HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-12/15/2010Jill M. Doherty, President
James F. I~ng, Vice-President
Dave Bergen
Bob Ghosio, Jr.
John Bredemeyer
Town H~lAnnex
54375MainRoad
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971-0959
Telephone(631) 765-1892
Fax(631) 765-6641
BOARD OFTOWNTRUSTEES
TOWN OFSOUTHOLD
BOARD OFTOWNTRUSTEES
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Minutes
RECEIVED
JAN 3 1 2011
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
6:00 PM
Present Were:
Jill Doherty, President
Jim King, Vice-President
Dave Bergen, Trustee
Robert Ghosio, Trustee
John Bredemeyer, Trustee
Lauren Standish, Secretarial Assistant
Lori Hulse, Assistant Town Attorney
CALL MEETING TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: Wednesday, January 12, 2011, at 8:00 AM
NEXT TRUSTEE MEETING: Wednesday, January 19, 2011, at 6:00 PM
WORKSESSlON: 5:30 PM
APPROVE MINUTES: Approve Minutes of November 17, 2010
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Lori will be here. She should be here soon. She usually gets
here around six o'clock. Besides the Board, we have Wayne Galante here taking our
Minutes. Lori Hulse is our legal counsel, she will be here. We have Peter Young from
the CAC, Conservation Advisory Council, here as well.
Before we get started, if you do come up to the mic, if you are recognized, come
up to the mic, state your name for the record, and make a brief comment, five minutes
or less. We have the administrative permits and extensions and transfers first on the
agenda that we usually have, and in the recent past we have given the audience
opportunity to speak to these. These are not public hearings and in order to have a
smoother meeting, I'll have to take a step back, and it's just for the Board to review and
make their comments on. If somebody would like to comment on these, they have
plenty of time before the meeting. The agenda is posted on our website and available in
the office. You are more than welcome to come in the office, review the files and put
your written comments in the file before the meeting. We were getting a little
disorganized at the meetings, so we have to tighten it up and we'll have to take a step
Board of Trustees 2 December 15, 2010
back. But anytime anybody wants to see any files, they are in our office and they can be
reviewed before the meeting.
With that, the next field inspections are Wednesday, January 12, at 8:00 AM.
TRUSTEE KING: So moved.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Second?
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor.'?
(ALL AYES).
The next Trustee meetin9 is January 19, at 6:00 PM, with a work session at 5:30.
TRUSTEE KING: So moved.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Minutes for November 17, 2010.
TRUSTEE KING: I just received them, I haven't read them yet.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I read them today. Anybody else?
TRUSTEE GHOSlO: I read them but I didn't really find anything.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: I read them and forwarded my changes, so I'll
make a motion to approve the Minutes of November 17, 2010.
TRUSTEE GHOSlO: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(Trustee Doherty, aye. Trustee Bergen, aye. Trustee Ghosio, aye.
Trustee Bredemeyer, aye). (Trustee King abstains).
TRUSTEE KING: I'll abstain. I want to read them and I'll send
in my comments.
I. MONTHLY REPORT:
The Trustees monthly report for November, 2010. A check for
$8,474.48 was forwarded to the Supervisor's office for the
General Fund.
II. PUBLIC NOTICES:
Public notices are posted on the Town Clerk's bulletin board for
review.
III. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEWS:
RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold
hereby finds that the following applications more fully
described in Section VII Public Hearings Section of the Trustee
agenda dated Wednesday, December 15, 2010, are classified as
Type II Actions pursuant to SEQRA rules and regulations, and are
not subject to further review under SEQRA.
These are listed as follows:
Michael & Denise Chuisano - SCTM#15-3-17
South Brown LLC - SCTM#18-6-18.1
Carrie Tintle - SCTM#115-11-8
Ed & Arlene Fox - SCTM#122-9-9.4
Robert Taylor, Norman Taylor & Margaret Ross - SCTM#126-6-9.1
Board of Trustees 3 December 15, 2010
Susan Forrest- SCTM#126-6-7
Charles & Carolyn LoCastro - SCTM#123-8-12
Elinor Treder & Patricia O'Connell - SCTM#126-6-6
Levin Family LTD Partnership - SCTM#-44-2-22
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Do I have a motion on that?
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I'll move that.
TRUSTEE GHOSlO: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Thank you. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE KING: We have three postponements, Jill.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: We have three postponements tonight.
Page three, number one MICHAEL & OILLIAN WILSON request an
Amendment to Wetland Permit #5438 to change the dock from 20x4'
to 30x4', add a four-foot fiberglass open-grate walkway along
the bulkhead and designate a ten-foot non-turf buffer landward
of the walkway. Located: 590 Tarpon Drive, Southold, has been postponed.
Page five, starts on page four, continued on page five,
number 11, JMO Environmental Consulting on behalf of FISHERS
ISLAND DEVELOPMENT CORP., requests a Wetland Permit to construct
an 8x132' Thru Flow boardwalk in the area of "Grey Gulls"; and
construct an 8x300' Thru Flow boardwalk supported by helical
anchors and elevated 18" above grade in the area of "Barleyfield
Cove". As mitigation, constructJcreate an area of freshwater
wetlands adjacent to the 1st and 18th holes of the Fishers
Island Club golf course. Excavate the area down to elevation
three feet and remove approximately 1,920 cubic yards of
material and stockpiling it. At proposed elevation three feet
create approximately 9,650 square feet of open water wetlands
and in that area between elevation three feet and elevation four
feet create approximately 26,450 square feet of vegetated
wetlands. Regrade portion of the fairway located to the south of
the proposed wetlands to control rainwater runoff by stripping
sod off the fairway and stockpiling it. Approximately 1,050
cubic feet of fill shall be placed in the exposed area to raise
the elevation of the fairway to elevation seven feet. Area shall
be replanted with the stockpiled sod. Located: P/O East End
Road, Fishers Island, has been postponed.
And number 12, Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc., on
behalf of EVAN GINIGER requests a Wetland Permit to construct a
docking facility consisting of a4x46' fixed elevated catwalk
supported by six (6) 4"x4" pilings and six (6) 6"x6" pilings;
3x15' hinged ramp; and 6x20' floating dock secured by two (2)
6"x6" pilings. Located: 315 Fleetwood Road, Cutchogue, has been
postponed. They will not be heard tonight.
IV. RESOLUTIONS-ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS:
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: The following three of them we have all
reviewed and are either exempt or consistent with LWRP, and I'll
make a motion to move all three of them.
Board of Trustees 4 December 15, 2010
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Jill, number one, there was an issue out there
in the field.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All right, I'll rescind my motion.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Number one, Creative Envirenmental Design on
behalf of KEVlN O'CONNOR requests an Administrative Permit to
remove the phragmites and revegetate with native plants.
Located: 105 Hill Road, Southold.
The Board went out and looked at this and we had no problem
with it. Everything looked fine. The only thing was there was
a fence, what appeared to be a goose fence or some type of fence
along there, and that would have to be removed. So I would make
a motion to appreve this with the condition that fence is removed.
TRUSTEE KING: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I11 make a motion to approve numbers two and
three as applied for. They read as follows:
Number two, Creative Envirenmental Design on behalf of
KEVlN O'CONNOR requests an Administrative Permit to replace the
existing wooden pool deck with a masonry patio. Located: 105
Hill Road, Southold.
And Number three, Garrett A. Strang, Architect on behalf of
BRANKO PEROS requests an Administrative Permit to reconstruct
existing shed reof on south end of dwelling changing configuration to a
gable end reof. Located: 815 Rabbit Lane, East Marion.
TRUSTEE KING: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
V. APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS/TRANSFERS/ADMINISTRATIVE
AMENDMENTS:
TRUSTEE KING: Under applications for extensions, transfers,
administrative permits, number one, Creative Envirenmental
Design on behalf of KEVlN O'CONNOR requests a Transfer of
Wetland Permit #1112 from Thomas Cook to Kevin O'Connor, as
issued on October 6, 1976. Located: 105 Hill Road, Southold.
This is a transfer of permit that was no problem to
transfer but what is there on the site is not what was there on
the permit, so this will have to be amended. We can do the
transfer but --
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: We can only transfer the actual permit.
TRUSTEE KING: We are only transferring what is on the original
permit
MR. CHICANOWICZ: If I may, Dave Chicanowicz, Creative
Envirenmental Design, representing Kevin O'Connor. I spoke to
him, told him that what he has in place is not permitted and
needs to be conform with what the town has. He has absolutely
no preblem with doing exactly that.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Okay, thank you.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Do you want to put a time limit to make the
Board of Trustees 5 December 15, 2010
corrections?
TRUSTEE KING: Well, he'll have to amend this original permit to
what is there.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: That's what Bob is saying, put a time limit on
when he comes in for the amendment.
