Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
100 Park Ave
Michael J.Domino,President �NX g SO(/Ty0 Town Hall Annex John M.Bredemeyer III,Vice-President �O l0 54375 Route 25 P.O.Box 1179 Charles J.Sanders Southold,New York 11971 Glenn Goldsmith G • Q Telephone(631) 765-1892 A.Nicholas KrupskiyCOU Fax(631) 765-6641 � NT`I,N� BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD November 15, 2017 Chris Dwyer L. K. McLean Associates P.C. 437 South Country Road Brookhaven, NY 11719 RE: 100 PARK AVENUE, c/o PAUL PAWLOWSKI 100 PARK AVENUE, MATTITUCK SCTM# 1000-123-7-3 Dear Mr. Dwyer: The Board of Town Trustees took the following action during its regular meeting held on Wednesday, November 15, 2017 regarding the above matter: WHEREAS, L. K. McLean Associates P.C. on behalf of 100 PARK AVENUE, c/o PAUL PAWLOWSKI applied to the Southold Town Trustees for a permit under the provisions of Chapter 275 of the Southold Town Code, the Wetland Ordinance, original application dated May 18, 2017, and, WHEREAS, said application was referred to the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council and to the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator for their findings and recommendations, and, WHEREAS, the LWRP Coordinator recommended that the proposed application be found Inconsistent with the LWRP under Policy 1 — Foster a pattern of development in the Town of Southold that enhances community character, preserves open space, makes efficient use of infrastructure, makes beneficial use of a coastal location, and minimizes adverse effects of development; Policy 3 — Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of Southold; Policy 4 — Minimize loss of life, structures, and natural resources from flooding and erosion; Policy 6.1 — Protect and restore ecological quality throughout the Town of Southold; Policy 9.3 — Preserve the public interest in and use of lands and waters held in public trust by the state and the Town of Southold; Policy 9.4 —Assure public access to public trust lands and navigable waters; Policy 10 — Protect the Town of Southold's water-dependent uses and promote siting of new water-dependent uses in suitable locations, and, WHEREAS, Public Hearings were held by the Town Trustees with respect to said application on July 19, 2017, on September 20, 2017 and again on November 15, 2017, at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, and, WHEREAS, the Board members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question and the surrounding area, and, WHEREAS, the Board has considered all the testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application, and, WHEREAS, the proposed structure, as applied for, does not comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 275 of the Southold Town Code, and, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, for the foregoing reasons, and based upon the application's failure to meet the standards contained in Chapter 275 of the Town Code, that the Board of Trustees deems the proposed project to be Inconsistent with the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program pursuant to Chapter 268 of the Southold Town Code, and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE based on no action the application of 100 PARK AVENUE CORP., c/o PAUL PAWLOWSKI for 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; and as depicted on the site plan prepared by L. K. McLean Associates, P.C., last revised on May 16, 2017. This is not a determination from any other agency. Very Truly Yours, Michael J. Domino, President Board of Trustees MJD/eac / f 15 I / W EXISTING GRAVEL PEEN N $5 DO DRIVEWAY \ ��' I IMIT OF CROSS BRACING \ ' PROPOSED 8" DRIVEN GREENHEART \ \ I L EXISTING STAIRS PILE (TYP.) 10 \ 121.7'SCTM: 10.0' O;C. 30.0 PROPOSED 4'x30 LOWER \ \ \ 1000-123-07-5.3 EXISTING GRADE (n'P' PLATFORM (EL.=2.50) DOCK EL. = 4.50' EXISTING BEACH AREA --__ TO REMAIN UNDISTRUBED 11 \ --=M:" - _- - MEAN HIGH WATER = 2.20'f I I o MEAN LOW WATER -1_20'f -5 0+00 1+00 10"0 TIP x 20' LONG o \ DRIVEN GREENHEART 00. PROPOSED DOCK PROFILE PILES W/ CAP SCTM: HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1� -10 1000-123-07-06 VERTICAL SCALE: 1"=5' CONNECT STAIR STRINGERS TO PILE 10'-0" MAX. SCTM: I I �,� I I 1 I / CAPS W/ GALV. SIMPSON H8 1000-123-07-02 I I I \ 1 I HURRICANE STRAPS (TYP.) STAGGERED J"O GALV. TIMBER BOLTS W/ PLATE WASHERS AND HEAVY HEX 2"x10" NUTS GREENHEART LUMBER BLOCKING @ MIDSPAN \ CONNECT 3x10 PILE CAPS TO PILE W/ 8"0 TIP x 20' LONG DRIVEN � �\ \ (2)-3/4"0 TIMBER GALV. THRU-BOLTS GREENHEART PILES W/ CAP EXISTING PARKING AREA / �\ `- �\ (TYP.) =oOoo, 3"X10" PRESSURE TREATED PILE CAPS s� SCTM: EXISTING 1-1/ \ \ '! \ 1000-123-07-7.3 7 8"0 TIP x 20' LONG DRIVEN STORY DWELLIN 2"00" GREENHEART LUMBER GREENHEART PILES W/ CAP \ . STRINGERS � 12"O.C. (TYP.) F: TYPICAL DOCK PLAN VIEW \ Y / Cl\ / \ N.T.S. RPPt10 LAPPED SPLICING THRU BOLTED W/ / PSE (4) 4"0 GALV. TIMBER BOLTS WITH PLATE WASHERS AND HEX NUTS 1 r\ 4* 2"X6" CEDAR DECKING ! a of 2"X10" GREENHEART STRINGERS W/ H8 C- 1 i ��` \ * i HURRICANE STRAPS ® 16" O.C. MAX O 0 1 \0 (TYP-) \ _ (TYP•), H8 HURRICANE _ ZEL. 4.50 _ 3 X10 GREENHEART SPLIT PILE CAPS �` %� \ - - THRU BOLTED W/ J"O GALV. TIMBER STRAPS EXISTING STAIRWAY BOLTS WITH PLATE WASHERS AND <� _ \ -\� HEAVY HEX NUTS (TYP.) t° - TYPICAL DOCK CONNECTION DETAILS �a X15-- � .4v\; �� 8"0 TIP x 20' LONG DRIVEN N.T.S. GREENHEART PILES W/ CAP ° ° 5� Z BULK _ - i i 0- / VA IES 3"X10" GREENHEART CROSS A-' ° i� BRACING W/ 8"x8" BLOCK. APPARENT HIGH WATER EL.= 2.20± GRADE Q) - -= ,- � � ��� 52,30•' W� � / -, p PROPOSED DOCK (SEE PROFILE) - .96ALW = TYPICAL DOCK SECTION A-A �- / /X-0.26 X .26 X-1:99 X=2.53 X-2.78 X-2.76 X-3.50 N.T.S. 0 ' ,+oo 12.0' --3- _ APPARENT LOW WATER --nLw a� hod PECONIC BAY EL.= -1.20± MAY $ 2017 _ X-2.41 � - .81 -3.88 X-3.75 X-3.77 X-3.90 SEE TYPICAL DOCK ...... .. -.. O PROPOSED 10 0 TIP x 20 LONG SECTION A-A O -3.00 DRIVEN GREENHEART PILES 8"0 TIP ' N 4'x3O' LOWER 0, W/ CAP 0 PLATFORM W/ (4) x-3.86 X-3.3891 .0 W/ x-3.89 x-3.97 x-3.96 EL. 4.50 4 t 2"X6" CEDAR DECKING 10 MOORING PILES _ _ - 2"X10" GREENHEART STRINGERS W/ HE j 4.0' 1+69 HURRICANE STRAPS ® 16" O.C. MAX. 5/16/17 L:::MF ADDED 4'x30' LOWER PLATFORM RGD X-4.06 X-4.15 X-4.08 X-4.04 X-4.07 X-4.07 X=4.02 ° _ 3"X10" GREENHEART SPLIT PILE DATE BY DESCRIPTION APPROV. BY UEL. 2.50 CAPS THRU BOLTED W/ J"O _ - GALV. TIMBER BOLTS WITH PLATE REVISIONS � J WASHERS AND HEAVY HEX NUTS Q _ (TYP.) TOWN OF SOUTHOLD L� ° SUFFOLK COUNTY NY E 100 PARK AVENUE, MATTITUCK NY Ln 0 SCTM: 1000-123-07-03 O LLI 10"0 TIP x 20' LONG DRIVEN cvcn SITE PLAN GREENHEART PILES W/ CAP - '��-''� ���' -- 'ro PROPOSED DOCK PLAN SCALE: 1"=40' .� 8"0 TIP x 20' LONG DRIVEN �j L. K. McLEAN ASSOCIATES P.C. O O GREENHEART PILES x`j'11 x N CONSULTING ENGINEERS 437 SOUTH COUNTRY RD., BROOKHAVEN, NEW YORK 11719 O W CAP 0- Co 0) F 6` 85 ���' Designed By: MF/CFD Scale: AS NOTED Sheet No. •� ����� ' r, :JS3t ? Drawn ByLOWER PLATFORM SECTION B - B M F Date: MAY 2017 N.T.S. Approved By: RGD File No. 16029.003 SURVEY OF PROPERTY W 1*':0 51TUATE: MATTITUCK MAY 1 s 2017 TOWN : 50 UTH O LD Sari OI down SSU FFOLK COUNTY, NY L--- Qgrd — ulla ..r�...-, " ` `� SURVEYED 07-15-2016 FOUNDATION LOCATION 09-20-201 G P\ I FINAL 12-02-201 G Gp� V o`N G GAP$ , SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX # _s0- ` 2000 1000 - 123 - 7 - 3 �GJG>a� CERTIFIED T0: 100 PARK AVENUE CORP. Z PAUL PAWLOWSKI GP Op <02 O FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 7,�0lL O C, T 7 O� <O V� 7 y �� Z0 �� >0 <.0 O N o 0 \ 2 ` N >0 0 N OOZ��� EO1\ v2 �` O AVER WAL � •�k�\ `'� �y p �0+\ OntZ0?