HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-09/20/2017 Michael J.Domino,President �*®f ® �® Town Hall Annex
John M.Bredemeyer III,Vice-President "�® '>>, �® 54375 Route 25
r2 ' ` • r2 P.O.Box 1179
Charles J.Sanders `Ls
Southold,New York 11971
Glenn Goldsmith
Telephone(631) 765-1892
A.Nicholas Krupski 01 � a Fax(631) 765-6641
"'Couff
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD RECEIVE®
�; led
Minutes +Soh'old
2 0
et
Wednesday, September 20, 2017 Town Clerk
5:30 PM
Present Were: Michael J. Domino, President
John M. Bredemeyer, Vice-President
Charles J. Sanders, Trustee
Glenn Goldsmith, Trustee
A. Nicholas Krupski, Trustee
Elizabeth Cantrell, Senior Clerk Typist
Damon Hagan, Assistant Town Attorney
CALL MEETING TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 8:00 AM
NEXT TRUSTEE MEETING: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 5:30 PM at the Main
Meeting Hall
WORKSESSIONS: Monday, October 16, 2017 at 4:30 PM at Downs Farm, and on
Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 5:00 PM at the Main Meeting Hall
APPROVE MINUTES: Approve Minutes of August 16, 2017
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Good evening, and welcome to our September 20th,
2017, monthly meeting. At this time I would like to call our
meeting to order and ask that you stand for the pledge.
I'll announce the people on the dais. To my immediate left
is Trustee John Bredemeyer, Trustee Charles Sanders, Trustee
Glenn Goldsmith and Trustee Nick Krupski. To my right, Assistant
Town Attorney Damon Hagan, Senior Clerk Typist Elizabeth
Cantrell and stenographer Wayne Galante. And tonight the
Conservation Advisory Council member with us is Keith McCamy.
Agendas are located on the podiums and out in the hall.
I would like to announce at this time the postponements.
Postponements are for a number of reasons, but typically
paperwork that was not completed.
On page seven we have number 13 and number 14. On page
Board of Trustees 2 September 20, 2017
eight we have number 15, 16 and 17. On page nine we have number
18 through 21. So those are all postponed and they are listed as
follows:
Number 13, Suffolk Environmental Consulting on behalf of
BUDD'S POND MARINA, INC. requests a Wetland Permit for the
reconstruction of existing ±51' long wave wall which will be
comprised of vinyl sheathing secured between two (2) tiers of
timber walers (6"x6"-both sides), and 8" diameter timber
pilings; widen the existing boat launch runway by
relocating/reconstructing the runway an additional ±2'further
towards the west in order to widen the overall width of the boat
launch runway from ±16.5' to ±18x5'; and to construct a ±97'
low-sill bulkhead comprising of vinyl sheathing sandwiched by
6"x6" timber top whalers, 6" diameter timber pilings (in a
staggered formation on either side of the bulkhead), with a top
elevation of 2' in order to allow tidal flow over the structure
during high tides; area directly landward of new bulkhead to be
filed with ±20 cubic yards (±250sq.ft.), obtained from an
approved upland source, graded, groomed and planted with
compatible native wetland vegetation (i.e. Spartina ssp. At 1'
o/c). Located: 61500 Route 25, Southold. SCTM# 1000-56-6-2.2
Number 14, Stacey Bishop on behalf of FORDHAM HOUSE LLC,
c/o DENIS BOUBOULIS requests a Wetland Permit to install a
±1,167sq.ft. on-grade paver patio along the seaward side of the
dwelling; extend existing westerly 15' long by 10' high by 12"
thick concrete and stone veneer retaining wall an additional 35'
seaward for a total length of 50' beginning at the left rear
corner of existing dwelling; at seaward end of westerly
retaining wall, install a 28' long, varying height concrete and
stone veneer retaining wall parallel with the dwelling; along
easterly side of property, extend existing 3' high natural stone
retaining wall an additional ±45' seaward; approximately 15'
seaward of proposed 28' long parallel retaining wall, install a
±3' high by±45' long retaining wall situated approximately 1'
landward of established 50' wide non-disturbance buffer; and to
install a generator pad, generator, and buried gas tank for the generator.
Located: 5205 The Long Way, East Marion. SCTM# 1000-21-5-11
Number 15, Michael Kimack on behalf of DEMETRIOS & MARIA
PAPAGIANNAKIS requests a Wetland Permit to replace existing
bluff stairs with new in-place consisting of a proposed new
10'x10' top landing using trex (or equivalent) decking; replace
two (2) ±10' long side retaining walls and 4"x4" posts along
upper 43"x10' staircase with new pressure-treated boards and
additional 4"x4" posts as needed; replace upper 43"x10'
staircase; replace 5'5"x10"1" upper middle landing; replace ±6'
long retaining wall and 4"x4" posts along the 5'5"x101" upper
middle landing using pressure treated boards and additional
4"x4" posts as needed; replace 43"x11'8" staircase and
5'3"x10'1" middle landing; replace 43"x12'9" staircase to a
5'2"x107' lower middle landing; replace 43"x12'4" staircase; an
existing 6'x6'3" shed near toe of bluff to remain; and replace
Board of Trustees 3 September 20, 2017
6'3"x20'4" bottom deck seaward of shed with a 22"x3'2" end seat
and steps to beach; on the four (4) staircases replace
stringers, treads, and 4"x4" posts as necessary using pressure
treated treads and stringers, and cedar(or equivalent)
railings; on the three (3) landings and bottom deck replace
decking, framing and railings using cedar (or equivalent)
railings and trex (or equivalent) decking. Located: 2100 Sound
Drive, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-33-1-17
Number 16, Suffolk Environmental Consulting on behalf of
RICHARD J. MAY requests a Wetland Permit to reconstruct the
existing ±76.0' long timber jetty along the southern shoreline
by reducing the overall length to ±68.0' (to extend to the ALW);
jetty is not to exceed 2.5' above grade; the use of vinyl
sheathing; 6"x6" timber walers; and 8" 10" diameter timber
pilings staggered on either side. Located: 1340 Cedar Point
Drive East, Southold. SCTM# 1000-92-1-5
Number 17, AMP Architecture on behalf of WILLIAM GRELLA &
GARY OSBORNE request a Wetland Permit for the as-built 232sq.ft.
Belgium block parking area; as-built 121sq.ft. Belgium block
walkway; as-built 517.3sq.ft. managed lawn areas; as-built
240sq.ft. gardens; as-built 160.5sq.ft. crushed shell areas;
as-built 22.3sq.ft. metal planter box; as-built 14.3sq.ft. metal
waterfall; as-built 15sq.ft. rear concrete stairs; as-built
713sq.ft. pavers on sand; as-built 95sq.ft. gravel on sand;
as-built 11 sq.ft. fire pit on sand; as-built 41 sq.ft. open
shower with Belgium block on sand base; as-built two (2)
7.2sq.ft. concrete table bases; as-built 16sq.ft. front concrete
stairs; and for the proposed installation of a 46.4sq.ft. set of
second-story wood stairs consisting of a 4'x4.3' upper platform
with 4'x7.4' stairs to seaward side patio area; proposed
installation of 27sq.ft. of pavers on sand.
Located: 1200 First Street, New Suffolk. SCTM# 1000-117-7-30
Number 18, Shore Marine Construction on behalf of FREDERICK
BLANCHARD requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4'x350' fixed
catwalk using CCA treated timber super structure and Thru-Flow
decking over a 1,400sq.ft. area of the fixed catwalk; a 3'x20'
aluminum ramp; and a 6'x20'floating dock secured in a "T"
configuration with two (2) 8" diameter CCA timber piles.
Located: 5503 Main Bayview Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-78-7-5.6
Number 19, ALAN A. CARDINALE requests a Wetland Permit to
construct a communal dock serving Lots 1.5. 1.7, 1.8 & 1.9
consisting of a 4'wide wooden ramp at landward end connecting
to a 4'x34'fixed wooden dock with a 4'x40'fixed "L" section;
two 3'x14' adjustable ramps off of either end of 40'fixed dock
section; two 6'x20' floating docks situated in an "I"
configuration with two (2) 8" diameter float securing piles for
each float; two (2) 8" diameter tie-off piles centered between
the two floating docks; and two sets of two (2) 8" diameter
tie-off piles situated approximately 13' away from each floating
dock. Located: 570 Private Road #28, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-122-3-1.5
Number 20, Suffolk Environmental Consulting on behalf of
Board of Trustees 4 September 20, 2017
675 HILL ROAD, LLC, c/o GLENN HEIDTMANN requests a Wetland
Permit to construct a dock consisting of a 4'x6' entry ramp
secured by two (2) 6"x6" posts; 4'x7' steps secured by four(4)
6"x6" posts; 4'x15' elevated catwalk supported by four(4) 6"x6"
posts; a 3'x15' hinged ramp; and a 6'x20'floating dock secured
by four(4) 8"x8" pilings. Located: 675 Hill Road, Southold.
