Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-08/20/2014 John M. Bredemeyer III,President rif SUUryoTown Hall Annex Michael J. Domino,Vice-President 'lam 01 0 54375 Main Road P.O.Box 1179 James F. King,Trustee Southold,New York 11971-0959 Dave Bergen,Trustee G Q Charles J. Sanders,Trustee 'O • Telephone(631) 765-1892 IiYCOU� Fax(631) 765-6641 P�Ll � BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SEP 19 2014 Minutes Soulhold' Town Glen Wednesday, August 20, 2014 5:30 PM Present Were: John Bredemeyer, President Michael Domino, Vice-President Jim King, Trustee David Bergen, Trustee Charles Sanders, Trustee Elizabeth Cantrell, Clerk Typist Lori Hulse, Assistant Town Attorney CALL MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 at 8:00 AM NEXT TRUSTEE MEETING: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 at 5:30 PM WORKSESSIONS: Monday, September 15, 2014 at 5:30 PM at Down's Farm, and on Wednesday, September 17, 2014 at 5:00 PM at the Main Meeting Hall MINUTES: Approve Minutes of July 23, 2014. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I just want to take this opportunity to thank the Board, particularly the clerks, in handling our business in my absence last month. It's good to be back. And we'll move ahead. Our next field inspection is scheduled for Wednesday, September 10th, at 8:00 AM. Do I have a motion? TRUSTEE KING: So moved. TRUSTEE BERGEN: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Our next meeting, Wednesday September 17th, at 5:30 PM, with a worksession at 5:00 PM. Do I have a motion? TRUSTEE SANDERS: So moved. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). Board of Trustees 2 August 20, 2014 TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: And a separate worksession on Monday, September 15th, at 5:30 PM at Down's Farm. Motion? TRUSTEE BERGEN: So moved. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I need a motion to approve the Minutes from our July 23rd meeting. TRUSTEE SANDERS: I'll make a motion. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So moved. Seconded? TRUSTEE KING: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (Trustees Domino, King, Bergen, Sanders, aye). (Trustee Bredemeyer abstains). I. MONTHLY REPORT: The Trustees monthly report for July 2014. A check for $6,938.96 was forwarded to the Supervisor's Office for the General Fund. 11. 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, August 20, 2014, are classified as Type II Actions pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations, and are not subject to further review under SEQRA: Charles Stabile—SCTM# 119-1-10 Geoffrey Pazzanese— SCTM# 135-3-8 Ralph Carbone, Jr. —SCTM# 1-2-6.5 Peter E. Baccile 2012 Q. Trust—SCTM#9-3-11 Robert G. & Margaret S. Warden—SCTM#9-3-14.1 WCKBH, LLC— SCTM#7-6-11 Nicolas De Croisset—SCTM# 117-10-19 Robert A. Czenszak— SCTM# 123-5-23 Cheryl L. Hansen Revocable Trust—SCTM# 78-5-17 Sean P. Fahey—SCTM#71-1-14 Paul Sennett—SCTM# 135-3-7 Jonathan Zavin —SCTM#86-2-4 Channing Real Estate, LLC, c/o Douglas Chan —SCTM# 145-4-17 Mario Malerba & Gary Napolitano—SCTM#57-1-34 TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I'll move that as a resolution. Is there a second? TRUSTEE KING: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). Board of Trustees 3 August 20, 2014 IV. RESOLUTIONS -ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS: TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: In order to facilitate the orderliness of the meeting and keep things moving along, actions for which the Board reviewed and that are relatively minor as far as administrative permits, can be grouped together. And for that, we have items one, two, three, four, six, seven, eight and nine that can be moved as a group. We'll hold out number five for discussion. They are listed as follows: Number one, Michael Kimack on behalf of DOMELUCA, LLC requests an Administrative Permit to construct an 18'x86'6" above ground pool attached to terrace/garden area on westerly side of existing dwelling. Located: 14909 Main Road, East Marion. Number two, John Berg on behalf of EMMA VAN ROOYEN requests an Administrative Permit to install five (5) new exterior doors and one (1) new window onto existing two-story dwelling. Located: 575 Hill Road, Southold. Number three, Barry Holden, R.A. on behalf of ANGELICA CATALA requests an Administrative Permit to replace three windows with a sliding door on existing one story dwelling; and construct a 7'x14' deck over an existing +/-12'x27' concrete pad. Located: 2250 Mill Creek Drive, Southold. Number four, Joan Chambers on behalf of JAMES TRUMAN requests an Administrative Permit for the as-built replacement of three (3) sill boards, three (3) poured concrete footings and three (3) posts under existing enclosed porch. Located: 65490 Route 25, Breezy Shores Cottage#18, Greenport. Number six, BOBETTE & RICHARD SUTER request an Administrative Permit to construct a roof over an existing 16'x22' deck. Located: 855 Fishermans Beach Road, Cutchogue. Number seven, Thomas Sanders on behalf of ROY&JOAN BERMAN request an Administrative Permit to raise the existing 10'x24' utility building to +/-4' above grade. Located: 520 Rabbit Lane, East Marion. Number eight, Patricia C. Moore, Esq., on behalf of JOHN & DANIELLA VENETIS requests an Administrative Permit to install windows and sliding doors in new locations; connect roof over existing dwelling to roof over garage portion of dwelling; install a trellis over existing +/-25'x12' deck; and install a 10' wide non-turf buffer along the landward edge of the bulkhead. Located: 2600 Takaposha Road, Southold. Number nine, FRANK J. KELLY requests an Administrative Permit to install 6' high PVC fencing along the side yard and street side with a double locking chain link gate at entrance. Located: 1900 Great Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel. Does anyone want to move that? TRUSTEE DOMINO: I'll move that. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second? TRUSTEE SANDERS: I'll second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Item number five, there is a return from the LWRP coordinator concerning this application in that the steps which the Board reviewed on field inspections, which they didn't Board of Trustees 4 August 20, 2014 have a problem with, apparently did not have a permit. So I'll leave it open to the Board, because I was not at that inspection, but it seems that you would consider bringing into consistency with the steps that are a minor action. I'll let one of you discuss it further, as I was not on that inspection. TRUSTEE BERGEN: In other words, the inconsistency is it was constructed without a permit. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Correct. And there was a prior permit history in the file that the applicants had sought prior permits from the Board. It seems like they're good customers. I don't know what the lapse is from. TRUSTEE BERGEN: I'll go ahead and move this one, if you'd like. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Do you want to take the file? TRUSTEE BERGEN: Sure. So, number five, John C. Jilnicki, Esq., on behalf of NATHAN GREENE & PATRICIA BERRETTY requests an Administrative Permit for the existing steps to beach which consists of a 3'3"x3'9" upper landing with attached 1'x2' bench seat to a set of+/-3'5"x10' steps with handrail to a 3'3"x4'6" lower landing. Located: 2565 Long Creek Drive, Southold. We did go out and looked at this. We did not have a problem with what has been proposed, so I'll make a motion to approve this application, deeming it be brought into consistency with the granting of this permit to address the inconsistency under the LWRP. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Motion has been made. Second? TRUSTEE SANDERS: I'll second that. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (Trustees Domino, King, Bergen and Sanders, aye). (Trustee Bredemeyer, abstains). TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Before I start in with the next item on our agenda, Item V, I just want to announce certain items have been postponed. Item ten on page five, WILLIAM & PATRICIA MOORE request an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit#8401 to cut the bank back landward to achieve an approximate 45 degree angle on the bank; and to reconfigure the stairs to beach to be a 4'x6' top landing to 4'x9' steps to a 4'x4' mid-landing with 4'x6' steps to beach. Located: 850 Ruch Lane, Southold, has been postponed at the owner's request. Item one on page seven, John C. Ehlers on behalf of FIRM FOUNDATIONS PARTNERS LLC requests a Wetland Permit to install a 16'x36' in-ground swimming pool with 16" bluestone pool coping; a 10'x16' bluestone pool patio; install a pool equipment area; and install pool fencing. Located: 1060 Fox Hollow Road, Mattituck, has been postponed. And I believe that's it. V. RESOLUTIONS - MOORING PERMITS: TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Okay, under resolutions for moorings, the Board has reviewed these requests for mooring permits and performed inspections and discussed them at our worksession on field inspection day. I don't believe there were -- and Board of Trustees 5 August 20, 2014 therefore I believe there was no problem with these moorings after discussion and review, the placement of them. I'll take a motion to approve these as a group. They are listed as follows: Number one, ANTHONY GALEOTTI requests an On-Shore/Off-Shore Stake & Pulley System Permit for a boat no larger than 18' in Mattituck Creek. Located: 3655 Wickham Avenue, Mattituck. Access: Private Number two, JOSEPH FINORA requests a Mooring Permit in Deep Hole Creek for a 32' Sailboat, replacing Mooring #623. Access: Public Number three, STEVE ANDREADIS request a Mooring Permit in Gull Pond for a 24' outboard motorboat, replacing Mooring #21. Access: Public TRUSTEE DOMINO: So moved. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Do I hear a second? TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). VI. APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS/TRANSFERS/ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENTS: TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Okay, under item number six on the agenda for extensions transfers and administrative amendments. Again, a number of these represent minor actions that are put under the Board's review during the course of our field inspection worksession, and many are directly inspected that day. I would say we could move these as a group with the exception of items three, four, seven and 12 will be pulled out. So we can move on one, two, five, six, eight, nine and eleven in the form of a resolution. So I would move to approve items one, two, five, six, eight, nine and eleven. They are listed as follows: Number one, ANDREAS &YULA SERPANOS request a One Year Extension to Wetland Permit#7908 and Coastal Erosion Permit#7908C, as issued on September 19, 2012. Located: 19105 Soundview Avenue, Southold. Number two, Docko, Inc., on behalf of WILLEM KOOYKER &JUDITH ANN CORRENTE requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit#7375 and Coastal Erosion Permit #7375C from Margaret Robbins Charpentier to Willem Kooyker& Judith Ann Corrente, as issued on August 18, 2010, and Amended on August 24, 2011. Located: East End Road, Fishers Island. Number five, Suffolk Environmental Consulting on behalf of SANDRA PAWSON SINCLAIR requests an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit#8347 and Coastal Erosion Permit#8347C to lower the top elevation of the proposed rock revetment to 12' above Mean Sea Level. Located: 29827 Main Road, Orient. Number six, Suffolk Environmental Consulting on behalf of PARVIZ LALEZARI requests an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit#8349 and Coastal Erosion Permit #8349C to lower the top elevation of the proposed rock revetment to 12' above Mean Sea Level. Located: 1390 Demarest Road, Orient. Number eight, Mark Schwartz, Architect on behalf of RICHARD AND JOANN SAVARESE requests an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit#8356 to remove existing and install new septic system. Located: 2575 Old Orchard Road, East Marion. Number nine, Douglas Ciampa on behalf of PARADISE POINT ASSOCIATION, INC. requests an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit#6209 to replace an existing lighting fixture located at the seaward end of the existing fixed dock with a new Dark Sky compliant fixture. Located: End of Basin Road, Southold. Board of Trustees 6 August 20, 2014 Number eleven, Francisco Sciotto on behalf of COVE CONDOMINIUM OWNERS ASSOCIATION requests an Administrative Amendment to Administrative Permit #8302A to relocate the three (3) seasonal kayak storage racks. Located: Main Bayview Road, Southold. Is there a second? TRUSTEE SANDERS: I'll second that. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Item number three is one that has to be entertained by the Board for consideration, David W. Olsen, Esq., on behalf of MICHAEL KOKE, GARRETT KOKE & TRACEY MELVIN request a Transfer of Wetland Permit#2062 from Jean Koke Holman to Michael Koke, Garrett Koke &Tracey Melvin, as issued on August 28, 1985; and for an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit #2062 for the existing 4'x50'fixed catwalk. Located: 875 Calves Neck Road, Southold. There is an inconsistent-- I'm not familiar with this. It's recommended the proposed action is inconsistent. A Wetland Permit for a dock structure was issued in 1988 authorizing access to public waters. The applicant is seeking authorization of an expansion (seaward projection) of an "as-built" locker, bench and dock structure that extends further(20') into public waters. The extension was constructed without the benefit of Board review or a Wetland Permit. The applicant fails to prove that the action meets the following requirements: Review and approval of dock applications. Before issuing a permit for a dock structure, the Trustees shall consider whether the dock will have any of the following harmful effects: Whether the dock will unduly interfere with the public use of waterways; whether the dock will cause degradation of surface water quality and natural resources; and whether the cumulative impacts of a residential and commercial dock will change the waterway or the environment, and whether alternate design, construction and location of the dock will minimize cumulative impacts; and whether adequate facilities are available to boat owners and/or operators for fueling, discharge of waste and rubbish, electrical service and water service. visited the site. I think most of the Board did. It's my understanding it doesn't extend further than the neighboring docks and that this action was an extension back to be able to use the dock because of erosion in this creek. I didn't see that, and we'll have to see what we have. TRUSTEE KING: Wayne's having trouble keeping up with you. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I'm sorry, Wayne. I'll slow it up. It's my understanding that the inconsistency based on this extending further seaward was not my understanding of what happened in this case; that the dock is in fact in the same location as the original permit, but that there was significant erosion on the landward side. I didn't seem to think we were having an issue with going further seaward. The extension is landward. And when I paced it off it was, the additional length was only on the landward side. So I believe we can address the inconsistency with the fact that it doesn't extend further out over the public bottom, and it was just the matter of maintaining the utility of the dock in its present location. Accordingly, I'll move to approve this application, deeming that it is consistent because it doesn't actually further encroach on public bottom. Do I have a second? TRUSTEE BERGEN: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). Board of Trustees 7 August 20, 2014 TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Item four, Trustee King if you could -- TRUSTEE KING: Number four, ALFRED W. COOKE requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit#511 from Alfred P. Cooke to Alfred W. Cooke, as issued on August 19, 1968; and for an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit#511 for the existing +/-606 feet of timber bulkhead with a +/-30' northerly return; and to replace a 106' section of failing bulkhead with new navy wall bulkhead with a deadman system of lay logs and stake piles; and install two new 6' returns buried below grade. Located: 5775 Mill Road, Mattituck. This is on the west side of Mattituck Creek. Its an old bulkhead. It probably was in place since the'30's. Its been renewed once, and now it's in pretty bad shape. I have no issues with it. The only thing I would like to see is a silt boom to be used during construction, during the reconstruction of it, and the area landward of the bulkhead is to remain pervious. Other than that, the matter is straightforward. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Do you want to put that in the form of a resolution? TRUSTEE KING: Yes. I would make a motion to approve this with the stipulation that a silt boom is used during construction, and the area landward of the bulkhead remains as a pervious area. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Is there a second? TRUSTEE DOMINO: How many feet? TRUSTEE KING: It's the whole -- you have a steep bluff and then the area between the bulkhead and bottom of the bluff. That's all just natural -- I would just say the whole area to the bottom of the bluff is left pervious. TRUSTEE BERGEN: Bottom of the bluff to the bulkhead. TRUSTEE KING: Yes. It's a driveway that comes in, fishermen stack their gear along the top of the bulkhead. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So the resolution is from the bottom of the bluff to the bulkhead as a pervious, and silt boom to be used during construction. Do we have a second. TRUSTEE DOMINO: I'll second it. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Item seven, I'm not familiar with this, if someone wants to lead in the discussion. Suffolk Environmental Consulting behalf of George Curis. TRUSTEE BERGEN: Bear with me for a second. (Perusing). Okay, number seven, Suffolk Environmental Consulting on behalf of GEORGE CURIS requests an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit#8435 to substitute a wood deck in lieu of a concrete patio that would surround the pool; the proposed pool equipment to be relocated to the eastern side of the property; the proposed pool fencing to be relocated to 5' landward from the top of the bluff, and along the side yards. Located: 3190 North Sea Drive, Orient. The Board did go out and looked at this. We did not have a problem with the project, but we did disagree with the location of the fence. And so what we are recommending is that the fence Board of Trustees 8 August 20, 2014 -- the pool fence I'm talking about-- should be located at the 18-foot contour line. So with that, I'll make a motion to approve this application with the stipulation that the seaward side of the proposed pool fence be placed at the 18-foot contour line. TRUSTEE DOMINO: I'll second that. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (Trustees Domino, King, Bergen and Sanders, aye). (Trustee Bredemeyer, abstains). TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Item 12, Patricia C. Moore, Esq., on behalf of GREG & CAROL KARAS requests an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit#8334 to construct an 8'x12' platform at grade landward of the top of the bluff. Located: 135 Soundview Road, Orient. I'm a little uncomfortable approving it as applied for because I'm concerned about bluff stability and also the safety of individuals going out on a platform so close to The Sound. I know this is not a public hearing but I had the opportunity to run into the agent for the owner. I don't know if there has been any discussion. would table this to meet with them in the field. I don't know if they have any different plans. I just wanted to voice my concerns to you. MS. MOORE: It might not be a bad idea to meet with my clients in the field, because they didn't, they were not quite sure exactly where you were suggesting that it be placed. And the original platform had handrails. So maybe that would be one way of avoiding the safety issues. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Okay, so you are open to further discussion. MS. MOORE: Yes, I think it would be a good idea to hold off. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Okay, enough said. Thank you. So for item 12, 1 move to table the application. It's scheduled mutually, field inspection, during next month's field inspection hopefully for the owner and agent can be out with us. MS. MOORE: That or if it's just one of you, whatever is coordinated, so. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I'm the area Trustee, I have no problem meeting with you. MS. MOORE: It's pretty minor. TRUSTEE BERGEN: There is a motion on the table. I'll second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Motion made and seconded. All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: At this time we'll go off our regular meeting agenda and into public hearings. I'll make a motion to do that. Is there a second? TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). Board of Trustees 9 August 20, 2014 VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS: AMENDMENTS: TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: This first hearing is in the matter of Suffolk Environmental Consulting on behalf of CHARLES STABILE requests an Amendment to Wetland Permit#8027 for the as-built +/-3' high by+/-63' long wood retaining wall located within the northeastern section of the property. Located: 9976 Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak on behalf of this application? MR. IVANS: Matt Ivans, Suffolk Environmental Consulting. I'm here to hopefully answer any and all questions. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I think that there was a question about construction without permits that probably entails why we have the determination of inconsistency. I don't know if there is a status of a violation or not on this file. That I'm not aware of. I know the Board during the course of field inspection and at our worksession, is concerned with the type and manner of construction, and we are not sure we have sufficient information to make a reasoned determination, given the fact that we see the structure as bowed out so much, and the materials don't seem to be of a type used in typical construction for a navy bulkhead or retaining structure. MR. IVANS: Do you guys want to set up a meeting at the site with Bruce? TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I think without getting too far out in front of the Board, I think the inclination we had during the course of our worksession was that it would be good to table the matter and have further discussion. I think it would probably be advisable to get Bruce and the owner to possibly entertain a discussion of that. MR. IVANS: Okay, then I'll have Bruce give Elizabeth a call Monday or Tuesday and set up something. TRUSTEE KING: The problem I see is it's starting to fail already. It's on its way. Now is the time to correct it. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Do you know why they designed it in that manner and used that construction material? MR. IVANS: Not really, except following the hurricane, I mean, he just threw up whatever he could, I guess. In a panic. TRUSTEE SANDERS: What's the plan? Do you have any idea what the plan is between the core logs, each stage? MR. IVANS: In terms of plantings? It's most likely going to be Cape American beach grass. So I'll just have Bruce set up a meeting with you guys at the site. TRUSTEE BERGEN: Just pass a suggestion, maybe consult with an engineer, since I'm not an engineer, as to looking at a more suitably-constructed structure. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Or if not more suitably constructed, if there is a way to stabilize or use the existing. You are talking about an engineering analysis in any case. MR. IVANS: All right. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All right, I'll make a motion to table this. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. Board of Trustees 10 August 20, 2014 TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number two, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of GEOFFREY PAZZANESE requests an Amendment to Wetland Permit#8170 to construct a 12' long vinyl return along the east side of the property. Located: 400 Richmond Road East, Southold. Is there anyone here to speak to this application? (No response). The Trustees visited this site last on August 12th, and we had no issues with the return and in fact this brings it into compliance to what was constructed. Are there any comments or questions from the Board? (No response). Hearing no comments or questions, I make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Motion made. Is there a second? TRUSTEE KING: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE DOMINO: I make a motion to approve this application as submitted, noting it will bring it into compliance. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second on that? TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). WETLAND & COASTAL EROSION PERMITS: TRUSTEE KING: Under Wetland and Coastal Erosion Permits, number one, Docko, Inc., on behalf of PETER E. BACCILE 2012 Q. TRUST requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit to install +/-445 linear feet of a gabion retaining wall, which has a volume of+/-1,120 cubic yards over+/-4,200 square feet; all waterward of the apparent high water line. Located: Off Equestrian Avenue, Fishers Island. The LWRP found this consistent and the CAC resolved to support the application as it was submitted. Is there anyone here to speak on behalf of or against this application? MR. NIELSON: On behalf of the applicant, my name is Keith Nielson, with Docko Incorporated, and I have prepared the application documents before you. This project has been discussed at various workshops before the Board, so unless there are some major questions, I'll just review it very briefly and take on any questions you may have. There is 445 feet of finished lawn along the shore of Hay Harbor. It's generally a well-protected area, but in Hurricane Sandy it was substantially eroded and disrupted to the point there was a landslide in that area about 80 feet long and about 100 feet south of the access path. And so the proposal is to install a gabion retaining wall against the base of the bluff. It will be varying in height depending on the height of the bluff immediately adjacent to the point of contact, and it will run basically the full length Board of Trustees 11 August 20, 2014 of the bluff. And we are going to put six-foot wide foundation baskets in and then 3x3x9' long sections parallel to the base of the bluff, like I said, height depending on the area to be stabilized. In all likelihood, the two trees that probably prevented the total collapse of that part of the bluff will have to be cut down in order to relieve those stresses. The one tree is practically dead. The roots will be left in place and the base of the bluff where the landslide occurred will be trimmed enough to allow the gabion wall to be installed as much as we can in linear fashion, but following the general shape to shore. And all of the sand that is excavated will be thrown back into the gabions, on top of the gabions, behind the gabions, more or less to form a complete transfer of the retaining structure to the bluff. It will also be embedded a couple feet into the ground so it will provide some scour protection. All the work will be done landward of the wetlands and in the area right in this area where we had the dune grass encroaching into the work area. That dune grass will be dug out and replanted into the area that is basically clear in the middle of the site. would be happy to answer any questions you might have. TRUSTEE KING: We were all out there and we all went over it pretty good on the field visit. I don't have any questions. I don't know about the rest of the Board. (Negative response). TRUSTEE KING: The only thing, you had mentioned you had already taken care of, is the re-vegetation in that one area. So I think it's pretty straightforward and we are all in support of it. Is there anybody else? Any comments? (No response). Hearing none, I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to approve the application as it has been submitted. TRUSTEE DOMINO: I'll second that. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). MR. NIELSON: Thank you. TRUSTEE BERGEN: Number two, Samuel W. Fitzgerald on behalf of ROBERT G. & MARGARET S. WARDEN request a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit for the existing two-story 48.39'x24.55' dwelling with a 24.4'x16.2' screened porch with deck above; a 13.59'x23.9' stone patio; 6.5'x23.9' stairs from stone patio down to grade with retaining wall; 6.91'x12.92' front porch; and to construct a 408sq.ft. one-story addition with an open porch onto the landward side of the dwelling. Located: 2945 Equestrian Avenue, Fishers Island. This was reviewed by the LWRP and found to be consistent Board of Trustees 12 August 20, 2014 and inconsistent. The inconsistency being the original dwelling was constructed without a permit, but the addition to the west side he found consistent. So he's recommending a non-turf buffer be required between the driveway and top of bank. The CAC resolved to support the application. Is there anybody here on behalf of this application? MR. FITZGERALD: Yes. My name is Sam Fitzgerald. I'm the architect for the project. I just would like to make a couple of brief comments about the project. More specifically about the existing house. It does not have a Trustees permit currently. The original house was, or I should say the house that is currently on the property now is not the original house. The house that was original, burned down in the '80s. And the house that you see today was built quickly after the fire and it was built on the old house's foundation. That's why the house now is so nonconforming in its zoning, set way back on the property. And it's very close to Little Hay Harbor. You have this aerial I could show you here. It's set pretty far back. As far as the new addition goes, its a one-story frame addition. It's landward of the existing house; elevation 23.9; well back from the Coastal Erosion Hazard Line, and we'll certainly implement any recommendations that you have as far as buffers and things like that. If you have any questions, I would be happy to answer them. TRUSTEE BERGEN: I have in the file here a Trustee permit dated March 30th, 1989, to reconstruct single-family dwelling, foundation and garage. MR. FITZGERALD: Right. I believe that the drawings that you have on file for that permit were not what was built. So I think that's the difference actually, is what was built does not match the drawings you have on file. That's why we are seeking the Trustees permit now. TRUSTEE BERGEN: Okay. And so just to clarify, as far as the request from the LWRP coordinator, that a non-turf buffer be maintained between the top of bluff and the paved driveway, you have no problem with that? MR. FITZGERALD: No problem with that. TRUSTEE BERGEN: Okay, any other comments from anybody in the audience regarding this application? (No response). Any other comments from the Board? (No response). If not, I'll make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE BERGEN: I'll make a motion to approve the application of Samuel Fitzgerald on behalf of the Warden's with a stipulation that a non-turf buffer be maintained between the top of bluff and the paved driveway. And in approving this application, will be bringing the original structure that was constructed without Board of Trustees 13 August 20, 2014 a permit into consistency under the LWRP. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE SANDERS: Number three, JMO Environmental Consulting on behalf of RALPH CARBONE, JR. requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit for the existing 20'x50' in-ground swimming pool; remove existing pool equipment building and construct a +/-23'x36' pool house with drywells for roof runoff; construct a +/-1,442sq.ft. patio with 6'x20' steps to dwelling; and reconfigure existing driveway with new stone gutter and drywell for runoff. Located: East End Road, aka: 6227 Castle Road, Fishers Island. The LWRP finds this consistent. The CAC did not make an inspection, therefore no recommendation was made. And ZBA findings, the Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under Type II category of the state's list of actions without further steps under SEQRA. The Trustees visited this on 6 August. We found everything consistent on our end. Is there anyone here that wishes to speak for or against this application? MR. JUST: Glenn Just, JMO Consulting, here to answer any questions from the Board. TRUSTEE KING: I didn't have any questions. We met the owner out there and walked around the property. TRUSTEE SANDERS: I'll make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE SANDERS: I'll make a motion to approve this application. TRUSTEE KING: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). MR. JUST: Thank you, very much. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number four, Patricia C. Moore, Esq. on behalf of WCKBH, LLC requests a Wetland Permit and Coastal Erosion Permit to construct a +/-110 linear foot stone revetment at a 1:1 slope; install a continuous line of silt fencing which is to be maintained throughout construction; a temporary 10' wide construction path to be re-graded as necessary and reduced to 4' after construction; any disturbed areas to be filled with loam and seeded; and install a 3' wide access path to beach. Located: 1460 Old Mallory Road, Fishers Island. The Trustees did a field inspection on August 6th and noted that the application was okay as submitted. The LWRP coordinator found this to be consistent. The CAC voted on August 13th to support this application. Board of Trustees 14 August 20, 2014 Is there anyone here to speak to this application? MS. MOORE: Good evening. Patricia Moore, on behalf of WCKBH LLC. I have no comments. I'm here to answer any questions. But I know the Board has been there onsite and has made personal inspections. So if you have no questions, I'll defer. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Any questions or comments from the Board? (No response). TRUSTEE DOMINO: All right, hearing no questions or comments, I'll make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (Trustees Domino, King, Bergen and Sanders, aye). (Trustee Bredemeyer, abstains). TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion to approve as submitted. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (Trustees Domino, King, Bergen and Sanders, aye). (Trustee Bredemeyer, abstains). WETLAND PERMITS: TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Number two under Wetland Permits, Michael Kimack on behalf of ROBERT J. MUSCO requests a Wetland Permit to remove the existing wood decks and steps; construct an irregularly shaped (+/-26'x16') in-ground swimming pool with a +/-500sq.ft. pool patio and associated pool fencing; construct a short retaining wall along northerly line of patio; install a drywell for pool backwash and pool equipment area. Located: 497 Ripple Water Lane, Southold. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak to this application? MR. KIMACK: Michael Kimack, on behalf of Robert Musco. I am respectfully requesting to table to the next meeting. I have not received a new survey yet showing the revegetation plan for the disturbed area. There was a violation on this, in the buffer area. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I think the Board appreciates that. We had brought this up for some discussion at the meeting, and also if you want to meet with us again or the owner, in the field, to revisit issues concerning this, if that would be helpful or if you have a new revegetation plan to review at that time, it would be helpful. MR. KIMACK: I should have a plan from the surveyor tomorrow so I'll bring it into Elizabeth. But I was not able to get it from the surveyor earlier to make it to this meeting. I apologize. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Thank you. Accordingly, I make a motion to table this application. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE KING: Number three, Michael Kimack on behalf of NICOLAS De CROISSET requests a Wetland Permit for the demolition of existing dwelling, porch and foundation; construct new +/-1,213sq.ft. elevated two-story dwelling, and an attached Board of Trustees 15 August 20, 2014 +/-340sq.ft. deck with steps to grade; remove existing sanitary system and install new sanitary system; raise the grade over new sanitary and under dwelling using +/-150 cubic yards of clean fill; and construct new storm water management system. Located: 20 Third Street, New Suffolk. This is a demolition of a house in New Suffolk. This was found consistent with the LWRP. The CAC supports the application with the condition of a 15-foot non-turf buffer landward of the bulkhead. Is there anyone here to speak on behalf of or against this application? MR. KIMACK: On behalf of Nicholas De Croisset. As Jim had indicated, it's the demolition of the existing structure, replacement pretty much the same footprint, but moving it a little further northward. It's the same on the westerly boundary and the same distance from the bulkhead on the southerly boundary. The first floor will be elevated on piers. The ground underneath is about six-foot elevation. The first floor will be about 14-foot elevation. I don't have a second floor or mezzanine floor attached to it. It will be construction of a new septic system as far landward, away from the bulkhead as we can, feasibly moving it on the property, removing the existing septic system. That new septic system will be elevated between one to two foot in order to meet the Health Department requirements because of the shallowness to groundwater. And there will be a new inground storm water management system. would be glad to take any questions. TRUSTEE KING: I was just kind of surprised that Zoning didn't move you further landward than the original house. MR. KIMACK: We discussed it basically. But the difficulty there is because there was a public roads next to it, Jim, there is a lot of cars that come and park using the beach access right there. And they accepted the, not the argument but the basic premise put forth, that we needed that parking space for offsite for this particular property, and moving the house too far landward there would diminish that ability. TRUSTEE KING: It's just unusual to use, when they have a demolition like that. MR. KIMACK: They did vaguely talk about the parking. It's a very, very tight area, basically, as you can see. TRUSTEE KING: Any Board comments? (No response). Any comments from the audience? (No response). Hearing nothing further, I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to approve the application and at the suggestion of the CAC, I think we should have a 15-foot Board of Trustees 16 August 20, 2014 non-turf buffer between the bulkhead and the house. MR. KIMACK: Accepted, yes. TRUSTEE KING: That would be my motion. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). MR. KIMACK: Thank you, very much. TRUSTEE BERGEN: Number four, DKR Shores, Inc. on behalf of ROBERT A. CZENSZAK requests a Wetland Permit to remove existing damaged bulkhead; construct in-place new 66' long vinyl bulkhead up to 12" higher than existing; construct(2) 15' long vinyl returns; backfill area with approximately 65 cubic yards of clean fill; construct new 4'x66'walk along the landward edge of bulkhead using untreated material; and reconstruct existing 4'x6' beach access stairs. Located: 4365 Camp Mineola Road, Mattituck. This application has been reviewed under the LWRP and found to be consistent. The CAC did not make an inspection, therefore they have no recommendation. The Board did go out and looked at this property. Is there anybody here to speak on behalf of this application? (No response). Okay, well, they had recommended in their application to raise the height of the bulkhead by 12 inches. When we looked at the bulkhead adjacent, we had recommended it going up 15 inches. So an additional three inches to match that bulkhead. And then install a ten-foot non-turf buffer north of the walkway. So, being there is nobody here, is there anybody in the audience who wants to speak for or against this application? (No response). Any other comments from the Board? TRUSTEE KING: It looks pretty straightforward. TRUSTEE BERGEN: I'll make a motion to close this public hearing. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE BERGEN: I'll make a motion to approve DKR Shores on behalf of Robert Czenszak, with the condition that the bulkhead is raised 15 inches and that there is a ten-foot non-turf buffer behind this bulkhead. TRUSTEE DOMINO: I'll second that. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Vote the Board? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE SANDERS: Number five, CHERYL L. HANSEN REVOCABLE TRUST requests a Wetland Permit to construct a +/-2,400sq.ft. two-story, single-family dwelling; new sanitary system; and pervious driveway. Located: 405 Williamsburgh Drive, Southold. The LWRP finds this consistent and the CAC moved by John Stein, second by Keith McCamy, resolved to support the Board of Trustees 17 August 20, 2014 application. I can't find ZBA here. There might not be one. (Perusing). So there no ZBA. And the field inspections, I'm thinking you have to take a look at these. Is this your handwriting? TRUSTEE BERGEN: Re-applying for a previously-approved structure. TRUSTEE SANDERS: And dwelling permit expired, but all okay. TRUSTEE BERGEN: Yes. TRUSTEE SANDERS: So we saw this on August 13th, 2014. Is there anybody here who wishes to speak on behalf of this application? MS. HANSEN: I'm Cheryl Hansen. I'm applying for the same permit we had previously. It's just re-applying. Hopefully there was no problems before and there are no problems now. TRUSTEE SANDERS: We did notice there was no posting of the hearing. MS. HANSEN: There was a posting but unfortunately there was a gentleman that came out the day we had that wind, and that's the day it fell down. And I noticed, because we are not too far from there, and 1 noticed it was off the post. And when I went over there, there was a gentleman with red Jeep and a gray beard and I was telling him it was just blown off to the neighbor's yard. So I picked it up and hammered it back in place. And I took a picture the day I put it up. So I have a picture with the date on it. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Okay. Any thoughts from the Board? TRUSTEE KING: It's the same as has previously been approved. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Okay, anybody in the audience? (No response). TRUSTEE SANDERS: At this time I'll make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE KING: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE SANDERS: I'll make a motion to approve this application. TRUSTEE KING: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). MS. HANSEN: Thank you, very much. TRUSTEE SANDERS: You're welcome. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Okay, item seven, Patricia C. Moore, Esq., on behalf of MARIO MALERBA& GARY NAPOLITANO request a Wetland Permit for the existing one-story 51.3'x79.2' dwelling with +/-140sq.ft. of 4' wide wood walkways; stone outdoor grill; 550sq.ft. pool with pool fence; 416sq.ft. shuffle board court; brick patio with walk; 120' long bulkhead with two 20' returns; 4' wide steps to beach; landscaping railroad ties; for the proposed addition of+/-200 cubic yards clean fill to raise grade around pool and install a 1,225sq.ft. stone patio; and existing non-turf buffer along the landward edge of the bulkhead. Located: 1250 Blue Marlin Drive, Southold. MS. MOORE: Thank you. This is a house that has, it's an existing house with an existing pool that all the structures that are Board of Trustees 18 August 20, 2014 presently there were constructed prior to the Trustees' jurisdiction in the '80s. The house never got the CO closed out and the pool apparently also didn't have a closed-out permit. So when we discovered that when we went to close out everything, kind of everything just started failing apart for this guy. have a picture of the pool, well, the decking that had been there. The decking had to be removed because back in the '80s, they went to the Zoning Board, and the Zoning Board granted the variances they needed, but when they came up with the calculations on lot coverage, it just didn't match the survey. So we ended up having to figure out how do we make a 1985 Zoning Board approval match a survey that now the surveys are different. So the simplest thing here was just to remove the decking, because it would be patio, converted to patio, which would be no lot coverage issues. So we made --the goal here was to make the property as conforming or more conforming than the Zoning Board had originally granted. So when the decking was removed, the pool was exposed. And I understand --well, we then went to the Building Department and said Building Department, okay, we removed the decking because we now meet lot coverage. And Gary said, yes, but now its unsafe because you don't have the decking. We said, well, what can we do. And he said bring fill. Because you have