•�00)�\OFr e� V 7� O� �oL \ � �\°G� \o �_ ZO y o 2 i p NN o Q Cl p G ONE 5 G?00� `a O< 019, M 55 0 0e 4 O�c O OG V O ON Q o e66yb ' w 1 02 \ l C TOP OF ESANK 0 pLANTING5• ~OtiPGH~ SEX___ --------�����=°- X33 �\-O 00 vE a r'�1�57 50 2 r70 n FvOOD /� 1 20 • P� G ON\G G� FEMA FLOOD ZONE ANNOTATED FROM F.I.R.M. 3G 103CO482ti NOTES /-� 'Unauthorized ollrrolion or addition to o survey ® JOHN VV t/1 E h LE RS LAND SURVEYOR �� EE� mop bearing a licensed land surveyor's seal Is a MONUMENT FOUND I � v'alouon of section 7209, sub—division 2, of the L' ,� New York Slate Education Low, QQ PIPE FOUND \ r 7�� r� 'Only copies from the original of this survey --0WIRE FENCE Q� �S �S marked with an original of the land surveyor's stamped seal shall be considered to be valid Irue {r copies" C EAST MAIN STREET N.Y.5. LIC. NO. 50202 'Certifications Indicated hereon signify that this }A survey was prepared In accordance with the ex— Area = 66 86 15a. Ft. RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 1 190 369-8288 Fax 369-8287 'sling Code of Practice far Land Surveys adopted by lh6 New York Stole Association of Professional Area = 1.534 Acres �/� — '° �� Land surveyors. Said certifications shall run only G PHIL SCALE I"= 50 longlalandlande,urveyorzom F,1' 5 0 �� to the person far wham the gamey IS Prepared, •ys, and on his behalf to the title company,governmen— tai agency and lending institution listod hereon and LA s to the ossignees of the lending institution Cerlificu- 13-188 hang are at lmnsferahle to nddiuonol institutions ROBERT C. SHEEHAN FOUR TIMES SQUARE NEW YORK 10036-6522 (212)735-3350 D E G E T DIRECT DIAL �• 21 2 735-3350 OCT — 2 2017 DIRECT FAX i 917 777-3350 EMAIL ADDRESS ROBERr.SHEEHANt7aSKADDEN.COM solIl110Id 0WA Board f Trustees September 26, 2017 Town of Southold Board of Trustees Town Hall Annex 54375 Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 RE: Application of 100 Park Avenue Corporation to Construct Dock Dear Board Members: The Coastal Environmental Review of the Proposed Dock at 100 Park Avenue, Mattituck is quite misleading in that in numerous places it says there are many "docks", groins and similar obstructions encroaching from the shoreline into the bay—at one point (p. 14, Paragraph F) asserting there are 70 "other shoreline perpendicular structure(sic) in the area." Many, many other times the Coastal Environmental Review document lumps "docks" and"groins" together to mislead the reader; BUT, THERE IS ONLY ONE DOCK INTO THE BAY BETWEEN JAMES CREEK AND DEEP HOLE CREEK. It has been there, as the document admits elsewhere, since 1954. No other docks have been built along this mile-long pristine stretch of the Peconic Bay shoreline for over half a century. Building the dock will begin a radical change to this shoreline, as the Trustees approval of this dock would naturally lead to applications to build similar structures all along our bay front, a completely unnecessary disturbance given the nearby access to Strong's Marina in James Creek(where we keep our boat)which is less than a quarter mile west of the land owned by the applicant. September 26, 2017 Page 2 As my earlier letter requests, the Board should reject this application, and leave our shoreline in peace. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Wobert C. Sheehan Trustee of the Elizabeth Sheehan Family Trust (which EPC I V E owns the shorefront property at 640 park Avenue, Mattituck) 2 2017 Southold Town ar ru tie Cantrell, Elizabeth From: Margaret Pisani <margypisani@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, September 22, 2017 2:51 PM To: Cantrell, Elizabeth Cc: Edwin Pisani Subject: Wetland permit Dear Trustees, It has come to our attention that a wetland permit for an exceedingly large dock was requested by 100 Park Ave Corp., c/o Paul Pawlowski.We live in Laurel on the Peconic Bay, a short distance from this property.We vehemently object to the construction of this dock. The Town of Southold has gone to great lengths to preserve the beauty and cleanliness of our waters.Allowing such a structure is counter to these efforts.After our waterfront deck was damaged by Superstorm Sandy we were denied the right to rebuild it to the original specifications(a structure for which we had every past legal permit).We were told to take 6' off the length of the deck for the reason that it was harmful to the environment and vegetation in the area. How then, can such a large structure as requested be built along the Bay?We rode out Sandy in our home and witnessed large stairs and decks(Mattituck Yacht Club,for example) ripped away, becoming dangerous floating debris. Must we add more at risk structures? We strongly suspect the proposed dock is part of a plan to bring in helicopter and seaplane flights to the property. Only just this afternoon a helicopter flew over our home, at very low altitude, and landed there.There have been other flights this summer. Considering all of the complaints and uproar over the East Hampton airport, is this what we should have in the Town of Southold?We have to control our own destiny on the North Fork and not make the same mistakes as the South Fork. Thank you for your attention in this matter, Margaret and Ed Pisani 7180 Peconic Bay Blvd Laurel Sent from my iPad i FIRS 1' Memorandum Date: September 15, 2017 To: Michael Domino, President Town of Southold Board of Trustees From: Aram Terchunian Subject: 100 Park Avenue Corp. c/o Paul Pawlowski SCTM# 1000-123-7-3 Enclosed please find four copies of supplemental information for the above case. Thank you. cc: P. Pawlowski D ECEIVE SEP 19 2017 Southold Town Board Trustees First Coastal, Post Office Box 1212,4 Arthur Street,Westhampton Beach, NY 11978 FM T Phone:631-288-2271, Fax:631-288-8949 www.firstcoastal.com �� Environmental Consulting and Construction. Permits to Construction. Preserving the coast since 1975 Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock at 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY SCTM 1000-123-7-3 ,. O • � • C' t Prepared By: Aram V Terchunian, M.SC. Coastal Geologist & Environmental Scientist First Coastal Consulting, P.O. Box 1212, 4 Arthur Street Westhampton Beach NY 11978 FIRST SEP 1 9 2011 4 www.firstcoastal.com Southold Town r o Tr e September 15, 2017 I. Project Location The project is located at 100 Park Avenue in the Hamlet of Mattituck in the Town of Southold, also known as parcel 1000-123-7-3 on the Suffolk County Tax Map(See Figure 1). The parcel is bounded to the south by the Peconic Bay to the north by Park Avenue (and the Mattituck Airport) and to the east and west by private residential properties. The property is approximately 1.70 acres and is improved with a recently constructed single family home. The shoreline is partially stabilized by timber groins. The subject property and the surrounding parcels contains numerous and substantial coastal shoreline structures, including docks and groins. Virtually every property in the 1.3 mile segment of shoreline in which the subject property is located between James Creek to the west and Deep Hole Creek to the east contains a shoreline structure (Figure 1). rov", , o t i 4 0 . 1� M► vt f, Deep Hale Creek 100 Park Ave rte, 4 l September 14,2017 0 00! 01 1:8'000 02 , Parcel Data 0 007! 01! 0.3 qn Figure 1: Location Map of 100 Park Ave, Mattituck, NY. R 0 Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock SEP 1 9 2011 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY FIRST SUM 1000-123-7-3 CQa � Southold Town Page 2 of 22 Tr II. Project Description The project consists of constructing an open pile catwalk using 8" piles 4 feet in width by 124.5 feet in length, with a fixed lower platform of 4 feet by 30 feet parallel to the catwalk and four 10 inches diameter tie off poles. All is to be made of untreated lumber(Figure 2). The proposed dock is to be decked with thru flow decking. All hardware is proposed to be galvanized. The proposed dock was designed by a Professional Engineer and will be constructed according to generally accepted engineering and coastal construction principals. Please see Appendix A for the proposed plans. 15 `�Extir"G SiMa "pposrn e'wr2x cxFFnxvxr xi M cxo55 Bronx l EXI"NG MADE to xFVMx x�mMlO) it 11 -- �-- YF/N HIGH YN1EN-2104 _ II 11 II JI ________ __ ___ __ __ __ __ 11 11 I 1 YFAN LOYI MIEII _1204 11 11 II _ II1' JJ _ fT S 0+00 t+00 xaoxixc we(mJ 1 PROPOSED DOCK PROFILE 2"X6 THRUFLOW DECKING 2"X12" GREENHEART STRINGERS W/ H8 HURRICANE STRAPS ® 16" O.C. MAX. EL. 4.00 3"X10" GREENHEART SPLIT PILE CAPS THRU BOLTED W/ J"O GALV. TIMBER BOLTS WITH PLATE WASHERS AND HEAVY HEX NUTS (TYP.) o, a E VAf IES 3"X10" GREENHEART CROSS 0 BRACING W/ 8"x8" BLOCK. GRADE 8"D DRIVEN D E C E I V E GREENHEART PILES SEP 1 9 2017 11 TYPICAL DOCK SECTION A-A Southold Town N.T.S. Boar of Trustpes Figure 2: Cross section view of proposed dock on subject property. Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock 7� 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY el�Qtm;t FIRST SCTM 1000-123-7-3 Page 3 of 22 III. Historical Shoreline and Structure Review The segment of shoreline in which the subject property is located is an approximately 1.3 mile length that is located between James Creek to the west and Deep Hole Creek to the east. Within this segment of shoreline virtually every property contains a shoreline structure such as a bulkhead, dock, and groin (timber or rock) and many contain multiple structures. Of these structures, a large percentage of are shoreline perpendicular and extend out into the nearshore region. Of the shoreline perpendicular structures that extend into the nearshore, 72 are shore perpendicular timber structures such as docks or timber groins. The vast majority of these shore perpendicular timber structures have been in place and functioning for over half a century. This can be identified in Figure 3,an aerial photo from 1962 that identifies the numerous shore perpendicular docks and timber groins found in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. Furthermore, in Appendix B, aerial photos spanning from 1962-2016 identify that these structures have been in place and functioning over the course of the past 55 years. Therefore, in this section of shoreline it can been seen that various shoreline structures including docks and timber groins can withstand the forces that are present in this site setting and remain functional for extended periods of time. Conversations with the contractor(Costello Marine) for the dock adjacent to the subject property(^830 feet west) located at 2790 New Suffolk Ave, Mattituck, NY identifies that the dock was constructed prior to 1954. In 1998 it underwent routine maintenance and was extended and is still functioning to this day. This is an additional example of how a dock in this location with a nearly identical setting and conditions to the proposed dock has been functional for over half a century. 