Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-12/19/2001Albert J. Krupski, President James King, Vice-Presiden~ Artie Foster Ken Poliwod~a Peggy A. Dickerson Town Hall 53095 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1892 Fax (631) 765-1366 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MINUTES Wednesday, December 19, 2001 7:00 PM PRESENT WERE: Albert J. Krupski, Jr., President James King, Vice-President Artie Foster, Trustee Henry Smith, Trustee Ken Poliwoda, Trustee Lauren Standish, Senior Clerk CALL MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 at 8:00 AM TRUSTEE KING moved to Approve, TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES NEXT TRUSTEE MEETING: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 at 7:00 PM WORKSESSION: 6:00 PM TRUSTEE KING moved to Approve, TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES APPROVE MINUTES: Approve Minutes of October 24, 2001. (Held until January.) MONTHLY REPORT: The Trustees monthly report for November 2001. A check for $7,342.34 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. AMENDMENTS/WAIVERS/CHANGES: MANZI HOMES, INC. requests an Amendment to Permit #4986 for the change in the side-yard from 30' to 27.7', southwest side only, well and well water line trenched through wetland area, and cesspool in front of house instead of rear, as per the Health Dept. Located: 400 Rene's Dr., Southold. SCTM#54-6-4.4 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to Table the application until new plans are received showing the final grade and a retaining wall. Gutters and drywells must be installed immediately. TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES THOMAS E. KRAUS requests an Amendment to Permit #5275 to erect a black chain-link fence (approx. 440'), 4' high around the backyard for pool safety. Located: 3329 Manhanset Ave., Greenport. SCTM#36-2-23.3 TRUSTEE SMITH moved to Approve the application, TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. on behalf of PETER J. JACQUES requests an Amendment to Permit #5416 to reposition the location of the proposed dwelling 4' to the northwest to maintain 20' from the side property boundary. Located: 4079 Main Bayview Rd., Southold. SCTM#78-2-18.2 TRUSTEE POLIWODA moved to Approve the application, TRUSTEE SMITH seconded. ALL AYES Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. on behalf of MICHAEL MCALLISTER requests an Amendment to Permit #5253 to to-vegetate the existing bluff (6340 sr.) with approx. 3170 plantings of American Beach Grass and 3170 plantings of Rosa Rugosa. Located: 17665 Soundview Ave., Southold. SCTM#51-1~3 TRUSTEE FOSTER moved to Approve the application with the condition that hay bales be placed down landward of the existing retaining wall, TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of FREDERICK MAYNE requests an Amendment to Permit #5362 to construct new vinyl-sheathed bulkhead within 18", measured face-to-face of the sheathing, of the existing bulkhead which existing bulkhead totals 32 linear ff. Fill space between old and new bulkhead with clean sand. Located: 860 Bayberry Rd., Cutchogue. SCTM#118-1-15.1 TRUSTEE KING moved to Approve the application with the condition of a 10' non-turf buffer behind the bulkhead, TRUSTEE SMITH seconded, TRUSTEE KRUPSKI abstained, TRUSTEE FOSTER Aye, TRUSTEE POLIWODA Aye. Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of JOANNE MCSHERRY requests an Amendment to Permit #5326 to construct a new vinyl-sheathed bulkhead within 18", measured face-to-face of the sheathing, of the existing bulkhead which existing bulkhead totals 173 linear ft; construct new 95 linear ff. of 4' wide walk, 4'X 6' stair landing, and 4'X 7' stairs to grade to replace existing structures of the same size. Fill space between old and new bulkhead with clean sand. Located: 660 Bayberry Rd., Cutchogue. SCTM#118~1-13.1 IV. TRUSTEE KING moved to Approve the application with the condition of a 10' non-turf buffer behind the bulkhead, TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded, TRUSTEE KRUPSKI abstained, TRUSTEE FOSTER Aye, TRUSTEE SMITH Aye. PUBLIC HEARINGS: THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING IN THE MATTER OF THE FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS UNDER THE WETLANDS ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. I HAVE AN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION FROM THE SUFFOLK TIMES. PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE MAY E~E READ PRIOR TO ASKING FOR COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMMENTS ORGANIZED AND BRIEF. FIVE (5) MINUTES OR LESS IF POSSIBLE ANDREW NIKOLICH requests a Wetland Permit to install 125 linear ft. of C-Loc Series 4500 vinyl sheathing on inside of the existing bulkhead. Extend second- story wall of the existing bedroom and eliminate second-story balcony. Construct second-story addition over existing garage. Install accessory building (10'X 8' shed), and restore circular driveway. Located: 850 Budd's Pond Rd., Southold. SCTM#56-5-15 TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Is there anyone here who would like to speak or comment on behalf of the application? Is there anyone who would like to speak against the application? TRUSTEE SMITH: I looked at this. What kind of a driveway are you going to put in? MR. NIKOLICH: It's going to be a circular driveway with bluestone or blacktop. TRUSTEE SMITH: I'd like to see an impervious surface, or if you put in blacktop, you'll have to install drywells to contain the water in your driveway. MR. NIKOLICH: Well in that case, we'll go with the bluestone. TRUSTEE SMITH: And, you're going to do this all behind the existing bulkhead that's there now? MR. NIKOLICH: Yes. TRUSTEE SMITH: And as far as the 8'× 10' shed, it's not a problem with that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh What about a buffer behind the bulkhead? TRUSTEE SMITH: don't think he has a turf buffer there now. You don't have a turf buffer. The grass doesn't go right up to the edge of the bulkhead does it? MR. NIKOLICH: No, it's all sand. There is no grass. TRUSTEE SMITH: Ok, because you have to have a non-turf buffer 10' back from the bulkhead, but I think you have that already. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The CAC made a comment requesting a non-turf buffer and that the applicant set the shed back as far as possible, and that the existing walkway removed and replaced with permeable material. Is there going to be any work on the walkway? MR. NIKOLICH: No. 4 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is that necessary or reasonable. TRUSTEE SMITH: No. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Ok, it's not necessary. All right, if there's no other comment, is there a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE SMITH: I'll make a motion we Appreve the application with the condition that there be a 10' non-turf buffer behind the bulkhead and that the driveway material be permeable. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded, ALL AYES MARK & LORRAINE AGLORA requests a Wetland Permit to construct a deck onto the rear of the house. Located: 200 Haywaters Dr., Cutchogue. SCTM#104-5-19 TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of the application? Against the application? I was at the site. I spoke to Mr. Aglora and this is really a standard deck on the back of the house. I would recommend approval, and I'm sure the GAG would also. If there is no other comment, I'll recommend closing the hearing. Do I have a motion on that? TRUSTEE KING: So moved. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I'll make a motion to Approve the application. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES 3. JOAN LACAILLE requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 1' high retaining wall, apprex. 60 linear ft., on northwest side of catwalk, and approx. 30 linear ft. retaining wall, 1.5' high northeast of catwalk. Located: 1255 Waterview Dr., Southold. SCTM#78-7-17 POSTPONED UNTIL JANUARY AS PER THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST 4. Land Use Ecological Services, Inc. on behalf of FRANCIS & MARIA MCNAMEE requests a Wetland Permit to construct a dock facility which consists of a 4'X 32' +/- fixed CCA timber pier, elevated a minimum of 4' above the existing wetlands vegetation. (18) 4"X 4" CCA timber dock pilings are preposed to support the pier and (1) 6" CCA timber mooring pile 10'+/- to the west side of the pier. Located: 910 Glenn Rd., Southold. SCTM#78-2-27 TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor or against the application? Now November 26th he sent us the revised plans. He's showing us 48' across. He's going out 10'. Do they have boats tied up at the bulkhead? TRUSTEE FOSTER: Acress the way they do. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So it's navigable. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Where is the original plan? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Everything is the same except he doesn't show the bulkhead across the way. He didn't show a distance to Iow water. TRUSTEE KING: I think it would be better if he came in perpendicular to this bulkhead. Make it perpendicular to the shoreline. Do you know what I'm saying? It would take up less room. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's true. The boat would be parallel to the channel instead of sticking out. TRUSTEE KING: It's going to sit caddy-cornered like that but if it was shifted around like that parallel to this, you could tuck that in there. TRUSTEE FOSTER: That makes sense. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I wish he were here so that we could tell him and specify that the boat can't have more than a 6' beam. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well we could do that anyway. Do you want to see plans or do you want to approve it with those conditions? TRUSTEE SMITH: I would approve it with the condition that you see a set of plans. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That way, the plan has to come in, we have a record of what we said tonight, and that way when the plans come in we check and we say, ok here's the dock turned, we double check it, and then we can approve it, otherwise it goes a whole another month. It's such a simple change. TRUSTEE KING: Why don't we just make him shift it to the east and make it 30'. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Ok. TRUSTEE FOSTER: You mean angle it? TRUSTEE KING: Yes. Bring that seaward end to the east so it's perpendicular to the bulkhead across the way and make the dock 30' instead of 32'. TRUSTEE FOSTER: That itself will bring it in closer. TRUSTEE KING: That will bring that in a little closer and shorten it by 2'. That should be very doable and very easy. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion we Approve the application based on a new set of plans showing the dock, the seaward end of the dock shifted to the east so the dock is perpendicular to the bulkhead across the creek and the length of the dock is to be 30' instead of 32'. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh The dock with the boat shall extend no further than 1/3 the way across the navigable waterway, not to the bulkhead, but the navigable waterway. TRUSTEE SMITH: Seconded. ALL AYES Land Use Ecological Services, Inc. on behalf of ERNEST H. SCHNEIDER requests a Wetland Permit to re-locate an existing lot line and construct a 1,320 sf. single family residence and sanitary system on the southern lot. Dwelling will be located a minimum of 100' landward of the tidal wetland boundary and the proposed sanitary system shall be located 109' landward of said boundary. The limits of clearing, grading and ground disturbance shall not exceed the 100' setback. Located: 915 Lakeside Dr., Southold. SCTM#90-4-5&6 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of or against the application? TRUSTEE FOSTER: This is where they pushed all the land-clearing debris right up, 10' to the bluff. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Do ] have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Artie, do you want to make a motion? TRUSTEE FOSTER: I'll make a motion to Approve the application with the condition that a new plan be submitted showing a 50' non-disturbance buffer and that the debris that's pushed up into the top of the bluff be removed, and that a row of staked hay bales be placed at the 50' setback line prior to construction. This application is approved subject to that work being done before the permit is issued. TRUSTEE SMITH: Seconded. ALL AYES Land Use Ecological Services, Inc. on behalf of ERNEST H. SCHNEIDER requests a Wetland Permit to construct a single-family dwelling (2,000 sr. footprint), 24'X 24' garage, associated sanitary system and pervious driveway. Located: 800 Lakeside Dr., Southold. SCTM#90-3-6 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of or againstthe application? This is the second lot. We have a 50' non-disturbance buffer on here, and it shows 20 cy. of fill coming in. It doesn't show gutters or drywells but we'll include them. Is there any other comment? If there's no other comment, do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE FOSTER: They certainly don't have an awful lot of reom to do any excavation there between the footprint and the non-disturbance area. Well actually, if they have to put the hay bales at the 50' buffer, they certainly won't be able to encroach on it; they'll just have to deal with it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: They're really not changing the grade. They show the final grade to be 10' and the original surface grade is 9 ½'. They're really not changing the grade. TRUSTEE FOSTER: I'll make a motion to Approve the application with a row of staked hay bales at the 50' non-disturbance buffer area and drywells and gutters for roof run-off. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES Docko, Inc. on behalf of PIRATE'S COVE MARINA, INC. requests a Wetland Permit to conduct maintenance dredging to restore a depth of 7' below mean Iow water, removing 300 +/-cy. of silty sandy bottom sediments over 4,000 +/-sr. for upland disposal. Located: Peninsula Rd., Fishers Island. SCTM#10-3-22 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak if favor of the application? Any Board comment? TRUSTEE KING: I just wanted to see the DEC permit. LAUREN STANDISH: Docko was trying to get it to us but they didn't have it in time for the meeting. TRUSTEE KING: I would give them a maintenance permit running concurrent with the DEC permit. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's way inside there isn't it? TRUSTEE K~ING: Yes, it's up in the cove there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would that be Coastal Erosion in the cove? TRUSTEE KING: I don't know. To me it's just straightforward maintenance. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh They don't show the Coastal Erosion Line on the survey that they submitted. To be on the safe side, I would approve this based on the possibility. TRUSTEE SMITH: Of what? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Of it being Coastal Erosion. They seem to think they didn't need a wetlands permit, which they definitely do. They are certainly adjacent to the wetlands, which they show. I think we would be inclined to approve both of them, the Coastal Erosion and the Wetlands. If there's no further comment, do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to Approve the application to run concurrent with the DEC permit. TRUSTEE SMITH: Seconded. ALL AYES J.M.O. Environmenta Consulting on behalf of WILLIAM D. REED requests a Wetland Permit to construct a single-family dwelling, associated sanitary system, public water line, driveway, patio and garage. Located: R.O.W. off Peninsula Rd., Fishers Island. SCTM#10-3-12 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of this application? TRUSTEE KING: It's so developed there. It's just past the marina. It's long and skinny. There's a house here and a house behind it. It's a real steep bank. There's a big oak tree here and a big oak over here. Why don't' we just draw a line between the two trees and make this no disturbance at all. That's the only thing we can do here. That's the only thing I could see. We need a line drawn tree to tree, and this will be non-disturbance down here. From the top of the bank, it's about 32'. It's going to vary. How about a staked few of hay bales running from the 18" oak tree on the north side of the property to the 24" on the south side of the property. From that point, there will be no-disturbance. I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE SMITH: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to Approve it with those conditions and also drywells and gutters to take care of the roof run-off. TRUSTEE SMITH: Seconded. ALL AYES Patricia C. Moore, Esq. on behalf of EDWARD WERTHNER requests a Wetland Permit to construct a single-family residence 61' to bulkhead and 60' to MHWL. Located: Windy Point Lane, Southold. SCTM#78-6-2&3 POSTPONED UNTIL JANUARY AS PER THE AGENT'S REQUEST 10. Samuels & Steelman Architects on behalf of RONALD CASSARA requests a Wetland Permit and Coastal Erosion Permit to renovate the existing frame residence and add new additions, resulting in a new one-and-one half story residence. Located: 30185 Cabot Wood Rd,, Peconic. SCTM#73-4-1 POSTPONED UNTIL JANUARY AS PER THE AGENT'S REQUEST 11.Suffolk Environmental Consulting, nc. on behalf of WILLIAM H. PRICE JR., ESQ. requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 1725 sf. single-family dwelling (footprint) with a 550 sf. attached deck (footprint) an 865 sf. gravel driveway, septic system and waterline, and place 125 cy. of fill to elevate the se ptic system house. Located: 100 Bay Road, Greenport. SCTM#'!,3-5-10 TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of the application? MATT IVANS: This pretty much speaks for itself. We're just reapplying for a permit that expired. You approved a permit dated February 25, 1999 and it expired February 2001. The applicant is basically just reapplying with the exact application. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We have questions for you but before we start I would just like to ask if there is any other comment on this application? All right. The CAC recommends Disapproval because the proposed structure was not staked, the landward edge of the wetlands should be identified and flagged, and there is also a concern with the high-tide mark in relation to the proposed structure. The CAC has a concern with the existing p~pe and the redirection of the road run-off. The CAC recommends that the structure is moved 75' from the wetlands. We had some questions. I don't know if the house was staked, was it? TRUSTEE KING: No. MATT IVANS: We could stake it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We also had questions with some of the...it seems like this survey maybe needs more detail. It shows a 6' contour and then a 4' contour, and I think the Boards needs...our field notes just say that we need the wetlands on the survey. There seems to be spartina patens inside of the 4' contour there, right next to the neighbors on the south side of the property. We walked in on the south side, on the neighbors' lawn, we walking in right in there, and it looks like that right next to their retaining wall, there is a significant amount of spartina patens. What we would like to see on the survey is the location of those and the identification of those patens there, and then we need to see the house staked. I don't know if the Board has any other comments. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Well I thought there were some concerns. TRUSTEE KING: On the first application, that road run-off was supposed to be resolved between Mr. Price and the Highway Dept. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: There's still a pipe running onto Mr. Price's property from the highway. I'm sure Mr. Price would like to see that resolved also because that's a problem. That's a Highway Dept, problem. We would like to see him work with the highway. MATT IVANS: Was the high-water mark unclear? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That, I believe was a CAC question. They had a concern with the flood-tide mark in relation to the proposed structure. It did seem like there was a rack line right up into the property. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Into the building envelope. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I think we would like to see the 5' contour placed on the survey also. This goes from 4' to 6'. I'm trying to find a picture here in the file. I don't know when these pictures were provided for the file. I don't believe they're recent, but I'm not entirely sure. They can't be recent. Is the Board going to request any other information on this application? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I don't think so. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh So we need that house staked and the vegetation shown on the survey. MATT IVANS: Ok, just south of the retaining wall, and the read run-off resolved with the Highway Dept., and 5' contours, Ok. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Ok, I'll make a motion to Table the application. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES 12. Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. on behalf of ALFRED & MARIANN SUESSER requests a Wetland Permit to construct 8 linear ft +/- of 10' wide +/- rock revetment (w/5' wide splash guard above) starting from the southeastern corner of the property to the existing wood deck/stairs; and construct 185 linear ft. +/- of 8' wide +/- rock revetment beginning from said existing wood deck/stairs, along the bottom of the bluff which runs contiguous to the southeastern edge of subject property, and terminate at the northeastern corner of subject property. Located: 5055 New Suffolk Rd., New Suffolk. SCTM#110-8-32.8 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of the application? MATT IVANS: I'm going to speak on both Suesser and Gleason together. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Ok, I'll open the hearing for Gleason also. 13. Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. on behalf of TOM GLEASON requests a Wetland Permit to construct 195 linear ft. of bulkhead beginning from the southeastern most property corner, along Cutchogue Harbor, (w/5' return at northern terminus) with a 5' wide splash pad on landward side of proposed bulkhead and 5' wide toe armor on seaward side of proposed bulkhead along entire length. Extending from the northern terminus of said bulkhead will be 130 linear ft. +/- of 16' wide +/- of rock revetment, itself running along the southeastern edge of subject property to the northern property line. In addition, applicant proposes to construct an access read (8.0' wide) on the northeastern section of said property. Located: 5115 New Suffolk Rd., New Suffolk. SCTM#110-8-34 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Ok, now you can speak. MATT IVANS: This is a coordinated project with two property owners working together to solve a common problem and that is erosion on the bluff. The Board went out there on several occasions and I think that we all agree that those properties have experienced significant erosion. What we can agree on is that the degree of severity of the erosion varies across both properties. The most severe erosion is occurring on the Gleason property and a bulkhead with toe armor is proposed. The plan and specifications submitted in connection with this application includes cross-section provides protection to his property and it is not our intention to remove any trees located on the bluff. (inaudible) It would not be reasonable to attempt to remove or dig into the bluff to locate the structures more landward as proposed, because further damage to the bluff would result. The combination of bulkhead and revetment is proposed because it's a more compact design both with standard revetments. The proposed toe armor in front of the bulkhead and the revetment that extends across the Gleason property and Suesser property are (inaudible) that are substantially below grade. Our applications to the Board were submitted to the Board on July 23, 2001 and there have been three hearing on this matter. During the last hearing, you had requested we stake out the bulkhead, which was done. You'll note that the proposed bulkhead (inaudible, background noise). Mr. Samuels is also here to answer any questions that you may have concerning the design of the project structures. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. We also have a number of photographs submitted by Thomas Sam uels and a letter attached to those. Would you like me to read that? At the previous public hearing regarding the referenced application, t~ambo agreed to provide the Board with photographs as evidence as to the effect, or lack thereof, of toe armor seaward of vertical face walls as well as so called splash pads protecting backfill in areas where historical storm surge overtopping has frequently occurred. The enclosed photographs represent structures in Southold approved by the Trustees, which required toe armor. You will note the absence of beach scour in front of all these bulkheads. F~ambo believes that all vertical face walls on the L.I. Sound and bulkheads on the Bay with Northeast exposure require toe armor as mitigation for permit issuance. The Alan Dickerson permit, for example, should require armor. The Trustees have previously armored returns only in some cases. The exception to Southold permits is submitted because it appeared to be of interest to some of the Trustees as an example of these types of structures as installed. The site is the West end of Shinnecock Bay, and an example of an extreme "splash pad': This bulkhead is at a Iow elevation and the splash pad was installed to prevent loss of backfill when overtopped in Northeast storm surges. Submitted with that letter are a number of photographs showing the Cerillo property and Peck. If I could ask, Mr. Samuels, when was that Peck bulkhead built? MR. SAMUELS: The bulkhead was built before last Christmas. At that particular Stretch, I took a lot of photos there because east of that is Bailie's Beach and with the jetty's, it's pretty well documented that there has been some erosion there. TRUSTEE FOSTER: That's right next door to the big blowout, Mihalios. TRUSTEE KING: Right. MR. SAMUELS: All of those bulkheads from Bailie's Beach Rd., to the end have armor with the exception of the Goldsmith bulkhead which was built in 1970, right in the middle there, and that was not armored. I have some additional photographs of armored bulkheads but I think those pictures tell the story as well as anything. The bulkheads east and west of Bridge Lane on the old Bokina farm, they're all armored, and they have done very, very well. The toe armor seems to retain the sand. We need the bulkhead on the south end of the Gleason property because of the elevation. I also mentioned the vinyl bulkhead on Shelter Island, on the wayto the Rams Head Inn. TRUSTEE FOSTER: I looked at that Tom. I went over and looked at that. I walked up and down and looked. It seems to be doing the job. It's very rocky. MR. SAMUELS: Well we brought in 850 trailer loads of stone as a Corp. of Engineers project. They armored it on the seaward side and the landward side. But, the Federal Government can afford that kind of armament. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: How many trucks? MR. SAMUELS: 850 trailer loads. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Where was that, Ram Island? There's a lot of stone there. MR. SAMUELS: That's all quarry stone. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Well I think the Board went out and looked at that not this month but the month before when it was staked and it was marked out and flagged as a structure. I don't believe, and anyone can correct me, I don't believe the Board was comfortable with that size structure there, nor did we feel, after reviewing this for months, literally months, since July, that this sort of protection is necessary in this area. We really don't want to make a mistake by allowing a structure of this magnitude where it's not necessary and it could in fact, do more harm than good. MR. SAMUELS: Well there's really no alternative to this structure. We attempted to mitigate the impact of those structures. I would hope that you'd agree that armonng (inaudible). There has to be some structure there. There has to be some solution to the erosion problem. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Ithink the erosion on the Suesser property, it's pretty clear that it comes from the jetty that's there on the beach and it's clear that the jetty has an effect on bluff erosion and on beach elevation both. It's very clear. MR. SAMUELS: The applicants have agreed to remove that jetty and use the stone for toe armoring. It doesn't protect the upland. The jetty does not protect the upland. It doesn't do much at all. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What do you think Artie? I need somebody to comment on this. The applicant is waiting for an answer. MR. SAMUELS: I might add that the DEC is the lead agency on this and neg. decked it and we have their approval and the Corp. of Engineers approval, so somebody, some agencies apparently believe that there is erosion out there. I think if you look at Suesser's stairs, you can see how much erosion has occurred since those stairs were built and I don't believe they're three years old. TRUSTEE FOSTER: I think that's caused by that little rock jetty in front of it. MR. SAMUELS: We're willing to take it out but that will not protect the upland from storm surge. TRUSTEE K~RUPSKI: But the upland doesn't seem to be particularly vulnerable there on the Suesser property. The CAC actually specifically recommends Disapproval of the application because of the proposed hardening of the shoreline seems to be excessive in this area for erosion control. Once you get away from dynamic of the neighboring bulkhead to the west that juts out, the jetty that juts out there causing the erosion scour on the Gleason property, once you get aWay from that, the erosion tapers off almost to nothing, the bank erosion tapes off almost to nothing, and the beach is built up until you hit that small jetty. In the shadow of that jetty are Mr. Suesser's stairs, which have suffered, and a ittle bit of bank erosion. Once you get past the shadow of the jetty again, the bank is stable, and the beach is stable. TRUSTEE FOS-FER: That elevation changes tremendously from...what is it 12' high on Gleason, where the bulkhead ends and then it tapers down to 3' or 4' as you go further down the beach. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I don't think we're against armoring the bluff in some manner but not armoring it in this manner. That's why we haven't jumped into this with both feet in July when we first saw it because we were a little unsure of the magnitude and how it will affect a huge stretch of beach and we don't want to ruin that stretch of beach by saying, well the DEC approved it so it must be Ok. We don't want to take that course. MR. SAMUELS: I can certainly understand that because I've been to the three hearings and I know what your position is. I hopefully supplied you with photographic evidence of other places where there is greater wave action; certainly more wave energy and those bulkheads in no way destroy the beach. There has to be some sort of relief and I don't know. If the Trustees want to come up with an Engineering scheme for erosion control, we can certainly entertain it. I don't think you want to do that. I don't think you want the responsibility. We will certainly accept the responsibility. There has to be some relief to the property as to what can be done. I had seen in many nor'easters the waves crashing on that bluff in storm surge conditions and there is a lot of erosion. The fact that there hasn't been a severe nor'easter since December 12, 1992, doesn't remove the natural law, which essentially says, if it's happened once, it will happen again, and how can I provide for the safety of the properties without a structure. The toe armor will be very close to the foot of the bulkhead. Most of the revetment you won't even see because of the elevation. The toe stones will be under the beach. You won't see it. Probably the first two stones in the revetment will be under-grade, and will stay under-grade, because of the energy absorbing qualities of the revetment. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What about that proposed access road? Is that proposed to come through the revetment onto the beach? MR. SAMUELS: Yes. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'm looking for some sort of cross-section of more details then what's shown on the survey. MATT IVANS: For the access? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's right. It would be on the Gleason property, right? MR. SAMUELS: It would be the north end of the Gleason property where the elevation is at it's lowest, close to the Suesser property line. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I don't see it on the plan. I see it on the survey. How would you cut a road? MR. SAMUELS: The architect, who you know, and I can get you his building envelope and his depiction of the haul road, which is a temporary haul road, which will be rebuilt on the way out. In other words, this section where you get onto the beach, so as you back out, you're pioneering your way back out up the haul road, and you rebuild the bluff, and it's not very high there, and then it has to be re-vegetated, as does all of the bluff on both projects. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I was under the assumption that the access road would be permanent, because you're going from 19 ¼' of elevation down to 4' something, so that's a pretty good change. MR. SAMUELS: No. That's why it's going to be graded. It's going to be built at different elevations. The purpose is purely protection with no intent to raise grade or .increase property or anything else. It's built right at the toe of the bluff. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh But our intention is to just to protect that beach there. MR. SAMUELS: Well that's why we're mitigating with the armor. Is there anybody on the Board that would question whether armor works? Is there anybody on the Board who has seen a site where a well-armored bulkhead has resulted in beach loss? Even the scour that's ordinarily seen right after the bulkhead, where the beach drops down to what call storm pavement. Even if those cases, the stone armor has retained sand at the base of the bulkhead in the spaces between the rocks. They don't fit together like a sea wall would, made out of concrete blocks. I can't think of another structure more suitable that I could give them any assurances that is going to last. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Jim, what do you think? TRUSTEE KING: For that area, it seems excessive. MR. SAMUELS: You've made that comment, but I don't know what that means. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Well we have been out there at least as many times as you have l bet. MR. SAMUELS: I remember dredging Wickham's Creek for the County and it must have been 15 years in a row. I've been down there a lot. Of course I looked at it right from my windows so, I've seen it. Every time I go sailing I see it. Every time I go in Schoolhouse Creek I see it. I've seen it in almost every condition. Remarkably stable. Our intent is to keep it that way. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh What do you think Artie? TRUSTEE FOSTER: Well what I think is that in my term on this Board, not having a lot of experience with these and not being around in a major storm event on this Board, you know we rely on these experts and I would think that there has got to be a couple of them here. I don't know. I don't know what to tell you. Aesthetically, it might be ugly, but will it do the job? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well it will do the job protecting the upland but will it do the job protecting the beach or at least ensure the integrity of the beach. TRUSTEE FOSTER: But as Tom said, are there any areas where there's been toe armor that have created a tremendous amount of erosion. TRUSTEE SMITH: I personally don't think it would do any harm to the beach. MR. SAMUELS: There is another form of mitigation that we certainly would be willing to entertain and that would be to cover the toe armor as we've done on the Sound, several time, and plant beach grass, actually on top of the revetment. I also submitted, today I Federal Expressed something to Lauren, and it was a situation similar to this in East Hampton where the homeowner could not obtain a permit for erosion ~;ontrol and he was asked to rebuild a bluff with the so-called soft approach. Each time it cost about, well in excessive of $25,000. It didn't work. Predictably, it won't work because if it would work, you wouldn't need a bulkhead and we wouldn't have bulkheads. The project-was finally denied and it went to the courts and everything else and the court, the appellate division, ruled in favor of the homeowner saying that the East Hampton ZBA could, they have the east end Trustees approved of it, but the East Hampton, which has an ordinance called Natural Resources I~ermit. They denied him, he went to court, went to the highest court in the State, the seven judges agreed unanimously that while the ZBA could require him to cover the structure and keep it covered and keep it planted, l~hat they felt that he could no longer keep so-cai:led the soft approach on the blUff. That's an analogist situation. On Lake Erie incidentally, the Corp. of Engineers protects private property with revetments. But anyway, to make a long story short, I think this ~s an analogist situation. You could stipulate, I certainly wouldn't keep the haul road open beyond the construction, but I could always talk to Tom Wickham about coming from the road he has up to Wickham's Creek. It goes onto the beach. That's how we can our pay-loaders and cranes in. At sea level, al those elevations on there are mean sea-level. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Last month we asked Bruce to stake it out, what it would be. We were struck by the size of it and I think the Board would be more comfortable with the minimum amount of structure there. MR. SAMUELS: You know the elevation of the structure to the south right? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well I don't think we can condition the permit on the removing of that. MR. SAMUELS: Oh no, but that's the elevation we're starting out at, tying into that, at it's extreme landward end of that return. We're building at the toe of the bluff. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Which is not to say that he didn't built out, or someone didn't build out at the time. MR. SAMUELS: I don't know. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: When I visited the site for the first time and looked at it, l thought if anything had to be done to stop the erosion and build the beach up, was a row of stone, or revetment, cover it with sand and plant behind that. MR. SAMUELS: That's what I just said as mitigation, what the court ruled. Which is a structure covered with sand, so that you didn't see it. As I said a few moments ago, the last bad not'easter we had was 1992, that's 9 years. Almost 10. In that storm, all the bulkheads on the east side of Nassau Point for example, were under 3' or 4' of water. That's why these structures should be built on an elective basis, not as a result of a catastrophic loss of property. The burden that is put on the industry, which can't handle those catastrophic storms really, it took us two years to take care of the storm damage. So, if you were to Condition the permit with covering it and beach grassing it, I don't believe the owners would have a problem with that at all. All they're looking for is protection against these storms, or a storm. TRUSTEE SMITH: Personally I think the rock revetment in front of the bulkhead makes it more pleasant looking. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Oh sure, I think the bulkhead itself could be minimized instead of ...maybe I'm wrong on that. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I didn't see any bulkhead in my vision. When I looked at it, I just looked at a revetment. MR. SAMUELS: Well it's a choice of what technique you want to meet. If I was to have a discussion with the DEC, they would complain about the footprint of the revetment to do that bulkhead section elevation, one on two slope on a revetment. So, YOu're going to come out into the beach, granted a good deal of the stone will be below grade and you won't see it, but that's a much bigger structure. You're picking up 10' of elevation, one on two grade on the revetment, it seems an awful lot to me like 20'. MATT IVANS: If I could just show this to you what the rock revetment would look like. It would extend to the high-tide mark. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Unless the rock revetment were started here. I think that's what we're saying. The bank right like this is pretty steep here. This shows kind of a Iow angle here. The bank is a lot steeper. MR. SAMUELS: It's a 45. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: This is Gleason and this isn't showing a 45 here. If you had a 45 here and I'm not saying that this is the final answer here in my mind. But, if you armored that wouldn't that accomplish the same thing? MR. SAMUELS: You have to come up to this elevation because the bluff is so high. The damage that is going to happen in an over-topping storm on the south end is going to really take back the top of that bluff. As it is now, we're going to have to re-contour that lip like we had to do on the Sound. You know, that over- hanging fringe? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't know if that should be done either. MR. SAMUELS: Well it's going to fall anyway. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Right, let it fall. MR. SAMUELS: Ok. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Technically, I look at it as if, the high-tide mark, we regulate 100' landward, and there have been cases where we drove sheathing into the land 100', 75', at our jurisdiction mark. Put the rocks down and let whatever happens happen. It seems reasonable. It protects the property. You're going to lose a little bit off the top lip but eventually... MR. SAMUELS: Well that's the whole thing. You're describing what we're doing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But the top lip does provide habitat also that we're concerned about. On the Sound, we're require~l that the top lip be left along and let it naturally, and of course once you provide toe protection, slowly erode. Once you provide toe protection, if there's no water coming off the top, the top lip, even if it's at a ... MR. SAMUELS: You can stabilize the bluff with a structure at the toe... TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But the top lip isn't just going to fall right off. MR. SAMUELS: It won't wall fall right off but whatever vegetation is there, as the roots dry it's going to come. Mother nature will take care of that lip. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But I think there's a significant habitat there. You have bank swallows and you have fox living in that bank, in that bluff. If you cut that bluff back, if you built the bulkhead, you cut the bluff back, you're going to eliminate all of that habitat. MR. SAMUELS: I~m not proposing to eliminate any habitat. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'm just saying, part of the permit would be to leave the top of the bank alone, even though it is a little unstable. I'm sure the applicant would want stairs for beach access. Is it proposed on Gleason or not? MATT IVANS: No, not yet. MR. SAMUELS: I think they'll probably share Suessers'. TRUSTEE'KRUPSKI: But you do have significant habitat that we wouldn't want to see lOst. MR. SAMUELS: We're just going to put beach grass where the sand is exposed with no vegetation, which is going, not with a big storm, but after every northeast storm that gets to the toe of the bluff and chipping it away. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't disagree with you that we haven't had a nor'easter in ten years, and that doesn't mean it won't happen again. TRUSTEE SMITH: It's just a matter of when. MR. SAMUELS: I hope we never have one, but it would be naYve to think that won't. 1'11 let you in March. March is really the worst month that we worry about. I've been ar~ound long enough to have been through some dusies. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We've had some pretty series ones in the last 15 years. MR. SAMUELS: Perfect storm, Halloween 1991. The hurricane before that when all the trees were leafed out. That was a tough one. Was that Gloria? No, Bob. MR. SAMUELS: You can condition it that the owner has a year following the loss of the sand over the revetment to re-sand and replant it. That's the way the ocean bulkhead permits are written. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well it's a concern for their beach. This isn't even a public beach. There is no public access here period, I wouldn't think. MR. SAMUELS: Well you'd be surprised. One of the favorite places for outboards would be the south side of Wickham's Creek; that little area there where the big sand pile is. If you go in there in the summer time on a hot day, you'll find 15, 20 boats there. They're actually using the Wickham beach there, inside the canal. Of course then they walk all the way up to Schoolhouse Creek. But, generally speaking, they don't swim there. They swim in the creek, in that little hollow dent in there. Just on the side of the pile of the dredged spoil, that I wish was on the beach. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What about access? Can you get the access through Wickham's or not? MR. SAMUELS: I'm sure. '11 see him in church. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We'd rather see that, don't you think? TRUSTEE FOSTER: I'd also rather approve something that's kind of effective and not a trial and error thing and waste these people's money. I don't think that's why we're here, really. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Are you going to approve it with the bulkheading? can make a motion for the rock revetment. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I thought it was "as submitted", covered with sand, and that the jetty removed and used as armor. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: They're requesting 195' ft. of bulkhead. MR. SAMUELS: And armor, we'll plant the armor. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right, but not the bulkhead. It's too high, you couldn't cover it, and the access would be off the property. The bank wouldn't be touched at all, the top of the bank. So, you would backfill only as necessary behind the bulkhead and plant up the bank and not affect the bank, from the top. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Well that's not the vision I had, so I'm not going to make that motion. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Alright, ['11 make a motion to Approve the application for Alfred & Marianne Suesser and for Tom Gleason with the condition that the rock revetment and toe armor on the Gleason property and the rock revetment on the Suesser property be covered with sand after the project is corn pleted and planted with Ammophila 1' on center, and in a timely fashion. Do you have DEC approval on this? MR. SAMUELS: Yes. TRUSTEE I~RUPSKI: So you're ready basically to go? MR. SAMUELS: Yes. TRUSTEE K~RUPSKI: All right, so the Ammophilia should be planted before April 1~t. Also, the stone jetty be removed and the stone can be used as rock armoring in either of the project and that survey beach elevations be taken before construction, at the corner of the existing bulkhead on the south side of Gleason, and in the middle of the Gleason property, and one on either side of th e jetty, to show how the removal is going to affect beach elevation. TRUSTEE SMITH: Before and after photographs should be provided. MR. SAMUELS: All the things that you just incorporated in this are what the DEC requires on ocean front structures. Essentially what it does is the owner who is being permitted to do this, is supplying data to the DEC as to what's happening to the beach like that. So what you're requesting is not unreasonable at all. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Tom, is there an ivy that grows over the bulkhead? MR. SAMUELS: Yes. The best stuff is Rosa Ruchieriana, which is a vine like rose. If it's planted seaward of the structure, the vine comes down in front of the bulkhead and it blooms. There's whites, pinks, reds, it's excellent, and it's available. TRUSTEE SMITH: I'll second that motion. ALL AYES 14.Amy Martin of Fairweather-Brown on behalf of AILEEN PASKOFF requests a Wetland Permit & Coastal Erosion Permit to replace the burned-out structure with a new single-family residence with pool. Located: 205 North Sea Dr., Southold. SCTM#54,4-4 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of the application? AMY MARTIN: We submitted the revised plans. (inaudible) We put the proposed drywells for the pool backwash on the side yard and we have a new site, landward of the house, for the newly proposed septic system. Obviously this house is really an eyesore at this point. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That keeps it in line. That's one of our policies, to keep the houses in line. AMY MARTIN: The new house, the deck is actually back further. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The pool ~s going where the deck is. So, the houses are in line. The new deck will go out from the house. TRUSTEE SMITH: That was our main concern. AMY MARTIN: When we started this, we hadn't had the survey that had the Coastal Erosion Line on it, but the Coastal Erosion Line goes right through the old house. (inaudible) TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES PAT MOORE: 'm here representing the neighbor. They called me in on the first proposal, which was objectionable to the neighbor, but this one is not objectionable. They had me sit here waiting to put their support of this application on the record. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there any other comment before I jump ahead? TRUSTEE FOSTER: I'll make a motion to Approve the application based on the newly submitted plans with the relocation of the house. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES 15. En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of MYLES MAHONEY (CONTRACT VENDEE) requests a Wetland Permit to construct a two-story, one-family dwelling, detached garage; and non-structural terrace; clear up to 50' landward of tidal wetland boundary; and establish a 50' non-disturbance buffer adjacent to the tidal wetland boundary. Located: 385 Grathwohl Rd., New Suffolk. SCTM#117- 6-14.1 TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Actually it should be maintain a 50' non-disturbance buffer. Is thero any one who would like to speak in favor of the application? ROB HERRMANN: It's a very straight-forward application. Most of the project is actually beyond the Board's jurisdiction. There are portions of it within it including clearing up to the 50' non-disturbance/non-fertilization buffer. The site was staked for the Board's and the CAC's field inspection. If the Board has any questions, t'd be happy to answer them. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Are there any other comments before we start? The CAC recommends disapproval considering that West Creek is identified as a unique pristine natural environment of the Town of Southold. They recommend a 100' non-disturbance buffer. The neighbor's garage is sitting right there, isn't it? It's actually behind the neighbor's garage, which we considered when we went out there. We've been out there a number of times. TRUSTEE SMITH: He's got a buffer how big, in front? TRUSTEE FOSTER: It looks like 50'. ROB HERRMANN: It's the standard 50' adjacent to the wetland boundary. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think that will provide adequate protection there. We have been to the site a cou pie of times and we've walked it a couple of times. There's a pretty good elevation there. The only thing we're going to require is drywells. ROB HERRMANN: There is a system of drywells not just for the house but for the garage also. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any other comment? We would also ask for a staked row of hay bales. I've never seen silt retention fencing installed properly, so I don't know if we're going to require that. Usually it's flapping or rolled up on the side or pushed aside or generally disregarded. TRUSTEE FOSTER: It's supposed to be below grade. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Have you ever seen it installed properly?. Most of the time we go on these projects, it's tied up on the tree or something. If there is no other comment, do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE FOSTER: I'll make a motion to Approve the application with a staked row of hay bales at the 50' line adjacent to the tidal wetland boundary. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES 16. Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of GEKEE WICKHAM requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 51' new bulkhead (with C-Loc vinyl sheathing) in front of existing steel sheeting, 18" face-to-face. Backfilling with 27 cy. of clean, trucked-in sand. Located: 1200 First St., New Suffolk. SCTM#117-7-30 TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Would anyone like to speak in favor of the application? JOHN COSTELLO: I am the adjacent to Gekee Wickham on this application. I'm here to answer any questions the Board may have. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh The CAC recommends Approval. Is there any other comment? Are you going to have to move those rocks out? JOHN COSTELLO: We'll move the rock out for the first foot or so, (inaudible). TRUSTEE KRUPSKh The access is from the water?. JOHN COSTELLO: The access is going to be from land. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh From the land. JOHN COSTELLO: We're probably going to take a piece of deck out. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Th at's all concrete under that deck. Did you notice that? JOHN COSTELLO: Yes, and if you remove a piece of that deck, you can move right in there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any other comment? TRUSTEE SMITH: I'll make a motion we close the hearing. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE SMITH: I'll make a motion we Approve the application. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES 17. Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of WILLIAM LEHMANN requests a Wetland Permit to remove and dispose of a 44' portion of an existing jetty. Install a new 44' jetty in-kind, in-place using CCA treated materials. Located: 730 Rabbit Lane, East Marion. SCTM#31-17-17&31-18-16 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of the application? JOHN COSTELLO: I am the agent for William Lehmann on this application. TRUSTEE K:RUPSKh The CAC Tabled this. They question the need for replacement and has a concern with the amount of material that's being excavated. JOHN COSTELLO: The amount of material that's being excavated? TRUSTEE K~RUPSKI: How much material is being excavated on this project? JOHN COSTELLO: None. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It says 100 cy. JOHN COSTELLO: There would be 100 cy. disturbed because we would be using a water jack. TRUSTEE K~RUPSKI: Ok. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: We had a question about the length. TRUST. EE I~RUPSKI: We measured 44' out, then there was extra. JOHN COSTELLO: There is a new 16' piece at the end of this jetty that was put in probably 10, 15 years ago. The inshore end was not done because it was in reasonably good condition. Now the sheathing is failing and they want to replace it. TRUSTEE FOSTER: So you're not going to do the end portion. You're going to leave that? JOHN COSTELLO: Yes, it's functional and in good condition. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Ok, it's just the piece in the middle. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Between the excavation and the extra piece on the end, everybody had some questions. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Is there a permit for that entire jetty? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh There's a 1962 survey showing a jetty that's cut off but it shows a 60' jetty. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE SMITH: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'll make a motion to Approve the application with the condition that the jetty starts 22" or 24" from the top of the deck. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES 18. Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of MORRIS FAMILY PARTNERSHIP requests a Wetland Permit to construct 100' new bulkhead (with C-Loc vinyl sheathing)immediately in front of existing bulkhead. Located: 1665 Shore Dr., Greenport. SCTM#'!.7-2-30 TRUSTEE SMITH: Is there anyone here who would like to comment on this application? JOHN COSTELLO: I~m the agent for the Morris Family Partnership application. TRUSTEE SMITH: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of or against this application? Does the Board have any comments? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there going to be a non-turf buffer or not here? TRUSTEE FOSTER: Yes. JOHN COSTELLO: It's not a big splash-zone area. They have a lawn there now. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The CAC recommends disapproval because they want it inkind/inplace and a 10' non-turf buffer. Any possibility of putting it in inkind/inplace. JOHN COSTELLO: Well the Board probably knows by now my position on doing it inkind/inplace. The bulkhead is creosote. It was probably built in the late 50's. The creosoted material does leach into the back fill. If you remove that bulkhead, I can assure you that the tide will rise and fall and take the pollutants out into the bay, whether you want to or not. We put silt fences up, the creosote material floats. Even though the DEC may require inkind/inplace, as it did on one job in Mattituck, they did not care about the wetlands. They didn't care about the creosote going into the bay. They wanted it removed because they wanted it removed. We did that under that condition. The trouble is, I would not environmentally recommend it because it does have a polycryptic aromatic hydrocarbon in the soil. We do have permits from the DEC for this under one condition. The condition is, after excavating behind the bulkhead, we place a drywell, and make sure that the roof run-off going through the drywell first. That was the only condition requested. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I'm looking for plans for this, unless it's in the other one. I didn't see a cross-section. JOHN COSTFLLO: I would certainly intend that the vinyl was cause less acidity to the environment. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You're showing that the existing pilings would be removed. JOHN COSTELLO: Yes. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Did the DEC require a non-turf buffer. JOHN COSTFLLO: No, they did not. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well we will. A 10' non-turf buffer for both of the Morris properties. JOHN COSTELLO: Do you have a reason for it? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: When you have turf, the pesticides and fertilizers get applied right to the edge of the bulkhead, and in a rain event, they are washed right over. Whereas the 10' non-turf buffer, those material are not applied directly to the edge, adjacent to the wetlands, they are applied at least 10' away and during a rain event they won't be washed directly into the water. They can use gravel. JOHN COSTELLO: But they will go into the water?. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Hopefully no. Hopefully if you apply nutrients for plants, the plants will use up those nutrients and they wouldn't be released into the water. If you're applying something next to a bulkhead, there's a possibility of shooting it directly over the side. JOHN COSTELLO: Just for the Board's information, if you can try to attempt to, with any of the bulkheads, backfilled, particularly in this areas where it's more clay than normal, to backfill with clean sand and you may be able to create a sand type of buffer, which would certainly assist where people have swimming pools, etc. TRUSTEE FOSTER: But doesn't that actually contain the water and never dry out? JOHN COSTELLO: The clay? TRUSTEE FOSTER: The sand. The clays kind of impervious and it doesn't allow the water to seep through it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It's just like sand on the beach. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Will it actually go down? Will it actually go through the sheathing so it leaches out of the C-loc? I know many cases when we excavate for a foundation in an area that's nothing but clay. People want to bring sand in to backfill around the foundation and that's the worst thing in the world you can do because the water goes down and lays at the footing and before you know it, it starts seeping in and you want to put the clay back that came out of there and grade it away so that the water doesn't go down there. But if the bulkhead itself is actually letting the water leach through, well sure that would be the way. The sand would act as a natural filter system. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE SMITH: I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE SMITH: I'll make a motion we Approve the application with the condition of a 10' non-turf buffer maintained at the top of the bulkhead, the piles will be removed and the C-Loc right against the existing whalers, and drywells to contain the roof run-off. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES 19. Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of MONIQUE MORRIS requests a Wetland Permit to construct 100' of new bulkhead (with C-Loc vinyl sheathing) immediately in front of existing bulkhead. Located: 1555 Shore Dr., Greenport. SCTM#47-2-29 TRUSTEE KING: Is there anyone here who would like to comment for or against this application? JOHN COSTELLO: I am the agent for Monique Morris on this application. [would explain that this is contiguous and immediately east of the Family Limited Partnership. It's the same construction. TRUSTEE KING: Are there any other comments? I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KING: rll make a motion to Approve the application with the condition of a 10' non-turf buffer maintained at the top of the bulkhead, the piles removed and C-Loc installed right against the whalers, and drywells installed to contain the roof run-off. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES 20.John F. Costello on behalf of JAMES & JUSTINE WEEDEN requests a Wetland Permit to construct a supported roof to supply shade for the pre-existing stone patio. Located: 1175 Bridge Lane, Nassau Point. SCTM#118-2-6.2 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is thero anyone who would like to speak in favor of the application? JOHN COSTELLO JR.: I'm hero to answer any questions. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I took a look at it. It's pretty straight forward. It's just a little shade roof on an existing patio. We've been down there a number of times. I don't know if the Board has any questions. Any other commer~ts? I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE SMITH: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to Approve the application. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES 21. Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of MICHAEL BRAVERMAN AND MARK STEFURAK requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 14'X 24'+/- addition to the existing house. Located: 2755 Cedar Beach Rd., Southold. SCTM#91-1-1 TRUSTEE FOSTER: Is there anyone to speak on behalf of this application? JIM FITZGERALD: Yes, I am here for the applicant. It's pretty straight forward. I think the only point to be noted that is not included specifically in the application that the proposed addition will be further away from the wetlands than the existing house is. That would be the northwest corner of the house is closer to the wetlands than the proposed addition. It will be on a crawl space. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Is that the reason for the plus or minus? 24' plus or minus? JIM FITZGERALD: It's simply because if it turns out to be 24' and 3" or 23' and TRUSTEE FOSTER: But not 34'. JIM FITZGERALD: Certainly not. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I looked at this and it was no problem. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Should we get some gutters and drywells on this? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: It never hurts. It does have a slope that goes down into the wetlands. TRUSTEE FOSTER: What's this 15' easement out in front? What is it, a paper road down thero? JIM FITZGERALD: Where? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right here. JIM FITZGERALD: If you look at the tax map, all of these lots down here are pretty well subdivided equally and this piece is cut out of the corner of this thing. There is physically no read there and I don't know who has the easement. haven't seen the deed. TRUSTEE FOSTER: It might be one of those situations like down in Goose Creek Estates there. JIM FITZGERALD: I don't know what that is Al. But do you see the way the corner is cut out for no apparent reason? And, it doesn't correspond with the direction of this easement. TRU S-I'EE FOSTER: That easement just appears to go on either side of that parCel, that's Why I asked. I thought maybe it was one of those little paper roads. Do you remember the one that just came u p recently in Nassau Point, that little 10' easement that appeared? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE SMITH: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'll make a motion to Approve the application with the condition of gutters and drywells to contain the roof run-off. TRUSTEE SMITH: Seconded. ALL AYES 22. Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of ANGELO PADOVAN requests a Wetland Permit to construct a single-family dwelling, partially on pilings, with on-site sewage disposal system and public water. Located: 22455 Soundview Ave., Southold. SCTM#135-1-23&24.1 TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Would anyone like to comment on this? JIM FITZGERALD: Yes, am here for Mr. & Mrs. Padovan. I have a cross- section here for the proposed construction. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Are there any other comments before we get into this. I'll read the CAC comments. The CAC recommends Disapproval for the following reasons: the applicant should provide the details of grade stabilization. JIM FITZGERALD: They are stabilizing it by building a house on it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh They do have a big retaining wall here also. It says elevation 20'. Is that the road elevation? JIM FITZGERALD: Yes, it appears to be. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh They want to build that up to the road, take a look. Let me finish reading the CAC's comments first. The proposed structure would have a negative impact on the existing road area. Although, they're not specific on how. There is a concern with the proposed septic design. The project is within the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area. I'm not sure how they found that out because we couldn't find the Coastal Erosion Line on the survey. JIM FITZGERALD: It runs down Soundview Avenue. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Oh, it does. Is it on here? JIM FITZGERALD: I don't know. On the official maps, it runs right down the middle of the road. TRUSTEE FOSTER: It's down the road? Really? We did think that house was a little too close. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Actually, you would have to apply for a Coastal Erosion Permit also. But, let me finish their notes. If the Town of Southold is in the business of approving houses being built within the wetland boundary, the Town needs to establish guidelines to address houses being built on the beach, is there any other comment? TRUSTEE SMITH: Didn't we tell them that we wanted to keep this house back? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think there's a Coastal Erosion problem here. But, you can make another comments if you like too. I think we would consider this the structural hazard area. JIM FITZGERALD: Well Al, I've spent a lot of time looking at that and I don't see any clear definition of what a structural hazard area is. I'm sorry, I don't see any clear description on how to locate the structural hazard area in any given location. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll read the Code. Structural Hazard Area: Those shore lands located landward of natural protected features and having shoreline receding at a long term recession rate of 1' or more per year. The inland boundary of a structural hazard area is calculated by starting at the landward limit of the fronting natural protected feature measuring along the line perpendicular to the shoreline and horizontal distance landward, which is 40 times the long term average annual recession rate. JiM FITZGERALD: I don't think the beach is receding at a rate of 1' or more per year in that area, and that's the first line in the definition. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We're going to have to review the Code and ask for help from the State on establishing the structural hazard area here because under the structural hazard area, if the Board defines it as a structural hazard area .... JIM FITZGERALD: I think the Board would have to show that it indeed met all of the conditions that are specified in the definition. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Absolutely. TRUSTEE FOSTER: The DEC was with us on that one. He was kind of waffling a little bit about this one. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The only other alternative would be to consider it the near- shore area. Let me read the definition of that. JIM FITZGERALD: The problem with the definition is that they go through all of these definitions of what appear to be subdivisions of the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area but they don't show up on any map. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well no, they would have to be defined by the Board, but if we didn't think it was a structural hazard area, I think the only other alternative would be the beach. The beach is defined as the zone of unconsolidated or that extends landward from the mean Iow water line to the waterward toe of a dune or bluff, whichever is most waterward. In that case it would be basically the whole location of this house. JIM FITZGERALD: Well all we want to put on the beach are the piles. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It seems like the beach extends up to the little building and even past that. The beach extends about halfway into the house. JIM FITZGERALD: But half of the house is supported on piles. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But it would be on the beach. The shore land subject to seasonal more frequent over wash are considered to be beaches. Then when you go into 37-15, beach area, 37-15D, all development is prohibited on beaches unless specifically provided for by this Chapter. I think you're really looking at, I mean I think it would be a stretch to call that a dune there. I think you're even looking at calling that a beach. We're going to have to Table this and rewew the Code. You're going to have to apply under the Coastal Erosion Permit. JIM FITZGERALD: Let me point out, if I may, that this lot is, I think, the only undeveloped property in that beach, if you will. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You said undeveloped? JIM FITZGERALD: Well it not yet has reached it's best use of property. All the houses and the giant deck that's on the property and the Condo. on the other side of the road, are literally in the beach. The houses further to the west are essentially the same sort of construction. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh This lot has, I think, some other limitations though. But, the Coastal Erosion Code here is one of the major players on how we review this. JIM FITZGERALD: I would like to think that the Board is not going to say, Ok, this one single lot is not going to be able to be developed because of what's on the beach. In my humble but kind of expert opinion, there is no environmental problem either with the property as it exists now or it exists With a house on it, and there is very little possibility of this house being subject to any storm problems that all the other houses in that same area have not been subject to for years and have survived. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Well let us review the Code and you also have to realize that there is a difference between limiting development and, how would you say, fully developing it. There is a lot of different areas in between no development and fully developed. But, let us review the Code before we even get into that gray area. I'll make a motion to Table the application of Angelo Padovan. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES 23. Proper-T Permit Services, Inc. on behalf of SALVATORE GUERRERA requests a Wetland Permit to construct a dwelling with on-site sewage disposal system and public water. Construct fixed walkway 4'X 178', hinged ramp 4'X 16', and floating dock 6'X 20'. Floating dock to be secured by two piles. Located: 1450 Ole Jule Lane, Mattituck. SCTM#122-4-44.6 POSTPONED UNTIL JANUARY AS PER THE AGENT'S REQUEST 24.Architecnologies on behalf of CHRISTOPHER M. & GLORIA GROOCOCK requests a Wetland Permit to construct an addition to the existing first and second floor. Located: 1030 West Creek Ave., Cutchogue. SCTM#103-13-8 TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of the application? FRANK NOTARO: I'm with Architecnologies on behalf of Mr. & Mrs. Groocock, and I'm here to answer any questions. I have some sketches that might assist us in the discussion. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Sure bdng them up. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Did you put the dock on there? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We spoke with the Groococks because they were going to upgrade their docking facility there. We encouraged them to put in all on one permit. MRS. GROOCOCK: We didn't have enough time to do that. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: To tell you the truth, I'd like to see it cleaned up before our permit is acted on. This was we can get that cleaned up. Right now, it is a violation, but it's a silent violation. It's to their benefit to get it out of there before the ice comes and moves it around all over the wetlands. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We would be happy to issue a dock permit there. FRANK NOTARO: If I may, the red indicates the existing house and garage towards the roadside, and an existing deck. What we're proposing to do is put a one and one-half story in the spot of the existing deck. Replace it with that. Also, a pre-fab conservatory on even space, one-story, along the line of the existing house. Most of the work will be taking place on the second floor and towards the roadside. This is the proposed floor plan and this is the road elevation and the water side elevation. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Just like we told the previous applicant, we like to keep all the houses in line because (inaudible) and then of course it does tend to destabilize the bluff. Whatever they want to put there is fine but it should be in line and no further seaward than what exists now. TRUSTEE FOSTER: That big tree was going to have to come out. FRANK NOTARO: No, that's why the conservatory... TRUSTEE FOSTER: Oh, you flipped it around? FRANK NOTARO: No actually the large trees are over here, right beyond this point. The existing house comes out to here. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Right, and their going to go out 15'. FRANK NOTARO: Right, and the tree is right here. It's a little bit deceptive because the existing house is about 4' higher. So that was the whole concept of putting it up here as opposed to putting it here because then we would have to disturb the trees here and they need them to stabilize the bank. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That was the concern with the Board. The house is coming out an extra 15'. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Well it's so close to the top of the bluff, then you've got to put your drywells in and you're digging right on top of the bluff. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If that could be moved back by any chance, it would be fine. Basically, anything they want to do there is fine, but we don't want to see the house go any further seaward. FRANK NOTARO: Than the line of the existing house? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's right. I don't think we have a problem with the deck because the deck is existing. MRS. GROOCOCK: The reason we particularly want a building built where the present deck is now, is because we want to make that into our bedroom so that we don't have to go upstairs. My husband has arthritis and we need to be on one level. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Well we don't have a problem with the bedroom but we can't have, and we just had that with Paskoff, they came in with an application to put a house further seaward then the neighbors, quite a bit, and we had to move it back in line with the neighbors, because that's our policy to keep the houses back. One neighbor goes out and then next year the other neighbor is going to be here next. MRS. GROOCOCK: Well the neighbor two houses down from us, is much further out toward the water than we are. TRUSTEE FOSTER: But that's all relative because the actually terrain goes like this. MRS. GROOCOCK: know it does but as far as from the water to the house, they are still closer to the water than we are. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Well we're trying not to continually make these mistakes. MRS. GROOCOCK: So, this deck is here now and we would like to have that be our bedroom. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We wouldn't have a problem leaving it as a deck, but to make the bedroom, you can see the impact here. First of all, there would be major excavation near the bluff, which we wouldn't want anyway, to destabilize that. You can see how much further it would come out in the front, with structure. A downstairs bedroom is fine but we don't want to see anything seaward of the house. MRS. GROOCOCK: But that's the most practical place for this bedroom. FRANK NOTARO: The configuration of the house is very old inside and it's not conducive to major changes in there. TRUSTEE FOSTER: I think the distance between here and the top of the bluff is greatly reduced. There is very little room between here and the top of the bluff. MRS. GROOCOCK: It would be the same distance to what's now the deck. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Well the deck exists already. It doesn't really shed any water. But, there's excavation involved here. We all kind of thought it was a little to close to the top of the bluff. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Especially where you have room in the back to put anything you wanted in. You don't have to press it seaward to the bluff, to destabilize the bluff, if you don't have to. MRS. GROOCOCK: I didn't want out there looking at the road. I wanted a deck here. The conservatory is a garden room and my husband and I are gardeners and we want a greenhouse. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Our policy is to keep them in line. MRS. GROOCOCK: This bedroom area is very important to us to have it on the main level. FRANK NOTARO: Is there anyway we can just look at this as if this were not there. There really is no view restriction where this wooden deck is. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We're concerned with the integrity of the bluff. The Groococks told us that their bank, they feel, is unstable and whatnot, and to have major construction there is not going to help it. MRS. GROOCOCK: (inaudible) TRUSTEE KRUPKSh You would be hurting yourself. You would be spending all of this money to correct whatever was done. TRUSTEE FOSTER: I can go out there tomorrow and measure it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Do you want to look at it again? This seems important to them. TRUSTEE FOSTER:Ithink if we all have these concems, Ithink we want to be pretty sure about our decision, so maybe we should. We were all pretty sure that we didn't want it to happen when we were there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh This is important not only to keep the houses in line, which we have a policy of doing, but also destabilizing the bluff. So, if you would like, we can take another look at it instead of making a decision here tonight, that you would be unhappy with. MRS. GROOCOCK: But my point is, the houses were not in line in the first place when we bought the house. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Well that's what we're going to take a look at, in light of that. You know what we mean by keeping them in line. FRANK NOTARO: No, I do. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh It's pretty important in a waterfront community. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Have it staked. FRANK NOTARO: Sure. When would you be going out next? TRUSTEE FOSTER: We wouldn't be going until next field inspection. FRANK NOTARO: I mean, just from my observations, I know what you're saying to keep them in line. There doesn't appear to be any kind of view restriction to the neighbor. TRUSTEE FOSTER: No, actually I don't think that was really a concern, the view. It was more the destabilization so close to the bluff, the run-off. Drywells would also be required. Once that addition goes up, you don't have a lot of room to Put drywells in. You would have to go upland. It gets pretty restrictive as far as geeing anything done. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh It's a pretty big project. The CAC recommends Disapprova because the project wasn't staked. Had the CAC been out to visit you? Ok, weYe going to take a look at it next month, so please meet us out there. We'll look at it with those two things in mind. MRS. GROOCOCK: Is that tomorrow? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh No, it's January 16% In the meantime, if you could put that floating dock and ramp, and catwalk and all of that on the application. It will give you time to do all of that. TRUSTEE FOSTER: They might as well do it all the same time. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'd recommend that the floats that are there now, be removed. It's a violation. If somebody called up it would be a violation. It shouldn't be there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Is there anyone who could remove those floats? MRS. GROOCOCK: I guess my husband and I will get the' hammer out and start taking it apart. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Well it doesn't matter who does it. It doesn't matter who builds the house. We're not going to say you have to build the house or anything. It's just that it is a problem, we were out there before. MRS. GROOCOCK: We were going to do it. It's just that one has to do things in stages and we've got to get our living quarters straightened out first and then work on the property. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh From our standpoint, those docks are doing damage to the environment because every time the tide comes in and out and there's a storm, they break the marsh apart and they're doing damage there. So, from our standpoint, that's a priority, if they're doing environmental damage. We're not saying you can't have a dock. We're saying we'd be happy to grant you a permit for a dock that's not going to do that kind of damage to the marsh. TRUSTEE FOSTER: We'd rather you had the dock than pull the floats and the boat up in the marsh. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We don't want to say you can have this kind of house of that kind of house because we like the way it looks or whatever. We're looking at it strictly from the other side from the environment side saying what is this house going to do to the environment. Is it going to destabilize that bank? That's the angle we're looking at. We're not worried about that we want the bedroom here, or the conservatory here, that really doesn't matter. It's the building itself. How is that going to effect the environment? MRS. GROOCOCK: Well we are concerned about the bank, and certainly as you know when we talked with you, we wanted to build it up, stabilize it, and we know it needs to be done. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh But from our standpoint, that's the priority because there is environmental damage being done today, tomorrow and the next day, and we'd rather see that remedied as quickly as possible. TRUSTEE KING: That addition just might aggravate it more. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh That damage is being done everyday. FRANK NOTARO: Is it possible to built this on pilings to do the least damage? TRUSTEE FOSTER: To put it on pilings? FRANK NOTARO: Just the bedroom extension. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh You wouldn't have excavation then. TRUSTEE FOSTER: In this case where you really wouldn't have excavation, I think it would certainly lessen the im pact. FRANK NOTARO: That's just a proposal or a suggestion. Again, I'm not an expert but there is a certain amount of, what I would consider, stabilized, not a great deal, but a certain amount before you get to the area that has the erosion, and if the Board could just look at that again. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Well we looked at that with the Groococks and we were struck by...we thought it was a stable vegetated bank right directly in front and they told us it was unstable. They of course own the property and believe it's unstable. We should look at it again and be sure, because this is a big project. I'll make a motion to Table the application. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES 25.Architecnologies on behalf of ELLEN D. ZIMMERMAN requests a Wetland Permit for the alteration to the existing second-floor. Located: 500 South Lane, East Marion. SCTM#38-6-11 TRUSTEE FOSTER: I looked at this. I just had a couple of questions actually, There's a minimal of 3.5 cy. of excavation on the permit. I didn't see on the plan where it indicated any excavating. FRANK NOTARO: The second floor does encompass a little bit of the existing concrete stoop. I have a plan. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Yes, I'd like to see it. FRANK NOTARO: In other words, this little bump out here is in line with the stoop. Again, it's existing, In other words, on the first floor what we're proposing is just bump that out in line with that. TRUSTEE FOSTER: It's just a 4' foundation. It's just going to be a crawl space. FRANK NOTARO: This deck just was there and it will remain and the sunroom will remain. The primary work is going on the second floor. That's just to kind of identify the entrance to the house because the house is turned sideways. That's where the 3.5 cy. comes in. TRUSTEE FOSTER: I think it's ok. I just think we should look for some hay bales up there because there is a little excavation. Do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE SMITH: So moved. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded, ALL AYES TRUSTEE FOSTER: I'll make a motion to Approve the application with the condition that a mw of staked hay bales be put around the front of the house during construction. TRUSTEE SMITH: Seconded. ALL AYES 26.Young & Young on behalf of PECONIC LANDING AT SOUTHOLD INC. requests a Wetland Permit to construct bluff area improvements including leaching catch basins, ecological landscaping in wooded areas, brushy areas and disturbed areas. Located: 1205 Main Rd., Southold. SCTM#35-1-25 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone on behalf of the application? TOM WOLPERT: I'm from Young & Young and I'm here to answer any questions or discuss any concerns you have regarding this bluff enhancement plan that we submitted. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Have they started that yet, the 100' test area or is that what this is all about? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh No, I hope not. Are there plans here? I'm looking at this and it's dated November 7~h. I don't think that's it. TOM WOLPERT: That is it. We submitted it on November 5~h. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Ok. "A" would be ecological landscaping wooded areas, remove the vines, "B" would be remove the Bittersweet, Sumac, Virginia Creeper, Wild Grape, and re-vegetate with Bayberry, Red Cedar, Heather, Big Blue Stem, and "C" ecological landscaping in disturbed areas, Bayberry, Red Cedar, Heather, Big Blue Stem, and "D" would be construction areas, set of one 8' diameter 12' deep leaching pools. Artie can you take a look at this? TRUSTEE FOSTER: Yes, I'm going to. Did we have this when we had that meeting the other night? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Yes, but the discussion was that we were going to let them do one part and see what it looked like, but we would require that the drywells be put in. TRUSTEE SMITH: When I went up there Sunday, everything was graded, the grass was planted, but there were no drywells. TRUSTEE FOSTER: I thought there was an area, when we were out there, and we talked about this, but there was one area that appeared to me that the bluff Sloped back towards the land, to the west side. TOM WOLPERT: I think over the 2700 linear ft. of shoreline that we have here, we have a little bit of everything. TRUSTEE FOSTER: But I thought the test area should be on an area where it tends to come back, because you need to cut a lot of this stuff down during planting and so forth and if you get a storm event or something in there, it would tend not to wash over if it was...in that particular kind of situation. When we were walking out there, I'm pretty sure towards the west end of the project, it was like that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Somewhere in here I think. TOM WOLPERT: The west end of the project would be sheet 1 or 3. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Where the ponding areas are, obviously that's a lower area. TOM WOLPERT: I think the test area should be in one of the areas where the reports say to put in a leaching pool. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Right, because that's a collection point. The water would tend to come in there. TOM WOLPERT: Right, that's a collection point and this is a demonstration type project and that involves excavation. But we have six opportunities to do that because we have six areas where we are proposing to put in this catch basin. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is that going to be adequate for drainage? TRUSTEE FOSTER: It's hard to say. You would have to do the calculations. Tom's the Engineer. He should figure out what it should be. What do you base it on a 2" rainfall? Of course, there are a lot of things you factor. I think the formula is a lot different for a grass area, isn't it, than it is for a paved area because the grass tends to soak up a lot of the water. Given all of those different conditions, I'm sure...is that how you calculated it? TOM WOLPERT: Yes. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I guess this operation couldn't have any tolerance for blowing the bluff out. TOM WOLPERT: Any potential? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any tolerance. In other words, if you developed say at swale Number 2 here, if you developed a serious gully here going over the bluff, I guess it would be in the best interest of the Peconic Landing to fix that situation quickly. TOM WOLPERT: Absolutely. TRUSTEE FOSTER: What are the soil conditions up towards the bluff? Is it good coarse sand and gravel? TOM WOLPERT: We haven't actually gone and dug a test hole yet. 33 TRUSTEE FOSTER: They did an awful lot of excavation for the basements and we were up there and I think they're all pretty sandy. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It is because they cut into the bank. What's the unit that's cut into the bank there? It's 34 or 33. It's all sand there. TRUSTEE FOSTER: It should support drainage given the right material. TRUSTEE KING: All it needs is the drywells. They'll contain the roof run-off and the natural run-off? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: They're going to handle it all, right? TOM WOLPERT: Well that's what we're proposing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: My feeling is that if these drywells put in don't work, you're going to have a problem. They better put drywells in pretty quickly. TOM WOLPERT: I think also, with success of the demonstration project as well as the Ultimate plan, is that, and I'll just call your attention to the notes on the right hand side Where all the work is going to be done, using hand tools only, with the exception of, the installation of the drywellS, obviously we'll need some equipment, and 'that the work would be done under the supervision of our env rOnmenta! manager, Jeff Seaman, who would be on the site. TRUSTEE FOSTER: He was wth you that night, right? TOM WO, LPERT: Yes, and unfortunately he Couldn't be here. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Another concern we had was at the end here. You've got one drywell here. I think what we would like to see here, at least for this one, not this one, is another drywell with,the roof run-Off directed. Well maybe that's enough to tak~ both run-off, directed directly into a drywell. TOM'WQLPEiRT: I would like this Board to at least consider that or give us the oppo~unities to substantiate that that is sufficient rather than just make a blanket cond[ on that every cottage needs to have a drywell for the roof run-off. TRUSTEE KRU PSKI: This was area.with great potential for roof run-off. TOM WOLPI~RT: I know that's an area of concern. TRUSTEE FOSTER: What are :they going to do with that retaining wall up there? If you fall~.off that you'd kill yourself. Are they going to put up a rail or something? TOM WQLPERT: They're talking about putting up a rail. We are now also planning ~)n a timber guard-rail along the end of the pavement. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We would like to see, and I think we'll put it in the conditions, that 38 and 39 ... TOM! WQLPERT: Have drywells for roof run-off. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes, drywells connected to 38 & 39. There's a high point here right? TOM WOLPERT: Maybe you want to do this area here. TRUSTEE FOSTER: I don't think there's a view there anyway. Basically this is what you?e trying to achieve, isn't it Tom, to get some kind of a view? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Well how about right in here then? TRUSTEE FOSTER: They want a Iow spot. TOM WOLPERT: In these designated areas "A" & "B", that's where we are looking to remove the evasive. "C" is just restoring areas that have been disturbed and "D" of course involves the leaching catch basin. 34 TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Can I make a motion to Approve the plan with the proposed landscape action in a 100' area to be designated, and we can draw it on here tonight, and that ail restoration work can proceed in the "C" areas and all drywell could be put in immediately. Then, following a review by the Board, we can proceed with other areas of the other landscape plan. Can I make that a motion? Is that clear enough Lauren? LAUREN STANDISH: What was the condition? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The proposed landscape action can be...what do you suggest for the "A" and the "B"? TOM WOLPERT: I really don't care. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Or a little bit of both. TOM WOLPERT: Probably "A" & "D". TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Well "DJ' you're going to do anyway. "C" and "D" you're going to get anyway. Pick a spot. TOM WOLPERT: What about this area, somewhere in here, 35 & 36. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI.' Sure. How about 37 & 38? You get "A" and you get "B" TOM WOLPERT: Ok. ' TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We'll say by cottage 37 & 38 and he can use his discretion to move it. TRUSTEE SMITH: Seconded. ALL AYES MEETING AJOURNED AT: 10:40 PM Respectfully submitted by, Lauren M. Standish, Senior Clerk Board of Trustees RECEIVED /,o · '--/,_~-. dAN 2 4 2002