to grade toward the house in order for the stoop to have a proper, no greater than two-foot stoop down. We made this application, which included all of the existing structures, since they all predated, and unfortunately the property is being sold and the buyer is under a time pressure. They thought the closing would occur on Friday and therefore the fill had to be installed right away. They shouldn't have done that. It's clear they should not have done that. I came here for a permit for the fill because that was the only activity that was requiring a permit. And so we are certainly, we, my client, is ready to proceed with the fact that he shouldn't have allowed the fill to be brought in. So we have that worked out. Now we just need the Trustees' permit so we can make everything safe and get this project completed. And that's where we are today. I understand there were some issues of the structural integrity of the pool. There is some bracing, the pool as you can see, was built in the '80s, so there are some repairs that are going to be needed, which interestingly, removal of the deck was a Godsend for the buyer because he would never have seen the structural problems of the pool, whatever they are called, the bracing of the pool. So everything that we tried to do here to make things better created, opened up another problem. So I'm hoping we are at the end of our problems. And having the Trustees' permit in place, we can clean this up and hopefully close out the permits that should have been closed 20 years ago. That's where we are. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Is there an intent to fill, close the house, Board of Trustees 19 August 20, 2014 come back, unfill, and repair the pool? MS. MOORE: Well, we didn't know that the structure had any problems, because the pool has not leaked. It's still, its been functioning. We saw pictures recently, I guess pictures of the braces that are rusted, and we are in communication with John, is the real estate broker, he's in communication with the buyer to try to figure out at what point those repairs get done. TRUSTEE KING: Pat, look at this. Can you see this? That's the liner going out through the pool's rusted-out hole. So it looks like it was a seal that held the vinyl in place. Now what's happening you have a rust line all the way around. There are some other spots I'm sure that are not-- MS. MOORE: We have a hernia in the pool. But we'll do whatever we have to. John spoke to my client. We'll do whatever needs to be done to make it safe. We have to make the Building Department happy. So the fill needed, we needed the fill for the house because the house has to be CO's out. The pool, we'll deal with the pool. The permit actually covers everything and having, which was, I don't know if it was premonition on my part, including the pool into this permit actually makes it simpler. Because then we can make whatever repairs or replacement of the pool as it is today, and it's all covered under the permit. So it gives us the flexibility to deal with the buyer in a fair way and in a way that will make both sides happy. So I'm the permit person, not the contract. But both sides are now aware of the situation. TRUSTEE SANDERS: I guess my question would be, in order to close, if you were to put the fill in, then close, because you have your stuff, but then come back, take it back out again and do the proper repairs. MS. MOORE: That's certainly a possibility. That would be great, but I don't know timing wise, and had whether or not-- I mean the key to it is to make sure the bank will allow us to close. So it may require a separate permit to assure Gary that we are coming back to fix things. So I have to talk to Gary. I have to talk to the Building Department to make sure that they feel comfortable that we are not going to just leave a dangerous condition unattended. (Board members off the record). If you are asking about the violation, I made a representation to Lori and she has been busy up there. I have the thousand-dollar fine in my file here, and I have an authorization for a plea. So my goal was to get everything done tonight so neither one of us has to go to court. You know, he was wrong in starting -- TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Without disclosing, there was some quiet discussion between our attorney and ourselves. I think we are on a similar wavelength. MS. HULSE: Pat, I brought the plea form with me, if you want to -- MS. MOORE: Okay. Yes, I figured we would be doing it after, because you were busy. Board of Trustees 20 August 20, 2014 MS. HULSE: I could always make time for you, Pat. MS. MOORE: Thank you. You're so kind. Put it this way, I'm ready. I have everything I need to do that. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Is there anybody else to speak to this application? I have several items in the file that should be brought to the attention of the Board. Is there anyone else that wishes to speak? (No response). The project has been deemed to be consistent with the LWRP. The LWRP coordinator now has made a recommendation that there be a non-turf vegetated buffer encompassing the area known as the splash area on the 2001 survey. MS. MOORE: Actually, it's there already. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Okay, I personally was not on the field inspection for this, so I'm not aware. TRUSTEE KING: It was mostly stone. MS. MOORE: Yes, it was a non-turf, it was actually very nice. It has like a little --so it's alright. We have that. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So it's an existing non-turf area. MS. MOORE: Yes, it's a non-turf area. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So there can be reiteration to maintain it as a non-turf area. MS. MOORE: That's fine. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Okay, I guess the CAC did not support the project. Apparently it was not staked. It was not a proper drainage or backwash device for the pool. And the non-turf buffer, okay, we just addressed that. And apparently they didn't see the notice of hearing sign posted. So particularly backwash for the swimming pool would be something to incorporate into this. MS. MOORE: I'm not really sure where the pipes are, so. It's a drywell. But that's fine. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: We could make a simple addition to this based on where -- MS. MOORE: When we figure out where it goes, yes. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Any other comments or questions? (No response). Hearing none, I'll make a motion to close the hearing in this matter. TRUSTEE KING: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). I would make a motion to approve this application with the stipulation that the area known as the gravel splash area on the 2001 survey be maintained as a non-turf buffer, and that the swimming pool filtration system have a suitably-sized backwash drywell installed. MS. MOORE: Okay. TRUSTEE SANDERS: And can we add that has to be mitigated. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: My understanding with communication with the Building Department is they are handling the engineering aspect of that. So that's my motion, for those two items, the backwash Board of Trustees 21 August 20, 2014 and non-turf. Do I hear a second? TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE DOMINO: Okay, number six, En-Consultants on behalf of SEAN P. FAHEY requests a Wetland Permit for the existing 4'x77'fixed, seasonal timber dock constructed entirely of untreated materials except for 4"x4"treated timber support posts with attached "L" shaped 2'x3' platform on landward end which is accessed by 3'x6' steps attached to a 4'x6' platform off the bulkhead. Located: 1415 North Parish Drive, Southold. The Trustees field inspection on the 13th, and a note to check older permits for dock and bulkhead. The CAC voted to support this application. The LWRP coordinator did not issue a report at this time. No findings that it is consistent or inconsistent with the LWRP. TRUSTEE KING: He's still working on it. TRUSTEE DOMINO: He's still working on it. Is there anyone here to speak to this application? MR. HERRMANN: Yes. Good evening. Thank you, by the way. Rob Herrmann of En-Consultants here on behalf of the applicant Sean Fahey. This is an application for an existing seasonal dock. This dock along with the two neighboring docks have been installed on a seasonal basis for at least about 20 years. From what I can figure out from old surveys, there is a 1986 survey, it's not terribly clear, but it does show a dock on the bay in front of this property at the time. And the Trustees have issued similar permits to what we are asking for the two adjoining properties, one to Lewick, to Thomas Lewick which was issued most recently in 2013. And then to the opposite side, back in 1990. This owner purchased the property with the dock in place and has over the years been continuing to install it as he was advised was the prior practice by the prior owner. But apparently there was never a permit issued for the dock to the prior owners of this property. I'm not sure exactly how he was notified, if one of the bay