100 Park Ave- 1962 A rj' _ r IN* . a Subject Property 2790 New Suffolk Ave. September 14,2017 1.2,000 Pd Mess Labels 0 0.0175 0.035 0.0?ml Parcel Data 0 0017'.0.035 007- Figure 3:Aerial photo from 1962 identifying numerous shore perpendicular timber structures. Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY nJD E C E I V FIRST SCTM 1000-123-7-3 DD CQQ7/� Page 4 of 22 L4 SEP 1 9 2017 L._.__.�_�..._. IV. Wave Climate Analysis According to the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map(FIRM) from September 25, 2009 for the subject property (Figure 4),the area is located within a Zone VE Elevation 8. This means that during a 100 year storm (that is, a storm that has a 1%chance of occurring in a given year) it has been computed that the subject property would experience flooding with wave driven flood waters in excess of 3 feet up to elevation+8 NAVD88. The FIRM from September 25, 2009 for Paradise Point Road (Figure 5) in which the Town of Southold has approved three docks is located within a Zone VE Elevation 13. This means that during a 100 year storm it has been computed that the Paradise Point Road area would experience flooding with wave driven flood waters in excess of 3 feet up to elevation+13 NAVD88. According to the FIRMS the Paradise Point Road region, which contains three docks approved by the Town of Southold, has a base flood elevation (BFE)that is 5 feet higher than the proposed applicants location at 100 Park Ave, Mattituck, NY. Therefore,the docks in the Paradise Point Road region have been approved in an area that has significant increase in flood elevation during a 100 year storms and thus an increase for potential associated damage when compared to the current proposed applicant's location. ` `.." s• NG 1�1 ALOW LrgNEF MAP SCALE 1" = 500' r so o Soo 11000 FEET Pp, � �RSZiIE METE Y 6 t # 76 - �`' "> ZONEiXfi' — — — PANEL 0482HH Lo,S, FIRM EPµE...• FLOOD INSURANCE RATE NAP 9--}y lv� for SUFFOLK COUNTY NEW YORK a - ALL JURISDICTIONS) ZONE AE �c o. CONTAINS COMMUNITY NUMBER r moo. SOUTHOLD,TOWN OF 360613 ZONE•X};• E•." r�, PANEL 482 OF 1026 MAP SUFFIX:H A ZONE X P ♦ � � .bio. :�,Q,ow a i ZONE VE,- - -GIlL-_'lT-- a MAP NUMBER ZONE AO nL COA 1(~ ^ 36103CO482H =T� BA Y MAP REVISED SEPTEMBER 25,2009 u.a _ .y a: ° 4 Y' ��• ^.:. �1� �''^� " I`. =' I vdual LmMrne.Na-g—e I\R e. Figure 4: Subject property located in VE EL 8 Zone. Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock , X41 UD' FIRST 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY SCTM 1000-123-7-3 Page 5 of 22 ? SEP 1 9 2011 Southold Town Board of Trustoes 4 OLDPgltgplSE POINT ROAD MAP SCALE 1" = 500' 50 0 S00 1000 # FEET ZpNE VE METE (EL 13) m PANEL 0167H r FIRM � < FLOOD INSURANCE RATE NAP ,I 0 ~.G LITTLE PECO I ®Q foKCOUNTY.NEW YORK (ALL JURISDICTIONS) O: BAY m CONTAINS: c COMMUNITY NUMBER 4 SHELTERISLAND, 360809 c' � TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,TOWN OF 360813 G ZONE X Docks o x R— _T'�pTT " ® PANEL 167 OF 1026 " 5� p'E"; ..� ® MAP SUFFIX:H NFP NM fpR FIRM PANE_IAYOIRI ,A % 'rte Mow b lher TM Nw lallriaer)hall E e a N. •;' __ _ 117) .'"w qr+V mw own.nr cemmm�a�x,. alii°w.s.eP».mmd ee,aed ap.auame wwea .ro. ....,. +wolyd wrmvNr AR BEACH f % a MAP NUMBER ROAD s, a S as 36103C0167H ` LIMIT OF MODERATE MAP REVISED EPTEMBER 25,2009 F, Fedrral t:—M—)M—g—t Ag—' , ZO y X`' Tnla s an o ficla cop o a po on a the above referenced flood map It f y e.�nea us F-Mtr orI-une. role mep mea ha rto th oete, s art. OTHERWISE PROTECTED AREA or�amerlamalxe wgcn mar nage Been made subseduem to the date on the NEX '� ESTABLISHED I4-16-1991 nne q«k Fpr melateat product inrormaeion emm National Flood lrc„rance Proprom flood m.m check the FEMA Flom Map Store at w.vrv.nmc tem.qp✓ Figure 5: Three docks located in a VE EL 13 Zone on Paradise Point Road. EC IVE SEP 1 9 2017 Southold Town r Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY FIRST SCTM 1000-123-7-3 Cva � Page 6 of 22 V. Southold Town Code The current proposed dock for 100 Park Ave.in Mattituck is in compliance will all sections of code for the construction of a dock within the Town of Southold. Below each of the identified Southold Town Code Section 275, please find responses as to how the current proposed dock for the subject property addresses the specific code requirement. Section 275-11 C- Docks. Standards for residential and commercial docks; general rules. It shall be the policy of the Town of Southold that all docks shall be designed, constructed and located so as to reduce a dock's potential adverse impacts to navigation, public safety,waterway congestion,access to public trust lands and water, and natural resources and habitats. The following standards will serve as a basis for granting, denying, or limiting permits for the construction of docks. M No dock shall be constructed, altered or removed without a permit issued by the Southold Town Trustees. In determining whether to approve such application, the Trustees shall consider the factors contained in § 275-11C(2)(d) below and all other provisions of this chapter. RL All docks shall be constructed of sturdy, durable and stable materials capable of maintaining position and location,supporting pedestrian traffic, and resisting lateral loads resulting from wind, wave,and impact forces. Docks shall be constructed,where possible,to permit the free circulation of water, reduce the effects of fluctuating water levels, and prevent adverse modification of the shoreline. Applicants shall certify as to the structural integrity of the dock so as not to cause a threat to the person or property of others. The current dock is proposed to be constructed according to generally accepted engineering and coastal construction principals and standards. Additionally, the proposed materials are engineer approved to withstand the subject forces of the area and have been proven effective in withstanding similar forces in the surrounding area and in similar applications and site settings. Furthermore, the dock is proposed to be constructed in manner to enable sufficient water flow and circulation in the immediate and surrounding area to not impact the adjacent shoreline. Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock LSEEP 2017 ���5� 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY SCTM 1000-123-7-3 ®� Southold Town Page 7 of 22, E3ojrd of Tnistpos I i In order to prevent the release of metals and other contaminants into the wetlands and waters of Southold, the use of lumber pre-treated with any preservative, including but not limited to chromated copper arsenate(also known as"CCA"),commercial copper quat(CCQ),penta products, Alkaline Copper Quat (ACQ), or homemade wood preservatives is prohibited for use in sheathing and decking on structures in the wetlands as well as on any part of a structure in low tidal flow wetland areas as determined by the Trustees.The use of creosote is prohibited.The use of tropical hardwoods -is prohibited unless it is certified by the Forest Stewardship Council or similar organization. Materials used for structural components shall be at the discretion of the Trustees. [Amended 12-18-2007 by L.L. No. 23-2007] The project is proposed to be constructed using untreated materials that are certified by the Forest Stewardship Council or other similar organizations. LL All docks and gangways onto such docks shall provide a safe pedestrian surface at all times. The proposed dock will tie into the existing grade and will provide a safe pedestrian surface at all times. LL All docks, including any vessel tied to the dock, shall have a minimum clearance of 15 feet of the seaward extension of any property line from adjacent parcels so as not to interfere with the neighbor's access to waters, unless the Trustees decide otherwise for navigational or other reasons.Waterside boundaries can be identified using the appropriate method for the shape of the shoreline for Long Island waters specified in 9 NYCRR 274.5. The proposed dock will have a minimum clearance of 15 feet of the seaward extension of any property line from adjacent parcels. The subject dock will not interfere with the neighbors' access to waters. La All docks and floats shall have the