SCTM# 1000-70-4-28
Number 21, Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. on behalf
of PARADISE POINT ASSOCIATION, c/o DOUGLAS CIAMPA requests a
Wetland Permit to construct a 42' long bulkhead extension
comprised of vinyl sheathing, two (2) sets of 6"x6" timber
waters, two (2) sets of 6"x6" timber clamps, 8" diameter timber
pilings, 8" diameter deadmen and tie-rods; backfill eroded area
landward of proposed bulkhead extension with ±40 cubic yards of
clean sand obtained from an upland source to be graded and
groomed. Located: 225 Briar Lane; Inlet leading into the Boat
Basin, Southold. SCTM# 1000-81-1-16.10 & 16.11
1 would also like to announce at this time that under Town
Code, Chapter 275-8(c), all paperwork and the files were closed
seven days ago. Submission of additional paperwork after that
time may result in the delay of the processing of the application.
At this time I'll entertain a motion to have the next field
inspection October 10th, 2017, at 8:00 AM at the Town annex.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So moved.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Second?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion has been made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
I'll make a motion to hold the next Trustee meeting
Wednesday, October 18th, 2017, at 5:30 here at the main meeting
hall. Is there a motion?
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So moved.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Second?
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: I would like a motion to hold the next work
session at Downs Farm, at 4:30 PM, Monday, October 16th, 2017;
and at 5:00 PM, Wednesday, October 18th, 2017.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So moved.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Is there a second?
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: At this time I'll entertain a motion to approve
the Minutes of our August 16th, 2017 meeting.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Move to approve.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion has been made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
Board of Trustees 5 September 20, 2017
I. MONTHLY REPORT:
The Trustees monthly report for August 2017. A check for$8,553.21 was forwarded to
the Supervisor's Office for the General Fund.
11. PUBLIC NOTICES:
Public Notices are posted on the Town Clerk's Bulletin Board for review.
III. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEWS:
RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold hereby finds that the
following applications more fully described in Section VII Public Hearings Section of the
Trustee agenda dated Wednesday, September 20, 2017, are classified as Type II
Actions pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations, and are not subject to further review
under SEQRA:
Joseph Grillo SCTM# 1000-145-4-12.1
Carole Rich & Donald Wilder SCTM# 1000-121-4-17.1
Ali &Wendy Azmoun SCTM# 1000-90-3-19
Charles Rosenbaum & Kimberly Landman SCTM# 1000-59-8-6.2
Fordham House LLC, c/o Denis Bouboulis SCTM# 1000-21-5-11
Peter R. Petrowski, c/o Rich Petrowski SCTM# 1000-122-3-26
Patrick & Diane Severson SCTM# 1000-73-2-3.1
D. Cannizzaro QRPT & B. Miltakis QRPT, c/o John Miltakis, Trustee SCTM#
1000-103-10-29.1
Brendan & Kristina Tully SCTM# 1000-80-5-4.1
Budd's Pond Marina, Inc. SCTM# 1000-56-6-2.2
RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold hereby finds that the
following applications more fully described in Section VII Public Hearings Section of the
Trustee agenda dated Wednesday, September 20, 2017, are classified as Unlisted
Actions pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations. A Long Environmental Assessment
Form and a field inspection have been completed by the Trustees for the following
applications and it is hereby determined that they will not have a significant effect on the
environment:
Alan A. Cardinale SCTM# 1000-122-3-1.5
TRUSTEE DOMINO: That's the resolution. Is there a second?
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I'll second the resolutions under Item III
for the State Environment Quality Review Act, both the
resolutions for Type II actions and for the unlisted action.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion has been made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
IV RESOLUTIONS -ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS:
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Roman numeral IV under Resolutions. Normally we
group these together but tonight we have to do each of these in order.
The first one, Creative Environmental Design on behalf of
TODD FREED & EDITH WEBSTER-FREED requests an Administrative
Board of Trustees 6 September 20, 2017
Permit for a Ten (10) Year Maintenance Permit to remove invasive
weeds and plants; and for pruning of selected plants for
improved root health. Located: 12400 New Suffolk Avenue,
Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-116-6-12.1 & 12.2
The Trustees did a field inspection on the 12th of
September and have the following comments: That this should be
reduced to a one-year permit, not a ten-year maintenance permit;
the vegetation should be cut to six-foot height; and that the
area Trustee be notified before any work was done.
Any other conditions or comments from the Board?
(Negative response).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: We have an inconsistency.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: There is an inconsistency, that is the LWRP
coordinator is concerned that we cut healthy American beach
grass and notes the invasive species have not been identified.
The Trustees noticed Black Locust and poison ivy. The
method of clearing has not been identified. We know Creative
Environmental stated the clearing would be by hand. So. Any
other comments from the Board?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, it's straightforward.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Hearing no comments, I'll make a motion to
approve this application with the changes noted. That is,
number one, would be a permit for only one year; that the
invasive species identified would be removed; vegetation would
cut only to a height of six-foot; and the area Trustee will be
involved in the process.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Number two, J.M.O. Environmental Consulting
Services on behalf of GCG BAYBERRY, LLC, c/o CHARLES THOMAS
requests an Administrative Permit to selectively remove trees,
vines, dead vegetation, and clear brush; install a 4' wide access path
to the dock; and to establish and perpetually maintain a 25' wide non-turf
buffer area along the landward edge of wetlands.
Located: 975 Westview Drive, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-139-1-4.2
The Trustees inspected this property on September 12th and
the notes state trees marked with pink ribbon are okay to
remove; and the guidance from the Trustees is the 25-foot
non-disturbance from the wetlands and a 35-foot non-turf
landward of non-disturbance.
So I would like to make a motion to make those
modifications to this. And I'll repeat that again. 25-foot
non-disturbance from wetlands and 35-foot landward of
non-disturbance.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Can we also add a low fence to delineate the
areas, Charles?
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Say again?
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Can we add as a condition that low fence to
delineate the beginning of the --
Board of Trustees 7 September 20, 2017
TRUSTEE SANDERS: So a point of correction. What are your notes --
I have 25 foot non-disturbance from wetlands and 35-foot
non-disturbance with the low fence. Delineating those two. So
that's my motion.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Okay, good.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number three, Michael Kimack on behalf of
GIORDANO B2 QTIP FAMILY TRUST requests an Administrative Permit
to construct a 209.8sq.ft. Addition with entry landing onto the
landward side of the dwelling. Located: 3775 Wickham Avenue,
Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-107-9-6
The LWRP coordinator found this to be exempt.
The Trustees did a field inspection on the 17th and noted
that it was a straightforward addition and request that there be
gutters to leaders to drywells as a requirement.
Are there any questions or comments from the Board?
(Negative response).
Hearing none, I make a motion to approve this.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Number four, Creative Environmental Design on
behalf of EDWARD & CATHERINE FORTE request an Administrative
Permit for a Ten (10) Year Maintenance Permit to trim landscape
area located seaward of the wood retaining wall. Located: 750
Trumans Path, East Marion. SCTM# 1000-31-12-3
The notes here stipulate --
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: There were Black Locust and other non-native
vegetation which were invading the pre-existing planting. A
suggestion that we have ten-year maintenance with a limitation
stipulation that vegetation be trimmed to no shorter than
three-feet in height.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: So therefore, we'll make an amendment to this,
suggested ten-year maintenance and no shorter than three-feet
high. That is my motion.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion has been made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number five, Creative Environmental Design on
behalf of JULIE ANDERSON requests an Administrative Permit to
remove existing natural vegetation and expand existing lawn area
seaward an additional 9,000 square feet. Located: 4298
Wunneweta Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-111-14-29
The LWRP found this to be inconsistent. The inconsistency
arises from the fact that the area of the lawn converted to lawn
--excuse me. The area to be converted to lawn appears to be
Board of Trustees 8 September 20, 2017
within a non-disturbance buffer as depicted on the approved plans.
The Trustees did a thorough inspection on September 12th
and when they flagged an area five to ten feet back from the
existing structure, it does not appear the additional area does
go into the --take a look at this. This is the existing
non-disturbance.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It doesn't appear to, no.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Okay. So it would appear the area flagged by the
Trustees does not impinge upon the non-disturbance area, thereby
addressing the inconsistency.
Any other comments or questions?
(Negative response).