TRUSTEE KING: I would say as soon as possible.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Within 60 days? How is that?
TRUSTEE KING: Yes. We can, you know, approve the transfer and
give him 60 days to come in to amend.
MS. STANDISH: He has that to amend the permit for what he has or
just --
TRUSTEE KING: He has a permit for an L-shaped dock, 4x30. What
he has is a float and another float. So it's entirely different.
MS. STANDISH: So he can keep the amendment.
TRUSTEE KING: Yes, I don't think the Board has a problem with
what is there. It meets the code, but it's entirely different.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: The platform didn't meet the code. Part of it
doesn't.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: He'll have to come in for an amendment.
TRUSTEE KING: It will probably have to be modified from what is there
MS. STANDISH: Okay.
TRUSTEE KING: So I'm wondering if we want to table this until he
comes in for the amendment.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Well, he has to come in to amend it. You can do
it at the same time it's on, we might as well do the transfer.
TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to approve the transfer of the
original permit with the stipulation the applicant comes in for
an amendment to that permit within 60 days.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: I'll second that.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?.
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Numbers two and three came in consistent with
LWRP. They read as follows:
Number two, Mark Schwartz on behalf of THOMAS & MAUREEN
DOWLING requests an Amendment to Wetland Permit #7407 to
demolish the dwelling to first floor deck and demolish the north
foundation wall and build new wall and footing. Located: 1200
Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue.
And number three, Garrett A. Strang, Architect, on behalf
of PAUL BETANCOURT requests an Amendment to Wetland Permit #6951
to change the configuration of the stairs to the beach. Located:
1825 Aquaview Avenue, East Marion.
And I'll make a motion to approve those as applied for.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Was that the one I did the inspection on?
Oh, that was fine. Betancourt was fine. That was the stairs.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Yes, that's not the Orient one. That's the
East Marion one.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Okay, I'll second that.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
Board of Trustees 6 December 15, 2010
VI. APPLICATION FOR MOORING & DUCK BLIND PERMITS:
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Applications for mooring and duck blind
permits. Both of these were reviewed by the Board, number one
is JOHN G. SCOTT III requests a Mooring Permit in Arshamomaque
Pond for a 24' boat. Access: Public
And number two, ROY ARGENT requests an Onshore/Offshore Stake in
Richmond Creek for a boat no larger than 18'. Located: 6429
Indian Neck Lane, Peconic.
I make a motion to approve both as applied for.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I'll make a motion to go offthe regular
hearing and on to public hearings.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
AMENDMENTS TO WETLAND PERMITS AND COASTAL EROSION PERMITS:
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Number one is postponed. Number two, JOSEPH
BATTAGLIA requests an Amendment to Wetland Permit #7028 to place
70' of natural boulders along the southeast side of the wetland
line; replace fill, soil and screening to restore property back
to original condition; replace native plants; and a One-Year
Extension to Wetland Permit #7028, as issued on January 21,
2009, and Amended on February 24, 2010. Located: 2000 Hobart
Road, Southold.
Joseph Battaglia is requesting an amendment, which we do not
have the complete application on, so we'll be tabling that
portion of it, however I'll make a motion to approve the
One-Year extension on permit 7028.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Second.
TRUSTEE KING: So you are approving the extension and tabling the
amendment?
TRUSTEE BERGEN: For the Minutes, let's make sure it's specific.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Again, I'll repeat myself, Joseph Battaglia has
applied for an amendment, and the application for the amendment is
not complete, so I'll be tabling that portion, his request for an amendment.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Do you want to do a vote on that?
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: That's what I'm doing. Do you want it separate?
TRUSTEE BERGEN: I think it's cleaner if it's separate. That's
all. Just cleaner.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I make a motion to table the amendment for
Joseph Battaglia as applied for because it is an incomplete application.
TRUSTEE KING: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I'll make a motion to grant the One-Year
Board of Trustees 7 December 15,2010
Extension for Wetland Permit 7028 as issued January 21, 2009,
and amended January 24, 2010.
TRUSTEE KING: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?.
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE KING: Number three, SOUTH BROWN LLC requests a Transfer
of Wetland Permit #3747 from John Tuthill to South Brown LLC as
issued on June 22, 1989 and Amended on December 20, 1990, and an
Amendment to Wetland Permit #3747 to extend and expand the
existing dock with a 4xl 5' landward extension, a 6x20' floating
dock and two (2) 5x30' finger floats. Located: 8070 Narrow River
Road, Orient.
This was found consistent with the LWRP, found consistent
with the Board policy standards, so therefore it's consistent.
It's just a typical list.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: It goes against the code, how can it be
consistent?
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Bingo.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: It's not an exempt area.
TRUSTEE KING: Conservation Advisory Council resolved not to
support the application. The Conservation Advisory Council does
not support the application because of the following: The
project was not staked, soundings are not provided and the
proposed materials are unknown.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: During -- just to point out, during our
review, we have gotten that information.
TRUSTEE KING: I thought he had stakes out there at that seaward
end of the piles.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: It was a float.
MR. YOUNG: We may have been out there earlier than --
TRUSTEE KING: Does the Board have any comments on this?
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Well, irrespective of the specifics of the
application, I have some institutional knowledge and background
which would probably be good for the Board to be aware of.
TRUSTEE KING: You are more familiar with it than I am.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Yes. The dock structure here was basically
to allow the inheritors of the former trustee, John Tuthill,
his family, to have family docking facilities as a result of a
taking of property when the DEC acquired the tidal wetlands
around the perimeter of Hallock's Bay, as the DEC was largely
responsible for the original application and requested the
Trustees for a dock, which was subsequently amended to allow for
more family members to keep their boat at that structure.
Presently, to my knowledge, the dock, the existing dock
structure, which is not in conformity with the current permit,
has been used only by Tuthill family members and in conformity
with the zoning for the upper lot, two members other than the
family, which are there as guests, and have use of the dock
gratis; one, an individual who is not well, and another
individual who is a working bayman. So within the context of
zoning, it's been used properly and the Tuthill's have been very
Board of Trustees 8 December 15, 2010
gracious in allowing the community to use the dock, and it's
being used by their families, so that sort of brings us up to
the present and where we are with the application.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Thank you, John.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Jim, what -- if we could just handle the
transfer first off. What was amended on December 20, 19907 In
other words that is what we could transfer at this point, whatever
was approved.
TRUSTEE KING: The original permit was amended to include a
float, 40x6', the catwalk 20x4', a ramp 8x2.5', and six pilings.
That's what the amendment, the original permit was for a 110-foot
catwalk, four-feet wide with a 4x10' ramp and an 8x30 float and
26 pilings. That was amended in December of 1990. What I just
read before, float, 40x6; catwalk, 20x4; and ramp 8x2.5.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: And I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, that
is what is out there up until there is a "T" float out there,
two floats out there. In other words, those "T's" disappeared.
TRUSTEE KING: Apparently. Well, actually --
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I have a detailed drawing.
TRUSTEE KING: Actually now there is 60 feet of six-foot floats
instead of 40. So 20 feet has been added to the original.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: There is two 6x20s when you come down the
catwalk, then it "T's" off.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: The drawing shows three.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Let me check my drawing. This drawing is
accurate. I don't believe that's accurate.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: I'm looking at it right here.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Whose drawing is that?
TRUSTEE KING: There is one drawing here.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Maybe that was what he was proposing.
That's interesting.
TRUSTEE KING: There is the latest drawing there. This one.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Presently thera is a fixed catwalk, a ramp
and two 6x20s. These are actual measurements I took in the field.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: That's what I thought. Where I was going with
this is we could transfer what was permitted, which would end it
at those two 6x20s. And then consider, after that, kind of like
what we just did, the amendment.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I think in the future we need to, if this is
the way the Board wants to handle these, we have to let the
staff know so we can do it separate. Because right now they are
applied for together, and if you feel, I mean that's why I did
that one together, because that's the way it's applied for. And
if you feel it makes it a better record, or for whatever reason,
this is not the time to reorganize our agenda.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: I'm not proposing to reorganize the agenda. What
I'm proposing to do is make this cleaner if we were able to
consider this as two separate items and transfer the one, and
then consider the amendment, rather than considering it all
together, because you have to transfer something first before we
can consider an amendment second.
Board of Trustees 9 December 15, 2010
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Okay, I was just making a comment.
TRUSTEE KING: In the future list them separately in the agenda.
That would clean it up.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Because it's just really, it doesn't matter
which way we do it, it's just, instead of changing it in mid-stream.
TRUSTEE KING: There are six boats tied off there, in this area.
That's the reason for the --
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Correct.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Do you want to effect a transfer as part of
the hearing process now, to keep this in? I think that's what I
heard Dave, Trustee Bergen say. It does make some sense, then
we can start discussing some possible amendments post that.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: That's what I'm proposing. It makes it cleaner.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: If there are no objections, I'll make a
motion to approve the transfer of permit of John Tuthill to
South Brown LLC.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE KING: Nobody talked about the structure that is there.