street address of the subject premises permanently affixed to the most seaward face for identification. Said address shall be at least three inches high and constructed of metal, wood, plastic or other material such that it can withstand exposure to the elements and is visible from the water. [Amended 10-9-2012 by L.L. No. 12-2012] The proposed dock will have the street address of the subject property at least three inches high and visible from the water permanently affixed to the most seaward face for identification. p EE I V E Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY ���5� 0 SCTM 1000-123-7-3 � SEP 1 9 2017 Page 8 of 22 Southold Town EL Except for structures used for water-dependent uses,there shall be no permanent structure located on or above the docks, ramps and floats. [Amended 10-9-2012 by L.L. No. 12-2012] The proposed dock will have no permanent structures located on or above the dock, except for water- dependent uses. u . Any application for a dock to be constructed at the end of a right-of-way or commonly held land requires the written consent of all parties having an interest in the right-of-way, regardless of how property interests in the upland parcel may be divided among the owner(s), lessee(s), occupant(s), easement holder(s), or any other person(s) or entity(ies) with a legal or beneficial interest in any existing or proposed docking facility. [Amended 10-9-2012 by L.L. No. 12-2012] The proposed dock is being constructed on an individually owned lot with no right of way. Written consent of all interested parties has been provided. LL All applicants for docks, including catwalks and ramps, extending across the foreshore shall be required to give and maintain a public passing way on the landward end of the dock, to enable persons to pass and repass around said dock, or steps or a ramp allowing pedestrian passage. [Amended 3-23-2010 by L.L. No. 1-2010; 10-9-2012 by L.L. No. 12-2012] A public passing way landward of the dock is proposed to enable the public to be able to pass and repass. u Preexisting nonpermitted and/or nonconforming structures cannot be replaced in kind without full review and approval by the Trustees. [Amended 10-9-2012 by L.L. No. 12-2012] The replacement of in-kind nonpermitted or nonconforming structures is not proposed as part of this project. L1 Personal watercraft or jet ski floats cannot be added to any float,stairway,or dock without a Trustee permit. Floats may not cumulatively exceed 120 square feet. [Added 10-11-2005 by L.L. No. 17-2005; amended 10-9-2012 by L.L. No. 12-2012] No float is proposed as part of this project. D ECEIVE Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY SEP FIRST' SCTM 1000-123-7-3 1 9 2017 ®�S Page 9 of 22 Southold Town Boar of Trus LL Lighting.Any and all lights associated with docks, floats or poles must be directed on the subject structure and not out into the adjacent wetland,waterway or property. Lights shall not be on unless the dock is-in active use. [Added 10-11-2005 by L.L. No. 17-2005; amended 10-9-2012 by.L.L. No. 12-2012] All lighting of the project dock will be directed on the structure and not out into any wetland, waterway or property. IL 3L Utilities and water. If power or water is to be installed on,a dock, plans for the installation must be provided to the Trustees at the time of application. Installation of such amenities on an existing permitted dock requires obtaining a permit amendment from the Trustees. [Added 10-11-2005 by L.L. No. 17-2005; amended 10-9-2012 by L.L. No. 12-2012] No water or utilities are proposed as part of this project. Dock locations and lengths. [Amended 10-11-2005 by L.L. No. 17-2005] M No dock shall be erected or extended if, in the opinion of the Trustees, such structure would adversely affect navigation,fisheries,shell fisheries,scenic quality, habitats or wetland areas. The current proposed dock will not have an adverse effect on navigation, fisheries, shell fisheries, scenic quality, habitat and wetland areas. RL Within creeks and other narrow waterways, no dock length shall exceed 1/3 the total width of the water body. Determination of the length of the dock must include the dimensions of the vessel. The proposed dock length will not exceed 1/3 the total width of the waterbody including the vessel. The waterbody is in excess of 5 miles in this location and the proposed dock is 124.5 feet. E C E E Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock ` SEP 19 ZpJ] 100 Park Avenue.Mattituck, NY - FIRST s ar thold Town ® � SCTM 1000-12347'3 s, Page 10 of 22 p ru o u Prohibited locations and activities. u. No new docks will be permitted over vegetated wetlands or such that it causes habitat fragmentation of vegetated wetlands in the following areas: Downs Creek, Hallocks Bay, Hashamomuck Creek and Pond, Long Creek (branch of Mattituck Creek, East of Grand Avenue bridge), Pipe's Cove Creek and West Creek. [Amended 12-18-2007 by L.L. No. 23-2007] The proposed dock will not be constructed over a vegetated wetland and is not within the above designated areas. LL . Machine excavation is prohibited in tidal or freshwater wetland areas. No machine excavation is proposed with this project. K Placement of fence, mesh or other material preventing passage under docks is prohibited, No fence or mesh under the dock to prevent passage is proposed. WL No floating docks, floats, dock components, or boats shall be stored on tidal wetlands, other intertidal areas or freshwater wetlands between April 1 and December 1 of each calendar year. No duck blinds may be stored on tidal wetlands, other intertidal areas or freshwater wetlands at any time. [Amended 10-9-2012 by L.L. No. 12-2012] No docks,floats,dock component or boats will be stored on tidal wetland, intertidal area, or freshwater wetlands between April 1 and December 1. Regulations for the placement and configuration of docking facilities. UL Residential docks. [Amended 10-11-2005 by L.L. No. 17-2005] ECE � ��� E SEP 1 9 2017 Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock Southold Town �� ���, 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY Board of Trustees SCTM 1000-123-7-3' Page 11 of 22 Only one catwalk may be permitted per residential lot. Only one mooring or dock may be permitted per residential lot. Upon a showing of special need due to low water level and hazard to property, the Trustees may permit both a mooring and a dock for the same residential property. [Amended 12-18-2007 by L.L. No. 23-2007] Only one dock is currently proposed for the subject residential lot. I1. If any part of a residential dock structure includes a float or floating dock,the float or floating dock portion shall be designed so that,with the exception of the pilings: EL It is no larger than six feet wide and 20 feet long except on Fishers Island if the need is demonstrated; or of equal square footage as determined by the Trustees; [Amended 12-18-2007 by L.L. No.23-2007] No floating dock is proposed. all No part of the floating dock will contact the bottomland during a normal low tide. No floating dock is proposed. LL In determining the permitted length of a proposed residential dock, the Trustees shall seek to maintain lengths consistent with the other docks (i.e., pier line) in the waterway_which meet the requirements of this chapter. The proposed dock is consistent with the other docks and structures in the waterway. Pilings shall not project more than three feet above the surface of a dock or catwalk unless a need for greater height is demonstrated. The pilings for the proposed dock will not project more than three feet above the surface of the dock. u All excess fill from installation of pilings must be removed from tidal or freshwater wetland area on the same day as installation and disposed of in an approved upland disposal area. During dock construction all excess fill from the installation of pilings will be removed the same day as installation and disposed of in an approved upland disposal area. Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock, D E E 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY 0 FIRST SCTM 1000-123-7-3 64;�it�t Page 12 of 22 SEP 99 2017 Southold Town Board of rTustees L✓ .r Tie-off poles associated with residential docks will only be permitted to secure one vessel. If the dock utilizes a float,the poles shall not project farther seaward than the outer edge of the float. If a float is not used,the pole(s) can be situated seaward of the end of the dock sufficient to secure the vessel. The tie-off poles proposed are only for one vessel. There is no floating dock proposed. Ig1 Only one handrail is permitted on a residential dock unless the need for two is demonstrated. Rails shall not be higher than three feet above the surface of the dock and posts shall not be placed closer than six feet on center or larger than four inches by four inches in dimension. No hand rail is proposed. ML Residential catwalks and ramps are limited to four feet in width. The proposed dock is 4 feet in width HL Residential boatlifts, floating or fixed, are prohibited, except in privately owned basins on private property at the discretion of the Board of Trustees. [Amended 12-18-2007 by L.L. No. 23-2007] No boatlift is proposed ML Commercial docks (marinas,yacht clubs and restaurants). The proposed dock is a residential dock and not a commercial dock therefore, sub-sections 275-11 C (2) (c) (2) (a) through (c) do not apply. §275-12. Standards for issuance of permit. The Trustees may adopt a resolution directing the issuance of a permit to perform operations applied for only if it determines that such operations will not substantially: A. Adversely affect the wetlands of the Town. The wetlands of the Town will not be adversely affected. Construction will take place during the winter months. Light penetrating decking will be used. Encrusting algae and barnacles will populate the piles. The existing wetlands is coarse sand, pebble, cobble environment subject to energetic wave action and typically lower productivity. Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock D E E V E 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY FIRST SCTM 1000-123-7-3 SEP 1 g 2017 Page,13 of 22 f outhold Town Trus ees B. Cause damage from erosion,turbidity or siltation. The dock will be of sufficient length to allow docking and operation in more than=3 feet(MLW)and thus is reasonable expected to eliminate proper turbulence. Construction in the winter months will minimize potential impacts of turbidity. The coarse sand, pebble and gravel has a naturally low turbidity. C. Cause saltwater intrusion into the fresh water resources of the Town. The project does not impact the freshwater aquifer. D. Adversely affect fish,shellfish or other beneficial marine organisms,aquatic wildlife and vegetation or the natural habitat thereof. The fish, shellfish or other beneficial marine organisms, aquatic wildlife and vegetation or the natural habitat in the area of the dock will not be adversely impacted E. Increase the danger of flood and storm-tide damage. The danger of flood and erosion damage will be prevented or minimized by design (by a Professional Engineer),construction and maintenance consistent with the Town Code. F. Adversely affect navigation on tidal waters or the tidal flow of the tidal waters of the Town. Navigation on tidal waters and the flow of tidal waters will be unaffected by the construction of an open pile catwalk dock that is to be constructed of untreated wood and of a similar size and scale as many of the over 70 other shoreline perpendicular structure in the area.. G. Change the course of any channel or the natural movement or flow of any waters. The course of any channel or natural flow or movement of any water will be unchanged. H. Weaken or undermine the lateral support of other lands in the vicinity. The dock will not weaken or undermine the lateral support of other lands in the vicinity I. Otherwise adversely affect the health,safety and general welfare of the people of the Town. The proposed dock will not otherwise adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of the people of the Town. J. Adversely affect the aesthetic value of the wetland and adjacent areas. The proposed dock will not adversely affect the aesthetic value of the wetland and adjacent areas that contain over seventy shore perpendicular structures and at least one dock. D EC ESE Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock SEP 1 9 2017 FIRST 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY tlL SCTM 1000-123-7-3 ' Southold Town Page 14 of 22 B ar of Trus ee VI. Southold Conservation Advisory Council Review At a meeting of the Southold Conservation Advisory Council held on Wednesday June 14, 2017 the council unanimously voted in support of the application of the current proposed_ dock on the subject property. Please see Appendix C for CAC Approved Resolution. VII. Southold LWRP Review The following discussion provides explicit examples of why the proposed action is consistent with the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (Town Code Section 268) Policy 1. Foster a pattern of development in the Town of Southold that enhances community character, preserves open space, makes efficient use of infrastructure, makes beneficial use of a coastal location, and minimizes adverse effects of development. The proposed action is fully consistent with the community character. The shoreline from James Creek to Deep Holes Creek is studded with over 70 shore perpendicular structures, at least one other dock, and massive shore parallel seawalls along the vast stretches of the shoreline. The prosed dock is designed by a Professional Engineer to meet the site conditions and will be constructed and maintained in a manner to prevent or minimize damages due to flooding and erosion. The proposed dock will preserve and enhance the ecological character of the shoreline and provide the same level of public access as presently exists. The proposed dock is consistent with the length, scale, location, materials and overall character of the shoreline. The proposed dock is a normal and customary accessory structure that is permitted by the Town Code. The following discussion will elaborate on each of the points raised above. Policy 3. Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of Southold. The proposed action is fully consistent with the visual character of the surrounding area. The visual quality of the area is established by the existing shoreline structures and development. There are over 70 structures that extend perpendicular from the shoreline into Great Peconic Bay. These structures range in length from 30 feet to 150 feet. They are constructed of a variety of materials including rock and timber. ES E � Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock 100 Park Avenue Mattituck NY FIRST SCTM 1000-123-7-3Page 15 of 22 old Tovwn f Trust" There is an existing dock located three lots to the west of proposed dock, which has been in use for over 50 years. This timber dock has received numerous repair permits over the decades since it was constructed and is serviceable today. The proposed dock will be constructed of untreated timber and is consistent with the other dock in the vicinity. There is no public view shed from the shoreline in the area of the dock. The nearest public access is Maratooka Rd, which is over 1,000 feet from the subject property. View to the west at Maratooka Rd is blocked by and 8 to 12-foot-high seawall constructed of timber that protects the property to the west of the road (see figure 6 showing the pictometry from the Suffolk County GIS ). Regardless, the viewshed here is one of numerous structures of substantially the same dimensions and materials. Thus,the proposed dock is consistent with the visual quality of the area.K. ♦ ,A I Rt Its r �t a; ,.1 Figure 6:View west from Maratooka Rd demonstrating existing viewshed and inability to see proposed dock due to massive seawall. Policy 4. Minimize loss of life, structures, and natural resources from flooding and erosion. The proposed action is fully consistent with minimizing loss of life, structures and natural resources from flooding and erosion. The proposed dock will be designed and constructed of durable materials that are consistent with the requirement of Southold Town Code section 275-11 C (2) (a) (2), specifically Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock , C E I V 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY FIRST SCTM 1000-123-7-3 SEP 1 9 2011 COQ Page 16 of 22 Southold Town "All docks shall be constructed of sturdy, durable and stable materials capable of maintaining position and location, supporting pedestrian traffic, and resisting lateral loads resulting from wind, wave, and impact forces. Docks shall be constructed, where possible, to permit the free circulation of water, reduce the effects of fluctuating water levels, and prevent adverse modification of the shoreline. Applicants shall certify as to the structural integrity of the dock so as not to cause a threat to the person or property of others." The proposed dock is designed by a Professional Engineer to meet the site conditions and will be built and maintained in a manner to prevent or minimize damages due to flooding and erosion. Significantly,there is a functional dock located only 800 feet away, which has been serviceable for over 50 years. This dock is irrefutable evidence that a properly contracted and maintained dock is reasonable along this shoreline. The applicant accepts the responsibility of building and maintaining an appropriately designed dock that will withstand the specific wave climate of this shoreline. Accordingly,the dock will minimize loss of life, structures and natural resources from flooding and