Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-06/26/2002Albert J. Krups]ri. President James King, Vice-President Artie FosTer Ken Poliwoda Peggy A. Dickerson BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOVv-N OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall 53095 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1892 Fax (631) 765-1366 MINUTES Wednesday, June 26, 2002 7:00 PM PRESENT WERE: Albert J. Krupski, Jr., President James King, Vice-President Artie Foster, Trustee Kenneth Poliwoda, Trustee Peggy A. Dickerson, Trustee Bob Ghosio, CAC Member Lauren M. Standish, Senior Clerk CALL MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 at 8:00 AM TRUSTEE KING moved to Approve, TRUSTEE DICKERSON seconded. ALL AYES NEXT TRUSTEE MEETING: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 at 7:00 PM WORKSESSION: 6:00 PM TRUSTEE KING moved to Approve, TRUSTEE FOSTER seconded. ALL AYES APPROVE MINUTES: Approve Minutes of March 20, 2002 and April 24, 2002. (Held until July.) MONTHLY REPORT: The Trustees Monthly report for may 2002. A check for $4,642.86 was forwarded to the Supervisor's Office for the General Fund. I1. PUBLIC NOTICES: Public Notices are posted on the Town Clerk's Bulletin Board for review. III. AMENDMENTS/VVAIVERS/CHANGES: DOUGLAS & CAROL RYAN request an Amendment to Permit #5220 to add a railing and benches to the dock. Located: 3210 Beebe Dr. Extension, Cutchogue. SCTM#103-9-2 TRUSTEE POLIWODA moved to Approve the application to add a railing only, and no benches, TRUSTEE FOSTER seconded. ALL AYES JOSEPHINE ALIPERTI requests an Amendment to Permit #5039 to add a 14'X 12' deck onto the rear of the house and to maintain a 40' buffer area to the rear of the house. Located: 400 Ole Jule Lane, Mattituck. SCTM#114-12-13.1 TRUSTEE KING moved to Approve the application to temporarily move the hay bales back 10' away from the northwest corner of the house with the conditio~ that drywells are installed immediately and once all of the construction is complete, the hay bales must be moved back to the 50' norYdisturbance buffer line and the 10' area restored. TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES MATTITUCK INLET MARINA & SHIPYARD INC. requests an Amendment to Permit #5198 for the relocation of ten 6'X 24' floats and the installation of nine pilings at ~he southern most dock. Located: 5780 Mill Road, Mattituck. SCTM#106-6-13.3 TRUSTEE POLIWODA moved to Deny the application, TRUSTEE DICKERSON seconded. AYES: TRUSTEE FOSTER, TRUSTEE KRUPSKI. ABSTAINED: TRUSTEE KING. JOSEPH & CATHERINE BARBATO re~ uest an Amendment to Permit #5435 for the existing 8'X 12' shed. Located: 200 West Lake Dr., Southold. SCTM#90-1-20 TRUSTEE POLIWODA moved to Approve the application, TRUSTEE DICKERSON seconded. ALL AYES WARREN CROON JR. requests an Amendment to Permit #5130 to install a 16'× 21' patio off the rear entrance to the house. Located: 2500 Ole Jule Lane, Mattituck. SCTM#122-4-12 TRUSTEE FOSTER moved to Approve the application with the condition that if the project creates additional run-off, management of it must be addressed. TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES Mark Schwartz on behalf of ROBERT SOMERVILLE requests an Amendment to Permit #5383 to change the building footprint of the house, as per survey dated April 30, 2002. Located: 485 Breezy Path, Southold. SCTM#89-2-8 TRUSTEE POLIWODA moved to Approve the application, TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES Land Use Ecological Services on behalf of DAVID G. BOSTIC requests an Amendment to Permit #5301 to reconstruct in-kind and place 26 linear ft. "smooth" face timber bulkhead/rataining wall, top elevation to match existing. The existing 18'X 8'6" elevated timber deck is proposed to be removed as well as the deteriorated wood deck and platform previously utilized as boat storage. A 4'X 4' 10. 11. 12. timber landing is proposed for transition from the existing concrete steps to the proposed timber stairs. 4'X 5' +/- timber stairs are proposed to be reconstructed in-kind and place for access to the proposed 18'X 21' timber platform which is to be reconstructed in-kind and place. The 18'X 21' platform is to be supported by (24) 4"X 4" CCA timber posts with a depth of penetration of 6'+. A 2'X 5' removable ladder is proposed for access to and from the water. Located: 2635 Laurel Way, Mattituck. SCTM#121-4-13 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to Approve the application with the condition that CCA is not used on the posts and there is ½" spacing on the deck. TRUSTEE DICKERSON seconded. ALL AYES Costello Marine Contracting on behalf of ANDREAS KARACOSTAS requests an Amendment to Permit #5400 to install rock armor in front of the bulkhead. Located: 21275 Soundview Ave., Southold. SCTM#135-1-2 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to Table the application and the Board will re-visit the site on July 16, 2002. TRUSTEE DICKERSON seconded. ALL AYES VICTOR & MARY ZUPA request a Waiver to install 123' of 4' high [31ack vinyl chain link fencing with one double driveway gate. Located: 580 Basin. Rd., Southold. SCTM#81-1-16.7 TRUSTEE DICKERSON moved to Approve the application with the condition that there is an 8" space on the bottom. TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES The OYSTER FACTORY requests a Waiver to erect a fence to protect the property prior to and during the demolition of the buildings because the Town has instituted an unsafe building action on the property. Located: 2835 Shipyard Lane East Marion. SCTM#38-7-7.1 TRUSTEE POLIWODA moved to Approve the application, TRUSTEE DICKERSON seconded. ALL AYES PETER;& BARBARA SWAHN request a One-Year Extension to Permit #5211. The only work left to do is remove and replace the 48' groin. Located: 2100 Park Ave., Mattituck. SCTM#123-8-8.1 &8.2 TRUSTEE FOSTER moved to Approve the application, TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES NICOLO DIBARTOLO requests a One-Year Extension to Permit #5207 to construct a second-floor addition on the same footprint, add an attached garage, and add an open porch and second-story deck. A one-year extension is required due to delays and corn plications with the DEC. Located: 475 Condor Court, Laurel. SCTM#127-3-6.2 TRUSTEE KING moved to Approve the application, TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded ALL AYES 4 13. JAMES & KAREN HOEG requests a second One-Year Extension to Permit #5038 to install an in-ground swimming pool. Located: 350 Willis Creek Dr., Mattituck. SCTM#115-17-17 10 TRUSTEE KING moved to Approve the application, TRUSTEE DICKERSON seconded. ALL AYES 14. BETH A. VENTRANO requests a Transfer of Permit #1989 from Donald DeLalla/Michael Pedmutter to Beth A. Ventrano. Located: 5545 Sl(unk Lane, Cutchogue. SCTM#138-2-18 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to Approve the application with the condition that the new ladder on the north side of the dock is removed and the two boats not be moored on that side because they are shading and damaging the inter-tidal marsh. TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KING moved to go off the Regular Meeting and go onto the Public Hearings, TRUSTEE FOSTER seconded. ALL AYES IV. 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. HAVE AN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION FROM THE SUFFOLK TIMES. PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE MAY BE READ PRIOR TO ASKING FOR COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMMENTS ORGANIZED AND BRIEF. FIVE (5) MINUTES OR LESS IF POSSIBLE PECONIC DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION INC. requests a Wetland Permit to remove dead and diseased trees and brush within the 50' buffer area. Located: 57958 Main Rd.. Southold SCTM#66-2-2.4 TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Is there anyone who would like to comment on this application? DAVID LECLAIRE: As a concerned citizen of Southold, I just want to be sure that only the dead brush and only the dead tress will be removed, if it is granted. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Thank you. Does the Board have any comment? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there any other comment on this application? I think we've been over it enough ourselves. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'll make a motion to Deny the application and to let it remain as a natural non-disturbance buffer area. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES GARY GERNS, as Contract Vendee requests a Wetland Permit to construct a single-family dwelling. Located: 1680 Brigantine Dr., Southold. SCTM#79-4-25 TRUSTEE DICKERSON: s there anyone who would like to comment on this application? GARY G ERNS: We have the revised survey showing the 50' buffer zone. (inaudible) TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We can make an allowance during construction and then you can re-vegetate that disturbed area after construction. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: What about the CAC? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I don't think the CAC has reviewed this new plan. BOB GHOSIO: Not the new plan, no. We were looking for a 100' setback the last ti'me we looked at it. We felt that there was a problem with the building envelope that it wouldn't be achievable. (changed tape) TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We're trying to be consistent with the non-disturbance buffer. Is~here any other comment? TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE I~RUPSKI: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUST~E D!CKERSON: I"11 make a motion to Approve the application with hay bales and 10 relief during construction to be re-vegetated after construction, and d~Wells and gutters on the house. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES MICHAEL A. CHUISANO requests a Wetland Permit to construct a single-family dwelling..Located: 575 Diamond Lane, Peconic. SCTM#68-2-10 TRUSTEE KING: Would anyone like to comment on this application? CHUCK BOWMAN: I think you've been brought up to date. We have provided you with a survey with 2' contours. We've also provided you with a driveway plan that you .requested that was done by Joe Fischetti, P.E. who is also here is you have any questions on how the driveway will be constructed. The wetland's flags as I have flagged this small area, this depression area shown on the map, and I have also discussed this with Chris Pickerall, which the Board has asked me to do, and Chds is going to go out and look at the flags, which he said he promises to do within a week. But, he did have one of the concerns that I have, was that the vegetation (inaudible) as you can see from the test holes. The reason we have a couple of high-bush blueberry in there is because that Iow area dips down within a ~oot ofgreund water. It's a real nice area as far as dune vegetation and it's diver~.ity and I think the house, the way it's situated now, is behind the Coastal E~resion Hazard Line. The sanitary system, we are looking into changing its configuration to bring it more southeast west, so we can bring the fill behind the Coa§~al Erosion Hazard Line, which is something that would be required under those regulations. We have also filed an application with the Zoning Board of Appeals for front yard and rear yard relief for the house. Gail Wickham is here, the~attorney for the applicant, and we discussed also the potential for discussing with the ZBA turning the house as well therefore being able to maximize the setbacks from the Coastal Erosion Hazard Line and from that little depression area. The driveway could also be snaked around that small depression area. These are all of the things that we are working on and I hope that the Board perhaps has had a chance to review what we submitted, perhaps not. But, certainly we're here to answer any questions. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well actually we're just going to answer that briefly. What was submitted was submitted today, so no, we didn't have a chance to review it. I'll keep taking comments in the meantime. PAUL MAGG10: I'm here with my wife Barbara and we are the owners of the subject property and I'd like to clear the air because we were not at the last meeting and there were many comments made that I'm quite offended by. In the first instance, we are not land speculators who just picked up a piece of land somewhere and tried to flip it a year later. We've owned this property since 1975 and we bought the property subject to the issuance of a building permit by the Town of Southold Building Dept. and an environmental conservation permit issued bythe NYSDEC, which was indeed issued, and a Suffolk County Dept. of Health s~wage permit, which was also issued prior to our taking title to the property. N0w~ it's my understanding that there were comments made here at the la~ hearing that the Magg os were trying to put something over on the Town when they quote "knew that property cQuld not be built on". I was highly offended bythose comments, l want the record to sho~ that that property did indeed have all ofr[Irte requ?.d permits issued in 1975 to construct a one-family home, 300' ba~k from the'liigh-w~ter mark, Which is what!the appl!cant is seekingl now. N~hiag different. We could have gone'in there in .1975, brought in our co¢'~raCtors,~'' constructed the house, and it would still be sitting rthere today. I also wa~t tO. poi, nt out that~thJs parcel is more than one acre in size. Some of the cor~mer~ts have been made by people who have homes on substandard lots only 50~0Or 6000 sq. ft. Who want to enjoy the scenic ViStas and use of the property th~'~e, have been paying the taxes on for these last 27 years. No one sent back ou{!~ax check saying, ~)h, you don't have to pay taxes on this property'because yo.~ c~n't build an it. Those taxes were accepted evew year, paid', every year, an~t at ene::.P,o r~i, we even took the property off the, market when the Peconic La,id TrUSt ihdi~ated an' interest in it and kept us sitting for two years Without the courtesy of a phone Call or letter saying that they were:not interested i~ the pr~erty. A~t~hat point, we put it back on the market. There were some of the ne§ilbY neighbSrs who tried to poison the well, so to speak, by comingl out when prd~ective burrs were looking at it and giving them false informatio8 until they we~ notified by me that they would be hearing from my attorney if they dared sp~ad, any false information that harm my economic interest. I do want this Bo~,rd to ueder~tand Where we're coming from here. If you look at the survey, youill ~ee Lots :i & 2are both approximately 7,000 sq.ft. There are other lots in tha~';wliole Acres of Diamonds subdivision that are only 4,000, 5,000, or 6,000 sq.~ and what.the applicant s seeking to do here s to, have a home Of s m lar s ze to. the homes that a ready ex st on a parce that's more than I acre n s ze MRS. MAGGIO From the perspective of the neighbors and the other people, we have for 28 years, been going to that property, not too frequently now, but in the ea~liier'year..4; ahd since it has all grown out, you can't park a car there anymore, but that doesn't mean that the property doesn't still belong to us and ,jou couldn't clear it and put our car there. We have just simply not gone out there very often. We didn't start as a young couple buying this property for our future use, intending to retire, using money that we could've used for raising our family, paying for this, and going all of these years (inaudible) Beatrice Hoggins, who passed away and then her brother, who gave us a mortgage and Mr. & Mrs. Meyers who were the people who lived on the next property, Lot #1, were well aware of our intentions to build a home there. We spoke with them many times over the years. Theywere a very nice couple. So, don't think anyone can say that they had no idea that anyone actually owned that property that they have been using'for 28 years. Thank you. MR. MAGGIe: One other thing I would like to point out is that the owner of Lot #1, perhaps thinking that we were a senile old couple who didn't know what the value of the property was, said that she would give us $60,000 for it, a one acre Long Island sodndfront, $60,000. Thank you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any other comment? CARMEN RAMIS: Good evening. I am an adjacent property owner to the lot in question, fReading etter n f e ) TRUSTEE KRUPSK · Would anyone else like to comment on the a cat on? · pp . ALFRE~D KNAF'P: Nave you had a chance to review the letter. Is that what your talkin9 about? TRUSTEE KRUPSK No, we have a lot of letters. ALFR~ED KNAPP: ak, this one here concerns my property. TRUSTEE ~I~RUPSKI: Wo~ld you like to read it into the record? ALFRED KN,~pP: Well, it s issue of absence of additional structures in the vicini~'~' an~li ~ says that there are two cottages in the area. I happen to own those two C~f~tag~s and I think made a few errors. Number one they are saying that the two '¢o~t~ges are located on two separate lots. That's not true. They are one lot of nine acres on the sound. The second thing, they misrepresented position of the cottages. These cottages are further east than they are on this. Thirdly, one cottage was built in 1930 and t.,he other cottage was built around 1960. One has been moved twice since the 30 s, because of the erosion. Lastly, both cottages a~e used by my friends and relatives and if it's occupied more than 20 n ' ghtsa year, ~ts a I.ot. Lastly, the cottages are about 15X 30 sq.ft, altogether. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Any other comment? HUGH~ SW, I~'ZER: I am very respectful of the owner's economic interest in the property/anti his desire to have economic benefit from it. What we haven't talked about yet i~ the fact, that there is another alternative to developing this piece of property, which is the County acquiring the prc~perty and adding this to the County Park. It seems to be just such an ideal opportunity for us. I would like to h~ve it before you officially and recommend that as Board, that you take a position withthat as the preferred alternative a'nd at least pursue and see how real that alternative can be made so that we kr~ow the details of that and give the owner the opportunity of understanding the economic impact of that as well. Tt~ank you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Thank you. That's a good suggestion. Mr. Maggio, do you understand that? MR. MAGGIO: With respect to that suggestion, as I indicated, we took this property offthe market for more than two years because the Peconic Land Trust said they were interested in buying it to expand Goldsmith's Inlet Park. They didn't have the courtesy during that two-year period to say "oh, we changed our minds and no longer have an interest". It was only when I called and said, "why is this thing taking so long", that I would told that 'Me no longer have an interest in acquiring that property". It was not until the people who live on Lot #1 say real estate agents and prospective buyers walking on theproperty that all of a sudden they were excited about the County making an offer to acquire it. Indeed, we were called buy the County after we had gone to contract, and they were told, sorry, you're too late. think we've done everything that a responsible citizen ought to have done, and at this point here, we should not have our economic interest injured because people want to continue the free use of someone else's property, the scenic vistas, the walking through the undisturbed vegetation, while someone else is paying thetaxes on it. We see that all too often. Someene ~wns a ¢lua~..e,r of an acre doesnt want the 2Oacres of their scenic.vis'~a eveloPed: Of course they always had the option of buyin~g that prop;erty. Indeed,;the people who lived on Lot #1, as I said, perhap~ thin'king,tth:a~we were a senileold couple, and said, we'll give you $60,000 fiorttiat one acre soundfront property. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I have to agree with you on a lot of what you said. But, the people in that part Of Peconic have had a pretty good record of land preservation. There are some people who have letters in this file that have put their money where'tbeir mouths are and really have a proven track record of land preser~.a, tion. So, maybe there are some people there that you can work with in that resl~ect. You're dght about otb er people just wanting to use the property and whatnol;, and you have a point there, and that comes before this Board quite often. We've often advised people, neighbors and whatever, to gettogether and purcha~ the property in question, because that's the only way they can really truly se8 it preserved. But, it's justthat this is an option, the County is an option th~a~ Mr. iSwitzer wanted you to be aware of. MR. M ~A~GGIO: Well we are already in contract. The contract vendee has ex, pend~d considerable sums of money to forward his interest in the property and fr&dkly I;~vould say that at this time, it's too little, too late, as far as the County in concem~d. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well we tried to make it clear to the contract vendee that this is an extremely environmentally sensitive parcel. MRS. MAGGIO: It was environmentally sensitive 28 years ago and it hasn't changed. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But, everything else has changed around it. That parcel is still a prictine beautiful spot... MRS. MAGGIO: Because we didn't build on it at the time. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Exactly. But the whole wodd has changed around it. MRS. MAGGIO: And now we're being penalized. There has to be a last end to a park. There will always be...if this property goes, then the next property will be the end of the park. The park does not go on forever and ever. There has to be an end and there will be and end. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No question about it, but my point is that this Board is operating under Chapter 97 right now. MRS. MAGGIO: I love land too. That's why we bought it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Ok, and we took this over in the 70's. We also operate under Chapter 37-Coastal Erosion, which we took over from the State in 1991. So, all of these different Town Codes are in response to what was happening in Town. I just want to tell y'ou because I've told the contract vendees, this is going to be a long intensive review process on this application and we can't guarantee you an outcome, we can't say next month, or next year. We're going to review it. We are asking for information~ Right now I'm working with the people in Coastal ErOsion in the State to try to get a determination on a structural hazard area, and I've called, them how many times and we've wrote th~m a number of letters, and we're t~ng to work with them'ta get an answer on the structural hazard area. The wetland review itself...when the applicant gives us a survey, and this fs without a lot of review because it just came in today, but when the applicant gives us ~ survey that.shows a wetland area with the driveway going through it, we can t just .~y, Well this is fine. This obviously has a lot of problems. D~n't expect a vote an th:is ~onight or_f,o,r a while because we're going to have to Io0k at absolutel~ everything ?at s going to' be impacted by putting a house out in the middle:o(iaii area that s not impacted right now. MR. MAGGIO:: Ok,: lets: Clarity that It's not going to be in the middle of the parcel. The build:ing envelopei~,ould begin 300' south of the high-water mark. S,o, the land that ha~ been in Pristine condition for the last several centuries, 300 back from the bigl~,Water mark-- will continue in that condition. The applicant has already offe~:,ed to~ mitigate any of the environmental impacts that you chose to sanitize and--I m sure t~ey would be able to do that. But, th s s still Amer ca, people, stiiJ have property rights, we understand the environmental concerns we understand ecological concerns, but at the same time, we also understand p!ivate: property r!~hts. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Ithink we're pretty strong on backing those u p. But, we just wanted to be fair with you and say upfront that it's our responsibility to review every a~pect of this application and that's it's not going to be a quick and easy review any s.telP of the way. It s not because there ,a_re 17 people against it. We've got aFie~her app ication on here tonight that s just as every bit as d fficult and there is very little opposition but we're just as concerned about it as a Board, and we've been working on it for a long time. So, it's not that it's just you or you because: there% a lot of people here writing a lot of letters. I mean, that gives us a lot of support, and they' raise a lot of interesting questions, but it's not just you. We're goihg ~to be here until 12:00 tonight on a lot of different things like this. Tl~at's where,we're coming from. It's not like we're against you or we don't like you; It's got nothing to do with you personally. l0 MR. MAGGIO: Ok, just a final comment. Ms. Gotbetter was told by me that if you and your neighbors really have interest in preserving this property, why don't you all get together and raise sufficient funds to buy it at market value and I will be very happy to sell it to you. Well now have a contract vendee whose read~, to pay market value and he has the right to buy that property and to use it. Ms. Gotbetter and her supports had that chance. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Oh, that's fine. I'm not disagreeing with you there. MR. MAGGIO: We don't expect a decision tonight, but certainly we also don't expect to be denied the use of our property to the extent that our rights and due process is violated. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I hope that we don't disappoint you. NEIGHBOR: One of the things that happened was that the people in the neighborhood did not know what was going on. There are people that live within that area that all of a sudden became aware of the fact that this property was in jeopardy, therewas Mrs. Hubbard and Mrs. Switzer, who as you said, have had a track record I~eyond belief in preservation. It's not like it was our little neighborhood With our little cottages on it. What happened was that our neighborhood became aware of what was going on. The story changed when people up and down the block realized what was going on. We didn't have it, that's right. He would be compensated fully. It's not like he's not going to get his money. Thank you. M,~RION GOTBETTER: I'm the other adjacent property owner and I'1,1 be really brief. I just wanted to clarify something and I fully agree with Mr. Maggio's frustration. We've been working on this for approximately five years with the Peconic Land Trust. We just did not have the means to purchase the property ourselves. Actually we made Mr. Maggio a significantly higher offer than $6(3,000, which I will not get into right now. What happened, and I'm not even sure Mr. Maggio is aware of because we weren't, the County had a freeze on all acq~uisitions because of things that were going on in their organization. We weren't aware of this and it delayed the process and I understand his frustration and his being dis~uraged with the Counties acquisition, however in your file you have a copy of the legislation that was finally passed in January. U nfoJrtunately we'~idn't know about it until March. Also, we've read in the paper that the County has looked at their whole process of acqu r ng property in terms of ex~edifing it and not letting this things go a long, long time, and I would just like to read a couple of sentenoes from a letter of September 2001, which also tells ~you how long th s has been,going on The otter s from Peter Scu y (Read ng etter n file.) Adjoining property' owners are Willing to contribute significantly toward the ac¢l~Jisition and that includes Carmen and myself and now fortunately since we've raised more attenfion, other people who also have means to do this, te help the County as need b:e'and to compensate Mr. Maggio adequately. The owner, at that time, of the subject parcel, had expressed interest and willingness to consider a structured bargain sale involving the Peconic Land Trust arid I hope tha~Mr. Maggio would have it in his heart to readdress this and look at it (inaUdible). LESLIE WISEMANN: I wasn't going to speak this evening. I know some of you from other situations in which I've seen the Trustees exercise incredible conscientiousness ~n attempting to adjudicate very complex situations with very fragile land that is often pitting against individuals economic interests, which are legitimate, attempting to build on fragile and sub-prime property, issuing permits that then become violated, where with all due respect, permits are issued with sensitivity toward preserving the land and then wetlands are filled in, or non- disturbance buffer zones are cleared, and then after the fact because you haven't got staff and money to implement and enforce the particular permits that you grant, things become unraveled. I'm here out of respect for your stewardship over the environment. I'm speaking out tonight because I understand how difficult the challenges can be. Tonight we have beard comments which have attempted to create a win lose situation where private interests, which are legitimate, and in which individuals with;all good faith purchased property with certain expectations of gain to which they are entitled, find themselves 25 years later with a situation that in which we understand environmental impacts in ways that we were clueless over. When hear situations about building on sub-prime property being described in terms of variances all over the ptace, You automatically know that the impacts will be of profound consequence. That they are attempting to manipulate within the laws that have been passe¢ to create variance.,s in order to buIld something on property that probably shouldn t be built on. That s the challenge all of you on this Board have con..tinuous~y been faced with. I've watched you do it. I've seen you walk on property. I know you've bee8 down to that pece of property and know you understan~iit's environment, at value. This is a situation that:begs a different kind of question where it should be conoeptualized differently because we are in a rare situation of w n, win, where the in~fMdUal Property dghts of the owners can be ¢orrlpensated [or appropriately while all of us Can benefit from the preservation of that land, not just one individual who wishes to put an individual home on a ~iece.of prol~ertythat could bel~ong to all of us. for all of our pleasure and enjoyment. No one Irises when that landis preserved and net built on it. All of us lose if one individual is the only one that gains. I believe that,you are our advocates. You are the stewards of this land that makes all of us war~t to live here and it's a rare situation where yo.u can act w th moral conviction and consciousness where you'll ha?. the imperative to actuallY create emphati~cy where you have the leg~al and ethical re~po.usibility to do ~o. I ask you on behalf of the Town of Southold, as a propert~owr~er myself, as someone who believes in the work of. the Trustees that you carefu, ly consider thb alternative options that will compensate the owner for all that ~eyiexpect to achieve over all the years they've paid their property taxes, while ensuring that we,here can walk that property in pleasure in seeing this pdstine areaileft in tact. I've been a professor of architecture for more than 3 ¼' decades, l'vetaught students how to build, where to build, and when not to build. The question here is, to build or not. It's not screwing around with the little details of the building envelope, it's 200' here, iit's this wide, it's that long, and the issue bef~e us is a much greater issue. This is a piece of proper~y that need not be built on, and should not be built on, and I implore you to exercise your responsibility as stewards of the environment, on all of our behalf, without jeopardizing the interest of the owners. Thank you. NEIGHBOR: (inaudible) and I am staying at 302 Diamond Lane. As I have many times since 1973 when he and his wife bought the property. You'll find you have a letter on file from me urging that no variance be granted to Michael Chuisano or no one else and I give you my reasons. Frankly, I was appalled that the permit to build was still under consideration. I've also put together for the Board a visual record of what will be destroyed and lost forever if construction of a house and its inevitable access road is permitted on Peconic dune. I always thought that no new building was ever to be allowed on the dune, an excellent ruling, so I can't understand why there should be any continuing debate here. The Board has the power To prOtect the Peconic dune. Please, use it. Finally, may I urge the Board to pursue the possibility of having this parcel added to the adjacent Suffolk County Parks Parkland for the er]joyment of the future generations. '];hank y.o,u. CHUCK BOWMAN: I understand and I think we all understand the neighbors desires and frustrations. I don't think the applicant or tee owner of the property can really speak to the question of acquisition. Like the owner said, I,belibve that he certainly went down that road and got nowhere with it and now has a contracfor that Gall certainly speak to. So, what we're going to try to do is take thisdata, which we just received today, and submit to the Board;.a report detailing how we are changing the site .plan to reduce the impacts as far as we~can. To answer your question about the Coastal Erosion Hazard 'area, ~Vhat I would suggest that we do, and FII be happy to set it up, is to get Eric Starr Oat here to meet withthe Board on the site. That I know I can get him to do, as he is the local representative. Just for your information, there are no structural,~hazard a(e~s on Long Island. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We have the authority to designate them, locally. CHUCK BOWMAN: That may be. But that has to go through a whole hearing arid procedure just like the maps did and the mapping procedure in order to designate them. Just as if I came and wanted to change the Coastal Erosion Hazard maps as,they exist now. There is a process that has to be done. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI:~ But in relation to that, the State has just spent I think $600,000 to study that part of Long Island coastline. It's not like this is a new area that's kind' of obscure and no one has ever considered an erosion problem th~ere. This is an area with a long track area of an erosion problem. Therefore, it b ~ecemes a good candidate for that kind of ooking into that kind of information. Ci-lUCK BO~/VMANi I have no problem looking into it. I would like to set up the m~ebting with E¢ic Starr and ali I'm trying to do...there are a lot of areas on the nei:tt' shore of Long Island that actually have a lot worse erosion problems. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Not was well documented as this one. CHUCK BOWM,~N: It's the western areas (inaudible), it's much worse, but reg~ardless, and I will set up the meeting. I will also confer with Chris Pickerall anld;then modify my report because I want to make sure that we are in ag reement, and we usually are, and I respect his opinion, and think he respects mine, so that we, nave something that isn't controversial, if you will. I think that's all We can do at this point is to just to try and do that and get you that information. GAlL WICKHAM: I just want to speak very briefly because we will be obviously coming back with additional material for you to consider, but on the question of the acquisition, Mrs. Moore stated at the last hearing that, believe she said that all elements in the County acquisition are in place, and other people have mentioned that, and we don't have any indication that that is the case. The owner has not received any kind of offer or communication recently, and unfortunately we know that the County acquisition program at this point is stymied by the recent developments and I just don't know how long that would take. We have other projects that have been stalled because of that and we do intend to pursue with environmentally litigating with (inaudible) until something shows up because we have nothing right now that would indicate that that is an alternative. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh But along those lines, you've heard the offer the community has made also to try to work it out. GAlL WlCKHAM:. I don't have anything specific other than general information. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you MARION GOYBETTER: Can I address that really quickly? We were told that any effort of the County would be put on hold because Mr. Maggio is in contract with Mr. Chuisano.:We were also advised by Pat Moore that we as a community, should not or coUld not make Mr. Maggio any offer at this time also because he's in contract. If that was not the case, we would put a package together. I think we have enough property owners who would be willJ ng to put up private money in the hopes thatJ m~¥be w~ would be able to get back at least some of f~he money from the County ifthat is or becomes a viable alternative. We believe it is an alternative at:this point. We know the County process is a mess. Wa have been told that things are better. So, maybe you can tell us, if we can put a package and offer togoth~e~ now, we will do that. TRUSTEE KRUPS~I: That would be between you and the properzy owner. MARION GoTE~E~I'~ER: We were p ann ng on standing back not to interfere with the contract process in that regard. GAlL WlOKHAM: I don't think anything has been demonstrated if thatwas the cause. The owner ~inaudible) and I'm not going to speak for him because I don't represent him. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I agree with you but l mean if the community wants to make any kind of an offer or whatever to a property owner, I mean that's got nothing to do with our Board. TRUSTEE FOSTER: So what are we talking about? How much money?. I'm part of the community. Ilive right there. MR. MAGGIO; Let me say that I don't think asking how much money is an appropriate question at this time and as I have said it, we are entitled to fair market value. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Absolutely. MR. MAGGIO: We are in contract that reflects fair market value. I would like to say another Word that I didn't mention before when we heard about people who are stewards of the environment. My wife and I owned a magnificent 100 acres parcel in Southampton that had subdivision approval for 48 clustered lots. We were apprOached by the County who had an interest in expanding that large park ]4 area in that part of Southampton, and that land was sold to them at considerable less value than what we could'va gotten had we gone forward and sold it to a developer. So, I want to clear the air in that respect. We have as much concern and respect for the environment as everyone else. By the same token, I don't think that power of law should be used to bludgeon us into a deal that we may not want to make. We are entitled to have this application reviewed by it's merits without any ulterior motives or pandering to other groups who don't want to see the developed and not have our rights violated. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I agree and I think I made that clear when l said we're reviewing another sensitive parcel tonight that doesn't have this in it's file and we're giving it just the same amount of scrutiny as we're giving this. It's not that it's you and it's not that it's this, it really what's on the map. TRUSTEE FOSTER: If there weren't another person in this room it wouldn't take any longer to do this. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We'd still be bludgeoning you. MR. MAGGIO: Well as long as it's done lawfully. It's when one steps outside of the law that one!finds problems. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh No, I think I made it clear. When we get a survey that sho, ws the drive,ray going through what the applicant submits as a wetland, we ye gotlbig preblems with that and I think if you sit for the rest of the meeting, you'll see that~we've been trying to uphold our 50' non-disturbance buffer from wetland areas ahd in fact, we denied one fellow even to put a fence in it. We've denied people from clearing dead trees .lust this evening, in a non-disturbance buffer area. So, we are trying to be consistent and if you sit here tonight with us for a few more hours, you'll see that we try to bludgeon everyone fairly. MR. MAGGI©: Well all that I would re-iterate is that in 1975 we had in hand a DEC permit, Southold Town Building Permits, and Suffolk County Dept. of Health permit. Sothe fact that we didn't go forward at that time should not be held against us now. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Thank you. CHUCK BOWMAN: So we'll proceed and put together the information. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Ok. I was going to ask for staking and everything but if you're going ~ change the plans, we'll wait until you get us plans that we can review and th~n we'll have everything staked in the field. CHUCK BOWMAN: Do I have your authorization to contact Edc and coordinate with the office? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh That would be fine. Eric and Bill Daley and the rest, they've been .But before on various projects. CHUCK BOWMAN: Eric is very knowledgeable. He worked on government projects. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We've met with him a number of times out here. That's fine. CHUCK BOWMAN: Ok, I'll set that up and get you the other information. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Thank you. I'll make a motion to Table the hearing. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES t5 HARBOR LIGHTS CANAL ASSOCIATION requests a Wetland Permit to maintenance dredge approx. 5,000 cy. of sand from the entrance of the canal. Located: Harbor Lights Dr., Southold. SCTM#71-2-1.1 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of the application? JOHN COSTELLO: My name is John Costello and I probably think this may be a little on the premature side because the DEC has not made a determination exactly which direction they are going to allow the spoils. The application is ~n and it's in severe need of dredging. But, the DEC has not made a determination whether they are going to let a portion of it go to the west or it has to go to the east. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We were there two months ago with another Costello. We agreed that it is a maintenance dredge operation and if someone wants to do it, pay for it, that we didn't have a problem with it. JOHN COSTELLO: It should be done but I'm not so sure and I can't tell you honestly where the spoil is going to go. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I think we can approve it and stipulate however DEC wants it. JOHN COSTELLO: Yes, I think you can approve it contingent upon that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Then you can come in and just mark up the survey. We'll need the yardage and all of that. Any other comments on this? I'll make a motion [o close the hearing. TRUS'~EE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Ill make a motion to Approve the application with the stipu, lation that the spoil go where the DEC wants it. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES DAVID J. LECLAIRE requests a Wetland Permit to m-vegetate the wetland buffer zone with plant/woody material and to Transfer Permit #5196 form Manzi Homes, Inc. to David J. LeClaire. Located: 10505 Soundview Ave., Southold. SCTM#54-5-37.2 TRUSTEE FOSTER: Anyone have any comments on this application? MARYANN MURTAUGH: I'm the adjacent property owner. Actually I have two comments. One has to do with, I believe, the proposed way the restomtio~ is going to be done. I don't think enough diversity is being used in the kind of plants that are going to be put there. I think what I saw on the plan was that they were going to use just pepperbush and high-bush blueberries. I know for a fact that there was a 60 year-old high-bush blueberry that was destroyed in this decimation of the vegetation and commend the fact that they are going to put more high-bush blueberry ~n but just putting in pepperbush and high-bush blueberry in is not much diversity. I think that there should be both ferns, gross, as well as woody shrubs. Not just two forms of woody shrubs that should be put in there. If there is any need for advise on that, I think that the owner should call the DEC, the wetland biologist them. They am there on Mondays and they can give some very good advise as to what other plants could be put into the area. In addition, I believe them is a wetlands nursery on the Internet that is available for advice and I think it's called Pineland Nurseries.com. That might be helpful. But I definitely think there should be more diversity in what's being re-vegetated. My second comment is that is actually probably more ~mportant and that is when the initial permit to the contractor-vendee for this house that was built, and which the owner now lives in, the original permit put the wetlands boundary line on the map n such a way, on the site plan, in such a way that it was measured, I believe, at the setback from the house and if you check with the DEC, both the freshwater wetlands program up in Albany or the people in Stony Brook, they never, ever measure a boundary line from, as a building practice, from a structure to the wetlands. You always measure from the vegetation line out. n this case, the boundary line, because it was measured from the house towards the wetland, is actually a straight line parallel with the street, whereas the wetland comes in at an angle from northwest to southeast, so when you go to the east s de of this property, the Suffer zone, is only actually, in fact, 20 ~ome-odd feet betw,e_en the wetland and the line tl~at s drawn. I think that's a very bad practice. If it s done on this proper~y then it must be done by all of the wetland permits that are given by this ~o~rd Of Trustees. also found out that prior Boar~ls of Trustees did not measure that way. I b~lieve that this practice is actually jeopardizing the wetlands in Our ~o~wn a~d I suggest you re-draw'tha~t lir~e or~ this-partiCular prope~ ar~l,don t use this practice when giving wetland permits in other places. TROS~EEKR'UPSKI:;~F Thank You. Just to briefly answer t~at pract Ce of easurfng.wetland Ifnes of the corner of the house we found It s the most accu:r~l~e ~h~l: easily enforceable ~ethod of measuring a wetland', line so that... MARYANN MuR¥,~U:GH: Well it s bad practice. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh No, because if it there is an enforcement problem, anyone can tape from the comer of a house, corner of a deck, tape out and see where it's been distur, bed ,to. If you have a wetland line. you're going to send five peo,pl~ out t~ere, riley are going to have five different wetland lines, and then you, re not realiy?.an~l som~ enforcement people might say well it looks fine, and someojne else might say well this is a problem, and then we found t to be very inCOnsistent as far as enforcement go~s. Wherever we can; we measure from the structure. MARYANN MURTAUGH: It's very bad practice. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We found it to be quite the opposite. Actually, it's the most effective way:of measuring a buffer area MARYANN MURTAUGH: Call Albany, (inaudible, speaker not using the microphone) TRUS?EE I~RUPSKI: If you spoke to them maybe we could educate them. MARyANN MURTAUGH: (inaudible) if you go all the way across that boundary lines comes closer and closer to the wetlands because the wetlands come closer to the Street, instead of making a contour, (inaudible). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well in the big picture of enforceability, we found that this is the most effective way to go. Any other comment on the application? Does the E~oard have any comments? TRUSTEE FOSTER: I'1] make a motion to close the hearing. TRUS-~EE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES 17 TRUSTEE FOSTER: I'll make a motion to Approve the application. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES ROGER SIEJKA requests a Wetland Permit to install an in-ground swimming pool 15'X 27', with a fence. Located: 130 Willis Creek Dr., Mattituck. SCTM#115-17-17.8 TRUSTEE FOSTER: Would anyone care to speak in reference to this application? Any Board comments? TRUSTEE KING: I looked at this. There's no problem. TRUSTEE FOSTER: CAC comments? BOB GHOSIO: We recommended Approval with a condition that drywells are installed. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Oh, absolutely. Do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE KING: So moved. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE FOSTER: 1'11 make a motion to Approve the application with the condition that drywells are installed for backwash TRUSTEE KIN G: Seconded. ALL AYES KATIE NICKOLAUS requests a Wetland Permit to repair steps on the bluff. Located: 17555 Soundview Ave., Southold. SCTM#51-1-2 TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Would anyone like to comment on this application? MR. NICKOLAUS: I have here a new drawing that simplifies the permit. In other words, it looks like only 1/3 of the stairs have to be repaired. I thought the damage was much more extensive. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We did too after stepping on it. MR. NICKOLAUS: You can see by all of our safety devices that we were concerned about not having it connected there because it was a danger. I put a padlock there and also the ropes. Apparently only 1/3 of the steps have to be repaired. The bottom steps are still there and the top is still there. TRUSTEE FOSTER: We noticed that when we walked down there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We just need to see this, have Peconic Surveyors put it on the survey. Have him put them on the survey. MR. NICKOLAUS: I do have an older survey to show where the stairs were originally. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right. Have him put the new stairs on the survey. MR. NICKOLAUS: He doesn't have to survey the whole property does he? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh No, just where the stairs and landings are going to be. We'll approve it tonight and when you give us the plans, we'll give you the permit. MR. NICKOLAUS: Ok, thank you. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Any other comments? I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'll make a motion to Approve the application with the stipulation that the stair plans are put on the survey. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of JAMES MILLER requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 6'X 40' ramp, continuing with a level 6'X 110' dock and ending with a 6'X 24' "L" dock pointing northeast. From the "L" dock, installing a 32"X 12' ramp leading to a 6'X 20' float. Installing a 15,000 lb. boat lift on the southwest side. Located: 1610 Paradise Point Rd., Southold. SCTM#81-3-19.5 TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Would anyone here like to speak on behalf of the application? JOHN COSTELLO: I represent James & Barbara Miller on this application. If there are any questions, I'll certainly try to answer them for you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Well take any comments first because we have a lot of questions. Any other comments at all? This is a big project and we have a lot of comments and questions. I think what we're goin§ to need from the applicant, before we can make a decision on this, is, there are two large structures similar to thisto the south. I'd like to see water depths at those structures and in between in going further up the beach. JOHN. COSTELLO: On everybody's property along the beach? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: _H,.o_w far does the Board feel we should go up the beach? Well, I'll explain why we're looking for this information. We've had a problem with docks on the bay, as far'as acting as jetties and piers. What they do is that they act as a j~tty, they slow the water, they trap the sand, the sand comes out of the water tha~s movii~g it along the beach, the sand settles in certain area, and you affect underWate~ vegetation, you affect shellfish beds, and we have a problem in cer[ain areas with this and want to see what affect this dock could possibly have on the underwater land there. JOHN COSTELLQ: It should be evident from the existingdocks. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But you should supply us with that information. JOHN COSTELLO: YOL h,ave to ask for it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh That s what we're asking for. JOHN COSTELL©. The e is no build up of beach at either one of those... TRL~STEE KRUPSKI: No, not beach. We're talking about soundings, underwater soundings, to see how the water depth is going to compare to those other two d0cks~and"; in between where there are no docks. JOHN :COSTELLO: Well if you would'ye asked, I could've provided that today. T~u~TEE I~RUPSKh Well we were just out there and we just did the SEQRA re¥iew, which we had been advised to do. How far up the beach do we want to go and how~:ar out? JOHN COSTELLO: It's not going to move (inaudible) as you can see by most of the jetties th'at :are existing there. I have an aerial photo to show you but ..,(inaUdible). It's basically stayed the same. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Any other questions that we want the applicant to answer, or any .other' information? JOHN COSTELLO: One of the reasons that this dock is exactly the way it's designed, Mr. Miller and his wife did not want an excessively long or big structure, they want a structure that meets the criteria of the DEC. and was met by the DEC and was hoping to get to 4' depth of water. It's not a high bottom. It's about 10' vegetation on th6 bottom of that ar~a. There is a Iow percentage of vegetation. There is no eelgrass. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: What would be the impact, if we approve this, 1,000 of these docks in similar, similar structure, on our bays. What would be the cumulative impact on our bay?. JOHN COSTELLO: You would have to do a generic impact statement in order to come u p with that conclusion. If it would depend solely on the bottom, solely by the area it is. If it was the same type of land, the same conditions, you're not going to get 1,000 docks in the same conditions, the same spot, the same beach, the same little drift areas, the same exposure the same direction, it's not going to happen. So it's hypothetical and it's tough to answer. TRUSTEE PO LIWODA: [ don't think it's hypothetical because our creeks started off with no docks. JOHN COSTF_LLO: This is not a creek. TRUSTI~E POLIWODA: It all started with one dock. JOHN C~OSTF_LLO: Let me tell you. None of us would be here without the pilgrims coming over here by boat. That used to be the method of travel at one time. Thank (~c~d we have trafns and cars and airports. Not everybody is going to have a dock. Not everybody wants a dock. Not everybody is a boater. Some people are. This is not in the creek. This is less sensitive, better circulation, less v~getation, Iow inter-tidal marsh, no high marsh being affected by this dock. Right next to the concrete wall there is a little high marsh that is well out of the bt~ild~ing.envelope. It is a less sensitive spot. We are only go~ng to the 4' depth of water. The two docks to the south are almost to the 6' depth of water. They put a lift ir~: offshore because of the wave conditions. Some places where there ~s eelg~ass, are considerably more sensitive. This is a less sensitive area. TRUSTEI=~ POLIWODA: I know it very well. I'm been around the entire coast. It's a~ very dangerous precedent. JOHN OOSTE~LLO: Underneath the dock, there is more protection, underneath the ~locl~, there is more vegetation growing beneath the dock, less disturbance of the Veget~ition u?er-a dock, there is more baitfish under a dock. Go see what the ~ishing is under the Greenport railroad dock. There is a lot of fish. You know that. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I've seen (inaudible) in North Carolina. J©HN COSTELLO: How about the fishing? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'1t read the CAC concerns, and there are other concerns that I just want to air here because we have everyone assembled. It is a large stru ~ture but there is also, besides the boat lift, there is also single dolphins, so it seems like it's more than a s~ngle-family dock. You've got a 6'X 20' float but thew you've got the 6'X 24' "L" on the end, then you've go the boat lift, then you've got the pilings, so it's kind of like a project that keeps on growing. JOHN COSTELLO: Do you want me to explain the engineenng? T.I~USTEE KRUPSKh Sure. JOHN COSTELLO: The float in the summer time in calm weather, is the easiest wayto beard a boat, board an outboard, in 4' of water, to take the grandchildren, 2O your kids, water-skiing, or accessing a small vessel. That's the safest and easiest. Weather conditions that face the easterly weather, if you want to have a boat and there's going to be severe weather or your not going to be around, I would suggest either taking it out of that area, or tying if off between dolphins or putting it on a boat-lift, as both the docks to the south have done. When you're not attending the boat, it is just safer. The "L" on the structure, let me tell you what the "L" is for, flow ice. The end of the dock usually impacts, or gets the most damage because of flow ice. Guess what. The "L" is put on to strengthen the offshore end against any ice conditions that we probably will have sometime but we haven't had any in the last 2 or 3 years. We will have them again. That's why the design. I design docks and that's the reason the "L" is put in. I'm just trying to make it safe and convenient. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It's a good explanation. JOHN COSTELLO: We'haven't had failure on any other docks. We built the last two the south and wehad no failures except an electric motor on the boat-lift once :in a while. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Thank you. If there ~s no other comment, the CAC recommend Disapproval because the structure would be fragmenting the environment, it would limit public access from both beach and water. It says here the project islacking soundings, but there are soundings that I saw in the file. The sb'ucture would impede nawgation and a potential navigation hazard. It does stick out significantly out into the water. As I pointed out, it does take up a large area o;nce it gets out there. Between the pilings and the "L", once it sticks out, and I'~ not saying tt~at the "L" is not necessary if your inclin,e,d to try to accomplish What the applicant is trying to accomp sh here m not say ng it's [rivolous. I'm just saying that it makes it quite a large item, as opposed to not putting it the~e. JOHN:COS'FELLO: You will see, and I don't know Kenny if you've been there, over ir~ the North Haven; areas, in areas that are developed, all are similar, larger, and similar heavy structures. This dock is less because of the protection and the (inaudible) along the shoreline is minimal compared to some of the open areas, and all. have the same similar shape. I've constructed 15 or 20 of them, and they survive. (char~ged tape)just did a major report (inaudible) that the area beneath the de¢k has icons dera6 y more growth than the area that has there now. TRUSTEE I~RUPSKI: Oould you get us a co py of that? JOHN~COSTELLO: It's ~000 pages and you have to buy it. If you want to buy it, it's foX,sale. [t!s Judge .,W. histler from Albany. TRUSTEE I~RUPSKh V~e'd like to see that documented. That would be very valuable. Kenny is going to read it. That's his assignment. Thank you JOHN'COSTELLO: You need to tell me what you want and I'll get it to you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: My point is that to accomplish this sort of marine access, you'resaying, you need this physical structure. JOHN COSTELLO: I would not want to take the risks of building an inferior structure that would be jeopardizing, and you've seen lesser structures that come out in the ice, they are d~amaged from the ice. and it's not a good thing to happen. I don't advocate it and will not do it. We want a structure that is go~ng to cause less. When we go in to repair a dock, it's just an expense that the owner does not want. There is disturbance to the environment putting a dock in and taking it out, and we've got a couple of those. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: In this day and age of environmental preservation, I think it's a real shame to even look at these kinds of permit applications. Looking up and down Robins Island, it's a beautiful preserved area. JOHN COSTELLO: I know, I built the dock on Robins Island. That's a major structure. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Not everyone owns 200' or 300' of bayfront. The precedent set is that the first one goes in of this size, (inaudible). JOHN COSTELLO: You know that this is not precedent setting. There are two docks down. There are.two other docks. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh All dght, let's move on. JOHN COSTELLO: You've got to tell me what you need. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh That's what we need. Does anyone have any other queSti0ns?. A want s.soundings and Judge Whistler's repor[. JOHN COSTELLO: You're going to have to subpoena it. I'll give you the name of the .... TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Why isn't it public record. JOHN COSTELLO: Because it's in the commissioner's office right now and it isn't released until the commissioner makes his judgment. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh So it hasn't been resolved yet? JOHN COSTELLO: No it hasn't been resolved. But the study is done. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Who did the study? JOHN COSTELLO: There are a bunch of studies. There is a DEC study on CCA and creosote. The document has all of it. There is a study part of it on growth columns under docks, whether there is more or less that the open bottom. The DEC came ,up w!t.h the survey. There was a 10% vegetation growth and there is aPprox. 10% is tlie same area as this dock. After the pilings are put in, there is considerable growth on the piling, than under the dock. You can look at any dock. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What dock was this document prepared for. JOHN COSTELLO: Steven Kroft TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there any other comment? JAMES MILLER: I'd like to make a comment. I'm the owner of the property. My background goes. back to being a commercial fisherman and I'm very sensitive to the environment. I've earned a living as an environmental contractor that cleans up oil spills throughout the world, so I'm very, very sensitive to these types of situations. Cer[ai.nly we've worked hard throughout our career and we've been able to acquire a beautiful waterfront home and we'd like to gain the access to the water by utilizing a dock so that we could moor vessels that are owned by the family and have a guest come over, have a small boat and utilize the bay. Certainly to go to;a public marina is for some people, what they would like to do imlife certainly we've reached the point where we believe that this is one of our privileges and rights and we've worked hard and we deserve it. So I would urge the Board to approve this permit. The bottom in the general vicinity there is very 22 gradual. The two adjoining docks that exist now, there is almost no build up of sand behind underneath those docks. The grading in that area is very, very gentle and very shallow, so I don'tthink we're going to have any environmental im pact at all, by putting another small dock out in front there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Thank you. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I'll make a motion to Table the application. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES JOHN COSTELLO: So what do you want. TRUSTEE KRUFSKI: We want soundings on the adjacent docks and Ken, do you want to go past or do you want to go out further, or just to that water depth? TRUSTEE POLIWQDA: This isn't just a simple answer. You know my point. This is a cumulative im pact in the unforeseen future. Everybody is going to have a deck at a certain length and then everybody has to have a big boat, and then they are going te get bigger and bigger until you stomp your foot down. TRUS'FE~ KF~UPSKh ~/e asked the applicant for inforr~afion and we have to give them the specifics~ JOHN COSTELEO: How about a Noah chart. Would that help? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Forwhat area? JOHN COSTELLO: That whole beach stretch. As a matter of fact, I could probably get you one from a few years back. TRU~TE~ KI~UPSKh That would be ideal. I mean this is one thing that were considering here also. This isn't I mean Mr. Miller spoke about his privileges and rights tOput a :dock there ~nd to put a boat there, but one thing we have to con~i~er is this is a public trust area. This is public properly. JOH~',Oos'itEI_LO: It,s State bottom. TRU~EF_ KRUPSKh It's State bottom and to the residents of New York State, it's p:ub~i¢ bottom, we have to consider that when we make decisions. It's not on your ewr) priva~te property. That's a little bit different. This is a public area that should be open for ,everyone. We have to protect the rights and once you put a strud~ure there, you re b~s ca y excluding the public from that area. Of course you can say you can clam under it and all of that but you're basically excluding that ar~a~ if pe0p~e can't boat through there anymore. It's been monopolized by one j:Je~S°n. I think that you have keep that in mind and I'm not trying to single you ~)ut; :but we have ha~l other people come and say, now I need a bigger dock beca~use I just bought, a 60' boat. And then what happen next year when you buy an 8~¢ bea~t. Then, they'll need. a bigger dock because they bought an 80' boat. So, ¥9~ have to look at it consciously and say, what is that right that you have to wha¢ OUt a boat and where does that eventually come up against the right of the publ!c, tO;use t~at public property. That's sort of a public use issue there also that I wa.bted to bdng up. JOHN COST:ELLO: For the record want to state that this area is New York State botte, m, first of all. The dock is not impeding people going up and down that beadh. It was.idesigned to end just above high water so that people, anyone, can walk~t~he:fore¢.~ores along the beach, and this is not impeding navigation. All that beac~h 'has jetties. It is quite a stabilized beach. All of those jetties have stabilized the l~e~ch. Ail: the jetties are full. That is one stable area. The bottoms have not 23 changed and you'll see that on two or three charts that I can supply you. The fact of the matter is, State law does allow riparian rights in front of your property. We are only seeking enough to meet the criteria of the New York State's 4' depth of water, which safely and adequately would handle a small boat, and not a 90' boat. And guess what, if we're going to put in a 90' boat or a 100' or an ocean- liner there, we would be coming back to this board to make the application. It's not going to happen. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Well this does also does, you mentioned people going across the foreshore and I assume Mr. Miller owns the beach, so this dock does block the foreshore, between h 'gh water and Iow water. JOHN COSTELLO: Traditionally. If it's open beach, people are walking along there now, they are goi,n,g to continue to walk along !here. TRUSTEE KRUpSK~I: It s not happening there but it s happen ng n a lot of places. We see it every month. You don't see it every month but we see it every month. JOHN COSTELLO: I go to more of these meetings than you do. I go to other Towns and I've seen it everywhere. TRUSTEE KRUF'SKh But that's an issue that we have to face. It's public access. JOHN COSTELLO: Not everybody is going to have a dock. I know a lot of people who don't like docks and don't like the looks of docks. They don't want one.. All I want to know is what you need. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh You've g,o_t to provide us with two charts. JAMES MILLER: Is that what I m led to believe, that if the soundings in that area provethat there is no substantial shoaling by the two other existing docks, you'll grant US a permit? TRUiSTEE KRUPSKh No, no, that's just one consideration. JA,,M~S ~IILLER: What are the other considerations that we have to meet then? TRU!STEE KRUPSKI: All of the other environmental standards in Chapter 97. Tha, t!s just one thing. j/~I~IE$ MILLER: (inaudible) if you're just going to sandbag it. TRU~STEE KRUPSKh No, no, we're not going to pop something on you. JAi'~I~S MILLER: Let's ma, ke a decision fellows that's fair and reasonable. TR~:TE~i= KRuF'. SKI: We re not going to pop something on you next month. J~ESI~ILLER: And then if my permit is denied, then basically there will be no docl~s in Southold Town from here on in. I'm the last one. I'm the guy that cr~ssed~the line and from here on in there will be no dock permits granted in So~t~qold'Town, In the bay, in the creek, period. End of story. TR~:sTE~ KRUPSKI: Not necessarily. We don't have any moratorium or any ban on docks right now. JAI~S MILLER; If that is the intent, you should declare a moratorium and have no ~ore docks in the community. I think it's only fair that if you didn't close the doo~to ~[ie barn, I stand here today, and you should grant my permit today, ~eoa~ase you didn't close the door. TRU~S~EE KRUPSKI: But no one .. J/~,'li=S MILLER: My permit is no different than any of the other docks. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Sure, but we're not guaranteeing everyone access to the barn though. Just because everyone comes to the door, not everybody gets in. We denied a dock on the bay three months ago, on it's own merits. We denied a dock extension on the bay. We've denied docks on the creeks. But, that's on their own merits. JOHN COSTELLO: What merits would you deny this one? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We don't know. We need all of the information, all of the environmental merits. Navigation, safety, possibility of siltation from the sand built up. There are a lot of factors. JOHN COSTELLO: Hypothetically. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We're going to look at Judge Whistler's report also. You said that that information is in there prowng that .. JOHN COSTELLO: Take Ken with you and go in his boat and go look at any dock, any dock, that's been there two or three years. Go look for yourself. Forget the report. Go look at the vegetation under the other two docks to the south of it. Just go look at the vegetation compared to the vegetation off the docks. Just do that for yourself. For your own education. TRUSTEE KRU RSKh We will. JOHN GOSTELLO: You can come to your own conclusion. I can tell you what the answer is aad I think _y,~).u know the answer too. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We ye been to Mr. Miller's house twice, and we'll be there again. JOHN COSTELLO: So we're going to meet on the 16th? What time? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh You'll have to contact the office. Catherine Mesiano on behalf af WILLIAM LOIS requests a Wetland Permit to perform selective clearing, grading and re-vegetation of property. Erect 10'X 10' shed and +/-70' fence on east lot line. Located: 58105 North Rd., Greenport. SCTM#44-2-9 TRUSTEE FOSTER: Is there anyone here who would like to speak on behalf of the application? CATHERINE MESIANO: I'm here on behalf of the applicant. The only I'd like to add is, I believe you spoke with Mr. Lois and communicated with him that you would approve his request but your requiring a 35' buffer from the top of the bank andward. The only consideration I'd like to make is, after having walked the property again tonight, there are areas of erosion along that bluff and he would like to add more vegetation to those areas. The revetment project is going to be so costly because he owns not only this property but the adjoining properly. There has been erosion along these properties. If you recall, we looked at this property at a year or so ago for the former owner. At that time, it hasn't really changed too much but shortly before that time. he had lost a good 4' in one storm and he's gotten some prices on doing a revetment on his property and having just purchased his property, he's not in a position to make that type of investment and he would like to use some vegetation to stop that. We would like to get into that 35' area and so some planting of some indigenous species that would he~ p support that. There are areas where there is some run-off and there are some 25 areas that are starting to erode. We are not proposing to add rock but we just want to add some vegetation to try to hold that intact as a temporary measure. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think that's fine with the Board but he's got to give us a plan showing exactly what he wants to do because if he does the wrong thing, he's going to really...there is potential for him to really do a lot of damage to his own property. CATHERINE MESIAN O: There is no intention of having any equipment in there or any machinery. It will be hand-digging and hand-planting those areas that are weak. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh But we really need a plan for that to show us. CATHERINE MESIANO: Ok, what I would ask you then is, I know that we are n agreement on the fence portion of the proposal and he is in agreement with a buffer area, which he .~ust wants to fortify, and if we can give him the approval on his shed and his fencing, and the other minimal clearing that he's talking about, and I'll come back to you at a later date with some type of planting plan for that bluff area. But, he does want to get that fencing u p and start protecting his property. As you know, there's been a problem with the adjoining property owner and he wants to handle that sooner than later. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh That was noted. The CAC comments, were the trees that are ~l(~it~g to, be removed should be flagged, the clearing limits were not indicated on a plan, the proposed shed was not staked, the CEHA should be staked, a violation should be issued for the dumping of fill, and they recommend a minimum ora 75'non-disturbance buffer. I don't have a problem with what your proPoSing but I think the shed and the fence should be put Qn the survey. OA:I'HERINE MESIANO: Yes, we will add that. I just didn't want to go through [he revisions of the survey until you make your... TRUSTEE KRUPSt(I: Well you'll- have to if he's going to come in for a stone revetment eventually. CATHERINE ME-SIANO: No, will do that but I would like to make your approval conditioned upon my submission of that so that I can go back to the surveyor with e~(astly what we ve discussed at this point and have that put onto the survey. TRUSTEE:~ KRUPSKh Does anyone have any comments on that.~? Just put the shed and the fence en the survey and we would like to see the 35' buffer, but if e s g,o ng to proposed planting ~n there, he can just show us a plan showing that. ~)b I ha~e ~ mot o~ to c ose the hear ng? TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUS-I!EE KRUPSKI.: Ill make a motion to Approve a 10'X 10' shed, a 70' fence on the east propgrty line and based on the submission of a survey showing those things, and also (he 35' buffer from the top of the bank, to be shown on the survey. If he wants to submit for a planting plan, he can do.so based on that survey. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES 10. En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of JAMES GRATHWOHL requests a Wetland Permit to construct a two-story, one-family dwelling with attached porch and pervious driveway; install a sanitary system with approx. 240 cy. of clean sand fill to be retained with concrete retaining walls according to SCDHS standards; connect to public water service; and establish a 25' non-disturbance/non- fertilization buffer adjacent to the tidal wetland boundary. Located: 545 Williamsburg Rd., Southold. SCTM#78-5-16 TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Is there anyone who would like to comment on this application? ROB HERRMANN: Although the Board has asked us not to present any new information this evening, I want to just very briefly just review the process today for the Boards refreshment and clarity on the record. We appeared before the Board back in January of this year after having secured a variance approval from the Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services, which this Board had previously requested that we set out to do. At that hearing, testimony was offered by myself and by the project engineer, Frederick Keith, ~n support of the application. Ultimately the hearing was adjourned until April :as the Board had requested additional information, primarily to bore an additional test hole. Atthe April hearing we submitted that test hole information and an addendum to the engineer's report analyzing it. At that time, I also submitted copies of Mr. Gi-~[hwOhl s deed and single and separate title search for the record, which demonstrated his ownership and single and separate title since 1966, when he purchased the lot. At that 8me, the Board had r:equested an additional adjournment in ordertobe afforded the opportunity to review those materials. We came back i ' and the Board actually req~ additional the property and the pr(~l,~erty which was done; and I assume the Board ~spection. Thereforeto date, we have addressed all r additional information. I have addressed and the lit issuance contained in Chapter 97 of the Town Code. We've into the record as evidence that the s those standards. Mr. Grathwohl has also obtained a tidal wetl ~ the NYSDEC whose standards for permit issuance were essential y Mr. Grathwohl~thanks the Board for it's continued carefq! consideration of the a. pplication, but does respectfully request tha~ [he hearing be c[6sed and that he be granted a we[largOs permit f(~r the pro, ct. Thank you.. TRUSTEE t~ROPSKI: Thank you. Any other comment? Any Board comment? CA~ comment? BOB GHO8~IO: We rea y had some concerns with the raised septic, in general, the~CAC dotes net like to see raised septics because of the proximity to the wetlands add'the tidal flow from the septic into the wetlands. Even though the Hea*lth Dept. tends to allow it, the CAC has researched the literature and we have found ~that there is research that shows that raised septics are not good for wet!.and proximity. TR~ISTEE KRUISSKI: Thank you. Clarification Rob, on one point of the survey, when we were out there two weeks ago on field inspection, we couldn't locate the stare for the septic system, but the septic wall, which is part of the septic system, 2.7 so the septic system is located...it's the line that's basically the same line as the house line, isn't that right, the porch line runs right into the septic system? ROB HERRMANN: Right, it's a parallel continuation of that straight line. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Ok. Based on our observations there, that line was 36' from the septic system. ROB HERRMANN: What line was 36' from the septic system? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That line of the porch, it's a straight line to the septic system, it's 36' from the wetland edge. You have 40' there, and we're not going to nit-pick. ROB HERRMANN: There's a 40' setback to the house at certain points. But, the actual setback to the porch itself is greater than 40'. It's not showing exactly on the survey what that is. There's just a 40' line drawn as an offset to show that's a minimum setback and that no structures encroach beyond that. The nearest point of'the sanitary system itself is 55' from the wetland boundary. I suppose in partiallyCresponsiVe to the CAC comment, the purpose of the raised sanitary system is, and again thi,s_ was discussed in extensive detail by the project e~gineer, but in I:aymen s terms, the purpose of that whi.c,h is not just required by the Health Dept but also by the State DEC, is if you didn t actually raise the sanitary.system, then the cesspools would be emptying effluent directly into ground~Vater. So, .I'm not sure how research could possibly show that the cesspools being raised above groundwater could some how be worse than dumping.effluent directly into groundwater, but not withstanding that comment, the retaining wall is, you said sort of offhandedly, that it's part of the sanitary system. It's not really part of the sanitary system. It's containing the fill that's around the system TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But we couldn't approve it without the wall. It's the sanitary system, i lt's part of the system. ROB H~RRMANN: Correct, but I'm just saying for a substantive purpose, there isn't effluent coming out where the wall is. The effluent is within the cesspools that have. to be set 10' back from those retaining walls as per Suffolk County Dept, of~Health Services code. So, the wall that you're Iookin§ at, and I don't know what the Setback is to that retaining wall, and I can scale it, but the setback to the a?t~al system itself is 55'. TRUSTEE NRUPSKI: It's 43' here. But like I said, we're not going to nit-pick your measurements here. ROB HE '.ERMA~N: To the wall you mean? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: To the wal s nce t's part of the sept c system ROB: H~I~RMANN: don't want to argue semantics but it's a structure that retains the sanitary system, but it is not part of the effluent discharge system itself an~l there is obviously a big difference. TRUSTEE I~RU:PSKI: Not really because you can't build that system without that wall. ROB HERRMANN: That's correct. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So 1 think we'd consider it to be part of the system. Any other Board comments? TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I have two letters that I would like to share. I had concerns about this property and I went to Mark Terry, Senior Environmental Planner of Southold Town, and asked him to look at the septic system and the information that you shared with us, and he says, as you requested, I reviewed and researched the plan and based on a telephone conversation with an engineer, the following concerns have been identified: the report fails to address the potential impact of sewage contaminants on surface waters. Undermining or sloughing of the northern neighbors property could be expected. Drifting the excavation away from the neighbor's property to prevent undermining would move the septic system closer the surface waters and may not be acceptable. I've verified with the Dept. of Health that the. proposed retaining walls do not stop contaminants from leaching into the groundwater and that in this case any contaminants that reach the groundwater table will be taken up in the groundwater flow and travel accordingly. Therefore, monitoring for nitrogen in the watertable maybe warranted. My recommendation is that due to the distance, to the wetlands, the Trustees should retain Chick Voorhis from Nelson, Pope and Voorhis to conduct a more thorough engineering analysis, of the proposed septic system. Hegoes on to saythat as you are aware, the Trustees have the right pursuant to SEQRA, to mandate this action and have the applicant pay for~he analysis, t also asked for sQme advise from Nature Conservancy and I have their letter here also. They say, As per your request on April 4, 2002, I am providing information on the stat~s of the above-merit/chad parcel with the Critical Lands PrOtectiOn Strategy database. As you learned on the April 4 informa/i°n session, ~he Oritical i_ands Protectio~ Stra~tegy provides a method by which tO i identifY ~an¢b that are criiical.to protect for hbtY~t~t and water quality in the PeconiC,Estutty. The parcet above r~eets two of the four eriter)a.i~ our initial analysib. Ir'sis ~tl~in ¥00~' of the shoreline, cOnsidered irnporta'nt because grou~d~vater inpdts i~to the bay are the primaS/ source of freshwater into the is witbih a Oritic~,l Nat~,ral ResOurce Area. corey creek I~as s~'gni~C'a~t biological diversity, cNRA ~.are idefined as areas containing concentra~ns ef h~¢h quality spawning, breeding, feeding and wintering or seasonal ~abitat for shellfish, finfish, waterfowl, shorebirds, fish and rare plant, and natural communities. A third criteria, is met by,this parcel flit contains tidal or frest~wa~er wetlands. Our wetlands data is not comprehensive and some smaller wetlands areas were not included in our at~aly~is. ROB HERRMAN: Well my initial response to that is disapl~ointment in the fact that the Board would!~e waited this long to consult their own experts after we've had a couple of hearir~gs where the Board said, is there anything else we could possibly ask the applioant to address, and the answer was "no". That meeting was followed up by a request for additional path-cutting and now that's followed up by this meeting with this additional information. Nonetheless, obviously any information that you Wish us to consider provided by Mr. Terry or Whoever, we would certainly respond to in wdting. I would reiterate that I believe that the issue of the sanitary system~ has been addressed, exhaustedly and comprehensively, by both the project engineer and the Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services. The Health Dept. does not issue variances lightly. They took a very hard look at this application. They had their own groundwater hydrologist on their Board of Review and I have certainly seen applications before the Board of Review denied. They concurred with our engineer's report on this application and I believe it's in the record what the Health Dept. determination was. Again, when we first appeared before this Board, that was your mandate to us, which was go to the Health Dept. and get a professional determination fromthem, and that's what we did. However, if you have additional comments there by an environmental planner, obviously we will do our due diligence and respond to them if you wish. TRUSTEE KRUPSKk We certainly didn't hire anyone. Did those comments require a response Or were they for our information? YRUSTEE DICKERSON: No, they were just for our information. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any other comments? JAMES GRATHWOHL: I'd like to comment. As you know, I'm Jim Grathwoh., and I just want'te underscore Rob's comments. As you know, we've been at this for a long time as we have answered all of your questions and have done our very best~to give you that informatian in atimely fashion. The points that Mark Te~:ry evidentia ly raised, I think~ and all of you were here at the ,p. resentation of Fr~ed Ne th gave, answered all these questions specifically and I m not technical and I'm not going to go back and try to respond to his concerns, but that p~resentat on that. Mr. Keith gave to each of you was very detailed and answered a of those questions, and my understanding as I heard Peggy read the letter, is if ~.ou go I~ack and Icol~ at the record, I th~nk the concerns will be answered to a po ntthat you shou d be sat sfed that those are no longer concerns. As far as the Nature Conservancy is concerned, I certainly understand that. But there again, similar to the other issues this evening, it's wetlands, but yet it's a buildable lot ~r~d we have done everything Possible to meet your concerns. I would like to raw this ~ a close ObviOusly. It's been going on for a number of years. Again, I thank you for your diligence, and I am not faulting you for what you have raised, the concerns you have raised, however, Ithink it's that time we really looked at all the presentatians we've g~ven you. I personally think we have very a~lequately answered .all your concerns and as Rob just said, each one of your requests has been fulfilled. So I was hoping tonight that there would be a vote on it and obviously I was hoping that it would be affirmative. I thank you very much and I would like You to give serious consideration to all of the requirements that have been put in~ it so that we don't have to continue coming back month aC[er month. Thankyou. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think it was the Board's intention to vote on this tonight. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I have one last comment. (inaudible) what Fred Keith had said about the sYStem that was going to be in place here. I asked him one question. I said will ~here be effluent reaching the creek because when the DEC does Ecoli testing, they wou d poss b y have a trace of t, and t wou d have a negative ~mpact on shellfish beds. His answer was a I~ttle b~t. Now that s not accePtable to me because ihat's a you need s att e b t because that's what the DEC tests for and it shuts down an entire shellfish area, Corey Creek. 30 ROB HERRMANN: actually believe Kenny, that if you reviewed the record, I do recall your question to him when he was talking about the vertical flow of the effluent down and you said %viii any of that material move laterally", and his answer was "yes, a little bit", but that was taken in the context of where is that effluent moving laterally to. Your question wasn't, "is it going to move into the creek", and he said "yes". That's not accurate at all. He described SOme lateral movement but if you look at that within the context of the process he was describing, and I'm not going to attempt to re-describe, it was something a little bit different than what you just stated, and there is going to be some lateral movement out of any cesspool of any septic system on any property, including your own. It doesn't mean that that material is then going to move over untreated a period of 60' or 70' or whatever it is. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: We went through a lengthy discussion on how after time the system breaks down:and it moves quicker laterally and he couldn't answer these questions, and then that's when I asked him to possibly find another system like this, take samples 5', 10', 15', away from the system, and he said he couldn't because this isthe first of it's kind. That's why I said this is unacceptable to ;Southold, if you can't come up with those answers. RQB HERRMANN: Well I also think that's an extraordinarily inaccurate recollection of the record. I think Fred's answer and my answer was that this was not a first of it's kind sanitary system at all. This is an extremely common sanitary system Within the Town of Southold and throughout the east end. It doesnt actu?y t~ke much to research into it. Just look at the County s code of standards. It scalied a shallow groundwater system..if you have a deep enough separation b,etween the surface and groundwater, you can put in one cesspool that's say 12 deep and 8 wide and thats all you need to handle three or four bedrooms. If you have a shallow groundwater table, for a three bedroom house, you have f?,e ~ings 8' wid ly 2' d ha ' tly typ , e, thatareon eep. T tsexac the eof syst that s PropOsed ' iq ' ct o Th em here. It s not un ue and it s n ne of a kind e process that Fred described was not something that he created for this process. It's an applicatiori of what the Suffolk Co. standards are. This is required by the County. -I:he design is conforming to the County. It was not created specifically for Mr. Grathwohl. TRUSTEE POLlWODA: Well he didn't give me a clear answer when I asked him where could we ~ind another one of these systems. ROB HERRMANN: think if you check the record he did give a very clear an werthat au,Il finddoz n n r I s y ~ e s a d p obaby hundreds of these systems around the Town of Southold. It just takes a phone call to the Health Dept. to get an independent answer. TRUSTEE POLiWODA: I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE DICI~ERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE POLiWODA: I'll make a motion to Deny the application. TRUSTEE DI',GKERSON: Seconded TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Now that the motion is made and seconded, I think I would like to add the Chapter 97-28 Standards. (A)This application would adversely affect the wetlands of the Town, (D) Adversely affect fish, shellfish, and other 3! beneficial marine organisms, aquatic wildlife and vegetation or the natural habitats thereof, and according to the letter we received from Mark Terry, (H) Weaken and undermine the lateral support of other lands in the vicinity. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: All in favor?. ALL AYES 11. En-Consultants, inc. on behalf of STRONG'S MARINE requests a Wetland Permit to restore the non-disturbance buffer adjacent to the tidal wetlands by removing parking materials; planting with native vegetation; and establishing earthen curb and gravel-lined swale. Located: Camp Mineola Rd., Mattituck. SCTM#122-9-3&122-4-44.2 POSTPONED UNTIL JULY AS PER THE AGENT'S REQUEST 12. En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of FRANK & LOUISE MARClGLIANO as Contract Vendees requests a Wetland Permit to construct a two-story, one- family dwelling on pilings; install a sanitary system, pervious driveway; drywell- drainage system, and public water service; establish a 50' wide non- disturbance/non-fertilization buffer adjacent to the tidal wetland boundary; remove existing driveway; and replant with native vegetation the approx. 1,150 sq.ft, portion of existing driveway located within the proposed buffer area. Located: 1800 Cedar Beach Rd., Southold. SCTM#89-2-3 POSTPONED UNTIL JULY AS PER THE AGENT'S REQUEST 13. En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of DONNA BLANCHARD requests a Wetland Permit to remove and reolace (inkind/inplace) approx. 27 linear ft. (including 5' & 7' returns) of existing timber bulkhead and backfill with approx. 5 cy. of clean sand to be trucked in from an upland soume and planted with beach grass (18" on center). Replant (12" on center) any disturbed spartina alterniflora adjacent to southerly return. Construct a timber dock, consisting of a 3'X 10' hinged ramp to extend from bulkhead onto a 6'X 12' float secured by (2) 8" diameter pilings. Located: 50 Budd's Pond Rd., Southold. SCTM#56-5-21 POSTPONED UNTIL JULY AS PER THE AGENT'S REQUEST 14. Land Use Ecological Services on behalf of JACK BIGGANE requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4'X 150'+/- CCA timber stairway. Proposed stairs to be raised 4' above the existing grade/slope. (60) 4"X 4" CCA timber posts are to be utilized in conjunction with the stair installation, and the posts areto be installed with a depth of penetration of 6'+. Located: 8871 Oregon Rd., Cutchogue. SCTM#83-1-34 TRUSTEE FOSTER: I did look at this and I didn't have a problem with it but there is another problem on the property that has to be addressed. Are there any other comments on this application? Board comments? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I think we discussed this with the agent. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Yes, we did discuss it with the agent. They have a problem there that he's aware of and that's got to be corrected. How did you leave that with him? 32 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You can give the description based on those, as a condition of the permit, what needs to be done. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Ok. Do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: So moved. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE FOSTE R: I'll make a motion to Approve the permit for the stairs with the condition that the drainage problem existing in the northeast corner be rectified by either a pipe installation into the drywell or lower the casting and re- grade that corner to prevent any further erosion, and that should all be part of the permit. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That should all be done before the stairs are constructed. 15. J.M.O. Environmental Consulting on behalf of JEAN A. SAUNDERS requests a Wetland Permit to construct a new dock located approx. 14' west of the existing dock. The old dock shall be removed and a new 4'X 86' catwalk, 3'X 20' ramp and 6'X 20' float secured by two piles is proposed and a new set of 4'X 20' steps up the bluff. Located: 4322 Westphalia Rd., Mattituck. SCTM#113-9-9.2 TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Is there anyone who would ike to speak for.or against the applicant? Any comment? I'll make a motion to Table the application. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES 16. J.M.O. Environmental Consulting on behalf of KENNETH DELOISELLE requests a Wetland Permit to reconstruct in-place +/-135' of timber bulkhead utilizing vinyl sheathing, to backfill structure with +/-10 cy. of clean sand which shall be trucked in from an upland source and to replant a 10'X 20' area immediately landward of southwest corner of the bulkheading with 2-3' Baccharis 5' on center. Located: 3310 Little Neck Rd:, Cutchogue. SCTM#103-9-12 TRUSTEE KING: Is there anyone here who wishes to comment on the application? BOB GHOSlO: The CAC felt the project was fine. TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to Approve the application. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES 17. J.M.O. Environmental Consulting on behalf of MARGARET CLEARY requests a Wetland Permit to reconstruct in-place +/-137' of timber bulkhead utilizing C-Loc vinyl sheathing and to backfill structure with +/-10 cy. of clean sand to be trucked in from an upland source. To reconstruct inkind/inplace existing 4'X 5' steps to access beach. Located: 425 Terry Lane, Southold. SCTM#65-1-21 TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Is there anyone who would like to speak on behalf of this application? I visited the site and it's straight-forward. Does anyone else have any comments? TRUSTEE FOSTER: CAC? 33 BOB GHOSlO: We had some discussion concerning the fill. It says in the application, and this seems to be typical and this is why it was discussed, is that it's always +/- 10 yds. and it's considerably more. This particular property ~s somewhat tiered. There is like two tiers. We were concerned that there would be too much fill coming...enough fill to actually level off the tier. So, that was a concern. Aside from that, it seemed like it was fairly straight-forward. We just recommended we put in a 20' non-tuff buffer and native plantings. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: noticed t~at the lawn was going right to that bulkhead there but there was quite a bluff between the high-tide mark and the bulkhead, so didn't consider it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh So do you want a 10' buffer?. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I didn't see a problem there. There was a large bluff area. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Ok. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I11 make a motion to Approve the application. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES 18. Eric Bressler, Esq. on behalf of RICHARD HORSTMANN requests a Wetland Permit to increase the footprint of the existing house and add a second floor. Located: 7225 Nassau Point Rd., Cutchogue. SCTM#111-15-12 TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of the application? FRANK BLANGIARDO: Good evening, I am Frank Blangiardo and I have an injunction (inaudible) Ms. Wickham from appearing at this hearing. Can I give the Board copies of Supreme Court Justice Seidell's temporary restraining order signed this afternoon? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh What do you think? It's a public hearing. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Is it an environmental issue? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Who is Justice Seidell? FRANK BLANGIARDO: He's a Supreme Court Justice. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: From where? FRANK BLANGIARDO: Riverhead for the last 30 years. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What does he have to do with us? FRANK BLANGIARDO: He's a Supreme Court Judge for the County of Suffolk. This action of real property must be brought to the highest court of jurisdiction, which is unlimited in it's equitable powers. It's the highest court in New York State. GAlL WICKHAM: Mr. Krupski, I maybe able to clarify this. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Go right ahead. GAlL WICKHAM: I would give the Board the courtesy of asking that this matter be adjourned in light of what possibly may be an injunction. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh No objection...what a second...is there anyone here to represent the applicant? 34 GAlL WICKHAM: I represent the applicant, but in light of the order that Frank Blangiardo has brought in, I would like to ask that the hearing be adjourned. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Well since you represent the applicant, we'll respect that. GAlL WICKHAM: In that the order may preclude us from presenting the hearing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh It's bizarre but, let's see your paperwork. FRANK BLANGIARDO: Certainly, if I may, if this body wants people to (inaudible) and you don't want people building illegal docks and illegal bulkheads, certainly you should respect the highest court in the County. (inaudible) TRUSTEE KRUPSKh You have to use the microphone if you're going to make a statement. Just wait a moment while the Board reviews this. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: It's 10:45 PM and the we're just trying to let it. settle... FRANK BLANGIARDO: Well this is pretty straight-forward. We don't have to be environmentalists or anything. It's just civil procedure. (inaudible) TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Just let us finish here, FRA~i+K BLANGIARDO The case is pending before Judge Catterson on the 3ra. TRUSTEE KRU~KI.: Could you Plea,.se give us a moment here? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: So she can t... FBANK'B~ANG]ARDO: Well l can't comment on other attorney's conduct. TP~US-i~EE~;~ I.q '-F KRUPSKI: IS there anyone else who would like to comment, who doesn't have a lega/order against them, on this application? I had on this application, I had a conversation with the surveyor about a week ortwo ago, and if you remember, therewas a Problem with the right-of-way. Now, the surveyor told me that the appiicant had 90 of property and he was go ng to supp y us w th a ne~v sur~ey, so w~ don't have that to work on. We don't have the new survey. It really doesn't r~atter,to us who represents the app cant The app cant can lily ~,epresent hi He's (inaudible), it says right there. he is also. Just for 5 or 6 days or so. : Well the meeting isn't until next month. the return date of this, which is July 3rd, : We'll have to wait, notwithstanding Mr. Seidell's comi'nents, ~ to wait for a survey. Since there is no one here to represent the have to send the applicant a note saying that we need a new in order to act on the application. I'll make a motion to Table the application in liglfft of the information TRU~EE FOSTER:" Seconded. ALL AYES 19. Frank Uellendahl on behalf of AUSTIN POWER requests a Wetland Permit to add a one-story addition to the existing structure, added gross floor area of 560 sq.ft. Located: 444 Midway Rd., Southold. SCTM#90-2-5 TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Any comments on this project? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: looked at this. It's pretty straight-forward. I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES TRU,STEE POLIWODA: I'll make a motion to Approve the application. 35 TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES 20. Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. on behalf of JOHN T. FARRIS requests a Wetland Permit and Coastal Erosion Permit to remove the existing irreparable dock and construct a fixed elevated dock (4' wide X 27' long), including steps located at the seaward terminus of said dock, and a pile/pulley system set thirty feet (30') seaward of the proposed dock to provide for the temporary tie-up of vessels. Located: 750 Willow Terrace Lane, Orient. SCTM#26-2-20.1 TRUSTEE FOSTER: Would anyone care to comment on this application? BRUCE ANDERSON: This is a case where a previous permit was approved this Board, a 100' dock, and (inaudible) so this application is to basically replace that functional portion of the dock, remove the (inaudible) and install the piling and pulley system to a]Iow him temporary access. We have DEC permits for this and (inaudible). TRUSTEE KRUPSKh It seems like a clever little system. BRUCE ANDERSON: Well it's the best we can make out of the situation we're faced with. I am annoyed by it because the man had a functional dock of 100' and there is a dock directly next door bythat sameagency of 100'. The man has been unjustly victimized by the DEC. (inaudible) TRUSTEE KRUPSKh We thought itwas clever. We sawwhat happened to the old One and we said, we'll somebody had a better idea TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I don't think we had a problem with it. BOB GHOSIO: We had no problem. TRUSTEE FOSTER: I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRU~STEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES TR~S~TEE FOSTER: I'll make a motion to Approve the application. TRI~STEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES 21. Proper-T Permit Services 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', fixed dock 4'X 41' and mooring pole 20' out from the fixed dock. Located: 1450 Ole Jule Lane, Mattituck. SCTM#122-4-44.6 POSTPONED UNTIL JULY AS PER THE AGENT'S REQUEST 22. Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of GREGORY MA,7?ANOBILE requests a Wetland Permit to construct a single-family dwelling with pool and decks; install on-site sewage disposal system. Located: 1460 Lake Dr., Southold. SCTM#59-1- 21.6&21.7 TRUSTEE KING: Is there anyone here to comment on this application? JIM FITZGERALD: I'm here on behalf of the applicant. When last we met on this, you were going to get Chris Pickerall to inspect the property and report back to you what he found I am anxious to hear that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Lauren, do we have a report from Pickerall. LAUREN STANDISH: No, it was just a verbal. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: He didn't give us a report. 36 JIM FITZGERALD: I understand that he did find... TRUSTEE FOSTER: Oh, definitely he said there was a cranberry bog. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We went again two weeks ago, the whole board, to take a look at it again This is the same as quite a few we've been going over tonight. Now somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we found the site to be buildable, and he certainly has a lot of area there to work with, but he's got to stay clear...the proposed driveway seems to be right in the bog itself. Maybe he could put the driveway on the other side of the house or something. JIM FITZGERALD: I'm sure we could do that. One of the things we have to do, however, isfind out where the magical cranberry bog is. It didn't seem to be marked in any way so it's .h, ard to tell wha~ the extent of it is. , TRUSTEE KRuPSKI: You re correct. We II just take this gentleman s comment. J M FITZGERALD:So where dowe stand on that. TRUSq'EE KRUPSKI: I think we need to...you as the agent, need to show it on the survey, and then you need to show us the setbac,k,s from it. JIM FITZGERALD: My only problem is the location. I m really disappointed that Chris went there an~ turned around and said, "yeah, they are there". TRUSTEE KRUPSI~I: I agree. I thought we would have something is writing that wOuld defir~e i~ a [itffe better. JIM FITZGERALD: Well:and put some stakes in the ground so that we don't have somebody gc and take a look at it and see it differently from what he saw and then ~. g~) b.~ ;k and forth about where the cranberry bog is. TRUSTEE ~F J: PSKI: I a, gree with your diss ppointment, I'm not saying that you'[e'wro.~g, ~[I Fm sa~ymg is that the bog is pretty well defined, so I don't think we,re geir~( naye;a disagreement on where the bog is. ,, JIM FI~ZGEF ~LD~ Are 3/ou suggesting that the kind of circular is the cranberry bog". TRUSTEE KRUPSKh On the survey here? JIM FITZGERALD: No, on the ground. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh All the vegetated area there. JIM FITZGERALD: Including the... TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The cranberries. Can you come up here and take a look at this? The bog, :w~e think, is basically right in here. JIM FITZG.E~I~D; Right. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We just want to see a setback from that. JIM FITZGERALD; (inaudible) with some thing that you will find acceptable. We can get Rob to put. it on. , TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We d accept Rob to put the cranberry bog on (talking) JIM FITZGERALD: I have one other thing. Although I wasn't afforded an opportunity to look at the pictures that were presented last time of the inundated area, I did look at them in the file at the office and it looks to me like there was a time When the road was flooded and there were a number of pictures of it. It's essentially the same time and same location. The road in front of my house has been flooded and it's not near Great Pond or any of those and the other thing is that.I'm depending upon the Boards degree of validity with which the Board attaches the concept of this area and the (inaudible) of Great Pond. Looking at the topographic map, it doesn't look like there could be any connection. Driving down Lake Dr., you don't see any areas where there appears to be a flow of water across the road in either direction. But regardless of all of that, I'm not quite sure what that would be. It rains and the water goes someplace, so it goes into creeks er it goes into the sound or Peconic Bay, and some of it goes into Great Pond. think that's the way God meant it to be, if I may mention God. Thank you very much for your attention. GEORGE BAMBRICK: I was here at the last hearing. I just want to go over some basicthings and maybe reviewwhere we are at so far. First of all, it was just recently brought to my attentiOn that in the record for the original application, it's not correct. The closest distance between the nearest exiting structure ancJ uPland edge of wetlands is net available. Is that correct? This is the wetland application data. This is in the record. JIM FITZGERALD:You me,an N/A? No applicable. GEORGE BAMBRiCK: Isn t that distance applicable between the existing st~uctare, a~id the u;pland edge o!,wetlands? JIM'FITZGERALD~ Well it doesnt in my opinion but I would be very happy to put a number in'there for you. TRUSTEE~KRUPS, KI::[ V~ell you mean on adjacent properties then because there is no StructUre Qn the Froperty, t,hat's why I assumed it's not applicable because there iS n~hi~g :on th~ ai~plicant s property. GEOiRGE.~A~BRiCK: Well the edge of property line across the road. TRUS~;EE: ~-.F~iUP~I: :But; I think this in relation to ... GEORGE B~MBF~JCK: Alrigh~. How about the second one. The closest distance between, nearest Pi'eposed structure .and upland edge of wetlands. Do we have that divan~-~? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well it's all to be determined. That means this is a work i~ progcess. GEORGE BAMBRICK: I was under the impression that we were going to be filling, [h~is says excavating. JIM F~ITZGEIRALD: 'It should be 650 cy. of fill. TRUS;-;EE KRUPSKI: Which we kind of assumed because it shows a raise in elevation here. GEORGE BAMBRICK: So we're talking about 650 cy. to be filled to be entered into {his, property. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: To be brought in, correct. GEORGE BAMBRICK: I just want to review some of the items we brought up last month. I'm not going to go into every detail but the community ~s opposed to the gra~ting Of this application. We have a petition on file, 55 adjacent property ownersr:opp~sing the granting of this request. I have several letters from my neighb0rsl I Would Say about 20 photographs and I think it's pretty clear that the water is coming from the overflow from Great Pond. It spills out over Lake Dr. and into the adjacent wetlands and then swings around into the area where the applicant wants the structure. It's very obvious. If you look at that from an aerial thing, you can see where at one point the Sound broke through. It broke through and came right up along Lake Court and right into Great Pond. So, there is historical evidence that the movement of water is there and will be there and it's a regular thing. The people who live in the neighborhood, they are very familiar with the flooding in that area. The original survey by the applicant's surveyor, failed to note the cranberry bog. At the last hearing, the actual surveyor came up to me and asked to look at a picture of it and admitted that he missed it. I called the DEC and asked for their interpretation of a cranberry bog. I spoke to Diane Radke. Her telephone number is 444-0275. She indicates that the cranberry bog is considered a wetland. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh It is in the Town Code. GEORGE BAMBRICK: From my point of view, looking at what l think is the cranberry bog, the applicant's stake, is at the edge of the cranberry bog. TRUSTEF_. KRUPSKI: We noticed that two weeks ago on field inspection. GEORGE BAMBRICK: So in fact, he's 0' from the wetlands. Not 50', not 75' as was recommended by two of your Trustee Boards lastweek. They recommended 75~ no buffer zone. I thinkyou made a determination of 50'. If you know that the cranberry bog ~swetlands, you ye got zero. So we went from 100 o 75 o 50, and~n°w if it'~ granted, where I think is a cranberry bog and Where it ends it's zebco. I'm wondering i~-the Board gave any consideration to those two memos that wbre submitted They seemed to indicate in face that~he original subdivision did not meet the standards at-the time to b6 included in the two acre zoning, mean in ~theone acre zoning. This means that the whole subdivision ~is in question. Theiother pe!~ tha~ we bring up is the location of the septic ~YStem. I noticed that,the al~p[i~nt ~ha.s, not filed yet for Suffolk County.HealthDePt. permits for the sep~icsy~t~m. If you II notice,; he has the septic sy~tem ~ight on L~ke Dr. His su~eyor ma~kes a comment, 'we and uses pul~ C wate¢. Incorrect. That d~e~ ing is o~ned by Theodore Malinokus. He might, use pu~b[ic wa~er. He has the .capacity~d use it. if be'so chooses, but he has a ~eil. ~d I '.hiink b~fore we c~nsi~er an al~pl[cation for a septic system, thai Could:be 0 Ircm ,,w,,e,,tl~inds, we sh~0uld see ~i~t'the 'Health Dept. says about positio0ing it ~it~in X amount of feet.fro~ Mr.!:~al~in0kus' wetlands. I also noticedith~t~h'ere is n0 application for the pEc. AC~r~ingto' Diane Radke who Iooke~ at t~e map~,, g~ta~te~ she didn't do ~n actual', !~ sp~ection,, she said that from what',she Can see, the per~it would not be~ gran~' , I~ased ~n her view Of the matter, I call;ed Chris u.p afte~r th!s meeting and::l old ~ m I.had. been advised that they Were going to askihirn to go in and Iooka his p?operty and he said he would that and the~ I went ~p te your office and I.~ :e~ did he in fact look at[he property in.question, and I Was told he did and he d cdr~fi~'m that ]~ was a cranberry bog and considered a wetland. So 1 thiak we sh~uld'give him the opportunity to put ~at i~ writing and als~ I would re~qu, est that;[he Cranberry bog actually be staked and. actually the wh~,le area shool~ be r~s~al~ed. I w~nder what affect 650 cy. or approx. 11 truck loads of fill s ge ng to have en this Cranberry bog How many ya~:ds can you get n a truck? TRUSTEE FO$'~ER: Or~ the average, about 20. , GE(~RGE BA~BRICK: Well in conclusion, I mentioned last week that we re in a domino effeet'here. I saw that again over and over again. Your ruling is 100', therl there's exception made because of circumstances, and now it's 85'. Then it goes down to 75'. Then John Smit~ comes ~n and say, you've gave my neighbor 75' can I have 60'. At some point it has to end. It has to go, that's it 100' period. Now there is one other item I want to mention. Mr. Mazzanobile is a contract- vendee. The original owner, to my information, purchased this property somewhere in 1980 and he filed for a subdivision, so this isn't the case of a family who saved up their earnings and have a life long e ream of building a house and now this is their only chance for some happiness. This is a subdivision with 8 lots in it that really should be 4 lots and I think that should come into play as far as your decision. Thank you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Thank you. Just to cladfy a couple of things that you said, the appl c,a_nts generally-come to us...there s a section in everyo e s Code whether it s DEE or Health Dept. or the Town Code, that says you have to have all necessary per~ ts before you apply. So it's like a dog chasing it's tail because you can t get all the neCessary permits because they w~nt it and they want it, so it's always I~een this Board's policy to be the first permit applied for because we feel that we have the greatest control. We're the ones that issue the permit first. So generally they come to us before they go to the DEC or Health Dept. GEORGE BAMBRICK: Can you then in fact say to them because of the circumstances of this application, because of the location of the septi~ system, I~ebause we have'information that the immediate adjacent owner did not have a well system, although the survey indicates that he uses public water, can you now then say, We'll '~able this motion and you go to the Health Dept. and get their permit, come back to us, a, nd w~'ll start hearing your process again. :I'RUSTEE KRUPSKI: We II that s kind of ~...if you say it like that it sounds good, but we .~ust denied an application tonight where they did just that. They got the H~alth Dept. app,'oval against, we though~all odds, and they came back with the DEC; .and they h~td Health Dept. To us, it ~ill didn't meet our stanc~ards and we denied the applic~ation. The fact that they get Health Dept. doesn't really concern us one way or anoth:er. We feel we should issue the permit based on it's own merits in this Town and they can move on to the other agencies. The Health Dept. thing is not...we had another one in Cutchogue where they got the Health Dept. approval IFirst we approved that one and it wasr~ t nearly as sensitive as the other one but they sought it first and that gives them added we ght there GEORGE BAMBRICK: There are not too many lots left around Great Pond. There is one righ,~ now that Suffolk County took for non-payment of taxes and I've been working ~i~h Melissa Spire to get that lot transferred over to the Town. Other than thai lot and a couple more that. can't, you have dev~l~pmer~t. People build and then ir1 the winter time all of a sudden wetlands start disappearing in frc~nt of their house for a better view. So, we don't wai~.t to kill G'reat Pbnd. TRUSTEE KRUpSKh Thank you. Any other comment? RICH rVICNALLY: I was here on the 22"d. I was the one who started off the m~gical cranberry bog. l can tell you, we ~icked them and we did eat them. I di~in't ha~e any evidence, data, or photographs last ti:~e, but I took a Walk with nd my sisteron the:property after we were I~ere on the 2:2 and took some photographs and I'm educating myself while I'm at:this meeting because I never 40 came to a public hearing before last month. One of you said 20 cy. per dump truck? Is that a ball park? TRUSTEE FOSTER: That's not all trucks. RICH MCNALLY: So there is going to be a parade of dump trucks filling in this piece of real estate real soon if this person gets this variance. TRUSTEE FOSTER: It's about 33 truck loads and it generally never takes what they tell you it's going to take. You can throw a couple extra hundred in there. RICH MCNALLY: If the estimate for the cubic yards of fill is less than accurate, than there could be even more dump trucks coming and whose going to count all the dump trucks? TRUSTEE FOSTER: The guy that delivers the dirt. RICH MCNALLY: Well I know I don't want to be sitting there on a beach chair counting dump trucks~ but I know it's going to take a lot of dirt to fill that lot across the street from usand.incidentally, my sister and I don't have public water either. We still rely on a well. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Which lot are you? RICH MCNALLY: 1455 Lake Dr. which is next to the other one mentioned. I'm right'acr0~s the s, treet. When I took photos recently, one of them shows basically righ[ in the middle of the lot, there is an oval area, which is pretty much vegefated. ~l'his :area is basically in a wetlands a wet season not just vegetation, this is a I ttle lake that is here. So basically this little lake, and it's only 10 or 15 yds. effof Lake Dr., this is not within the designated wetland area on this map. bn th.is map,~these little hash marks to me, reading many Rand-McNally maps, these lit'[le hash marks mean marshland or wetland areas. All of these hash mark:'s pretty much follow the vegetation in the background. The cleared out area, which is sand, is not considered to be wetland. But when it rains a lot, this is a lake.. So~;,somewhere along the line, I'm sure, this is going back probably 40 or 50 years, bi,cause I remember when I was kid, everybody used to say, the middle of the circle is wetlands. For 40 years no houses were built on the other side of Lake Dr. from where we are. There is one house that's opposite and it was there n the ear y 50;s and that s ~t. I saId to the Board again what has changed ~n 40 yearS? Why Would we allow some person to come in, buy a couple of lots, and puf~ a house there inthe middle of the wetlands? TRUSTEE KR(JPSKI: We were the ones who brought up the cranberry bog and we. saw it two'weeks ago. The applicant is going to have that put on the survey an~l Proceed accordingly, I assume. RICH MONALLY: For t~e Board's reference, I marked on a copy of what was sent ~o me, the map, 1. marked where the telephone is and in just a general area I yellow ink, I marked what basically this lake is. This is a picture of what is now dW, because this is a dry season but that vegetation area turns into a lake. The water table comes above the ground. But on this chart, the wetlands are behind the~se lines here,, which ... TR~USTEE KRUPSKh We are all in agreement with you that this needs to be put on,a;survey and this is a separate area that's not shown on this survey and that it will be put on the survey. 41 GEORGE BAMBRICK: Are we going to'have the survey done by the applicant's surveyor who missed the odginal cranberry bog? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Absolutely. That's why we go out in the field to verity it. RICH MCNALLY: This is not the cranberry bog. The cranberry bog was further back. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Well it's where it is. We saw this two weeks ago. GEOF~GE BAMBRICK: If you continue, and I hope you're going to upgrade to 75', but if you were to continue with your 50' no disturbance buffer, would that include that cranberry bog? TRUS~'EE KRUPSKh Well it is a protected wetland. GEORGE BAMBRICK: So he would have to be 50' from that cranberry bog. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Right. He's got to re-design his plan to reflect that cranberry bog so he's get buffers. He's got a good deal of area. We've been to the site a couple of times and that is one of the most barren spots we've seen ever, which is unusual because usually with a wetland involved, especially a freshwaterwetlands, usually you get quite a bit of vegetation and it's a more interesting spot. This really lacks anything there except... GEORGE BAMBRICK: Well I don't know how he's go~ng to redesign it because on the west side, that's underwater. His closest point on the map, if I recall, is 77' I think, on that side. On ~the other side, not even taking into consideration the crariberry bog, Ithink itwas 66' So, right now he's not within the 100'. TRUSTI'EE KRUPSKh Well that s their job. JIM FI.TZGERALD: Can I have the name of the person at the DEC that said they wouldn't issue the permit. GEORGE BAMBRICK: I didn't say they wouldn't issue. They said, based on what they ~can see on the map, just the map, their little field survey, that this whole area was wetlands. JIM FiYZG ERALD: Ok, good. Thanks. As we said at the end of the last meeting, if Chds confirms that there is a cranberry bog in there, we will have it staked and put it on the survey and we'll try to relocate the house, and we'll present it to the Board~ and anybody else that's interested to see. If we can't do it, then we won't do it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh There's a line on the survey showing 50' parallel to Lake Dr. What is the significance of that? JIM F~TZGERALD: I don't know. He probably put that on because that's the ordinary front yard setback in this area, however there is an existing variance granted which runs with the land for 40' and I confirmed that with the Building Dept. that they would recognize that for any new house that's put on the property. TRUS:TEE KRUPSKh Ok I just saw that and didn't know what it was. GEORGE BAMBRICK: I'm sorry I didn't hear that. There's a variance on that proPerty? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh A front yard setback. GEORGE BAMBRICK: He has a building permit with a variance on it? JIM FITZGERALD: Sometime in the past, the applicant obtained a variance to permit a 40' front yard setback for a plan he submitted at that time. The variance 42 runs with the land. He sells it and the buyer gets the variance along with whatever else (inaudible). GEORGE BAMBRICK: I never received any notification on a hearing. JIM FITZGERALD: You can talk to Mr. Georgeopolis, I don't know. ARLENE MC : I'm the President of the Kennys Beach Civic Association and Yes, Town Board of Southold, you are the stewards of our land. On behalf of the association we implore you to preserve this parcel of wetlands. We feel that if it's permitted to be built on, this environmentally sensitive parcel would have a negative effect on Great Pond. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Thank you. Anyone else? JIM FITZGERALD: I need to clearly understand so that I can respond to it more adequately, what the perceived adverse effect of developing this property would have on Great Pond. ARLBNE MC : Well we've been here and have owned this house for about 26 years and we have en more than, many occasions I should say, when all things come together and Great Pond has risen with the amount of rain that we get in the Spring, the water travels underneath Lake Dr. and winds up across the way in that area. So it does prove that Great Pond does have some kind of connection that it does flow to the north. RICH MCNALLY: We've learned over the years that our wetlands are a very vital resou,rce and that tiie wetlands that we have, when storms come in, the Iow lands, ~he sand, they act as a big sponge and they help distribute the water all around. There is ali sorts of wildlife that lives in wetlands and basically when one house comes in with a load of fill and covers up all the wetlands they are gone forever. One thing a~bout Southeld is in many respects it has maintained it's dignity ever the years and many Town Boards before this one have realized that slow grewth for Sou~thold is possibly the best growth. When I drive out here I sometimes think 1'4 6oming to Montana when I get out to the Northville Turnpike. Just~he open spaces that we have out here, it's a pleasure. We've lost the cauliflower and the. potato farms but they've been replaced by wineries. Now, Napa Sonoma in California are getting ...the east end of Long Island is getting competitive with California wines. It's beautiful we've been able to preserve out open space and yes you are the stewards of our land. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Thank you. I'm going to make a motion to Table this aPpli.cation until we get a new survey. TRUSTEE'FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES 23. Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of PETER BOGER requests a Wetland Permit for the existing concrete block bulkhead 23'9" overall length, with small- stone armoring on seaward side; permit existing small-stone return configuration at south end of bull~head at grade, 9'+/- overall length Located: Windy Point Lane, Southold. SCTM#87-4-4 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak on behalf of this application? JIM FITZGERALD: I'm here for Mr. Boger, and Mr. Boger is here. 43 PETER BOGER: Can I present the Board a booklet of photos that I think might be beneficial? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Sure. PETER BOGER: i'm the property owner. First of all, I would like to apologize to the Board because I simply did not know that a permit was required for this type of structure. My family has owned this property for over 55 years and over all that time the land has remained substantially unchanged when we first acquired it. So my point is that I appreciate your environmental issues and I certainly wouldn't want to do anything to harm the environment. The purpose of the bulkhea~ was to stop a serious erosion problem. One or two feet of the property in this area has been eroded annually for approximately the past 10 years or so. The location of the erosion is at the end of the neighbor's bulkhead and the prevailir~§ winds drive the waves into this area with g~eat force. Fve learned throughthis process, and ge~tting an education, that this erosion at the end of this existing bulkhead is a fairly common occurrence. The situation has become so severe that the water is now eroding the land behind my neighbor% bulkhead. The erosion has a!so create~ aseriousfalling risk. The undermined land, which is approXimately 3-5' above sea le~el app'ea~s sol:id when p~ople Wall~ onit, only to cave in becau~ of the concavenature of the erosion. Iwas especially concerned:over thais faCt~;.because small children fre~uen~ this Io~atibn.fo view the creek. This is a hIgher I~.Oint'and provides ar vantage point and peep[eitravel onto my property to view the Creek and .risk fallingin that situatior~. FOr several years I've tried to step the erosion with various plantings, vadous grasses arid small trees. The. SeVer~ Wind ~ndwaves p~OVe too Str~ng for the plantings ~nd they quickly, die from exp°sui~e to salt wa~er. Even s~a gra~s~ Which g~siin saltwater I don't know t~e exact name of it, but it ¢~ulU n°t take root ~s a result of the constant paundir~g of ~he waves. The pr;eYailingi, win~s an~l th~ configurat on, as you Ca~ see from the phe~ographs drive the wate~r right into th s area very harshly[ AccOrdingly, the only viabl~,so utiOr~ I felt was a:s~all bulkhead. This s~ruct~ir~ is only 24" high and 24"' in I~ngth~ I w~nted ~ construct the smallest possible ~t~Ucture to do the jol~. I would :li~ke to point out t~at the bulkhead was no~ ~nstal~d to dock a boat~or enlar, ge t~e property. In fact, the bulkhead is approxima{~Iy ~' to 15' close~.te land. ~hff lo'ceti~n ~:[' the .bulkhead was selectedi ~ it weUl~i~ie into thee end of my neighl~r's existing buli~head and this would step th~ eroS~n. The structure causes no :hindrance to 'naVigation whatsoever. Th~, bulkhead was self-installed by myself using clea~ fill and no vegeta;t~on was destroye~ ~n the process. The reasor~ for ~hat was ~o ~vegetat~on could grow there ~ stap,:the eros on. Tl~e bu khead has been sucoessfu n that the erosion has c;eased'~rand there is a safe gr~ ,ade d, own to'the wate, r. The sea grass is now retut;ning:~o~h the wate~'side of thel bulkhead and I expect i~: will occur in front of the:bul~hea~l ,~ithin Several Years hiding ~t f~Om view. The :;fl' buffer exists behind :the bulkhead now and the natural vegetation, which was formerly undermined and killed ~1~ the sal~ater is now taking ~oot behind tize ~ulkhead. In rn~ view removai of t;ie~bulkhea~ would only serV~ t~ deteriorate tl~e ~rea and thie erosion woukJ certainly return and this would recreate the unsafe Condition. Thank you. 44 JIM FITZGERALD: think the thing I would like the Board to (inaudible) the net effect on the environment would be more adverse if the bulkhead were left in place than it would be if the bulkhead were removed and the area were made to look like the way it looked when the bulkhead was installed. I think the point is that it doesn't seem to have caused any harm by reason of it's existence and we would like to have you consider the possibility of leaving it in place because we thought it would be less intrusive than taking it out and then having to figure out what to do about the erosion in the area. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh You see the problem with your neighbor's bulkhead caused the erosion onto your property because of the wind and wave action. PETER BOGER: Yes. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh But, but building another bulkhead, you just kind of perpetuate that problem and you're just going to transfer that wave energy further onto your property. You just kind of passed it on. That's one reason why I'm totally against this structure. PETER BOGER: If you look at the photographs... TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We were out there a number of times also. PETER BOGER: There is a jet of land, a meaaow that comes out, that blocks the waves so that the waves will not directly hit the left hand side of the bulkhead as you look at it in the photos, TRUSTEE KRUPSI~I: I stil feel the same way. Aisc, by hardening the shoreline of thecreek, What you do is you totally disrupt the natural environment by putting a hard structure there on the creek. That's why we haven't allowed any of these bulkheads on the creek in 20 years. If you notice all the bulkheads in the creeks, none of them have been permitted within 20 years, because environmentally, they am pretty~much completely all wrong, in a creek. pETER BOGER:~i: The drainage issue is solved by the fact there is no cement between the blocks. Water filters out quite easily and in addition there is stone on the bottom of, the blocks. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh But we noticed your property slopes up to the edge and then it~comeS down so you don't have a big force of water from the upland flushing thre~gh.'there. PETER BO~]~:R: No, there is very little rainwater run-off. That would be the case whether the, .l~ul~head was there or not. TRUSTEE 'KRU!PSKI: Correct. There is no problem with filtration. ;KI: What we're trying to say is the wetlands grasses, the sparti~a alte~nifi~ra, the spartina patens, act as a filter for the wetland itself. Not f~)m ihe upland .~ater, but from the creek itself. PETER BO~ER: 1 don't understand. Prior to the bulkhead being constructed, tl~ere'was no, sea grass there at all because it could not take root due to the peund~ng of ~he:waves into that area. Curiously enough, once the bulkhead was in place, andithe bulkhead has been there close to two years, the grass is now grOwing and flourishing directly in front of the bulkhead, where in the past it was not there. 45 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I remain unconvinced and I'd recommend it's removal and re-vegetation plan. PETER BOGER: Well if that be the case then how would the Board recommend that I stop the erosion remembering that I've tded with plantings. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI Maybe you need some help from people who would be helpful. That's my recommendation. JIM FITZGERALD: Since you visited the area a couple of times, you'd notice that the area in front of the bulkhead is not scoured at all. There ~s a smooth transition from the area in front of the existing marsh in front of the bulkhead and then beyond. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, that's a stretch. I can't agree with that because that marsh used to extend.. :when the neighbor put the bulkhead out, who knows when, actually the picture you submitted shows it the best, the neighbor's bulkhead...what they did years ago, they built the bulkhead and they backfilled it. They just g~ined all ofthat property. That's what caused the damage. But we can't perpetuate that kind of...and granted, I'm not saying you did a land grab or an~hing like that, but the hardening of the shore ne s a serous prob em and wherever that occurs you do encounter lower water quality and of course less wiidlife I~ecause it makes sort of a sterile environment. PETER:BOGER: Well the wildlife has no trouble crossing over this because just last.Sunday / saw Canadian geese with their offspring jumping off of it and climbing or~ top of it. So that s not a problem. TRus'F~E KI~PSKI: I~ someone has a comment or recommendation... T ~Rus'FEE DI~KERSON: I'm in agreement with your recommendation. TRUSTEE Po~LWODA: recommend removing that wall and replant using the c?Conut fiber en~l~let it grow up. By your statement of actually have grass grow in frO~ of it that'tells line ~here is not a lot of wave action. J M FI'I:ZG~:RA,LD: Well there is enough to make the erosion occur at the end around the~eorner of the return, which is a routine thing. So you're convinced that the.removaL Of the.bulkhead would be less...the act of removing the buikhead'V~°u d~be~ lesS, intrusive on the environment than eav ng t there? TR~S-I~EEKI~UPSKI: Absolutely. TR~JST.EE PO. LIW0DA: LOng term, yes. JIM FIT"ZG~RAI~D: Oh sure. was going to suggest that you let us leave the bU'.lkhead.id fora y.,e~r and we II carefully document what happens to it in the next year, ar~d, tltien, if,~,tithe end of that time it has caused what appears to be some significa~nt ¢~hange in the area we'll take it out and fix it any way that you say. PETER B'O~GEFb,: I Would certainly agree to that. It is not n~y intention to harm the environmer~t just t(~ Stop the erosion. We're not going to put beach chairs out there and V~ew the ',creek from this spot. If it's removed, I'm still going to have the same problem and.like I said, I've tried for several years to put plantings in there b~t to r~o a~ail. I thi,nk in another year or so that grass in front of the wall will grow and! completely obscure the wall from view. TRUSTEE '~RUPSiKI: But you don't take into account the vegetation ane the hal~itat: ~ha~tha~ wall is covering. PETER BOGER: There was no vegetation when I put the wall in. 46 TRUSTEE KRUPSKh But it's all habitat. You took that and you buried it and you made it all upland. So you completely changed that marine environment forever, by covering it, and that's the objection. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Sometimes bare spots are good as habitat. PETER BOGER: Well there are a number of bare spots down the shoreline that are untouched and natL ral. This is a very small portion of my property. I'm don't want to bulkhead the entire meadow, I just wanted to stop the erosion. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh I think we should move on and vote on this. TRUS'FEE PQLIWODA: is there still shrubbery and.trees in the marsh? PETER BOGER: Behind the bulkhead the shrubbery and natural vegetation is now flourishing. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: The cut brush that was all piled up in the marsh. Is that your property? PETER BOGER: Directly behind the bulkhead? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: To the south. Somebody cut down trees and branches and brush .and laid it up in the marsh. PETER BOGER: Directly behind the bulkhead, I was in the process of filling it in and there was some brush in there that was going to be buried there. TRUSYEE POLIWODA: That needs to be removed. PETER! BOGER: '[:hat can ,b_e,:removed. That's not a problem. TRUSTEE K;RUPSiKI: That s Choking off the marsh vegetation. It shows it in the pictures that were Sub,m,,itted. Artie, what s your opinion? TRUSTEE FOSTER: I II go along with the rest of the Board on it. T~Us'FEEI;I K NG: Ithink it should be removed. TF~JSTEE I~RUF~SK: So what we need is a re-planting plan. You have to remove it and remeve the fill and remove all of that brush that was piled there and remove ali of the stone and come in with a re-planting plan and I would suggest you ContaCt Cornell Cooperative Extension and they can give you some hel~)~w~h p ant material Kenny suggested that coconut fiber which I think we wo~ d be interested n, f you wanted to try to use that to stab ize the bank wh e the vegetation is growing. JIM FITZGERALD:: What type of vegetation woul,d that be? TRUSTEE I~RUPSKI: Ordinarily it would be what s there, spartina patens and spa~rtina~a, lterniflora. That would grow in that area. JIM FITZ-~ERALD: That was the stuff that was there before. TRUSTEE .t~RUPSKI: Yes, that s all that s going to grow there. JIM F~ITZGERALD:-~I When this started before the bu khead was permitted, there was grass a'nd there was wetland. Isn t that what we re go~ng,to put ~t back as. He% il:ready been ;fined $300.00 by the Justice Court and he s already paid $200,OOfor his application fee and going in and taking out the bulkhead and now replanting? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Absolutely. JI'~M 'FITZGERALD: Is that what you're granting a permit for or are you somehow other di:re;cting him to do that? TRUSTEE' KRUPSKh Whatever is the most effective suppose and the least painful. That's what has to be done. It's in his own interest to protect his own 47 property. The wall is not something we would ever have approved. If you have just come in here and said, look I've got an erosion problem and I want to put a wall, and we just went through this with Mrs. LaCaille around the corner, we wouldn't said "no, you cannot absolutely do this" for all the reasons that we stated tonight, even though it's late and I'm sure we missed a few, and so she didn't. We would never have permitted this from the beginning. It's not like we're trying to punish you because you did it without a permit. It's just that we wouldn't and we couldn't approve this. PETER BOGER: If the planting plan does not work, where do I stand then? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: In my honest opinion, I believe it will work, in that location TRUSTEE KRUPSKh That's why we recommend it. We not trying to lead you into some kind of a trap because that's pointless. We're trying to recommend something that will work for you and protect your property. PETER BOGER: My only concern is that if it doesn't work.. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh There are a million variables. We can't answer that, if it doesn't work, honestly. We're trying to recommend something Chat we have seen work. in the past. PETER BOGER: My only concern is that if I remove the wall and try the plantings, even with professional guidance, (changed tape). TRUSTEE KRUPSKh That's a doubtful scenario but I suppose it's possible. JIM FITZGERALD: H~ow would you feel about rocks? PETER BQGER: ItwOuld depend on where, and it would depend on the location and the elevation. JIM FITZGERALD: It's certainly a possibility. TRUS~TEE KRUPSKh thinkwe would rather see something done with the coco,nut ma~ting What that would do is armor the area while it's being planted and ~hen the plants grOw through it and then they hold that in. So it gives you some protection during the time the plants are growing. PETER BOGER: So is the Board giving me approval to remove the wall? TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Yes, remove the wall and remove the fill, and come up with a plan, w~ll give you like 60 days or something to come up with a plan to re- vegetate whether you:want to try the coconut matting or some stone on the corner there or something. But re-planting definitely has to be a component of the plan. PETER BOGER: Does that need to be presented to the Board again? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If we Table this and then you can amend the application so you won't have to put in a new application. I'll make a mo[ion to Table the application. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES 24. Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of PATRICIA WIEDERMAN requests a Wetland Permit to reconstruct inkind/inplace 90'+/- of existing timber bulkhead; reconstruct inkind/inplace 80'+/- of existing timber jetty; reconstruct inkind/inplace 30'+/- of existing timber jetty, extending this section of jetty to overall length 40'+/- as originally existed; add fixed dock platform 4'X 8' on top of and at end of 48 40' jetty, with 3' access walkway along top of jetty. Located: 450 Cedar Point Dr. East, Southold. SCTM#90-2-15 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of the application? JIM FITZGERALD: I don't have anything to add to what was submitted. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I have some field notes here that actually show the jetty on the west side to be 20' long. We measured it. We were there. We taped it off. Do you have anything e~se to add or ca~ I make a comment? JIM FITZGERALD: No. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh 1'11 take this gentleman's comments first before the Board's comments. CHARLES DANILCZYK: On that issue, I'm positive that there is an inaccuracy but this is the section that you're talking about? As far as the bulkheading on the east side is concerned, l'm the adjacent property owner and I've been waiting for some time to have that bu khead repaired. What's it's doing is killing the shellfish. When we have a storm coming in, the shellfish are driven through the holes and the breal~s in the bulkheading andup on my beach and then I end up with 10-15 seagu Ils waiting there patiently for their meal. If you look down at the other jetties, there are no seagulls. My point is that we should, on old bulkheading, if we get any breaks, anywhere, that the Town should allow repair immediately because it is destroying the shellfish. The bulkheading on the west side where they are talking about putting a dock on it, I have pictures here of the entire shorefront and nobody has a dock because the water is only like a foot deep at Iow tide and the waves come in, pick up the boat, and then slam it down into the rocks. What I would be concerned with is, I'd end up with oil spoils and bulkhead damage. I have pictures of that a rea and I know you've been down there and you know what it looks like. TRUSTEE KRUPSKh Thank you. I don't think the Board had a problem but I'm just going to go right into it. The Board doesn't have a problem with the replacement of the easterly jetty and the westedy jetty, at 20', I don't think we have a problem with the reconstruction of the same length of 20', however, we want'to see it Iow-profile, as we do on all jetty replacements, so it would start no hi~jher from the bulkhead than the top of the bottom whaler, which is about 4' off the top of the bulkhead there, which would make that walkway and dOck kind of impractical because it would end up in the water at Iow-tide. We didn't see a need for the dock because it wouldn't last. The boards would just get destroyed and most of it would be underwater anyway. JIIM FITZGERALD: I understand. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there any other comment from the Board? I'll make a rrlotion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to Approve the application to reconstruct 90' of timber bulkhead, 80' of timber jetty on the east side and 20' of timber jetty, Iow-profile, starting from the bottom whaler on the west side. We just need a new set of plans showing 20 and the Iow-profile of the jetty. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES 49 TRUSTEE FOSTER moved to go off the Public Hearing and go back to the Regular Meeting, TRUSTEE DICKERSON seconded. ALL AYES RESOLUTIONS: The Southold Town Board of Trustees RESOLVE to double the fees on "as-built" projects to cover the extra costs of review. TRUSTEE POLIWODA moved to Approve the Resolution, TRUSTEE KING seconded. ALL AYES The Southold Town Board of Trustees RESOLVE to change the monthly Legal Notices to read as follows, "Files may be reviewed up to 24 hours prior to the scheduled public hearing". TRUSTEE POLIWODA moved to Approve the Resolution, TRUSTEE DICKERSON seconded. ALL AYES MOORINGS: GISBERT AUWAERTER requests to replace Mooring #830 in Little Creek with a 25' boat. ACCESS: Public TRUSTEE POLIWODA moved to Approve the application, TRUSTEE DICKERSON seconded, ALL AYES MEETING ADJOURNED AT: 12:30 AM RECEIVED AND FU.F.D BY TI-]E SOUTHOLD TOV~N CLERK HOUR Town Clerk, Town of $ou~hold Respectfully submitted by, Lauren M. Standish, Senior Clerk Board of Trustees