Hearing none, I make a motion to approve this application.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion is made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Number six, Nigel Williamson on behalf of
LANDERS FAMILY TRUST, c/o DESPINA GIANOPULOS LANDERS &JAY
LANDERS request an Administrative Permit to alter existing 1-Y2
story dwelling to a two-story dwelling; add a dormer over
existing two-story garage; and adding a 8.4'x4.5' covered porch
over the existing brick and concrete platform. Located: 5705
Stillwater Avenue, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-137-4-4
On the 12th of September, the Trustees were down at this
property and we, the only notes that I see is drywells -- can
you look at this?
All right. Correction. The LWRP has found this to be
inconsistent. The reasons are to follow: The proposed action has
been reviewed under Chapter 268 waterfront consistency review of
the Town of Southold. They state it's my recommendation the
action is inconsistent with policies Four and Six of the LWRP and
therefore inconsistent with the LWRP. The structures are located
within the FEMA flood zone; A base flood elevation six foot, it
is unknown if the first floor elevation of the dwelling complies
to FEMA standards. If the dwelling does not comply with
standards, threat of property loss from flood is high due to
close proximity to the waterbody. There is no ability to
relocate the structure out of the AE zone. The as-built large
deck pool and other structures did not benefit from the benefit
of Board of Trustees review or a wetland permit. The deck is
setback six-feet from the bulkhead and all structures are
extremely close to the wetland waterbody.
So to make this simple, I'll make a motion stipulating the
construction must meet all Building Department permitting
requirements for flood zone. That is my motion.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number seven, Frank Uellendahl, RA on behalf of
Board of Trustees 9 September 20, 2017
KATHERINE OLIVER requests an Administrative Permit to install an
on-ground 8'x8' hot tub; install a 5'x10' combination outdoor
shower and gas tank enclosure area against the dwelling; and to
extend existing front entry porch over to the garage. Located:
1255 Bay Shore Road, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-53-4-2
The LWRP found this to be consistent.
The Trustees did an inspection on the September 12th. No
issues found. It was a straightforward application.
Any questions or comments from the Board?
(Negative response).
Hearing none, I make a motion to approve this application as
submitted.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
IV. APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS/TRANSFERS/ADMINISTRATIVE
AMENDMENTS:
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Under Item V on your agenda, number one Jeffrey Patanjo
on behalf of BRENDAN & KRISTINA TULLY request a Transfer of Wetland Permit
#7217 from NSHE Williamston, LLC to Brendan & Kristina Tully, as issued on December
16, 2009. Located: 220 West Shore Drive, Southold. SCTM# 1000-80-5-4.1.
As a result of the field inspection of this site it was determined that the swimming
pool that was applied for under permit#7217 was never constructed and said permit had
expired. Accordingly we can't transfer something that had never been acted upon. I
would move to deny this transfer that is proposed.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Is there a second?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: In order to simplify our meetings I make a
motion to approve as a group items two, three, four, five and
six under Roman numeral V. They are listed as follows:
Number two, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of BRENDAN & KRISTINA
TULLY request a Transfer of Wetland Permit#8065 from NSHE
Williamston, LLC to Brendan & Kristina Tully, as issued on
February 20, 2013. Located: 220 West Shore Drive, Southold.
SCTM# 1000-80-5-4.1
Number three, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of BRENDAN &
KRISTINA TULLY request a Transfer of Wetland Permit#6237 from
NSHE Williamston, LLC to Brendan & Kristina Tully, as issued on
November 16, 2005. Located: 220 West Shore Drive, Southold.
SCTM# 1000-80-5-4.1
Number four, GULL POND LANE, LLC, c/o GREGORY CASSIMOS
requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit#9022 from Elaine F. Nesin
to Gull Pond Lane, LLC, c/o Gregory Cassimos, as issued on May
17, 2017. Located: 875 Gull Pond Lane, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-35-4-28.42
Number five, J.M.O. Environmental Consulting Services on
behalf of FRANK & PAULA DOKA request an Administrative Amendment
Board of Trustees 10 September 20, 2017
to Wetland Permit#9039 to chock the 6'x20' floating dock so
that it will remain at 2.5' above the creek bottom; to install
four(4) floating dock support piles with two of the piles
installed at each end of the float; and a "cross beam float
support" would then be installed between each of the two piles
located at either end of the float. Located: 755 Lupton Point
Road, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-115-11-4.1
Number six, Creative Environmental Design on behalf of
RICHARD &JANET DOWNING request an Administrative Amendment to
Wetland Permit#8925 to install an approximately 25'x60' area of
sod with access steps and a fire pit within the area seaward of
the deck and landward of the 50' setback from the wetlands.
Located: 995 Willis Creek Drive, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-123-10-2
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
VI. MOORINGS:
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Under Roman numeral VI, BONNIE NAULT requests a
Mooring Permit in Mud Creek for a 19' sailboat, replacing
Mooring #24. Access: Public
I'll make a motion to approve this application.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and second. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Public hearings. At this time I'll make a motion to go off our regular
meeting agenda and enter into our public hearings.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: This is a public hearing in the matter of the
following applications for permits under the Wetland ordinance
of the Town of Southold. I have an affidavit of publication from
the Suffolk Times, pertinent correspondence may be read prior to
asking for comments from the public. I would ask you to please
keep your comments short and relevant to the topic at hand. And
I'll also remind you that under Chapter 275-8(c), any paperwork
submitted at this time may result in a delay of the application.
WETLAND PERMITS:
Under wetland permits, number one, J.M.O. Environmental Consulting on behalf
of JOSEPH GRILLO requests a Wetland Permit to replace in-place existing 2,180
square feet of first story wood decking. Located: 365 Mesrobian Drive, Laurel.
SCTM# 10000-145-4-12.1.
The LWRP coordinator found this to be inconsistent. The inconsistency arises
from the fact that the deck was not constructed with a Trustee permit. And that in the
Board of Trustees 11 September 20, 2017
event the action is approved, will require a vegetated buffer.
The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this application with the
condition of a drainage plan, and hazardous conditions on the property should be
addressed.
The Trustees did a field inspection on the 17th. Trustee Glenn Goldsmith in fact
did the field inspection, and noted that the house needs a lot more work than just a deck;
questioned if in fact it was a teardown; noticed the collapsed cesspool cover; and that
the house needed gutters to leaders to drywells.
Is there anyone here to speak to this application?
MR. JUST: Good evening. Glenn Just, JMO Consulting.
The actual reason we are here is because the Building Department, according to
Mr. Verity, and I guess Amanda, there is an existing building permit to reconstruct
the dwelling as it sits; windows, doors, things of that nature. Interior. I realize there
is trees and raccoons living in the house as we speak. The deck was the only thing
left out, again, as Mr. Domino had said earlier, and that was the reason that we are
here is because the Building Department said we had to get Trustee approval to
re-sheet the deck to meet with the permit that exists already for the rest of
the reconstruction of the dwelling.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: What about the drywells, is that a problem?
MR. JUST: I would not think it would be. And I'll stop by there
on the way back tonight. I didn't get a chance on the way here
to look at the thing with the cesspool cover.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Be cautious if it's after dark because the
picture we have, the photograph, from the inspection, it's a hazard.
MR. JUST: Right. That's what Liz told me yesterday afternoon,
so. If that it needs covering, we'll take care of it right away.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: We don't presume to know entirely what the
Building Department does but we would surmise that it would not
have come just for the deck only if it had not been reviewed by
Mr. Verity and the department.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Can you address the issue raised by the LWRP
coordinator concerning the vegetation? Normally we ask for a
ten-foot non-turf buffer. Is that --
MR. JUST: With those bulkheads, sure.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Any other questions or comments from the Board?
(Negative response).
Hearing none, I'll make a motion to close this hearing.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: I'll make a motion to approve this application
with the condition that there be a ten-foot non-turf buffer and
gutters to leaders to drywells. And noting that by granting the
permit will address the inconsistency.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
MR. JUST: Thank you, very much.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: The next application, CAROLE RICH & DONALD
WILDER request a Wetland Permit for the existing 80'6" long
Board of Trustees 12 September 20, 2017
fixed timber dock consisting of landward steps to ground leading
to a±73'1" long by 4'8" wide fixed dock, and a 12'0" long by
7'5' wide seaward fixed platform in a "T" configuration.
Located: 2435 Laurel Lake Drive, Laurel. SCTM# 1000-121-4-17.1
The Trustees inspected this site on September 12th and we
did note that the structure is in non-compliance as a
pre-existing nonconforming dock made entirely of non-toxic
materials over the waters of Laurel Lake. And we have specific
recommendations I'll discuss in light of the LWRP coordinator's
report, because that will address some of the inconsistencies
that are in the report of the administrator.
And the Conservation Advisory Council has voted to support
this application.