erosion and is consistent with this policy. Policy 6.1. Protect and restore ecological quality throughout the Town of Southold. The proposed action is fully consistent with protecting and restoring ecological quality in this coastal area of the Town of Southold. The proposed dock will have no adverse impact on the ecological values of this coastal area. The shoreline and nearshore area in the vicinity of the subject parcel and within the area that the dock will be located is characterized by a sandy, pebbly, cobble substrate that is consistent with the wave energy of this reach of shoreline. There are no existing seagrass beds. There are no known threatened or endangered species residing within the project area. The proposed dock will be constructed of thru flow decking(greater than 50 light porosity) and elevated above the water surface a sufficient distance to minimize or eliminate any potential shading. The construction of the dock will be undertaken during the winter to minimize impacts on ecological values. The piles that support the dock will become a habitat for encrusting algae, barnacles and other primary producers,the surface area of which will actually exceed the footprint of the piling. Moreover,the primary producers on the sides of the piles have a greater diversity and abundance of beneficial ecologic assemblages than the existing sandy, pebbly, cobble bottom which is traditionally of low productivity. The operation of any boats to be moored at the dock are insignificant. The dock has adequate depth (more than -3 feet below Mean Low Water)for boats that are normally used in this bay. Accordingly, there is little to no likelihood of prop scour from the engine. Also, as explained above the coarse sand, pebbles and cobbles here are attuned to the wave energy climate and accustomed to upheaval, relocation and redepositing during coastal storms. :PECoastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock =:-7E] 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY FIRST SCTM 1000-123=7-3 Page 17 of 22 Taken together,the materials, procedures and construction methodology of the proposed dock will preserve and restore the ecological values of this shoreline the Town of Southold and thus is consistent with the LWRP. Policy 9.3 Preserve the public interest in and use of lands and waters held in public trust by the state and the Town of Southold. The proposed action will preserve the public interest in and use of lands and waters held in public trust by the state and the Town of Southold. The public will have the same access along the shoreline as presently exists. The public will have the same navigational access as before the dock is constructed. As discussed earlier,the shoreline in the vicinity of the proposed dock is replete with existing shore parallel and shore perpendicular structures. The nearest public access point is at Maratooka Road over 1,000 feet to the east. There are approximately 10 groins in the reach of shoreline that extend form the beach into the water and impact access along the beach and in the water(see Figure 7 showing this shoreline from 2016 Google Earth image). R r OL 00 Google x ' ;l Earth Figure 7: Shoreline from 100 Park Avenue to Maratooka Road from 2016 Google Earth image. In fact, there are many times that the beach at the end of Maratooka Road is completely inundated with water and impossible to access. See for example Figure 8 from Google Earth 2013. E C E I V E Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY FIRST Southold Town 6�t��SCTM 1000-123-7-3 Board of Trustees Page 18 of 22 r �i�A ;,� �� d�.�. i •�1 it „�.� .'? ,- 5 Figure 8: Completely inundated and impassable shoreline Maratooka Road from 2013 Google Earth image. Nevertheless, the proposed dock provides for lateral access along the beach because the landward end of the dock meets the beach at or about the mean high-water line (see Figure 2 and Figure 9). Thus, the public right of access along the beach is unfettered. Similarly,the dock extends into Great Peconic Bay more or less in the same location as an existing timber groin. Thus,the navigation in the water will not be significantly impacted. The addition of the dock is insignificant on a shoreline with over seventy shore perpendicular structures many of which are of equal or greater length. The jetties and groins that litter this shoreline are obstacles to navigation and in fact can become navigational hazards during storms or when subject to unsafe boat operation. Conversely,the proposed dock will be a navigational asset that will provide boaters in distress with a safe harbor. Finally, the applicant is exercising his riparian right to reasonably access navigable waters, without any impact on the public rights of access. A dock is a reasonable and customary method of access navigable water and the Town Code provides a series of standards for the construction of a compliant dock. The proposed dock complies with all of the standards enumerated in section 275-11 C (2) and 275-12. Accordingly,the proposed dock is consistent with Policy 9.3 E C E I V E Southold Town Board Tru Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock FIRST 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY wOQ�� SCTM 1000-123-7-3 Page 19 of 22 _ 1 ..I.- ..I11.: -I--. '.I... Iii._. '.t-'., i--.I I-•-:-• '..'V',I s` -1 140 PARI:AVENI:E MATTITUCK.Nl' PROPOSED IK"AERUL\al5 . F _ -.l'.-•.< .r,.lv T- 1..6.\tcl—.ean U— P.C. �'I•MI Figure 9: Schematic location of proposed dock with relation to existing dock and groins. Policy 9.4. Assure public access to public trust lands and navigable waters. The proposed action will assure the public access to public trust lands and navigable waters. For all of the reasons enumerated above in response to Policy 9.3,the proposed action will assure the public access to public trust lands and navigable waters. Moreover, the proposed dock will not impact a federal, state or locally designated navigational channel. Policy 10. Protect the Town of Southold's water-dependent uses and promote siting of new water- dependent uses in suitable locations. The proposed action will protect the Town of Southold's water-dependent uses and promote siting of new water-dependent uses in suitable locations. The proposed dock is a water dependent use to be erected in water of sufficient depth for mooring and navigation of traditional pleasure boats (greater than-3 feet Mean Low Water), will be designed, constructed and maintained to survive in the specific wave, surge and ice conditions of this location in Great Peconic Bay, is a normal and customary accessory structure permitted by the Town Code, is consistent with the general character of the area, will preserve and enhance ecological values, and will not have any impact on public access or navigation. Accordingly,the dock is fully consistent with Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock D C E I If E FIRST 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY � SCTM 1000-123-7-3 r Page 20 of 22 Southold Town j d � Memorandum from the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) Principal Planner and LWRP Coordinator Mark Terry dated July 17, 2017 In a memorandum from the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) Principal Planner and LWRP Coordinator Mark Terry dated July 17, 2017, it was identified that the current proposed dock for the subject property was identified inconsistent with LWRP standards 1,3,4, 6.1,9.1, 9.3 and 10. Moreover,the Memorandum offers the alternatives of 1)temporary seasonal mooring of boats and 2) docking of boats in a marina. Both of these alternatives are unreasonable. The Memorandum claims that the wave condition at the site are so significant that a dock designed by a professional engineer and built in accordance with the Town Code will "result in frequent structural damage and loss". However,this very memorandum claims that a mooring that is held by an an without any engineering standards or codes will be safer. These two conclusions are at odds with each other and more importantly the facts established at this site and others. The alternative of mooring at a marina is likewise unreasonable, because there are no impediments to the applicant exercising his riparian rights of construction a dock to navigable water, when that dock is: 1. Consistent with the Standards of the Wetlands Code pursuant to Section 275-11-C(2) 2. Consistent with the Standards of the Wetlands Code pursuant to Section 275-12 3. Consistent with the Standards of the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (Section 268), in that, a. The proposed action is fully consistent with the community character b. The proposed action is fully consistent with the visual character of the surrounding area. c. The proposed action is fully consistent with protecting and restoring ecological quality in this coastal area of the Town of Southold. d. The