constables saw it going in, or if a neighbor, for some reason, this year, Mr. Fahey was advised that there did not appear to be a permit for the seasonal dock and that he should come down to the Trustees and apply for one so that he could also be permitted to continue doing what has been done over the years and what is done on two adjacent parcels with Trustee permits. As you can see from the survey we submitted with the application, the current survey of the dock does not extend out as far as the two adjacent docks, but appears to be adequate, has been adequate for the owner's use. So there is no proposal to expand it in any way. Board of Trustees 22 August 20, 2014 The Trustees, from what I could find in your town records, actually heard an application on this dock a number of years ago, I think about ten years ago or so, to add a floater to the end. And that petition was denied. But I guess for whatever reason, at the time, you didn't actually issue a permit for what was there, you just denied the proposal for the expansion. And my guess is that just that probably now as you have gotten more meticulous about your recordkeeping and permitting and everything, that would probably not happen today, but for whatever reason that happened at the time. So even though the Trustees viewed the dock, saw the dock, treated the application, made a decision on the application, when they came out the other side there was still no permit for the seasonal dock as it existed and as it continues to exist today. TRUSTEE DOMINO: For the record, that application was denied April 11, 2002. MR. HERRMANN: Yes. Thank you. TRUSTEE KING: Rob, is there a DEC permit on it? MR. HERRMANN: There is not. I didn't find that there is a DEC permit on the dock either. TRUSTEE KING: Should he have one? MR. HERRMANN: Probably. But it depends on how long it goes back. If the dock has been going in since prior to '77 then it would be pre-existing for DEC. But I was not able to determine that. The document that I could find was '86 that shows a dock. But they would basically have to go through a process of contacting the DEC and seeing how they wanted to deal with it. TRUSTEE KING: I was just curious because it appears to be like a new dock, almost, as you look at it. And I could just envision an Environmental Conservation Officer going by and saying, hey, here is a new dock, where is the DEC permit. MR. HERRMANN: Well, it is installed on an annual basis. TRUSTEE SANDERS: When you say"installed," does that mean all the decking and the pilings? TRUSTEE KING: The entire dock is removed. MR. HERRMANN: Yes. Section by section. If you go through, that's a Google Earth aerial. We submitted -- I looked at a lot of Bing aerials and a lot of Google aerials. I think in our application, the fourth photo, figure four was actually the best Google Earth aerial I could find, from 2010, that actually shows all three docks in the water. And that matches up really nicely with what is on the survey. But as you go back, depending on what month the photo is taken, one dock is in, two docks in, three docks are in. They all seem to put them in and out at different times. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Is there a presumption they went with seasonal docks because icing, ice movement on the bay just takes the dock and just turns it into a memory? MR. HERRMANN: I would guess, Jay. I don't really know. From what I could understand from the paperwork and from the practice and what the contractors involved with the docks have described to Board of Trustees 23 August 20, 2014 me, those docks have always been -- TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I remember as a kid, when I used to play there, I used to run around Bayview, I remember there were docks back, historically, I think that's where they sort of build docks, a lot of guys just went with seasonal. Just so you are aware, I got a call from Mark Terry today and apparently he's researching this for the Trustees and they specifically request we hold off on approving or denying tonight based on the fact they are demanding legal action surrounding the denial of the float of this dock, if I heard him correctly, and there may actually be some additional information that is available to the Trustees based on their determinations to deny the float and may have actually been upheld. And I'm not sure I'm getting this exactly correct, but he did request that pending, this was unusual and not in the ordinary, he had problems getting held up, apparently there is, he's doing research and providing some additional historical information that came to light today, actually. I got the call from him. MR. HERRMANN: There is no pending legal action on that. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: No, no. Not pending now. I mean historically the Board may have denied the former owner the float, which may have resulted in litigation where the Trustees' determination was upheld on the courts and probably been advisable for the Trustees and current Board to review that determination, is what he requested. TRUSTEE KING: We can't move on it. There is no LWRP. So it's moot anyway. MR. HERRMANN: I'm just struggling to figure out what that has do with anything. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I don't know if the issue is concerning the use of public bottom or upland issues. A prior Board of Trustees might be considered by this Board for good or ill, simply because it involved a determination of the Board which was put under legal review. So I think that would always be something a current Board might want to review before they vote on a matter. TRUSTEE KING: Rob, what are the dates? Up by November 1st and in no earlier than April 1 st? MR. HERRMANN: Yes. I don't know if there is a set schedule to it. TRUSTEE KING: I think seasonal floats, I believe those were the two dates. MR. HERRMANN: I could tell you quickly what you did for the adjacent parcel. If it says. (Perusing). The dock, well, the subject dock is in the center. The permit that the Trustees issued for the permit, I guess that would be to the west, if my direction is correct. Yes, to the west. That was issued August 21 st, almost a year ago today, to Thomas Lewick. The Board of Trustees approved the administrative amendment to Wetlands Permit 5014 to reinstall the seasonal dock that consists of a 4x4 platform, 420 ramp, leading to a level 456 fixed dock as depicted on revised project plan prepared by Thomas Lewick. It does not stipulate the in and out date. The original Board of Trustees 24 August 20, 2014 permit that is referenced in that decision was issued July 6th, 1999, wetland Permit, then it just goes to describe the same dock. But it doesn't have a date on it. And then the dock to the east, that was originally issued by the Board June 22nd, 1990. And that looked like it was -- it doesn't say it on that one either. So there was no timeframe on either. But basically you have the three docks in a row. The west and east have permits. Its a little bit shorter in the center. We are just looking basically for the same decision rendered to the two neighbors. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Any additional questions or comments? Anyone else wish to speak on this matter? (No response). Hearing none, I'll make a motion to table this application pending the LWRP. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). MR. HERRMANN: Will you let us know if there is anything else you want or need from us? It would have been great if Mark had done this before tonight. All right, good night, all. TRUSTEE KING: Number eight, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of PAUL SENNETT requests a Wetland Permit to install 52 linear feet of vinyl bulkhead with a 12 linear foot vinyl return; install 3'x7' timber stairs to beach; install 60 cubic yards clean sand fill landward of proposed bulkhead; and install a 15' wide non-turf buffer along the landward edge of the bulkhead. Located: 450 Richmond Road East, Southold. This was found inconsistent with the LWRP. New bulkheads in creeks and bays are prohibited unless the operation involves the construction of a low sill bulkhead. Note however the portions of the property are located in the FEMA VE zone, boating hazards should be taken into account in your decision making. In the event the action is approved, all bulkhead construction and renovation work requires the establishment of a permanent non-turf buffer. Those are the comments from the LWRP coordinator. The CAC resolved to support the application as it was submitted. Is there anyone here to speak on behalf of or against this application? MR. PATANJO: Jeff Patanjo on behalf of the applicant. This is the same continuation of the other three bulkheads that were just done, previously approved, just to the west. One of the Susan Oliveri properties, which is one house in between, which is Geoffrey Pazzanese that you just did the approval on. Same situation. She didn't have a bulkhead and we want to create a continuous bulkhead across all three of these properties. TRUSTEE KING: I think the first thing we should do is refer to Board of Trustees 25 August 20, 2014 these as retaining walls. They are not bulkheads. MR. PATANJO: Correct, retaining walls. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: That gets us out of the issue of bulkheads on bays. And they truly are retaining walls. TRUSTEE KING: We were all out there and looked at it. Do we have any pictures of that? Where are you with the DEC on this? MR. PATANJO: Still pending review. TRUSTEE KING: They have not approved it yet? MR. PATANJO: No. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Do we have our pictures that we took? TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Apparently not. TRUSTEE SANDERS: If you need to see them, I have them. TRUSTEE KING: We have pictures in the file that are pretty good. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Okay. TRUSTEE KING: My only concern on this, is it is really heavily vegetated along that bluff. And you are going to lose all that when you put that bulkhead in. MR. PATANJO: The same situation was with the Oliveri property. It was also heavily vegetated. We did lose some during the storm. And Mr. Sennett is fearful that since his neighbors constructed bulkheads, he'll lose property as well during the next storm. And we are not going to disrupt any tidal wetlands. TRUSTEE KING: I understand that. Like I say, I was just a little uncomfortable we are going to lose so much vegetation there. TRUSTEE BERGEN: I believe out in the field we had looked at moving it slightly landward, so there was a spot there where it could result in the loss of one Baccharus. TRUSTEE KING: It would be like on the northeast/easterly side, I guess. I was a little disappointed, quite frankly, the neighbor to the west of that bulkhead is out further than I thought it was going to be, personally. It almost looks like a land grab, you know. TRUSTEE DOMINO: If you look at the survey, it's consistent with the property. It's not a land grab in that regard. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: You have the aspect of elevation against the scenery backdrop. TRUSTEE KING: Does he own out to the high water mark, do you know? MR. PATANJO: Yes. The tide line is at the high water mark. TRUSTEE KING: Does someone want to make a motion? I'm uncomfortable moving on this, quite frankly. TRUSTEE SANDERS: What would change your thoughts? TRUSTEE KING: If the bulkhead was moved landward more along the toe of the bluff, rather than out so far. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: You say it's pending with DEC? MR. PATANJO: DEC, just notice of receipt of application is all I have. TRUSTEE BERGEN: How about we look at the opportunity here to table this, meet you out in the field where we can determine what we think is a more appropriate line for this retaining Board of Trustees 26 August 20, 2014 wall. Would you be comfortable with that? MR. PATANJO: The only reason I am is because I don't have DEC and I don't know what they are going to say. TRUSTEE KING: That's one of my concerns, too. MR. PATANJO: So I'm comfortable with that. TRUSTEE KING: And maybe you'll hear something from them in the meantime. MR. PATANJO: Correct. TRUSTEE KING: All right. I'll make a motion to table this application and revisit it on the next field inspection. TRUSTEE SANDERS: I'll second that. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE BERGEN: Number nine, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of JONATHAN ZAVIN requests a Wetland Permit to remove existing timber ramp and float; construct an additional 4'wide by 30' long pier extension onto existing 4'x39'fixed pier for an overall length of 69'; install a new 3'x16' aluminum ramp; install a new 6'x20' floating dock with two (2) 8" diameter piles; and install thru-flow decking over wetlands area on existing and proposed dock. Located: 3005 Wells Road, Peconic. The CAC did not make an inspection, so they have no recommendation from them. The Board did go out and looked at this on their field inspection. The LWRP found this to be inconsistent. The inconsistency is several pages long. Basically it's the proposed dock extension would extend into public waters significantly farther than the existing dock. So he's suggesting an alternative of seasonal mooring. This is Richmond Creek, a significant coastal fish and wildlife habitat. Public access could be infringed. Again recommending the alternative use of seasonal mooring. The applicant enjoys public access via existing private dock structure. So just for clarification, the dock was extending out a short distance. We did, when we were out there, initially, we couldn't see the stakes. We then discovered the stakes, it's full moon high tide, they were significantly underwater. But we could see the shadow of orange underwater. So is there anybody here to speak for or against this application? MR. PATANJO: Jeff Patanjo on behalf of the applicant. This is really just an extension to obtain more water depth for his boat. He has a 6x20 float, typical aluminum ramp, and as you can see on the proposed plan, it's in-line with the adjacent docks to the north and to the south. There is no projection further into the waterway than they are. And the waterway is fairly large. 440 feet wide. It's got some good width to it. TRUSTEE KING: Do you know whether or not this was previously permitted, under another name, maybe? MR. PATANJO: I don't know. Board of Trustees 27 August 20, 2014 TRUSTEE BERGEN: Yes, if you could just come up to the microphone so we could hear your comments. MR. ZAVIN: Jonathan Zavin. I believe it was previously permitted. We just bought the house a year-and-a-half ago. But when we bought it, we did look for permits, and I'm quite sure the thought was the dock was previously permitted. I know a number of you gentlemen saw it, and the problem is at low tide the boat is in the mud because the dock is located in a cove. The other two adjacent docks actually project out much further because we are in this little shallow cove area. So what we are trying to do is just get out far enough so we are somewhere near the other docks in the same water. MR. PATANJO: I want to add to that, sorry to interrupt, but it is permitted TRUSTEE KING: That's what I thought. Was it under the name of Nahas, maybe? MR. PATANJO: I don't know. It was 2013, they did a revision for 8148. It was permitted. TRUSTEE BERGEN: 8148. Thank you. TRUSTEE KING: That's what I thought. I thought it was a permitted structure. TRUSTEE BERGEN: And I know, with what you have proposed here, it's actually bringing it more in-line with the other adjacent docks and with the construction standards that would match the other docks. You have also proposed flow-through open-grating over the wetland area, correct? MR. PATANJO: Correct. We'll replace all the existing decking with the flow-through over the wetlands. TRUSTEE BERGEN: Okay. Anybody else who wanted to speak regarding this application? Any other comments from the Board? (No response). With that, I'll make a motion to close this public hearing. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second. All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE BERGEN: I'll make a motion to approve the application of Jonathan Zavin as described, noting that this was a dock previously permitted under permit number 8148, and given the construction standards and the fact that it is not going to extend beyond the other docks, we would deem it consistent under the LWRP. TRUSTEE DOMINO: I'll second that. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE SANDERS: Ladies and gentlemen, last but not least, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of CHANNING REAL ESTATE, LLC, c/o DOUGLAS CHAN requests a Wetland Permit to remove and replace 78 linear feet of storm damaged timber bulkhead and 35 linear foot return with new vinyl bulkhead and return in-place; add 100 cubic yards of clean sand fill; and install a 10' wide non-turf buffer along the landward edge of the bulkhead. Board of Trustees 28 August 20, 2014 Located: 455 MacDonald Crossing, Laurel. The LWRP has found this to be consistent and the CAC resolved to support the application. We did go inspect this on the 13th, and we were suggesting --so August 13th we did inspect this. Is there anybody here to speak on behalf of this application? MR. PATANJO: Jeff Patanjo, on behalf of the applicant. I have no comments unless you have a question. It's to remove and replace bulkhead and replace fill lost during storm. TRUSTEE SANDERS: I think one thing we were suggesting is a ten-foot non-turf buffer. MR. PATANJO: It's already on the plan. TRUSTEE SANDERS: There you go. Then I'll make a motion to close this hearing. TRUSTEE DOMINO: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). TRUSTEE SANDERS: I'll make a motion to approve this application. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Motion made. Is there a second? TRUSTEE KING: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). MR. PATANJO: Thank you. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Motion to adjourn. TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: All in favor? (ALL AYES). Respectfully submitted by, *0% "0.X_ John M. Bredemeyer III, President Board of Trustees