The project as proposed was found to be inconsistent with
the LWRP insofar as there is not a Trustee permit on the
structure and it is not in conformity with the current dock
standard; and there were a number of public use and
environmental issues raised in the inconsistency concerning the
fact that covering public lands that the Trustees should
consider that project in light of its potential to fragment
habitat in Laurel Lake, which is a state recognized protected
waterbody and we would consider cumulative impacts and take into
consideration non-toxic materials be used in any future construction.
The Board had discussed at length many of those issues
before the LWRP coordinator's report was issued during the
course of field inspection, we realized that this dock was not
strictly conforming with the current standards but it was made
entirely of non-toxic materials, and the Board based on field
inspection determines that it would do more damage to the
environment by trying to remove the structure now. And with the
non-toxic lumber used during the constructions severely
weathered, the dock is sufficiently off the bottom, there is no
diminishment of the vegetation in the lake and we noticed there
appeared to be no fragmenting or disruption of the habitat
whatsoever. It was healthy fish populations, healthy natural
emergent and submerged aquatic vegetation there. But the Board
did specifically, in discussing this at work session, felt that
in granting a permit for this existing pre-existing
non-conforming dock that all alterations or changes must require
a permit and that repairs ordinarily allowed by the code must be
of non-toxic wood to prevent harmful effects to poorly flushed
lake waters.
Accordingly I would move to approve this application as
submitted, and the set of plans drawn by Donald Wilder on August
5th, 2017, with a stipulation that all alterations or changes
will require that Southold Town Wetland Permit be applied for
and that the ordinary repairs allowed to a dock under the
Wetland Code must be of non-toxic wood to protect the lake
waters of Laurel Lake, this bringing the project into
consistency with the LWRP. That's my motion.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
Board of Trustees 13 September 20, 2017
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I didn't call for any public comment. Sorry,
Mr. Wilder would you like to speak? My bad. I had such a long
shopping list.
MR. WILDER: No, it was adequate, thank you.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Is there anyone else who wishes to speak to
this application? I can reopen the hearing.
(Negative response).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I would move to close the hearing in this
matter.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I would now move to approve with the
stipulation of non-toxic material to be used on any repair and
that any repair or alteration come before the Board.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Number three, Long Island Pool Care Corp. on
behalf of ALI &WENDY AZMOUN request a Wetland Permit to install
a 16'x32' in-ground swimming pool with 16" wide coping around
pool; install 4' high pool enclosure fencing; install a pool
equipment area; and install a 300sq.ft. paver patio in between
the dwelling and the pool. Located: 425 Cedar Point Drive East,
Southold. SCTM# 1000-90-3-19
On September 12th, all the Trustees examined this property
and the notes state that it looks good, with no major issues.
The LWRP has found this to be consistent.
The Conservation Advisory Council has resolved to support.
Is there anybody who would like to speak on behalf of the
applicant?
(Negative response).
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Crickets.
Any further thoughts from the Board?
(Negative response).
Motion to close the hearing.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Motion to approve the application.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Number four, Patricia C. Moore, Esq. on
behalf of CHARLES ROSENBAUM & KIMBERLY LANDMAN request a Wetland
Permit to install a proposed pervious gravel driveway not to
exceed 12' in width and conform to Chapter 236 of the Town
Board of Trustees 14 September 20, 2017
Code-Stormwater Management; maintain existing discharge pipe
located under the driveways on Lot 1' (SCTM# 1000-59-8-6.1) and
Lot 2 (SCTM# 1000-59-8-6.2) in order to facilitate water flow to
the freshwater wetlands located on Lot 1 and Lot 2; establish
and perpetually maintain a 75' wide conservation or scenic
easement along the landward edge of the freshwater wetland
vegetation; establish and perpetually maintain a 50' wide
non-disturbance buffer along the landward edge of the freshwater
wetland vegetation; along the landward edge of the 50' wide
non-disturbance buffer install either a split rail fence (using
untreated lumber), a stone wall, stone boulders, or boulders and
native plantings, all with sufficient penetration or spacing in
the wall or boulders to allow water and small natural habitat to
pass under or through the wall penetrations; and to submit final
design and specifications of pervious driveway prior to
construction of driveway. Located: 6710 Soundview Avenue,
Southold. SCTM# 1000-59-8-6.2
Is there anyone here who wishes to speak on behalf of this
application?
MS. MOORE: I'm here, but I think you want to put something on
the record. That's all.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Yes. This project has been deemed consistent
with the LWRP.
The Trustees are familiar with the site having been there
several times. The field inspection on September 12th, the Board
indicated that we will want to see the silt fence at the 75-foot
limit and that we did make mention of a potential, if there is
an emerging threat to oak trees in this area of oak wilt, and as
a result of subsequent review by the Trustees and referral to
the Department of Environmental Conservation, there is some
concern the trees in the area have been shown to have oak wilt.
It's not known whether the trees specific to this site have it.
Usually the procedure is to contain --to chip the tree and
limit whole tree movement.
The DEC had communicated with us recommendations and I
believe that the Board reviewing these is amenable to the
applicant discussing proper tree care with the DEC. And that
might be an appropriate item to put in our permitting process.
Are there any questions?
(No response).
I believe we have been to the site a number of times and
the construction of the drains and the proposed pervious
driveway are in conformity with the Board's previous inspections
and request of the applicant.
Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on behalf of this
application?
MS. MOORE: No. We thank you for all your time on this
application. I will contact the client, and Elizabeth, maybe
tomorrow you could e-mail me that way I can forward it to their
landscaper. That might be the fastest way to get this
information. Because I know they are anxious to address the
Board of Trustees 15 September 20, 2017
trees due to the storms, so. And landscapers are very difficult
to coordinate.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Yes. Any questions from the Trustees?
(Negative response).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Actually, several of the trees are on lot
one as well as one may be on lot two, so that since I think
there is good will shown here to do the right thing, the DEC
also knows where you live, and --
MS. MOORE: Yes, thank you. Well, not where I live. Actually,
they know'where I live, too. But it's family, so, I mean, there
is cooperation obviously there between the two siblings.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Right. And the fact is fortunately this
particular tree problem is usually self-limited so the proper
handling will probably limit additional exposure. So the trees,
they have gorgeous trees on the property.
Hearing no further comments or concerns, I would make a
motion to close the hearing in this matter.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I would move to approve this application as
submitted according to the recent revised plans dated August
14th, 2017, with the stipulation that the owners conclude the
tree removal process as indicated by the New York State
Department of Conservation Forest Health Section. That's my
motion.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
MS. MOORE: Thank you.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number five, L. K. McLean Associates on
behalf of PETER R. PETROWSKI, c/o RICH PETROWSKI requests a
Wetland Permit to remove existing timber bulkhead and install
in-place 141.6' of new vinyl bulkheading with a dead-man system
consisting of a 93.3' long bulkhead, a 12.0' long westerly
return, and a 36.3' long easterly return; re-vegetate all
disturbed areas with top soil and seed; no work will be
performed on the seaward side of the bulkhead. Located: 295
East Legion Avenue, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-122-3-26
The LWRP coordinator found this to be consistent.
The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this
application.
The Trustees conducted a field inspection on September
12th, noting that there was a house on the plans but not in the
description; questioning that the existing dock exceeds
one-third of the width of the creek; but otherwise noting it's a
straightforward bulkhead replacement, and looking for a non-turf
buffer of 15 feet.
Is there anyone here who wishes to speak on behalf of this
application?
Board of Trustees 16 September 20, 2017
MR. DWYER: On behalf of the property owner, Chris Dwyer from LK
McLean Associates. Although there was no work proposed seaward,
as indicated on the existing-conditions plan and proposed site
plan, they do intend to build --to take down the existing
dwelling and replace it with a new house and septic system.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I think for simplicity's sake we are not
addressing that. If you can submit new plans with no house on
it so we can have a clean set of plans just for the bulkhead, so
we don't get the two mixed up.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: How about in terms the non-turf buffer
proposed? We are looking around 15 feet landward of the
bulkhead.
MR. DWYER: We can propose something that would not require
fertilization and go with the recommendation. Right now they do
have grass.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: There is also a dock coming off the side that
is non-permitted as well. They only have a permit for 6x30.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: There is one permit in here from 1992, permit
#4003, which is in Elizabeth Petrowski's name, which permits
one 6x30 floating dock and a 4x10' ramp to extend no further
than adjacent docks. So currently there is more than that on the
site. So one, is the original permit#4003 will have to be
transferred to the current applicant's name. And we'll have to
get rid of the second dock that is on the site and just --
MR. DWYER: I know the owner of the boat is currently trying to
sell that boat. And I think that was a condition of having it
there. I know that it's in the process of being sold.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Is there anyone else here wishing to speak to
this application?
(Negative response).