proposed action will preserve the public interest in and use of lands and waters held in public trust by the state and the Town of Southold. e. The proposed action will assure the public access to public trust lands and navigable waters. f. The proposed action will protect the Town of Southold's water-dependent uses and promote siting of new water-dependent uses in suitable locations. The other inaccuracies in the Memorandum have been corrected in the above detailed policy discussions. rE C E SEP 1 9 2017 r Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock Southold Town 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY Annni of Trustees FIRST SCTM 1000-123-7-3 Page 21 of 22 1 . , VIII. Conclusion & Recommendation Following review of the proposed project, it is FCC's recommendation that the current proposed dock at 100 Park Avenue, in Mattituck, NY be approved by the Town of Southold. FCC has investigated the project and identified that is it consistent will all regulations, LWRP policies and is engineered to withstand the site conditions of the area. The current proposed project is recommended to be approved as it addresses the following items: • The,proposed dock has been designed by a Professional Engineer and is to be constructed according to generally accepted engineering and coastal construction standards and will therefore be able to withstand the site setting and site conditions. • Historical shoreline structures in the surrounding area of the proposed project further support that the structures have existed and functioned in this area for over half a century and that the proposed dock would be able function in the site conditions. Most notably the 72 timber groins in the 1.3 mile segment of shoreline adjacent to the property and the dock at 2790 New Suffolk Avenue, Mattituck, NY(^'830 feet west of subject property). • The Town of Southold has approved 3 docks in the Paradise Point Road region in an area,that according to the FEMA FIRMS has a Base Flood Elevation (BFE)that is+5 feet higher than at the applicants property and therefore subject to increased energy(Applicant's property at 100 Park Ave: BFE VE EL+8, Paradise Point Road: BFE VE EL+13). • The applicant's current proposed dock is consistent and in compliance with all sections of the Town of Southold's Dock Code. • The Southold Conservation Advisory Council unanimously voted in support of the application of the current proposed dock on the subject property. • The proposed project is consistent with the LWRP for the Town of Southold. Given the above stated items, it is FCC's recommendation that the current proposed dock be approved by the Town of Southold. D SEI VE SEP 1 9 2017 K Southold Town B a o Tr ee Coastal Environmental Review of Proposed Dock 100 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY FIRST SCTM 1000-123-7-3 ei;�:Yfk Page 22 of 22 I _ I ' I // w^ EXISTINGDGRAVELRIVEWAY \ INENs\ N�lid \ I I 15 NR OP CROSS BRAN PROPOSED 6'ORN GREENHEART STNRS PILE(TYP) 10 \ \ I CTM: ea s'S3-07-53100 - 2i �0(T(P C PLATFORM(EL3250L0)WER 300' \\ \ \ I_ •// \I EXISTING GRADE I 5DOCK \I I BEAOH AREAI e / —To-,WN UNDISTRUBED MEAN HIGH WATER=220'f \ \ I I I 0 MEAN LOW WATER -1 20 t -50+00 I 1 F00 PROPOSED MOORING PILE(TTP) SCT 1000-123-07-06 PROPOSED DOCK PROFILE HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"=10' SCTM: VERTICAL SCALE 1'-5' ,I 1000-123-07-02 I r \ I f f\\ \ STAGGERED J"O GALV TIMBER BOLTS NS MAX WASHERS AND HEAVY HEX CONNECT STAIR STRINGERS TO PILE 10'-0•MAX _ EXISTING PARKING AREA \ 1 I 1 ( •$oo \ CAPS W/GALV.SIMPSON HB � \ 20' LONG GREENHEART PILES W/ 8"0 ' \ \ HURRICANE STRAPS(TYP.) TIP SCTM: EXISTING 1-1/7 \ / �/ \ 1000-123-07-73 \ STORY DWELL! \\U\ S\ 2'x12• 3'X10" PRESSURE TREATED PILE CAPS GREENHEART L MB R BLOCKING If°a \\ CONNECT 30 PILE CAPS TO PILE W/ `iy LAPPED SPLICING THRU BOLTED W/ (2)-3/4.0 TIMBER GALV THRU-BOLTS 20'LONG GREENHEART (4)1"O GALV.TIMBER BOLTS WITH PLATE 0 I / \p`\ \•1 /— (TYP) PILES W/8' TIP WASHERS AND HEX NUTS x1 2"x12"GREENHEART LUMBER STRINGERS® 12 ° "O C (TYP) EXISTING STAIRWAY \ TYPICAL DOCK PLAN VIEW NTS STRAPS RICANE TYPICAL DOCK CONNECTION DETAILS ° NTS APPARENT HIGH WATER EL=2201 216"CEDAR DECKING � _ - r / / �8�\ 21 "X2'GREENHEART STRINGERS W/HE C, / 17A'• ° / //� HURRICANE STRAPS® 16" OC MAX. PROPOSED DOCK /—" / ✓ EL. 4.00 3"X10•GREENHEART SPLIT PILE p (SEE PROFILE) _ /-e es �'_ i // CAPS THRU BOLTED W/1'0 I _ GALV TIMBER BOLTS WITH PLATE I, /x-axe` x s "max-r4s x-zs3 y=-z Te x-z>s/z-zso (TMP RS AND HEAVY HEX NUTS II 1 N o �/ PECONIC BAY APPARENT0*W v�A1ER11 U ,I sD° LI —x-24 �'p• -]91 x-SBB x-ST] x-STI x190 _ V I6 II N 3"X10'GREENHEART CROSS 1 BRACING W/B•x8•BLOCK I 3 O_ 4'x30'LOWER TFORM W1(4) x-]ee xa.e r xc]9a x-]Se x-a9T %u 10'�MOOR NG PILES a'sl /\ " GRADE — . _/ 5/16/17 MF ADDED 4x30' LOWER PLATFORM RGD d / 0.0' _ 1+69 a.� �a x-age z-als x•"" �x-aas x-sm x-aoT x\49x / - _ 8"0 DRIVEN DAA BY DESCRIPTION APPROV BY GRTENHEART PILES REVISIONS % E �+p TOWN FOLK COUNT HOLD o a TYPICAL DOCK SECTION A—A 100 PARK AVENUE, MATTITUCK NY SCTM: 1000-123-07-03 a N.T.S. SITE PLAN PROPOSED DOCK PLAN I Ic SEP 1 9 2017 SCALE. 1"=40' II N L. K. McLEAN ASSOCIATES, P.C. O CONSULTING ENGINEERS aA SOUTH CWNiRf AD,6POOIOIAVEN,NEW YORK 11719 t0 N Southold Town I Designed By MF/CFD scele AS NOTED sheet No TjBoard p TrusteeaD—By MF Date: MAY 2017 APPaved By. RGD Fite Ne 16029.003 U Ili 100 Park Ave - 2016 ai III I •I I P RK�A-, }I A ri } > isi13 13 PARKA..r • r k 3 u ,i F'ARKA, r -� ^ N" 'N � f g..:. 563 TERRY _ u ` II I f'I a 50 PA308 1. RKAV , 620,TE RF,', r •3g�i TERRY F.�.TFI �� ` � ' �'`. e V September 14, 2017 1:2,000 0 0.0175 0.035 0.07 mi Address Labels Parcel Data E C 2Lam- i� V E 0 0.0179).035 0.07 km , D Y �� SFE' I SEP 1 9 2017 L Southold Town Boar of Tru to Web AppB wilder for ArcGIS 100 Park Ave - 2013 o- v A e -4I PARK A": x r a > .' t � I a a. y } . w s y � 77- -doom A IM Ar r d 1 Y :.,« y - , f� a« '-e�"a'�� �' r r. ,tea-1 I I I 1, � ♦ ��� t. :y 4? I f7L Of ' 50 PARKAV 711 1 , , *x t AtILI I H -90 TEFfiY PATH �4'!O TERF,Y F'.�iH 4 z, nx � s Y u ,. September 14, 2017 1:2,000 Address Labels 0 0.0.. 5 0.035 0.07 mi Parcel Data b E 0 0.01757.035 0.07 km V Southold Town ar o Web AppB uilder for ArcGIS • 100 Park Ave - 2010 • 10 RAR T e 1:: ►. i_U j 1352 2F.ARK•,'fi„' _ PARKAS 35 PARKA'i 154 PARK AN/ '2 PARK A', 5u3 TERRY PATH 3 •• F., RK Ab' 1�4 FARK A'J 70 PAR KAVM r - ;- 308 PARK AV r- `�- 'ate+ `—'�- ...�•- M T F .) ,TERRY PATH 580 TERRY PATH • 44u3 TEF F Y F'.A.TH i September 14, 2017 1.2,000 Address Labels 0 0.0175 0.035 0.07 mi Ty-----T------I Parcel Data VIC,C." LF0 0.017 .035 0.07 km 1 9 2011 SOuthoid Town ' ar r ee WebAppBuilder for ArcGIS 100 Park Ave - 2007 lit, 06 l '� I I •I I' 4 r �k ,� `` _ ar +♦ d V i Al i e. ,,TERR`r'PATI I "k „I II f'F,Y F-'TH r � 4 { 9 September 14, 2017 1:2,000 Address Labels 0 0.0175 0.035 0.07 mi Parcel Data 0 0.01750.035 0.07 km D ECLe uthold Town Web App6 wilder for ArcGIS a r 100 Park Avt �=004 w il'G ,...�,,..�" � jar ar. -�'3. * � ,dam., ��• � �0 �Q'.92 PAR.1 � 950 PARK a aha . sy _" PARK A'J a , _ TERRY PATH 350 PARK Av'4V I ' .s T $ 70 PARK AL' I II -maw 44— ,4 ak 4 620<TE RRY PATH _ 5801TER FPA .. , �490,TERRY P;=.11 I .s wool Y • 1 September 14, 2017 1.2,000 0 0.0175 0.035 0.07 mi Address Labels 0 0.017ED.035 0.07 {m Parcel Data In WebAppBuilderforArcGIS 100 Park Ave - 2001 II J FARK„ "i*Air, w I ARKAI.:1 -4- 4 PAR _ � ' ; ' kI .✓ Op 9 272PARK ' Y , TERRY PATH i x ' I.•t I i f . . '• 50 PARK ki, • ` 1 A .�620,TE RRY P VH 580 TERI;Y PATH 450,TERR'r'�F'.ATH' ''• ; �7 i s , September 14, 2017 1:2,000 0 0.0175 0.035 0.07 mi Address Labels //�� 2 11 , Parcel Data , �A E 0 0.0175J.035 0.07 km G SEP 1 g Southold town aro Tr e Web AppBuilder for ArcGIS 100 Park Ave - 1984 -w ,Ilk II II I I F-, F..F AO V411 d4 ./ 5 i3 TERRY PAT 350 F' h I , Af ?0 PARI•. . 00 % w# �► 5U FARK•AV ,+ „ ~ hs, Off JE FF I"Ti1 TERRY PATH T' TEF F r F'�.i JW September 14, 2017 1:2,000 Address Labels 0 0.0175 0.035 0.I mi 0 0.0170-035 0.07 km Parcel Data IM Web AppB uilder for ArcGIS r - 1! s , a i . w. S � ` ,� � - v y � w ` , � .. •ti�. ♦« �`„�,� �. R • `ate -` a .. �+.. �'•.� �� i y, � �,�--�- ,�'y= r'- y f~ �; _'.�' ^. . ��. `; 'w�• � - � !� . `••� ��� �i..�;i `, �..ti't "C ""C'1•R �,r _i`. �, � �' �. ' ," ►- 7V y;, �� ,�` ~ ',4a► I ' �•� r .}, •`'` ia,, �1' �k i1 Ilk �� _ yy � � � w`ww ` �� � '�� '� �� ��. � ♦. t i•. \ A�t ,l • �i Y � rd \' '" �'�11.� 4 ( �\ a � � "* lb 4 ~- 7 y 4 ♦ y, • . �4 ivy \ff R"\ s i r 1 �►. ti a` A `\` ti, • i '1 ' „ '�� `• � ?. 1. k i,5 ^` a ry � � °` �. .., ` , �i \�.��. *- �?•\ � � '"� A • .• r ,,rte ..�R ��_ � i j' `�� is -e � �" A R. R� w �'�.. ' � 5 r � 14 �`.._ '� � .it .. � ` «.� �,�`� � . ..• +, �.4 R• .. �� `����9�`. s�'w .. 'l �\ � —_ 46 \' �� 5r"+ � '� '► `� '��� �n a� �� ... � i t It � ��y � � _ i. .4�"�w. :""�► �1`1*�i1 � �• �1 ''�f ..�,,,7r�•—- �� •�„',R�"� °.w � �,t«,,�,.._,�'t� ��..4 "`.