In my mind there is an awful lot of structure there for a private dock.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: So what are you proposing?
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Can we separate out the discussion of, let's
say, there is some environmental issues that might help address,
I don't know what Mark Terry has for his, with his consistency
with conditions, but there is, I think there is an issue, there
was a request to store the floating docks at the end of the
catwalk, and presently the way the catwalk is configured, they
would have any floating dock section stored there would end up
being on the bottom for significant periods of time, which I
think is not desirable for the intertidal vegetation that might
exist there. And there is also a loss of some vegetation on the
upper edge of the ramp, there is an undercutting of the bank
that could stand to be revegetated, from some stress. So
environmentally speaking, going back and looking at the site, it
was my recommendation to Mr. Reginald Tuthill, who brought the
application, to bring the dock into current standards with
respect to strictly environmental matters concerning the marsh,
that any amendment would have to include putting of an
open-grate over the intertidal marsh area because there is a
loss of Spartina under the current catwalk, as well as
revegetating possibly with as much five or ten cubic yards of
clean sand brought in from an upland site to revegetate the
undercut bank and possibly entertain a catwalk extension of
maybe eight or ten feet, which is the distance between pilings.
So if the Board were to grant any approvals for float storage,
it would not have floats on the bottom and we would have an
opportunity to restore the wetland.
TRUSTEE KING: This is basically what you are describing right
now, is that latest drawing. I think we need to see a little
more accurate drawing drawn to scale, too. It makes things lot
Board of Trustees 10 December 15, 2010
clearer for us.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Right. It's just strictly the issues on the
catwalk. Exactly. To have open-grate and slight extension.
The other issue comes down to the, I think the coverage issue.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Yes, I don't disagree with what you are saying,
John. I think though we have to consider what the current code
is and when we are amending the wetland permit, we are amending
under the current code, and the current code allows for one 6x20
float. It doesn't allow for anything more than that.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So then the permit transfer would require
the applicant to, strictly viewing that, then the applicant
would have to stay to the conditions on the transferred permit.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Unless an amendment is granted otherwise, yes.
I mean, Lori; is that correct?
MS. HULSE: What was the question, Dave?
TRUSTEE BERGEN: In other words, the applicant would have to
stick with what was originally permitted, which was transferred
tonight, and not have any structure in addition to that, until
an amendment is approved by this Board.
MS. HULSE: If it's just the transfer that was approved tonight, yes.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Yes, that's all he has right now is what the
amendment is. He doesn't have anything else now. So if we
don't go any further, that's all he could have and he would have
to abide by that
MS. HULSE: If he's asking for something different - sorry, go
ahead.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: That's not my understanding. My understanding
is we are approving a transfer to what was approved originally,
which means anything else outside that would be not approved and
would have to be removed.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: That's what I just said. That he would have to
abide by what the permit amendment said.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Sorry, I misunderstood.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: As of 1990.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Yes. Not physically what is out there. I
didn't say that.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Okay.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I'm talking the paperwork.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: We have not heard from the applicant as far
as the hearing process and I know, now that there has been a
permit transfer, this might be a point of starting conversation
with the applicant as far as the hearing process.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: It's an amendment, it's not a full hearing.
It's a hearing, but.
MS. STANDISH: It's an advertised amendment.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Do we have questions of Mr. Tuthill?
TRUSTEE KING: Is there anyone here who cares to speak on behalf
of this application, or against it?
MR. TUTHILL: Excuse me.
TRUSTEE KING: Did you want to speak for the application?
MR. TUTHILL: I thought you said if anyone wants to speak against it.
Board of Trustees 11 December 15, 2010
TRUSTEE BERGEN: No. For or against it.
MR. TUTHILL: I didn't hear that. Reginald Tuthill. I don't want
to get into it too much. The only thing I can say, when they
took the 28 acres of land from me, the fact is to have that
approved, the state, it was all part of the negotiation. And
you can see, we never paid for that permit, and they took 28
acres of land, and at the time when we originally put the dock
in, and a float, that was all we needed. But over the years
what has happened, you have a drain upstream that comes from the
state down the main read and of course you get a lot of deposits
in there, and the water is very shallow these days. So
therefore we want to just get out so the boats will have enough
water to the come in at Iow tide. I took some soundings to show
you exactly, and I think I handed it to somebody the day you
were there. And we want to work with you. We don't want to do
anything against the law. And I don't want the Tuthill, the
South Brown LLC, it's a commercial operation, it was all put
together because of estate planning, and that's the way we had
to get this land out of our estate and into trust and things
like that. And this, everything is granted over to our children
and my grandchildren already. And we just want to, we would
like to have a dock that we can use for our own family, and we
help out, as I say, Jim Rodden (sic) asked if he could put his
boat in there during scallop season, we said fine, because our
boat are out of there, usually, in September, and there was
another person who wanted it, he had cancer, wanted to go
fishing, we said fine, you can put your boat there, on a
temporary basis, and that was it. So we are willing to work
with you. All we want to make sure is we just get out far
enough to get in the water. And the 110 feet that we have, when
you stop to think of it, because we lost 15 feet to erosion,
okay, we are taking the measurement from where we are starting
out rather than taking it from the dock and going out to the 110
feet. And we are still under the 110 feet we have been granted.
And the reason we never put the catwalk all the way out there is
the fact that the pilings come out in ice. Right now, you see
what is happening, it was a lot better off to have floats
because you can break them down, pull them in and put them near
shore off the dock and tie them off in the winter.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: So what we could possibly do, what the Board can
entertain is an application that would meet code plus meet your
need, with you amend the permit to address a longer catwalk, I
believe, as Trustee Bredemeyer said, and then a ramp and 6x20
float. That would then conform with the code.
MR. TUTHILL: The only problem is you put pilings and you put a
catwalk out of there, we'll be taking this out every year, with the ice.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Yes, and we do that with a lot of docks in town
where we do require the floating dock and ramp to come out each
year. Seasonal, it's called, and we do require that in a lot of
floating docks in the town.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I believe Mr. Tuthill is saying the fixed
Board of Trustees 12 December 15, 2010
catwalk would come up in the ice. That's why he doesn't do the
the whole catwalk, because every year in that area, because it's
the back of the creek, so that's why he's not requesting the
fixed catwalk.
TRUSTEE KING: We have a dilemma here.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: What is the dilemma?
TRUSTEE KING: The dilemma is you can't transfer something that
is not there. The original permit is not there. The dock on the
original permit does not exist.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: But then it was amended afterwards? It was
amended in 1990.
TRUSTEE KING: No, what was amended in 1990, 40x6' float, 20 foot
catwalk, isn't there now. Now you have --
TRUSTEE BERGEN: It is there to this point. There is addition
beyond that.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: If we don't approve anything else tonight, he
has to conform to that permit, he has to rip out what he has and
conform to that permit.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: He has it to amend his structure to conform to
what that original permit was that was trensferred.
TRUSTEE KING: I'm saying we can't transfer it because what is
there existing is not the same as what was on the permit.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Then you can't transfer permits any time in
the winter because the floats are not on the dock.
MS. HULSE: That's different, if it's seasonal, Jay. You can't
trensfer a permit if the permit doesn't match what is out there.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: We did that already tonight.
TRUSTEE KING: We are in error, evidently.
MS. HULSE: If he wants to try to conform it, if he can, that's
one thing. Otherwise he should be coming in with a new
application for an as-built if it doesn't match.
TRUSTEE KING: In other words, instead of trying to transfer the
permit and amend it, he should be coming in for a new
application for what is there and what he wants.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: I understand the logic. If we approve the
transfer, we are actually creating a violation.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Not if we condition the transfer that the
structure must match what was on the original permit.
MS. HULSE: But he's coming in here and asking for a trensfer for
something that does not exist right now. And that's a legal
fabrication. You can't do. I mean, if you want to try and
fashion something, but I'm telling you, legally, you can't do that.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: And just to make the record clear, Mr. Tuthill
is doing it this way because this is the way we directed him to
do it. So it's our -- and that's the way we did the previous one.
So we just did a previous one, we did the transfer and we told them
to come in right away for an amendment. So that was wrong.
MS. HULSE: If this gentleman can conform it and then remove the
additional structure, then that's fine, if that's the way you
want to handle it, or he can withdraw this application and come
back in with a new application for the entire structure. But of
Board of Trustees 13 December 15, 2010
course that procedure was not correct, that I would have to say,
from the information you are providing me at this point.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Would an easy track be to leave the transfer
stand, request conformity, then request a detailed application
for the change. That way we set the tone by granting the
transfer and have the dock come into conformity, which might
happen, it will be in conformity during winter storage at this
point because the floats will be out of there, then we can
discuss going forward a plan certain.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I think that's the best way to go right now,
especially since we don't really agree on what, we don't have an
idea on what we really want to approve out there at this point.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: And then he's in conformity with a permit
that was granted and transferred, and then we can have
discussions that go forward and we can also amend our procedure
so this doesn't happen again.