Any comments from the Board?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Just to make the dock adjustment and the
15-foot non-turf.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: What about the jet ski?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I thought it was just a whaler.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: And the jet ski. Do we have pictures?
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Any other comments?
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I guess an additional comment would be given
the extent of the work that is being proposed, if at this time
the applicant wanted to downsize the dock or amend it into
keeping with some of the current standards. Obviously the Board
will honor the existing permit. Obviously the problem with the
addition. But as far as if marine construction is taking place
replacing bulkheads is also a tie in with the dock, if it's a
time to consider the dock itself as being let's say instead of
six feet, four foot wide, conforming to current standard while
removing that additional spur that is not permitted, might be
time to think about it while all the construction is taking place.
And the jet ski ramp actually is also, would be a
non-compliance, because that usually goes against the surface
area of 120-square foot standard 6x20 float. So.
Board of Trustees 17 September 20, 2017
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Any other questions or comments?
(Negative response).
I'll make a motion to close this hearing.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion to approve this application
with the condition of a 15-foot non-turf buffer, new plans that
do not have the house on it, and that the current docks are
brought into consistency with the original permit.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: And removal of the jet ski.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Removal of the jet ski float.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Is there a second?
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: The next hearing, number six, L. K. McLean
Associates, P.C. on behalf of 100 PARK AVENUE CORP., c/o PAUL
PAWLOWSKI requests a Wetland Permit to construct a proposed
4'x121.7' timber dock with a finished elevation of 4.50;
construct a 4'x30' fixed lower platform parallel to the seaward
end of dock using four (4) 10" diameter piles with a finished
elevation of 2.50; and for two (2) additional 10" diameter
mooring tie-off piles installed 12' off the lower platform; and
non-treated wood will be used in the construction of the dock.
Located: 100 Park Avenue, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-123-7-3.
This application previously had a public hearing which was
held open until tonight. In the intervening time, a number of
letters have been added to the file, I believe 17 at last count,
at the Board of Trustees work session on Monday night.
Also, we received, just, I believe this morning, a report
from First Coastal, dated September 15th, dealing with the dock.
Since this has been received in the office of the Trustees
within the one week before the meeting, where the code
specifically precludes submitting materials within one week.
The Board has not had an opportunity to look at this study at
all. And accordingly, we can open the hearing, take some
additional comments or concerns, but understanding that the
Board will have to hold this over to a further hearing for the
individuals additional opportunity to comment on the project and
also to comment on the additional study that has been submitted.
Is there anyone here wishes to speak on behalf of this application?
MR. TERCHUNIAN: Thank you, Mr. Bredemeyer, Mr. President,
members of the board. My name is Aram Terchunian, First Coastal
Corporation, West Hampton Beach, New York. I'm a coastal
geologist and environment scientist.
My apologies for the seven-day lapse. And I appreciate the
Board's examination of the report we submitted. It will be
useful in your deliberations.
I won't spend a lot of time on it but I would like to just
Board of Trustees 18 September 20, 2017
go over some of the main points. If I could direct your
attention to some of the items that I think are most important.
So the dock that is proposed and in front of you is
designed by professional engineers. It is to be constructed
according to the generally accepted engineering coastal
construction standards, and it will therefore be able to
withstand the site conditions and setting.
We have done a historical analysis of structures in this
area, the Board I think will be interested to know that there
are over 70 structures located along this one mile, 1.2 mile
stretch of shoreline from Deep Hole to Downs Creek. Most of them
are timber groins, one of them is a dock. They have been there
for something on the order of 50 years, most of them. So clearly
this is an area that has a series of shore-perpendicular
structures extending out into Peconic Bay, which are of similar
scale and size as what we are proposing.
It has been brought to my attention that perhaps wave
impact in this area is of concern to the Board. You'll find we
have conducted a wave analysis using FEMA flood maps and we
compared this particular area to the Paradise Point area where
this Board has previously approved a number of docks. And the
flood elevation in Paradise Point is actually five-feet higher
than it is at this location.
We also conducted an evaluation of this dock, again Section
275 of the Town Code, going through point by point and
identifying how this proposal satisfies each and every aspect of
that section of the code.
We also reviewed the LWRP report that was supplied to the
file. We disagree with the conclusion. We believe that report
has a series inaccuracies which we have attempted to correct.
And we believe that we have provided a thorough analysis of the
policies pointed out in the LWRP report, and those policies are
-- a review of those policies show this proposal is fully
consistent with the Town's LWRP.
I would point out that the Town's Conservation Advisory
Council has voted unanimously in favor of the application, and
I'm sure the Board will want time to review the material
submitted, and I would be happy to return at a later date to
answer questions you may have. And that is what I have to say
this evening, unless there a question I can answer.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: No. I'm sure the Board would be very
interested in reviewing all this information you have provided
us. Any questions?
TRUSTEE SANDERS: I want to make one note. You said there are 70
structures and only one of those are a dock?
MR. TERCHUNIAN: There's 70 shore-perpendicular structures that
extend between 50 to 150 out, and one dock, located about 300
feet away.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Is there anyone else that wishes to speak to
this application?
Board of Trustees 19 September 20, 2017
MR. LESTRANGE: I wish to speak in opposition.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Please come up and state your name. I know a
number of people have spoken before and put letters in. If you
could be brief and also reiterate if you have spoken before.
MR. LESTRANGE: Thank you, very much, Mr. Vice-President, Mr.
President and Trustees. My name is Kenneth J. LeStrange, 960
Willis Creek Drive, Mattituck. I'll be brief.
In terms of this recommendation, I have several concerns.
Being located on Deep Hole Creek we do in fact have a dock. We
went through permits process and so forth. It's quite laborious,
and should be. And we are very happy that we did it.
This dock is quite large; quite large, by at least my
standards and by the standards of the area.
Another concern that I have is the potential use of said
dock prospectively. I have heard nothing about what use it's
going to have, whether a vessel of some kind will be moored
there or whatever, but I understand it is connected with an
airport, which was in existence when we bought this place in
2004. However, my concern is, and I realize this is not a
concern of these Trustees, the issue that we already have with
seaplanes and helicopters crossing this area of the Peconic Bay,
both the north fork, south fork and Peconic Bay itself.
So I am concerned that the use of this dock may be very
different, prospectively, than perhaps we are anticipating right now.
It was news to me, I apologize this is my first time in
front of this group, that there were letters and so forth. We
should probably put most of this in writing.
Thank you, very much, for your time.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes
to speak to this matter?
MR. CUDDY: Good evening. Charles Cuddy on behalf of Paul
Pawlowski. I want to clarify something. Will this be held open?
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It will be held open. We'll table the matter
and hold it open for additional comments and give the
opportunity for the public who may wish to review the report and
for the Board to study it.
MR. CUDDY: So there will be further comments at the next hearing.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Yes.
MR. CUDDY: Thank you.
MR. PAWLOWSKI: Paul Pawlowski, 100 Park Avenue. Owner. Thanks,
for your time tonight.
I just want to just briefly talk about the use, just quickly. And I know
I sent in letters and the letters that you received are mainly about the
potential use of this dock. And for the record, I sent something in but
I also want to say in person, there is no --this use is for my private
residence for my family only. There is never going to be a seaplane tied to
this. There will never be a helicopter landing next to it. And
I can confidently say the word never. I know you never say
never, but I can say that. This property is a 1.7 acre
residential property. Yes, it's next to the airport, however
there is a lot of residential properties next to airports, and
Board of Trustees 20 September 20, 2017
by no means do I want someone landing their plane coming through
my property going to the airport. That's just a statement of
fact. Then out of common sense, no helicopters can choose the
water over a runway that is five-hundred, six-hundred feet away.
And no seaplane in the northeast will choose the dock over a
perfectly new runway. Most of the seaplanes in the northeast do
have landing gear with their skates, but that would be a far
stretch to say that this has any commercial use whatsoever.
On a personal level, private level, whatever, that is just
not part of what this use is. The goal here is to use this dock
for the same boat that I put on the mooring. I would like to
remove the mooring just because it's not very-- it's not easy
with the kids to get on. And that's the bottom line.
As far as overall length, it's a 120-foot dock, which is
when you are drawing a line across the coastline there it's well
short of the dock that is to the west by 50-plus feet. And the
dock itself, as far as size and length and stuff, is all well
within code.
So the length compared to most docks is average at best.
Compared to the most recently approved ones into the bay, it's
30-feet shorter, close to 30-feet shorter.
So those are my points on use and overall size. I look
forward to you reading the comments on the face off of our
comments back to the LWRP response. And as the applicant, I feel
I'm asking for something within code, with precedent, and I look
forward to the next meeting.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Thank you.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: And the Board has reviewed your
communications at work session Monday night, and to be clear,
we'll give this report a very hard look.
