Loading...
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