MS. HULSE: Just to, not with this specific application, and I'm
not speaking to this specific application, but essentially what
that is doing is you are looking at additional structure as you
are end-arounding a public hearing, and you are giving him
something that is more than what he would be entitled to by just
a transfer. If you look at it that way, it is really something
that should be reviewed as a full permit.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Even though it's a published amendment.
MS. HULSE: Yes, it's still a transfer.
TRUSTEE KING: With all that being said I think we should table
this application. We approved the transfer. Until we get our
ducks in a row.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Okay. Do we want to end discussion and table
it right now or do you have more ideas we can give Mr. Tuthill
now so he can go back to the drawing board? As far as design.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: I already expressed my idea.
TRUSTEE KING: I would like to bring it a little more into
conformity with the code. What is there now is really extensive
over what the code allows.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: I agree.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Do you want to, maybe we can deny the amendment
as it is and have him re-apply for a full permit.
TRUSTEE KING: We can do that.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So we'll have a transfer, he can bring the
dock into conformity with the permit. I think that makes the most sense.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Give him the opportunity to withdraw the application.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Yes, where he doesn't have to pay the fee.
MS. STANDISH: He already paid.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: He already paid the fee, and we moved on the
transfer already. So it doesn't matter.
TRUSTEE KING: Do you want to make a motion to deny the
amendment?
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Sure. I'll make a motion to deny the amendment
as submitted and request the applicant, if they would like to,
apply with a full permit so we can go out and look at it.
Board of Trustees 14 December 15, 2010
MR. TUTHILL: So the standing permit that I have --
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Excuse me, there is a motion on the table. Let
us finish that, then we can explain.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I'll second the motion.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Yes, Mr. Tuthill?
MR. TUTHILL: Okay, just bring me up to date. You'll amend the
permit.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: The permit was transferred to South Brown LLC.
The amendment as you applied for has been denied. And what you
need to do now, if you want to amend the permit, you need to
apply for a full permit. Otherwise you have what was approved
in 1990. That's what you have now is what was approved in 1990.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Based on what I think our attorney is
telling us, we wouldn't be able to entertain that request for a
new permit unless the existing structure would be in conformity
with the permit that we just transferred. So in other words we
can't have all that additional coverage there, that may be fine
during the winter when the materials are in storage so that
becomes a moot point, but we would not want to be entertaining
an application for a structure that is already there that does
not have a permit.
MR. TUTHILL: Okay. Thank you.
COASTAL EROSION PERMITS:
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Number one under Coastal Erosion Permits
GreenLogic LLC on behalf of LEVIN FAMILY LTD PARTNERSHIP
requests a Coastal Erosion Permit and an Administrative Permit
to install roof mounted photovoltaic solar system onto the
existing motel building. Located: 58855 Rt. 48, Greenport.
This was reviewed and found to be exempt under the LWRP.
The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support the
application, and the Board has reviewed the application and we
didn't have any questions about it. I didn't know if there was
anybody here who wants to speak with regard to this application
(No response).
If not, any other comments from the Board?
TRUSTEE KING: No, I looked at the plans, it looks like it's all
going to the landward side with the roof on the south side of
the hotel, on the road side.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Okay, I'll make a motion to close the public
hearing.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BERGEN: I'll make a motion to approve the application of
GreenLogic LLC behalf of the Levin Family LTD Partnership as
described at 58855 Rt. 48, Greenport.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Do we have a second?
Board of Trustees 15 December 15, 2010
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
WETLAND PERMITS:
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: The next hearing is in the matter of MICHAEL
& DENISE CHUISANO request a Wetland Permit for the existing
beach access stairs. Located: 1525 Soundview Road, Orient.
This application, the Trustees went and inspected the site.
It was a site of a prior application for which a Wetland Permit
was denied. The Conservation Advisory Council has viewed the
site and did not support the application because the existing
stairway is located in an area that could accelerate erosion,
and additionally there was insufficient non-turf buffer adjacent
to the stairs. And the report under the LWRP indicated
specifically that the survey submitted to the office and copy of
aerial submitted for the file indicated that the stairway was
not removed, was to have been removed by virtue of a court
decision, so that the LWRP would not forward a new report at
this time because they had already previously given a report.
Is there anyone here who wishes to speak for or against this
application?
MR. CHUISANO: Good evening, Board. My name is Michael Chuisano,
I reside at 1525 Soundview Road, and my wife Denise. Back in
2007, we are actually here for a reapplication. Back in 2007,
as you said, we were denied a permit for these stairs. I just
would like to read the law that governed that denial.
Individual residential stairs are prohibited on bluffs if the
property is part of an association that maintains a common
stairway within a reasonable distance. At that time we
respected the decision of the Board, and for two years we used,
we attempted to utilize the adjacent association property ramp
that is there now. What I would like to show you is, sorry, I
only have two copies (handing) this is the association property
beach access that is there right now. The law itself makes
reference to a stairway. That, as you could see, is an
inadequate stairway. It's not a stairway at all. It's a ramp.
We used that ramp for two years. And the problem that we have.
We have two problems with. Well, one is the inadequacy of it
being a stairway. It's not a stairway. The other is, in order
to get down to the beach on that ramp you need to hold both
rails, you need to take baby steps, you need to have your weight
back on your heels. It's extremely dangerous when it gets wet,
rains or after a morning dew, it becomes very slippery. To walk
down there with a beach umbrella with one hand and holding the
rail with the other, it's just very unsafe. My wife recently
had an ACL replacement in her knee and because of the range of
motion she is left with she is very unstable using that. My
parents are well into their 80s. I can't see myself and my wife
using that beach access when we are in our 70s, 80s and God
Board of Trustees 16 December 15, 2010
willing our 90s, to get down to the beach. My wife and I are
together for 35 years. We have one thing in common, one common
interest, and that's the love for the beach front, and that's
why we chose that piece of property to build our house. Now, if
we are going to be denied access, a proper and safe access to
the beach, it will have a detrimental effect on our livelihood.
So what I'm asking of the Board tonight is to please vote in our
favor to do something. I understand it is in the wrong place,
the one that I actually put, that was a temporary construction
set of stairs that I built because we'll had a family reunion
party at the house this summer and we had over 120 people and I
didn't want to expose them to that beach access. That's all we
needed to do is have, you know, the day marred by somebody
falling down and hurting themselves.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: You realized you should have come in and
applied before you built those. Because you are in violation.
MR. CHUISANO: Yes, I do realize that. And you know what, I was
wrong, I paid my debt to society, I paid the fine. I left it
there, for the reason being so when you made a site visit you
would see exactly where it was going to go. That's a temporary
set of construction stairs that could be dismantled. The stairs
I put, it's temporary. It could be dismantled within 20 minutes.
TRUSTEE KING: I would suggest that be done.
MR. CHUISANO: Absolutely. Absolutely. Like I said, if we are
denied safe and adequate beach access, it's just going to have
an adverse effect on our happiness for the rest of the time we
were in Orient.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I would also like to point out the platform
is 7x7 feet square. It's in violation in and of itself with the
construction standards.
MR. CHUISANO: Also, for the record, I'm informed that it's been
requested that the neighbor wanted to have read into the record
a letter in favor of the application. It comes from Gayle
Schembry, dated December 15, and requests to the Board of
Trustees of Southold, we are unable to attend tonight's
board meeting but would like to add this memo to your Minutes.
We are the direct neighbors of Michael and Denise Chuisano and
support their request to construct beach access stairs on their
property. The Chuisano's keep their home and property in
pristine condition and enjoy the beach more than any other
neighbors we have seen. I am confident Mike and Denise will do
whatever is asked of them by the Board to comply with the town
and, again, have no objections to their request. Thank you for
your time, and enjoy the holidays. Gayle and Peter Schembry,
1425 Soundview Road, Orient.
I would just like to say one other thing, please. My wife
and I are very proud to be residents of the Town of Southold and
Orient Point and we would like to be equally as proud to know
our Board of Trustees can make decisions based on situations
like this, not only to be stewards of the land but to keep the
needs of the residents in mind, at this point.
Board of Trustees 17 December 15, 2010
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Have you gone to the association with your
concerns for the ramp and ask them to consider constructing
stairs instead of the ramp there?
MR. CHUISANO: No, I haven't.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: We have been pretty strict with this, with what
it says in the code for other areas, especially for the houses
that are right next door. And I think at this point the Board
feels that these stairs should be removed, that you built, and
maybe as Trustee Bergen alluded to, talk to the association to
see if they will upgrade the ramp that they have here into a
more efficient stairway and easier access.