Is there anyone else who wishes to speak with respect to
this application?
(Negative response).
Board members, any additional comments?
(Negative response).
Hearing none, I make a motion to table this application to
provide the Board an opportunity to review the study of First
Coastal and allow members of the public to review same, and
we'll put this matter over presumably to next month's regular
meeting. Motion to table.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Number seven, Costello Marine Contracting Corp.
on behalf of JAMES WEEDEN request a Wetland Permit to construct
178' of new retaining wall; fill void areas landward of new wall
with approximately 60 cubic yards of clean trucked in fill; and
re-grade disturbed area. Located: 1175 Bridge Lane, Cutchogue.
SCTM# 1000-118-2-16.1
Board of Trustees 21 September 20, 2017
The LWRP found this to be inconsistent. His reasons are as
follows: Rate of erosion does not look severe enough to warrant
eliminating the natural shoreline. Properly designed and
installed vegetation in conjunction with coir logs or similar
treatment have approved effective in controlling erosion in
lower energy areas. Maintaining the qualities of the natural
shoreline is recommended.
A wetland permit was not found and the application states
that coir logs and vegetation were used in the past to control
erosion when coir logs and vegetation were installed.
Hard structures are not the only practical design. Coir
logs with vegetation are recommended for consideration.
Vegetative methods are not proposed in the current design.
The CAC resolved to support this application with the
condition of a ten-foot non-turf buffer landward of the
retaining wall.
The Trustees inspected this location on September 12th.
All were present. The notes are: Retaining wall near top of
bank far back enough to keep its feet dry. Then a discussion
about the location of the tree and efforts to save the large
healthy mature tree.
Then also use of coir fiber logs a few feet from the toe of
the retaining wall.
Is there anyone here that wishes to speak regarding this
application?
MR. COSTELLO: Jack Costello on behalf of the applicant to answer
any questions.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Looking at the plans and after our discussion
with you, we really need to keep this far enough back to
actually make it a retaining wall.
MR. COSTELLO: That's the plan.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So I think we discussed in the field you
marking out where you'll be and we'll go down and inspect it.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: The plans were really hard to read. The new
ones you guys submitted. That was one of the things we had
noticed Monday when we --
MR. COSTELLO: The plans clearly indicate the retaining wall will
be at the top of the bank. So the foot of the bulkhead will be
clearly out of the water, as we had discussed. And the wetlands that
were delineated by Robert Fox show where the wetlands start
and end, and everything will be landward of that. And those
ribbons still remain. So the wall will be considerably behind
the wetlands delineation marks.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Is there a way you can stake out exactly
where the wall will go?
MR. COSTELLO: There were stakes there that are ribboned. But
when you guys were there you can clearly see the wall will go at
the top crest of the bank. That's where the wall will be
installed. Kind of like to remediate the erosion. To basically
draw a line in the stand where I can't go any further because
the property has eroded significantly over the past 20 years.
Board of Trustees 22 September 20, 2017
I'll gladly put stakes along the bank but you can clearly see
the top of the bank is where the wall is going. And like I said,
it's clearly behind the wetlands delineation. That's why we
spent the money to do that.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: The top of the bank on the one --
MR. COSTELLO: The only place it will go outside the top of the
bank is by the big oak tree. Besides that, the top of the bank is
a line. Excluding where the oak tree is.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Then to the west of that, right, I think you
had it where it was going to be two feet back from the top of that?
MR. COSTELLO: Yes. And at that point, as it runs toward the
existing bulkhead, it will be almost completely buried. You
won't even really see it. As you go into the basin, you'll see a
certain percentage of it, but clearly not much. The only place
it will be noticeable, really, is by that oak tree.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If we push it in a foot from the top of the
bank on this side of the oak tree from the picture, I think that
will help alleviate some of the concerns of it being a bulkhead.
Because if we put it right at the top of the bank, we are one
storm away from it being a bulkhead. Which is something we have
to try to avoid.
So I would like to see something, if we could move it in
slightly and then in the new plans you have the coir fiber logs
at the base of the retaining wall, if we could move those out
and plant in between, it will also help satisfy the LWRP
coordinator, because then we are not just putting a wall in
there that goes down very close to water. If we could kick it
back a little bit, vegetate in front of it, then it's absolutely
a retaining wall.
MR. COSTELLO: How far out do you want the coir log?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Anyone have any thoughts on that?
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: We were all thinking about the same on that.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Three, four feet out?
We could do three, four feet out of coir logs with Spartina planting behind it.
MR. COSTELLO: Well, it would not be Spartina, it would probably
be Cape American beach grass because it's landward of the high
tide. Spartina is generally used seaward of high tide with the tidal zone.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The water is right there.
MR. COSTELLO: If you move the bio-log out three feet--
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: To keep it out to whatever elevation --
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Whatever elevation it turns out. I recall it
being slightly lower. But if you do the work and that's where
it is and you go with beach grass, I would not oppose that.
MR. COSTELLO: If it needs Spartina, we'll do that, but I believe
it will be high enough that Cape American beach grass will be
high enough. Whatever you want.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Can you show me on the plans where you want to
put those? Can you approach?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If you could approach and take a look real
quick, and show on the plans.
(Mr. Costello approaches the dais).
Board of Trustees 23 September 20, 2017
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So what we are discussing here is just kicking
it out to here and then vegetate.
MR. COSTELLO: If we put it here then it will actually fill above
high tide.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: And one foot back so you get some --
MR. COSTELLO: Right.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Just to give us a little extra to have a
natural barrier.
MR. COSTELLO: Fair enough. If you approve it based on that, I'll
send you plans in tomorrow.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone else here that wishes to speak
regarding this application?
(Negative response).
Are there any other comments from the Board?Any thoughts?
(Negative response).
Okay, I make a motion to close this hearing.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I make a motion to approve this application as
amended with the following amendments: New plans depicting the
wall being back one foot from the top of the bank; coir logs
roughly three to four feet from the bottom of the retaining
wall; plans should also depict a planting plan between the coir
logs and retaining wall. And once you stake the area, to contact
our office to have the area Trustee come and do an inspection
before the work begins.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number eight, Costello Marine Contracting Corp.
on behalf of NICHOLAS & GEORGIA NOTIAS request a Wetland Permit
to construct a dock consisting of a 4'x40' fixed landward ramp
up onto a 4'x150' level dock; construct two 4'x40' lower
platforms at offshore end of dock; install four (4) 10" diameter
mooring pilings; install water piping and electric conduit to offshore end
of dock; and to construct a 4'x20' walkway/ramp over dune.
Located: 450 Paradise Point Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-93-1-3
The LWRP coordinator submitted a seven-page memorandum
noting numerous inconsistencies, including but not limited to
the fact that the proposed private structure would extend into
public waters, resulting in a net decrease in public access to
public water under-land lands and the nearshore area. Public
beach and boat ramp located to the south of the parcel
impediments to the use of the area would occur as a result of
construction of a private dock structure.
I will not read each and every one of these at this time.
The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this
application with the provision that, the condition that be made
for lateral access along the shoreline.
Board of Trustees 24 September 20, 2017
The Trustees did a field inspection on the 12th, and to
elaborate their concerns, there was a concern the location of
the dock was not in the center of the property but was close to
the property line and moved in the direction so that it was very
close to a public boat ramp.
There was also concern for the location simply being near
the public boat ramp. It was the feeling of the Board at the
field inspection that this was, the dock is 150 foot in length,
could be somewhat shorter, significantly shorter, and still
reach deep enough water. That this application could benefit
from a pre-submission. Could benefit from a pre-submission.
With that being said, are there comments or questions from the
Board?
TRUSTEE SANDERS: There was a letter issue, too, right?
Did you mention that?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes. One of the neighbors didn't receive -- it
was signed for by a tenant, which is not--
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It's a non-issue.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's what they were referring to.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: They didn't get a chance to speak about it.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: At this point I would like to make a motion to
table this hearing to give the applicant an opportunity to meet
with the Board onsite to discuss remediation of this
application. That's my motion.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Yes, I'll second that motion.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: If you want to discuss it further.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: No, I think it makes sense to go out.
Particularly locating it so far on the side of the property
line. Usually most dock applicants -- it was well said. I'll
second the motion.
MR. COSTELLO: Are you going to take comments from the public?
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I think it would be good, yes.
MR. COSTELLO: Jack Costello, on behalf of the applicant. The
dock meets the setbacks requirements and the boat is only going
to be in 2.5 feet of water. The dock really can't get any
shorter, and as far as the setback of the dock, it's 38 feet off
the property line. So I mean, what rules are we using in
determining the location of the dock?
