, structures, and natural resources from flooding and
0iOn'
[] NOT AI'PLIC~LE
It is intuitively obvious that the likelihood of the structure proposed contributing to
increased hazards which could result in the losses listed is minimal. Natural
protective features will not be adversely affected
Policy 5
[] YEs
tect and improve water quality and supply in the Town of Southold.
L.~NO [] NOT APPLICABLE
The proposed project will not include a pump-out station nor will liquid or solid
wastes be discharged into the water or wetlands. Disturbance of the creek bed
during construction and thereafter during active use of the structure will be
minimal.
Policy 6
[] YEs
Protect and restore the quality and function of the Town of Southold's
ecosystem.
~NO [] NOT APPLICABLE
Although the shading resulting fi.om the project structure may adversely affect the
sparse submerged wetland vegetation which may exist immediately under it,
efforts will be made in the conslruetion to space the deck planking to permit some
sunlight through. The extension and dock additions are all in open water and there
is no new impact on any surface vegetated area. The project is not located in a
Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat. All statutory and regulatory
requirements, at all levels of government, will be strictly complied with. No
dredging, excavating, or filling is proposed.
Policy 7
[] YES
oteCt and improve air quality in the Town of Southold.
[] NOT APPLICABLE
The construction or use of the project as proposed will not result in significant
mounts of new air pollution. The siting of the dock is such as to limit the usable
size of the boat, and thus the size of its engine.
Policy 8
I--] YES
Minimize environmental degradation in the Town of Southold from solid
waste and hazardous substances and wastes.
~NO [] NOT APPLICABLE
The project as proposed will not result in the generation of any additional solid
waste. The handling and storage of petroleum products, if any, will be
accomplished through the use of approved containers and facilities, and approved
methods of handling and storage will be followed.
Policy 9 Provide for public access to, and recreational use of, coastal waters, public
lands, and public resources of the Town of Southold.
[] YES [] NO ~NOT APPLICABLE
This policy is not applicable to the proposed project.
Policy 10
[] YEs
Protect Southold's water-dependent uses and promote siting of new water-
dependent uses in suitable locations.
[] NO ~4rNOT APPLICABLE
This policy is not applicable to the proposed project.
Policy 11
[] YEs
Promote sustainable use of living marine resources in Long Island Sound, the
Peconic Estu~l'y and Town waters.
[] NO ~NOT APPLICABLE
This policy is not applicable to the proposed project.
Policy 12
[] YEs
Protect agri~91tural lands in the Town of Southold.
[] NO ~rNOT APPLICABLE
This policy is not applicable to the proposed project.
Policy 13 Promote appropriate use and development of energy and mineral resources
[] YES gO [] NOT APPLICABLE
The planning and construction of the project is, and will be, such that energy
efficient design criteria are applied throughout, based upon any local or State
building codes, or upon practices generally recognized as desirable in this regard.
As has been stated, any handling and storage of petroleum products will be
accomplished through the use of containers, facilities and methods of handling and
storage as approved for residential property use and generally accepted as safe.
ProperoT Permit Services P.O. Box 617, Cutchogue NY 11935
Phone: 631-734-5800
jefitzge@suffolk.lib.ny.us
Fax: 631-734-7463
MEMORANDUM
DATE: 9/24/08
TO: Lauren - Trustees' Office
FROM: Jim Fitzgerald
SUBJECT: Gail Rerisi, SCTM #1000-76-1-15.3
As you requested, here are four copies of the LWRP Consistency Assessment Form.
Hydrographic Map
Measured Site: 02-03-05
Located New Docks: 09-12-08
Map Amended: 05-28-05
07-11-05, 08-05-05, 09-15-08
SCT#'s 1000-76-1-15.3
& 1000-76-1-15.6
Situate: Goose Creek
Town: Southold
Suffolk County, NY
Datum: Low Water
1"= 40' I
N
-o,~ / / Dock
./
SEA
LEVEL
MAPPING
P.O. Box366
Aquebogue, NY 11931
ROBERT H. FOX
NYS PLS~ 50197