MR. CHUISANO: I happen to know the association funds are very
tight at this point and I don't think there will be any reom in
there for something like that.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: You never know until you ask, but I think that
is something that the Board would rather see at this point.
Maybe your stairs could be move over there once they apply for it.
MR. CHUISANO: Probably not. Those are temporary construction
stairs only. That's really not to code or anything.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: That's my opinion. I don't know what anybody
else thinks.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It was well said. I have to agree.
TRUSTEE KING: So deny the permit.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Is there anyone else who would like to speak
for or against this application?
(No response).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I'll make a motion to deny the permit.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: We have to close the hearing first.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I'll make a motion to close the hearing in
this matter.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Second. All in favor?.
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I'll make a motion to deny the permit and to
direct removal within 30 days.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Of the temporary.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Of the temporary stairs.
MS. HULSE: Yes, that's been the subject of the violation. They
have been up for months. They need to come down within 30 days.
I have spoken to Mr. Chuisano about that.
TRUSTEE KING: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?.
(ALL AYES).
MR. CHUISANO: Thank you.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Number two, Costello Marine Contracting Corp.,
on behalf of JULIE ANDERSON & ANNE ADRIANCE requests a Wetland
Permit to remove 151' of existing bulkhead and construct 151' of
new bulkhead inplace and provide ten-foot non-turf buffer
landward of new bulkhead. Remove existing 10x30' wooden deck and
construct new 10x30' deck inplace. Remove existing ramp and
install new 32"x12' seasonal aluminum ramp onto a 6x20' seasonal
floating dock secured by two eight-inch diameter anchor pilings.
Board of Trustees 18 December 15,2010
Remove accumulated debris and overgrowth of vegetation from
existing marine railway. Recondition track-trolley and track bed
as required. Located: 4302 Wunneweta Road, Cutchogue.
This was an application that came before us last month, and
I believe was tabled after some discussion. It was, as
explained last month, it was found exempt under the LWRP, and
the CAC did not make an inspection, therefore no recommendation
could be made. I know I went out in the field and met with Mr.
Costello regarding this application since the last meeting, and
talked about some possibilities of changing the description of
the application for us for this meeting tonight. And correct me
if I'm wrong, it looks like the description this month is the
very same description as last month?
MS. STANDISH: Yes, it was as applied for.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Thank you. Is there anybody here to speak on
behalf of the application?
MR. COSTELLO: Jack Costello on behalf of the application. I had
him bring in a new set of plans for you earlier this week. I
don't know if you got them. It was based on everything we
discussed. It should have been a new set of plans brought into
the Trustees' office. If not, I have one set of plans with me.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: We have them here.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Bear with me.
MR. COSTELLO: The first thing the Trustees were concerned about
was the big 10x30' dock which now the new set of plans we moved
behind the bulkhead. So it becomes a deck rather than a dock.
And the other thing was the issue of the beach grass and
providing an area where that could be transplanted. And on this
it shows that we are actually, the one error on the plans is
that we are going to be removing 151 feet of bulkhead and only
putting 146 back in, because we'll actually shorten the bulkhead
and provide a 75-foot area for the beach grass to be
transplanted in. I know Dave and I talked about Iow sill walls
but when I went up there with of the draftsman, upon further
consideration, we were just going to move that return over and
allow for more area for the beach grass to be, you know,
planted. So therefore we take less structure, shortening the
bulkhead by five feet and that gives the beach grass more area
on the other side of the track.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Just for the record, I see another amendment to
what was originally described was the float. You are now
proposing to be a 30-foot float?
MR. COSTELLO: 4x30. Same square footage. It was going to be
6x20. The fear was we are taking away that 30 foot of dockage
there and we want to make sure we supply 30 foot of dockage on
the other side.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: I just wanted to make sure that was on the
record.
MR. COSTELLO: Same square footage.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: So what in essence you are doing here is
shortening the bulkhead that leads to the, I'll call it railroad
Board of Trustees 19 December 15, 2010
tracks, and in essence, by doing so, creating an ama them of
new marsh.
MR. COSTELLO: Correct.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: And you feel the new ama of marsh being created
will be approximately equal to the ama mamh you'll disturb
with the restoration of the boat.
MR. COSTELLO: Equally if not greater, because them is already
room them for the beach grass to be transplanted on to and
we'll give it an additional amount of ama them because them
is quite a bit of area on that side of the track, mom so than
the other side.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Have you started an application process with the
DEC yet?
MR. COSTELLO: Yes, based on the other set of plans. But we am
giving and giving, so to amend the DEC permit won't really be an
issue.
TRUSTEE KING: Do we have any pictures of this? I had in my mind
all the Spartina was across the tracks. Here it's off to the
side of the tracks.
MR. COSTELLO: We are proposing to transplant it.
TRUSTEE KING: All right, I see.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: See how it's hem, and then mom in front of.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: This is the best picture we have.
TRUSTEE KING: I see. The drawings don't show that's where the
Spartina is at the present time.
MR. COSTELLO: I have mom pictures hem that am pretty
accurate, if you would like.
TRUSTEE KING: Now this -- am I reading this wrong? That's the
existing Spartina is to be transplanted with an arrow showing it
coming hem, and it's the same shape.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: That's the way I interpro t this. What we am
looking at is on sheet four of eight of your plan.
TRUSTEE KING: So in my mind that's not accurate because that
Spartina is not them, it's at the end of the tm cks. It's not
on the side.
MR. COSTELLO: As of now, when the picture was taken, when the
draftsman was down them --
TRUSTEE KING: If you replace the tracks hem, you would not be
disturbing that Spartina.
MR. COSTELLO: That's right now. This time of year is where the
lion's share is. Right now it encroaches upon that. This is
what we are talking about doing, moving this back this way,
providing all this ama. This portion, I mean even without
moving this, it's room to transplant that here. But we am
actually giving it another 75, 80 feet moving it this way. This
is where the Spartina will go. Whether or not this is all of
it, right now if you look at it, it's not that much because it's
dormant this time of year. When it flourishes in the Spring is
when it probably encroaches on the railway hem. Even without
moving this return is plenty of room for Spartina to be
transplanted on the side and we am offering to move this whole
Board of Trustees 20 December 15, 2010
return over and provide this area, too. Then we are taking this
whole existing deck, now, dock, and move this back here.
TRUSTEE KING: I understand.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: I remember the end of that railroad being in the
mud. Under the mud. I'm assuming this is reflective of where
it will be once you uncover it.
MR. COSTELLO: I don't know where it continued, to be honest with
you.
TRUSTEE KING: Because it's completely covered.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: So maybe that's the covered part and this is
the Spartina that you are thinking of. Because that's right at
the end.
TRUSTEE KING: The Spartina is right at the end of the trail of
grass.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Regardless --
TRUSTEE KING: Most of the track is under the bottom now.
MR. COSTELLO: Here is a pretty good picture. That's at Iow
tide. That was all in the Spring, all the grasses are
flourishing.
TRUSTEE KING: (Perusing). Yes. Now this is also going to have
to be dredged out on the north end of the track, right?
MR. COSTELLO: This picture doesn't show it going that far. I
don't know where the end of it is, but I'm not really proposing
to do any major amount of dredging.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: If you are not planning on doing any dredging,
what's the depth you want to extend this track out to? Because
right now the track is, as I see on the plans, is pretty much
even with the proposed end of the bulkhead.
MR. COSTELLO: Yes, a little past that. By our best telling
that's where it ends. We are not proposing to add any structure
to it. Whether or not that -- I mean, that's where we are
proposing to put it. If we need to amend that to get more depth,
we'll do that. But right now that's where we are proposing to
end it.
TRUSTEE KING: My question is how to you get a boat on the
trailer. And it would only be high tide can you use it.
MR. COSTELLO: It's not a commercial railway. It's for the guy
who hauls his boat once a year. If he can use it only at high
tide, I don't think that's an issue.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Well, does this plan reflect what we asked him
to do? It seems like it does.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: I think so.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: I think so also.
TRUSTEE KING: We talked about extensive Iow sill also.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I'm fine with how he's doing it here instead of
the Iow sill.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: In essence what we were trying to create was a
new wetland or marsh area with a iow sill and what he's done,
with reconfiguring this design is, he's accomplished the same
goal.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Right.
Board of Trustees 21 December 15, 2010
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Right.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Just the other piece, Jack, for the record, we
noticed on the piece of property there was a, what appears to be
a drainage pipe going through the bulkhead now so when, if this
Board approves this project, we would ask for that drainage pipe
to be removed.
MR. COSTELLO: Yes.
TRUSTEE KING: This should just be left alone on this side.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: What we are looking at.