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: The Board has -- sorry, you speak. I'm
sorry.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: I'll withdraw the motion so we can have a
discussion.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I'll withdraw the second. Go ahead.
MR. COSTELLO: I'll gladly discuss this now before we go. I'll
meet you onsite, that's no big deal, and we can certainly table
the application. It's not like we are going to need this for
Christmas or anything. But what are the concerns about the
setbacks, considering we are 38 feet off the property line.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It is a sizeable piece of property here. We
have to consider everyone within the town, including the
neighbors, and we are right up against their property line. I
Board of Trustees 25 September 20, 2017
mean, yes, it may be 38 feet but it's still shifted all the way
over to that side, and it also brings it closer to the public
access ramp and the public beach. So that's something that has
to be considered here. Because public access is obviously number
one priority.
MR. COSTELLO: But I mean it really doesn't impede public access
down the beach, because there is 50 feet to walk between the
dock and down the beach.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I think we are talking more access to
approach to and from the public launching ramp, is predominantly
the main issues we are talking about.
MR. COSTELLO: Okay, so the second Tuesday of the month, next
month?
TRUSTEE DOMINO: We made a motion earlier tonight to have the
meeting on October 10th. So that's what it is.
Hearing no further comments, I make a motion to table this
application.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Okay, next application, number nine, Samuels
& Steelman Architects on behalf of PATRICK & DIANE SEVERSON
request a Wetland Permit to partially demolish a 560sq.ft. area
of existing dwelling and 264sq.ft. front entry stair; construct
new two-story addition and screened porch onto remainder of
existing dwelling for a total 1,871sq.ft. footprint; install a
new 275sq.ft. front entry with stairs; install new 43 linear
foot at 4' high retaining walls at front entry; install an
additional 136sq.ft. of decking onto seaward side of dwelling;
install a new well; install a new sanitary system landward of
dwelling; remove portion of existing driveway and install
743sq.ft. of new gravel driveway with parking area; reconfigure
existing pool terrace by removing 1,469sq.ft. of existing and
installing new for a 2,150sq.ft. terrace footprint around
existing pool; reconfigure existing pool fence for a total of
323 linear feet of fencing; removal of 8 trees; and install
gutters to leaders to drywells to contain roof runoff, and in
accordance with Chapter 236 of the Town Code-Stormwater
Management. Located: 9202 Bridge Lane, Cutchogue.
SCTM# 1000-73-2-3.1
The project was determined to be inconsistent with the
LWRP. The coordinator could not find permits for showing a house
that was constructed in 1986. Actually I was on the Board of
Trustees in 1986 and this house would not have needed a wetland
permit from the town at that time because the jurisdiction did
not include distances from the water until after that. There
were 75 feet and it did not include the protection of bluffs and
dunes. The wording of the'code has since changed. So as one who
was here the last century, I have to amend that.
The other point, the LWRP coordinator meant was the fact
Board of Trustees 26 September 20, 2017
there was a history of erosion on the property such that it
would be advisable that new structures be located as far from
the top of the bluff and coastal erosion area as practicable. I
believe the Board on their field inspection felt that that
condition is actually being met with a very small deck addition
and that all constructions is behind the Coastal Erosion Hazard
Area line.
The Conservation Advisory Council has voted to approve the
application, support the application.
And there is a Zoning Board of Appeals deliberation in
favor of the application. Is there anyone here who wishes to
speak on behalf of application?
MS. STEELMAN: Nancy Steelman, Samuels & Steelman Architects,
here to answer any questions or concerns.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: We felt it was fairly straightforward. Any
questions?
(Negative response).
Anyone else wish to speak on behalf of this application?
(Negative response).
Seeing no one, I make a motion to close the hearing in this matter.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Motion to approve this application as
submitted noting that the plans largely building the house
within the existing footprint and behind the Coastal Erosion
Hazard Area brings the project into consistency with the Town
LWRP. That's my motion.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Number ten, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of D.
CANNIZZARO QRPT & B. MILTAKIS QRPT, c/o JOHN MILTAKIS, TRUSTEE
requests a Wetland Permit to remove existing deteriorated timber
bulkhead and landward concrete retaining wall; construct
in-place of wooden bulkhead 81 linear feet of new vinyl bulkhead
with two (2) 10 linear foot bulkhead returns, and raised an additional 18"
from existing bulkhead height; install 23 cubic yards of clean sand fill
landward of proposed bulkhead; and install and perpetually maintain a
10' wide non-turf buffer along the landward edge of the bulkhead.
Located: 1460 Strohson Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-103-10-29.1
The LWRP has found this to be consistent. One note required
a non-turf buffer is vegetated with beneficial species.
And the Conservation Advisory Council has resolved to
support this application.
On the 12th of September all Trustees examined this
property. Notes are to follow: Low sill, no rebuild of a huge
dock; check permitting on dock; and recommended for thru-flow on
part of the walkway. And there are questions on gutters with no
drywells.
Board of Trustees 27 September 20, 2017
Is there anybody here who would like to speak on behalf of
this application?
MR. PATANJO: Jeff Patanjo, on behalf of the applicant. There was
a couple of different items there. One is the thru-flow on the
existing, the deck, and we have no problem doing that over, say
the first ten feet, that the wetlands can grow in that area, as
shown in this photo. There is evidence the wetlands are growing
in front of the existing bulkhead. The existing bulkhead as it
sits right now, there was some conversations I believe about a
low sill bulkhead in this location. The whole intent is to match
the neighboring bulkheads to either side of this property. There
are two to the north and the south. Of this there are two
bulkheads we are going to tie into, which is a perfectly good
situation for this. Because it did exist previously.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: I don't recall any other functioning bulkhead.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: The only think I recall is a bulkhead like
that continuing.
MR. PATANJO: I have it on my survey. I see a bulkhead to the
north and the south.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It's definitely not on the one side.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Well, a couple of questions. When we went to
this property, the first thing we all said this, it's a perfect
example of a property that does not seem to need a bulkhead
because of such lush growth. There is no trees that are causing
the vegetation not to grow. So when you are looking at this,
it's very thick and lush, and actually looks like the bulkhead
that is currently there is causing a lack of growth. By its
removal, it seems the environment will naturally go back to its
original intent and it would still suffice the owner's
protection for the land. At least that's our thoughts on that.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Both neighboring properties have healthier
Spartina growth and they don't have that bulkhead sitting right
on the water.
MR. PATANJO: That's what I would like to see.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: It's enormous growth.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The picture that we saw is the most amount on
this property that we are talking about. But the neighboring
properties toward the edges where the bulkheads are even more
failed are much happier. It doesn't really read like a situation that
would require a new bulkhead for property protection or--
MR. PATANJO: What we are trying to do obviously is to protect
against any future erosion. There is an upper retaining wall
which is concrete block right now that we are trying to remove
by way of installation of a new bulkhead. Would consideration be
given to removing the existing bulkhead and put in the new
proposed retaining wall. It's about three feet, four feet back.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Put it just slightly behind the concrete.
Because the concrete bulkhead is closely linked to where the
embankment falls off.
MR. PATANJO: Correct. So if I was to modify the location of this
proposed one back in line. It's right behind those Rosa Rugosas.
Board of Trustees 28 September 20, 2017
Modify the location. You can see the wall in the back there.
Put that as the bulkhead location and then simply remove the
existing wall and allow that area to revegetate naturally.
Again, it will be --
TRUSTEE DOMINO: That's a healthier proposition.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Much healthier proposition.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: What if in addition to that, if at the
location of the existing bulkhead, when you pull it out, to put
some coir logs and planted area between, in other words, you'll
upset, probably some of the Spartina will be upset anyway.
Can you use that --
MR. PATANJO: I can understand what are you saying but if we did,
in the past, what the DEC had us do, we can just cut it. Looking
at those, there is no bulkhead to really move.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Cut flush.
MR. PATANJO: Cut flush. Just a couple piles. Because those are
laying horizontal, the 2x10s, these will come out in two
seconds, then we can just cut the piles flush.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: The coir logs -- it will just go by itself
MR. PATANJO: Yes. It will just revegetate.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: So if I'm hearing you correctly, your
suggestion is to modify the location of the proposed bulkhead to
the location of the cement -- landward. Landward of the cement.
Then it becomes a retaining wall and not a bulkhead.