TRUSTEE KING: Not to be transplanted. Just leave that area
alone and plant over on this side, rather than --
TRUSTEE BERGEN: I agree
MR. COSTELLO: Are you saying move the railway over?.
TRUSTEE KING: No. The picture shows most of that Spar/ina on
the side.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Most of the Spar/ina is to the west side of the
track and we are saying leave that where it is and just create
the new area on the east side, bringing in, you know, new
Spar/ina to plant in there rather than transplanting, plant new
right in there, leaving the other side.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: It will be minimal disturbance there, so
whatever is disturbed can be removed. That area, leave the main
there, you are saying.
TRUSTEE KING: Yes, there is stuff there, leave it alone.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Right, because you won't be disturbing the
whole area. Just par/of it. Makes sense to.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Anybody else in the audience who wanted to speak
on behalf of this application?
(No response).
Any other comment from the Board?
TRUSTEE KING: I think it's an improvement.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: I'll make a motion to close the public hearing.
TRUSTEE KING: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BERGEN: I'll make a motion to approve the application of
Costello Marine on behalf of Julie Anderson and Anne Adriance to
conform with the plans submitted December 10, 2010. And the
condition is that, one condition is the drainage pipe that is
shown existing on the bulkhead right now, that will be removed.
Another condition would be that the existing Spartina Alterna
flora that is to the west of the boat launching area would
remain untouched so that new Spar/ina Alterna flora will be
planted in what is proposed here on these plans, the new wetland
area.
TRUSTEE KING: 12 inches on center?
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Yes, plant the Spartina 12 inches on center.
MR. COSTELLO: How many square feet? That area is about 75
square feet that is noted. What's the square footage you want?
TRUSTEE KING: As much as possible.
MR. COSTELLO: There in that area is 100 square feet that won't
Board of Trustees 22 December 15, 2010
interfere with that railway.
TRUSTEE KING: What you have shown there is probably a hundred or
more. Plant it up.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: That's my motion.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
MR. COSTELLO: Thank you, have a happy holiday.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Number three, Catherine Mesiano, Inc., on behalf
of PEGGY SCHWARTZ requests a Wetland Permit to install a 30"x14'
ramp and 6x20' floating dock with two eight-inch diameter anchor
piles. Located: 3210 Little Neck Road, Cutchogue.
The LWRP report found this to be consistent with LWRP. The
Conservation Advisory Council resolved not to support the
application because it was not staked and therefore there was
not enough information to make a recommendation. However the
CAC does recommend a 30-foot non-turf buffer. I do notice in
our notes it was noted that there was goose fencing out there,
and if I'm not mistaken, the Board was looking to have that
goose fencing removed.
MS. MESIANO: Consider it removed.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Aside from that, I think it was a pretty
straightforward application. As I see -- was there a DEC permit
already on this?
MS. MESIANO: DEC, Army Corps and Department of State has already
approved. And the goose fencing will be removed.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Are there any other comments or anybody in the
audience who would like to address this application?
(No response).
Anybody on the Board have any comments?
(No response).
TRUSTEE KING: We'll issue this after the fence is gone?
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: I suppose we can do that.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Make it a condition of the permit.
TRUSTEE KING: It's pretty permanent looking right now.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: 30 days to remove it.
TRUSTEE DONERTY: If you make it a condition of the permit, they
don't get the permit until the fence is removed.
MS. MESIANO: Will photographic evidence from me suffice or do I
have to schedule for inspection?
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: I'm all right with a photograph.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: I would be happy to go out -- once notice is
given to the office, I would be happy to go out and take a look
just to conform it.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: That's what I was going to suggest, is one of
us can go out and confirm it.
MS. MESIANO: Saves me a trip to Cutchogue.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: With that, I'll make a motion to close the
hearing.
TRUSTEE KING: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?.
Board of Trustees 23 December 15, 2010
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: I'll make a motion to approve the application as
submitted with the condition goose fence be removed, giving a
time parameter of 30 days to do so at which once it's removed
and we are done the inspection, we'll issue the permit.
TRUSTEE KING: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?.
(ALL AYES).
MS. MESlANO: Thank you.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Number four, Ocean Consulting on behalf of ALI
REZA HOMAYUNI requests a Wetland Permit to reconstruct inplace
the existing stairway/walkway down and across the bluff
consisting of a 3x8' walkway, 4xl 5' walkway, 4x5.5' stairway
down to a 4x13' landing and 4x12' stairway down to beach.
Located: 22195 Soundview Avenue, Southold.
It's inconsistent with LWRP and the CAC does not support
the application because of the lack of property, due to severe
erosion and encroachment on to town property. It's directly on
a town road. That's what the CAC is referring to. Is there
anybody here to speak for or against this application?
(No response).
The Board knows this stairway has been there for many years.
There is a, the platform that is existing now is larger than the
code allows, so we would request that the lower platform be
brought to code, which would be like a 4x8. So that 4xl 3
landing should be brought down to a 4x8 landing. That would be
one change that I would request. Any Board members have any
other comments?
TRUSTEE KING: The only questions I have is how do we handle the
property issue?
TRUSTEE BERGEN: I think the larger issue for the applicant is
this is on town property.
TRUSTEE KING: This is the town right of way. I don't know.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Town property, we don't regularly regulate,
so if the question would be to the highway superintendent? In
other words we don't want to -- we want to confer at least with
those who would have interest in roads that we don't approve a
structure that will impede town maintenance or impede or create
liabilities.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Then I suggest maybe we table this. I'll make a
motion to table this application to bring in Pete Harris on this
and come up with some other idea.
TRUSTEE KING: Well, we can't approve an encroachment.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: No, I don't know, Lori, if this will require an
easement from the town.
MS. HULSE: It would. It's an encroachment. I don't think even
Pete would be able to help you on that.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Okay, so, well, I have a motion to table it.
Do I have a second?
TRUSTEE KING: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?.
Board of Trustees 24 December 15, 2010
(ALL AYES).
MS. HULSE: Jill, you can just deny it.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Well, I was thinking let the applicant, if he
wants to come up with a different plan that doesn't encroach on
the town right of way, give him a chance to do that before we
deny it.
TRUSTEE KING: It's difficult because the land is gone.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Right. But still I figure give him the
opportunity, since he's not here tonight. I don't know if it's
possible but, you know.
If we could move on to number five.
TRUSTEE KING: Number five, Samuels & Steelman Architects on
behalf of ED & ARLENE FOX requests a Wetland Permit to construct
additions to the existing dwelling and modifications to the
existing sanitary system. Located: 2503 Camp Mineola Road, Mattituck.
This is simply a permit that was approved that expired. It
was found consistent with the LWRP, and the Conservation
Advisory Council resolved to support the wetland application
with the condition of a drainage plan, the Iow spot on the
property remains natural, and effort made to save, transplant or
replace trees. We were out there, I don't think there is going
to be any trees removed:
MR. TALGUT: Ural Talgut, Samuels & Steelman Architects,
representing the Fox's. I'm here to answer any questions the
Board may have.
TRUSTEE KING: When we looked at this, I remember the first
approval, it's a duplicate of what was approved the first go
around. So there has been no changes to the plans. I don't
think any of us had a problem with if any of it. So if there
are no other comments, I'll make a motion to close the hearing.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to approve the application as
submitted.
TRUSTEE GHOSlO: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Number six, Anthony Golfo on behalf of CARRIE
TINTLE requests a Wetland Permit 1o construct a second-story
addition on the landward side of the existing dwelling; change
windows, doors, siding and roof, construct a second-floor deck,
ground level patio, platforms and steps to grade, on the seaward
side of the dwelling. Located: 1235 Lupton Point Road, Mattituck.
This was reviewed under the LWRP and found to be exempt and
consistent in that he reviewed the ground level patios and
platforms and step to grade separately, as minor actions,
separately from the majority of the application. That was what
he found to be consistent, while the majority of it was exempt.
This was reviewed by the Conservation Advisory Council and the
Conservation Advisory Council supports the application with the
Board of Trustees 25 December 15, 2010
condition that turf is removed under the deck and shed; gutters,
leaders and drywells are installed on the house and garage, and
the non-turf buffer is increased to a total of no less than 20 feet.
The Board did go out and reviewed this property. And is
there anybody here to speak on behalf of this application?
MR. GOLFO: My name is Anthony Golfo, I'm here for Carrie Tintle.
I'm here to answer any questions you may have.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: There was a couple of questions we had. We
noticed that the work obviously had already started on this project
MR. GOLFO: What I did is I went as far as I could with the
building permit that I have. There is a building permit for the
interior and some of the windows.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Where we are going, normal process would have
been come in for application from us prior to starting the
project. In other words there has been land disturbed and you
should have come in first. But be that as it may, we didn't
have an issue with it. We wanted 1o maintain the hay bale and
silt fence you have there. We like that. So we want that to be
there. We also want it to comply with Chapter 236, which is the
town drainage code, so we want this to include gutters, leaders
on the house to drywells. Then we also wanted to see a 20-foot
non-turf buffer maintained along the width of the property down
at the water's edge.