MR. CANNIZZARO: David Cannizzaro. May I just say something. The
primary reason for this application where we reached out to Jeff
is that over the years and we've had the property since 2003, we
have noticed the retaining wall has actually lost its structural
integrity and it has moved toward the water to the point where
it's keeled over, and I'm afraid we'll end up losing the whole
house eventually, because it has a tendency to shift and pull
and we have had three hurricanes and the ones of latest memory
is Irene and Sandy. And what it does, every storm that comes
leaves a reed line higher and closer to the property. And we
have, I have a pick-up truck and we have to load it up and make
three or four trips with the reeds that just pile up.`And I
could see that causing the contribution. And I trust Jeffs
guidance here, but I do want to mention this. There are two
adjacent bulkheads in direct line with our bulkhead and if we
were to pull it back, it would be like boxing, we would box in
the adjacent properties with bulkheads and we would, it would be
like a square. And I'm all about complying and trying to work,
any reasonable method. But Jeff, you realize, the neighbors,
we'll have to cut and box it out. You know.
MR. PATANJO: Well, we'll do returns on either side anyway to
protect your property.
MR. CANNIZZARO: That's why I thought bring up the height of the
bulkhead to prevent --
MR. PATANJO: What we would do is continue, it would be continued
across and tie it into this, and it would be continued and it
would be one continuous wall.
Board of Trustees 29 September 20, 2017
TRUSTEE SANDERS: You have to direct your thoughts to us.
Here is my suggestion, because it will get complicated and
I think it would be perhaps wise for all of us to visit the site
so you can express your thoughts and you can express your
thoughts and we'll understand what we are talking about.
MR. PATANJO: Do you want to postpone it until next month?
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Or table for revised plans. It's pretty
straightforward. It's just a matter of the owner and agent
getting together.
MR. CANNIZZARO: Would the survey show that though?
MR. PATANJO: Yes.
MR. CANNIZZARO: Because if the survey shows the adjacent
bulkheads --
TRUSTEE SANDERS: I would like to go back because I can't recall
other bulkheads and if I do recall them, I recall them as
trashed. So I would like to make sure we are approving something
I believe in.
MR. PATANJO: Do you want to table it?
MR. CANNIZZARO: Nobody likes to extend it or--
TRUSTEE SANDERS: This way it gets it done correctly for the
future and there is no confusion.
MR. CANNIZZARO: I agree with that.
MR. PATANJO: I agree with that.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Would anybody else like to speak on behalf of
this particular, including you?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If the other members of the Board don't feel
they need to see it, I don't mind going down.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: I'll go with you.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So that's something we don't have to put it on
the --
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It is storm season. They could move ahead
with getting a set of plans that we might review then by next
work session or amended plans.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: That sounds good.
MR. PATANJO: So you would --
TRUSTEE SANDERS: I would like to go there. I'll go with you.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do you want to meet with them or just go check
it out again?
MR. PATANJO: What I can do is I can give you a set of revised
plans and stake it again in the field what my suggestions are.
Then you can go whenever you want.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That sounds good.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: When can you get this done? I just realized I
I'll be gone for two weeks.
MR. PATANJO: I can get it done by next Monday or Tuesday. When
are you going away?
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Next Tuesday.
MR. PATANJO: I would have to e-mail it to you.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: That works for me.
MR. CANNIZZARO: So that's not this coming Monday, it's next
Monday?
Board of Trustees 30 September 20, 2017
TRUSTEE SANDERS: I'll be gone. But if you are able to get that
information through the e-mail, that will be fine. I'll be able
to correspond with where I'm going.
MR. CANNIZZARO: Thank you, very much.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: So I make a motion to table this hearing.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number eleven, Jeffery Patanjo on behalf of
BRENDAN & KRISTINA TULLY requests a Wetland Permit to install 88
linear feet of vinyl retaining wall landward of existing
bulkhead; install a 10'x20' un-treated deck landward of existing
bulkhead; and to establish and perpetually maintain a 25' wide
non-turf buffer along the landward edge of the bulkhead and
along the bluff face. Located: 220 West Shore Drive, Southold.
SCTM# 1000-80-5-4.1
The LWRP found this to be consistent and inconsistent. The
inconsistency was the proposal to install a 10x20' untreated
deck landward of the existing bulkhead is inconsistent with
policy four of the LWRP.
The CAC resolved to not support the application because in
accordance with Chapter 275-11, construction and operation
standards retaining walls are not permitted unless excessive
erosion can be demonstrated.
The Conservation Advisory Council did not observe excessive
erosion on the bluff.
Trustee Bredemeyer did an inspection on September 13th,
noting the need for a retaining wall is demonstrated. The
proposed deck is 200 square feet. The neighbor's deck is
120-square feet. And the possibly of scaling back the deck to
120-square feet.
Is there anyone here wish to speak regarding this application?
MR. PATANJO: Jeff Patanjo on behalf of the applicant. We'll
scale the deck back to 120-square feet. If you have any other
questions I'm happy to answer them.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Generally try to abide by the suggestions
and recommendations of the Conservation Advisory Council as the
Trustee on point there. The slopes are pretty steep. And when,
sometimes slopes themselves may give a hint towards me because
they didn't look to me like they were so robustly vegetated. And
there could be legitimate difference of opinion here. They were
nicely vegetated and we hope they continue to be well vegetated.
MR. PATANJO: The reason for this, I did the other three to the
north of this property, northwest, whatever it might be, and a
lot of those have the second retaining wall also. The retaining
wall behind it.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: And there was severe erosion on a
number of those houses and --
MR. PATANJO: After the storm I was there.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: (Continuing). And we had been there and I
Board of Trustees 31 September 20, 2017
believe you were the expediter on a number of those, yes.
MR. PATANJO: So I definitely feel for storm prevention it's well justified.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Is there anyone else here wishes to speak
regarding this application?
(Negative response).
Any further questions or comments from the Board?
(Negative response).
I'll make a motion to close this hearing.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Motion to approve this application with the
condition that the deck be limited to no more than 120-square
feet, thereby bringing it into consistency with the LWRP.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Number 12, Suffolk Environmental Consulting on
behalf of 5345 VANSTON ROAD, LLC requests a Wetland Permit to
construct a dock assembly off the eastern shoreline consisting
of a 4'x41' fixed landward entry ramp and elevated catwalk
secured by twelve (12) 6" diameter posts; a 3'x15' hinged ramp;
and a 6'x20' floating dock secured by four (4) 8" diameter
pilings; and all hardware to be hot dipped galvanized. Located:
5345 Vanston Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-111-14-1
The LWRP coordinator found this to be inconsistent. His
concerns included the navigable channel in this area is narrow
and a vessel is not shown at the end of this dock. Therefore
impacts to navigation are unknown that the time; the material
which the dock will be constructed of have not been specified;
it is unknown if specified treated lumber will be used. The
decking of the dock has also not been specified.
It is recommended that the proposed dock structure is
designed to not extend into public trust waters resulting in a
net decrease in public access to public underwater lands.
The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this
application.
The Trustees visited this site, again, on September 12th,
and found it to be fairly straightforward; also mentioned that
thru-flow was needed; and discussed possibly dialing it back
slightly.
Is there anyone here that wishes to speak regarding this
application?
MR. ANDERSON: Bruce Anderson, Suffolk Environmental Consulting,
for the applicant. It's fairly straightforward. I would say I
certainly have no objection to using thru-flow over the
vegetated wetlands. So we are happy to add that specification.
We generally use treated piles in this town, and that would be my
expectation.
And thirdly, when you say dialing it back, if you look at
Board of Trustees 32 September 20, 2017
the map before you, you are talking about maybe bringing it back
what, a foot? Two feet? I don't even know if it's worth it.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: That was our earliest-most assessment. I
think when we looked at the plans again we realized there is
actually not a lot of bank.
MR. ANDERSON: We put it right at the back for that reason.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: We did two assessments. There was an initial
assessment and discussion in the field and then we actually
backed away from that during the course of field inspection
because of the way the underwater slopes were.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So I think mainly we are looking for thru-flow
decking and non-toxic cross members.
MR. ANDERSON: Cross members. That's fine.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It's a still-water area. Dialing it back on
toxic materials in still-water areas is, particularly since
cross timbers will last almost as long as treated lumber anyway
on typical dock construction.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Absolutely.
MR. ANDERSON: I would be happy to make those changes.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone else here that wishes to speak
regarding this application?
(Negative response).
Any other comments from the Board?
(Negative response).
That being said I make a motion to close this hearing.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And I make a motion to approve this application
with two stipulations: That through throw decking is used and
non-toxic cross members are also used. And that's to be depicted
on the plans.
MR. ANDERSON: I'll put them on the plans.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So new plans depicting that. And just to be
clear, also, upon inspection, it is very clear that navigation
is not an issue at this site, following the site visit. And also
we will bring this into consistency with the two prior amendments. RECEIVED
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor? OCT 0 2011 0-3
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: I'll make a motion to adjourn. �.
TRUSTEE SANDERS: Second. SVtld Town Clerk
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
Respectfully submitted by,
Michael J. Domino, President
Board of Trustees