MR. GOLFO: So right now you want me to increase what is there.
There is about 15 feet to the bulkhead now.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Correct.
TRUSTEE KING: I think it varies there, if I remember. There is
quite a bit there, I guess it would be on the easterly side,
there is more of a buffer.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Yes, yes. On the east side you have a pretty
wide buffer but on the west side is a very narrow buffer and we
want to make sure it's at least a 20-foot buffer along there on
the west side.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All the way across.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Yes, all the way across. So we are looking to
maintaining a minimum of a 20-foot non-turf buffer there.
MR. GOLFO: Okay, anything else?
TRUSTEE BERGEN: That was it. I think regarding the CAC's request
for turf to be removed under the deck, my guess is any turf
under that deck, if it's not removed prior to construction or
not removed already, it will die. It won't live. So
MR. YOUNG; It was a drainage consideration.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Any other comments from the Board?
(No response).
Any other comments from the audience?
(No response).
If not, I'll make a motion close this hearing.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES)..
TRUSTEE BERGEN: I'll make a motion to approve the application of
Board of Trustees 26 December 15, 2010
Anthony Golfo on behalf of Carrie Tintle as described at 1235
Lupron Point Road, and it was found consistent and exempt under
the LWRP, with the condition that the project conform with
Chapter 236 and there be gutters, leaders and drywells included
on the construction of the house. There will be a 20-foot
non-turf buffer maintained along the width of the property down
at the water's edge and will be maintaining the hay bale and
silt fence that is currently there during construction.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
MR. GOLFO: Thank you, very much. Have a good holiday.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Next application, number seven,
En-Consultants on behalf of CHARLES & CAROLYN LOCASTRO requests
a Wetland Permit to remove and replace (inplace) +/-66'
Iow-profile, timber groin with Iow-profile, vinyl groin.
Located: 2400 Park Avenue, Mattituck.
The Trustees went and visited the site, inspected the
property and didn't have a problem with it. It is consistent
under the LWRP and the Conservation Advisory Council supported
the application. They request a condition that a non-turf
buffer be increased to 20 feet in connection with this application.
Is there anyone here who wishes to speak on this application?
MR. HERMAN: Good evening. Rob Herman of En-Consultants on
behalf of applicant, Charles and Carolyn LoCastro. This
property actually sits between two other properties for which
permits were recently issued by this Board for a groin
reconstruction. And almost as if this were a planned groin
cell, the groin replacement you approved to the west for Mueller
was 55 feet, and to the east for Helius ended up at 77 feet and
this will sit 11 feet in between them at 66 feet. We did have a
survey prepared. The documented Iow tide sitting right where it
is supposed to at the end of the Mueller groin to the west, and
it sits out at the end of this groin. And actually the photos I
submitted with the application, you could see the Helius groin
to the east was probably about 80 to 90% reconstructed at the
time the photo was taken.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It was finished when we were there
MR. HERMAN: All right. They were pretty close. It's a Iow
profile groin now. It's timber. It will remain a Iow profile
groin, only it will be vinyl sheathing. And again it should sit
nicely between the other two, again, almost as if the cell were
designed well. I know sometimes in the LWRP comments, Mark
mentions that the Board should try to view these things has
groin cells, which is hard to do, just because of sort of the
staggered nature of when people come in, but this should
actually work out as designed for this area.
If the Board has any questions or comments on it, I'm happy
to address them.
TRUSTEE KING: What is wrong with it?
MR. HERMAN: You know, what is funny is Chuck Hamilton asked that
Board of Trustees 27 December 15, 2010
question about seven or eight years ago when we tried the same
application. The timber is, when the beach fell, you could see
some of the timber here is starting to rot in some spots, and it
may have even been longer ago than that, that Charlie had tried
this application, and what will happen, during the Helius
application, I think the Board saw when the beach had dropped
there quite a bit, it gets exposed. So I think it's a little
bit of a Catch 22. What Charlie would like to do is get this
thing replaced before it reaches the point where the beach drops
and then it gets destroyed and then we get into a situation
where it's claimed to be not functional. In fact that was the
fight I had with Chuck a decade ago where to replace the groins
he always wanted them to be functional and when we petitioned to
be replace it he said it was too functional. And now you are
asking the same question. Again, this is one of the things that
the groins on either side have just been done and so I think the
goal here is to just get this one done and then have this cell
done, rather than continue to put it off.
TRUSTEE KING: It's just my philosophy if it ain't broke don't
fix it.
MR. HERMAN: I hear you. And I didn't anticipate you saying that
but I'm not totally shocked by it. We have been down the road
before. And actually, I could probably, I don't know if it's
the same file or a different one but, yes, it looked like it was
maybe around 1999 when we had last petitioned to do it. And
that was the question at the time. So he's put it off for about
ten years but I think he is reluctant, just having seen this
past winter the way the beach did drop after those two
nor'easters, to take the chance it drops, the structure wrecks
and then somebody comes back and says well, now it's not
functional and you can't replace it.
TRUSTEE KING: Mr. Hamilton is gone now, so you are just stuck
with me.
MR. HERMAN: Carry on his legacy. You deliver it with much more
charm.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Any more comments from the Board?
(No response).
I'll make a motion to close this hearing.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Motion to approve the application as
submitted for En-Consultants on behalf of Charles and Carolyn
LoCastro.
TRUSTEE KING: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?.
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: The next three hearings, applications, are in a row. The
properties are in a row. Are attached. Does anybody have any objection if I open all
three at once?
MR. HERMAN: I was going to request that. I was going to ask
Board of Trustees 28 December 15, 2010
Lori's permission.
MS. HULSE: Done.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I'll open the next three hearings, number eight
is En-Consultants on behalf of ELINOR TREDER & PATRIClA
O'CONNELL requests a Wetland Permit to construct approximately
50 linear feet of vinyl bulkhead and approximately 36 linear
feet vinyl return in place of (and 12" higher than) existing
timber bulkhead and return; backfill with approximately 50 cubic
yards clean sand to be trucked in from an upland source; and
construct 3x6' beach steps. Located: 3105 Sigsbee Road, Mattituck.
Number nine, En-Consultants on behalf of SUSAN FORREST
requests a Wetland Permit to construct approximately 47 linear
feet of vinyl bulkhead in place of (and 12" higher than)
existing storm-damaged timber bulkhead; backfill with
approximately 100 cubic yards clean sand to be trucked in from
an upland source; and construct 3x6' beach steps. Located: 2999
Sigsbee Road, Mattituck.
And number ten, En-Consultants on behalf of ROBERT TAYLOR,
NORMAN TAYLOR & MARGARET ROSS requests a Wetland Permit to
construct approximately 58 linear feet of vinyl bulkhead in
place of existing timber bulkhead; backfill with approximately
15 cubic yards clean sand to be trucked in from an upland
source; and remove and replace (inkind/inplace) 4x7' steps to
beach. Located: 2995 Sigsbee Road, Mattituck.
And they are bulkhead replacements. Let's start with the
one by the road, which is Treder.
MR. HERMAN: That's Treder. It's Treder, Forrest, Taylor.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: On Treder, we had questions on the return on
the west side of the property. There is that jog, a little bit
of a jog. Is there any reason, we were thinking if we can move
the bulkhead back to that jog, which is a few feet, and just
straighten that out, and move all the bulkheads back a little
bit. That was one comment we had in the field.
MR. HERMAN: Really?
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Yes. It's just a comment we had. We just
thought, you know, straighten out that jog. And also, on the
whole bulkhead, why did you want to go 12 inches higher on that?
MR. HERMAN: Well, it's easier to respond to the second question
first. Again, Rob Herman, En~Consultants, on behalf of the
applicants for each of the three hearings. Taylor is the
property farthest to the east and his bulkhead is a foot higher
than the other two. So we were just going to propose to, and
again, there is not a dire need for this but just practicing the
usual Board, following the Board's usual practice we were going
to try to get all these all on one level height. It seems that
Treder's is a shorter bulkhead, but it is not. The beach there
is just higher. Taylor's beach is scoured the most of the
three, and appears to be the lowest, but if just look at the
difference in height between Taylor and Forrest you can see
Taylor is a foot higher. So we were going to try to match the
elevation of Taylor and then carry that across. At the end of
Board of Trustees 29 December 15, 2010
the day you'll still have a lower vertical distance between the
beach and the top of the bulkhead closest to the road, but
that's just because the beach there is higher. The bulkhead
would still be built at the same level elevation.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: If you look at the pictures of Taylor, it's
actually just a little bit lower than the other ones but
somebody added a whole section to it. Whether that added
section was added legally or not, I don't know.
MR. HERMAN: I see what you are saying. You mean how Taylor's
height gets achieved.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Yes, because it's clear from the pictures it's
added
MR, HERMAN: There is an additional waler or something at the
top?
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Yes.
MR. HERMAN: Well, I mean, the other option is to maintain the
height of Treder and Forrest and just carry that across and that
will end up bringing Taylor down a foot. Or if you want to
bring Taylor down six inches and raise the other two only six
inches and sort of take the middle distance. It's not, again, I
don't know that it's terribly critical one way or the other. My
guess is that Taylor probably added those because he probably
got overtopped. So he probably, I mean his goal is to maintain
that same height. Whether that was done legally or not, will
probably be moot once the Board makes its decision now. Because
you'll either allow him to maintain his height or come down a
little bit or whatever. I mean I guess splitting the difference
would be to bring him down six inches and bring the others up
six inches and just take the height across.
TRUSTEE KING: We could do that.
MR. HERMAN: That's more drafting for me, but it might be the
easiest way to resolve it. Just so we end up with a level height.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I agree. The other question we had on the
Treder property, is we noticed you are still proposing a return
on the east side of the property.
MR. HERMAN: On Treder? A return on the east side? No.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: It's not in your description but it shows there
was a return there.
MR. HERMAN: There is no return on Treder's property. Is it
Forrest, maybe?
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Maybe it's Forrest.
MR. HERMAN: Forrest is a return on the east side. We are not
proposing to replace that. We are just proposing not to mess
with it. There is an existing return between Taylor and
Forrest. That's shown to remain. We are not proposing to
replace that.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: That was our question, what you would be doing with that.
MR. HERMAN: No, that's going to stay. Wait. Sorry, looking at
the wrong plan. That's the only downside of opening three
hearings at one. Taylor's return on the east side we are
proposing to remain. No, I have to go back to Taylor. Because
Board of Trustees 30 December 15, 2010
the return between Forrest and Taylor is actually on Taylor's
property. Yes. And I'm showing the same thing there. Actually
all of the returns with the exception of the most westerly
return, which is the westerly return on Treder adjacent to
Sigsbee, that's the only one we are proposing to replace. All
the rest of the returns are to remain. And each plan shows each
return to remain.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Okay.
MR. HERMAN: Unless you see something different that I'm not
looking at. But I don't think so.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: It was just not totally clear. We wanted to
make sure.
TRUSTEE KING: Didn't we have a question how are they ever going
to replace that with that big tree? On the landward end is a
huge tree there.
MR. HERMAN: On the Sigsbee side.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: Yes, there is a group of trees.
TRUSTEE KING: I don't know how we could physically do that, put
the return back in there.
MR. HERMAN: Yes, and actually, I'm trying to recall -- lan
Crowley is the contractor and I'm trying to remember if lan even
has active plans to replace that or if we were just trying to
include it within the permit in case a decision is made to
replace it. I mean --
TRUSTEE KING: I think you could replace part of it, but not
replacing the whole thing with that tree there.
MR. HERMAN: As you go back a certain distance, you get to that tree.
TRUSTEE BERGEN: It's almost at the end of your proposed return.
TRUSTEE KING: It's a big tree.
MR. HERMAN: That may be why, because I do just vaguely recall
lan talking to me about that return and that he may have
indicated they would only go back so far. But we didn't know
what distance, so I just showed the whole thing. But I didn't
realize why.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Here is a picture.
MR, HERMAN: I don't think I noticed it. (Perusing).
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: It's not the best picture, but the return goes
past it
MR. HERMAN: Yes, I think he has to stop shy of that wooded area.
There is really no reason at that point.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Because if it's back far enough.
MR. HERMAN: It looks like maybe it's 24 feet or so, just looking
at the separation between the piles, but I don't think I have
any issue with conditioning a permit on plans revised to shorten
that distance. I just don't know what distance that is. It's
easy enough to measure. So maybe we could just get a
measurement on it.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: We can just say return to stop at the tree.
MR. HERMAN: Yes, then I'll go measure it and actually put a real
distance on it.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Yes.
Board of Trustees 31 December 15, 2010
MR. HERMAN: I don't want to start messing with -- I mean, I
don't know that I would be able to suggest to three property
owners that they all dump three feet of their property just to
straighten a three-foot jog on Treder's property at the read.
TRUSTEE KING: I don't think it would be that much, Rob.
MR. HERMAN: Well, it's three feet back.
TRUSTEE KING: If you sight it down the whole length of the
property, there is not that much on the other properties. And
there has been a bump out there by about three feet from an old
bulkhead. So it's not like they are giving up a lot. They
already grabbed a lot.
MR. HERMAN: Well, it's three feet.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I didn't mention the CAC comments.
Conservation Advisory Council doesn't support the application to
raise the bulkhead and recommends the applicant consider
alternative engineering solutions such as armoring of shoreline
and a survey submitted depicting accurate property lines.
MR. YOUNG: We don't see really, I don't see, and I don't think
the CAC saw any shoreline, property line, on these little
schematics.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Well, they are on here on the survey that came
with it, you could see the property lines goes to the shore.
MR. YOUNG: It is, okay.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Yes, and there is a note in the, a letter in
the file from a neighbor, Rob, if you would kindly notify the
applicant that anybody is allowed to walk across the foreshore
underneath the high tide point
MR. HERMAN: Is that John Condon?
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Yes.
MR. HERMAN: John contacted me. I don't know what that whole --
there an issue with the swimming. I mean I'm not getting
involved. I'm happy to pass along any message but I'm not going
to involve myself in that dispute.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: That's how we feel. We are passing along a
message to let your clients know.
MR. HERMAN: John contacted me directly to let me know. He
indicated he felt, obviously, the wall should be replaced and
follow proper engineering practices, et cetera, but I think he
was using the opportunity of the application to try to address I
guess what is sort of an ongoing little neighborhood dispute.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Yes, we don't want to get involved in that
either. So are there any other comments from the Board on any
of these applications?
(No response).
They are found consistent with LWRP, all three applications.
MR. HERMAN: $o I guess the only question is what, I mean, again,
I can't consent tonight to moving three bulkheads back three feet.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I don't think it's, to me it's not such a big
issue. It's just something we talked about.
MR. HERMAN: Maybe we can cut a diagonal in that corner instead
of having an "L" shaped jog. I guess it's sort of absurd to try
Board of Trustees 32 December 15, 2010
to recreate that but I would have to do the diagonal in a way
that it doesn't encroach any further on the beach. So it would
be some small cut back in the corner. I'm happy to certainly
make that change. I can run the diagonal through the back side
of the jog, so if anything it opens up that corner rather than
encroaching anywhere on the beach. Because that certainly we
could not do.
TRUSTEE KING: Just go across the two corners, Rob.
MR. HERMAN: Yes, I'm just saying I want to try not to go to the
outer corners, because then you are actually filling in that
little corner of beach.
(Perusing). Anyway, I would say we just eliminate that jog,
shorten the distance of that return to be replaced, and reduce
the raising of the height to six inches. And I would give you
revised plans on Treder for those three things. For Forrest, I
would be giving you revised plans just to reduce the raising by
six inches. And for Taylor would be giving you revised just to
reduce the height by six inches. And take off that top wale.
TRUSTEE KING: By George, I think he's got it.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I'll make a motion to close this public
hearing. If there are no further comments, I'll make a motion
to close the public hearings on all three.
TRUSTEE KING: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I'll make a motion to approve the application
of Eh-Consultants on behalf of Elinor Treder and Patricia
O'Connell with the condition that the west return stops at the
tree; the height of the bulkhead is only heightened six inches,
not the 12 inches, and straighten out the jog and to have new
plans reflecting that with the actual measurement of where the
return ends to the tree.
MR. HERMAN: Got it.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: And with a ten foot non-turf buffer as shown on
the plan.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: I'll make a motion to approve the application
of Eh-Consultants on behalf of Susan Forrest with the condition
that the bulkhead be raised only six inches higher, not the 12
inches higher, and the ten-foot buffer, to be included.
TRUSTEE KING: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Number ten, Eh-Consultants on behalf of Robed
Taylor, Norman Taylor and Margaret Ross, motion to approve the
application with the condition that the bulkhead is reduced in
height by six inches, and with a ten-foot non-turf buffer.
TRUSTEE KING: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
Board of Trustees 33 December 15, 2010
(ALL AYES).
MR. HERMAN: Thank you.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: Being no other items on the agenda, I'll make a
motion to adjourn the meeting.
TRUSTEE GHOSIO: So moved.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOHERTY: All in favor?
Respectfully submitted by,
Jill I~} Doherty, President/]
BoaYd of Trusteesv
RECI~IVED
JAH 3 1 ~'/
(lerl