��1�+;� .,. i_ i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 100 Park Ave - 1962 { ► All. I =-I I. vp , � 15GPARKAV w � . ,0 PY.f h.. 1 *� 100 PARK NV • 70 PARK AV r i, a .� Jp 308 P"..F J 000, TERRY PAT f i I I PRY PATH � S 11 FF;1_ f -..THJ p air 4. r dog September 14, 2017 1:2,000 Address Labels 0 0.0175 0.035 0.07 mi Parcel Data nZ9 0 0.017N.035 0.07 km Web AppBuilder for ArcGIS Peter Young,Chairman - Town Hall,53095 Main Rd. Lauren Standish,Secretary P.O.Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Telephone(631)765-1889 Fax(631)765-1823- Conservation 65-1823Conservation Advisory Council Town of Southold At the meeting of the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council held Wed., June 14, 2017 the following recommendation was made: Moved by Greg Williams, seconded by Keith McCamy, it was RESOLVED to SUPPORT the application of PAUL PAWLOWSKI to construct a dock 607 sf. with a 4'X 30' lower dock. Access to the dock with be from an existing stairway. Located: 100 Park Ave., Mattituck. SCTM#123-7-3 Inspected by: Greg Williams, James Abbott The CAC Supports the application, however, the height of the dock and provisions for lateral access were not depicted on the plans. East /west lateral access should be indicated near Point "A". ,Vote of Council; Ayes: All Motion Carried D EC E VE SEP 1 9 2017 Southold Town ar Tru e r.�: .._ - - ''` �'.�ys'�c�-:'•i7:�`:-i�r�'G':+�.:d�' >, .X.�., 'Er ',.;-y.`.macr'.=.`..�rg.,,oa5rn:"+„..xi�?a„.s.Y=' '- 3 r ,• •d-':.k.,s�:„_,�;,':^f:�t3::;,ri�"..,z�S;3'ftj>v%''•a.:;-,,`_'':'�.ct..w,=,- - , _ - _ a" ,{`0-,:YIN w , MP7l p.21TY �-'9, s t'.S t b:s�"x':,",�Li.''.;"';x s; .,;i^s p.'s1�.s9..fsa;•sr? '�x.. $0 X1 o0 ,s ZkV1197 s = r 041L11242 960 .. ;.. - "v;-. _�..y �c. ��` . .-'rte." :a..i,`?;,,_•.r 4 - - ..,.- wl . , " :.-i��_�',�x w�•t't{,:<+.''. _ }n�n�a .�..-.T„.;'zi,,�•.r ?,,' ' _. ai First Coastal FIRST SE i 201/ Zi PO Box 1212Cava E Westhampton Beach NY 11978-7212 Nthog lawn i Michael Domino,President Roard of Trustees Town of Southold Board of Trustees 54375 Main Road ? Southold,NY 11971 . � �dhddldd�ldidi�llpolulhlllu�lllll�ld��wh�dhl�llh�lidu - . '°'.y'4'jzti� „x.-�,.;+- - ;'x•1:=:.','„:".;=i;= y"f, .£` ";:.•„,: ,,�;'r` •7x0., ` ' ^' - t' e�. '�`,�.i=�:, .y1 '�ra:;r„y.•; e={:.ae..,,�.s;y.�i..;�,,�,,,,.,.:;.•.' ..r ' • ..-.. Citi��.. `�t,➢� . .. .¢,.,xY_r.;��;-I^' `.seg a':'j',+';y:: -� - - - t .`� :-� il. _ v +,�.•:+..... .�..�:Oxy`,•_' n _. . , " `r '"�i''t�yu^>. �-�"- -,T.t+-�.T5^y,`N.��`• f'u.O, e _°L-.; +d,..._�- .> - - � ,. h.'>2,.c `�'KK T�.k�r -_ :r...•`s i'.�:,.q6,')fie.' "�'- > l4 �,.. .,t P, j S"'�'@-}.. ' v^kms' •�.., -* ,, .. ri 't..�,r:�,�;�.e,.:n�,�.,}';Frg.' •'�sii.,a�„�f}r4$,2,-w,..�, ,' , „ ”} .. : s , v. '" pat�' .•.%. .g, Y•� .c„,4�k',:',e '".�4"J�.. .-1=1c s.•fi N_ i DiSalvo, Diane y From: cassidywj@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2017 11:01 AM To: DiSalvo, Diane Subject: Wetlands Permit Request- 100 Park Ave,Mattituck Ms.Disalvo: As a resident of 270 Park Avenue Extension,) wanted to express my deep concern and strong objection to the permit request of Mr.Paul Pawlowski to construct a 121-foot dock into Peconic Bay. The negative impact of such a structure has been outlined by many of our neighbors, but I join them in reinforcing my fear that such a structure will change the tranquility and stable environmental conditions that we currently enjoy. I have enjoyed the benefit of being a summer resident on Maratooka Point for more than 60 years. I have joined neighbors in cheering changes that have been beneficial to all. Mr.Pawlowski's desire to build a long dock into the Peconic Bay can be viewed only as a benefit to him and having no positive impact on his neighbors. I appreciate the opportunity to alert you and the Trustee's to my objection.) am hopeful that Mr.Pawlowski's permit request will be denied. Respectfully yours, Ann Cassidy 1 1-". 0 DiSalvo, Diane From: Bill Carmean <bcarmean@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday,August 30, 2017 4:58 PM To: DiSalvo, Diane Subject: Board of Trustees: Letter Regarding Paul Pawlowski's Application to Build Dock Attachments: Carmean - Dock Application.docx Dear Diane: My wife and I live on Park Avenue in Mattituck, near where Paul Pawlowski wants to build a large dock into Peconic Bay. We strongly oppose the approval of this application. I attach our letter to the Board of Trustees asking them NOT to approve the application. Thanks, Curtis Carmean and Nancy Ross Bill Carmean cell: 215 595 8387 i DiSalvo, Diane From: JOSEPH BENDOWSKI <joebend@optonline.net> Sent: Friday,August 25, 2017 11:49 AM To: DiSalvo, Diane Subject: Pawlowski 121-foot dock Dear Ms DiSalvo I am a 16 year resident of Mattituck located at 3060 Park Avenue.When we first located the aforementioned property it i was in a state of total repair but we were able to have the vision to see through the time and expense of restoring the property. The house itself was completely demolished and through the years we have been able to restore it to splendor that the Bayfront represents and deserves. Among the necessary projects we faced was a completely demolished bulkhead and groin partially due do fire and erosion.We applied for a permit to replace both and were granted permission to restore the bulkhead to its original form. However,when it came to the groin, originally at 60 feet,we were told that because of the towns restrictions on "hard surfaces on the bay"we could only restore 30 feet of the groin.This left the remaining destructed groin exposing a dangerous situation to both swimmers and boaters alike.After appeals we continued to be rejected. Now, I find it difficult to understand how the town would consider allowing a 121 foot long by 4 foot permanent"hard" dock to be constructed extending into the bay where no docks exist and where previous ones were ordered removed. We believe this will set a president allowing all residents to pursue applications for docks that will seriously risk the safety of boaters and potentially cause an irreversible impact to the environment. Please consider the long term affects of your decision and its far reaching implications to our environment and lifestyle. Thank you, Joe and Donna Bendowski 631-298-1453 i August 16,2017 Southold Town Board of Trustees/Environmental Review Board c./o Diane DiSalvo Re: L.K. McLeran Associastes/Paul Pawlowski wetland dock permit 100 Park Avenue, Mattituck(1000-123-7-3) Dear Trustees, I am herein making a strong objection to the application for a proposed large bayside dock with a platform extension made by the above mentioned applicants. I am a life-long resident of the North Fork and the owner of a beach house located at the very end of Marratooka Point in Mattituck and can testify to the fact that the severe shoreline erosion to all our homes which has been increasing each and every year appears to be a direct result of residential and commercial waterfront alteration and activity all along the westerly littoral portion of Peconic Bay back to James Creek and points beyond. This proposed marine structure would further damage the stability and foundation of the sea bed, sand bars and sea life of the immediate area as well as stand out as a structure truly suitable only in a vacation marina rather the beautifully scenic open bay. I know I don't have to remind the board but there are presently less than a hand full of existing Peconic Bayfront docks from Riverhead to Orient Point all constructed long,long ago and all much smaller then herein proposed! It seems ludicrous to seriously consider this application in light of the overwhelming community opposition to this permit or lack of proof for any comparable permits issued in the last several decades. Of even more importance is the use issue for this proposed dock. Since the applicant is one of the new owners of the airport which directly adjoins his new Bayfront residence on this site what is the real intended use of the structure? Helicopters have now been landing at the airport along with a marked increase in private aircraft The North Fork is now similar to the flight path of Kennedy Airport and the residents here are entitled to the peace and quite they once enjoyed but still pay taxes for. The possibility of those numerous Hamptons-bound seaplanes and hedge- fund helicopters may instead make landing at this site on the North Fork as important as the East Hampton Airport? This application is a perfect example of how the North Fork is slowly losing it's identity. Should the board grant this application to change the overall tranquility and bayside vistas of this wonderful part of God's good earth then we have surely relinquished our own heritage forever. Yours truly, Robert A. Celic Resident/Taxpayer 41b August 16, 2017 Ms. Diane DiSalvo c/o diane.disalvo@town.southold.ny.us Town of Southold Southold, NY Reference: SCTM# 1000-123-7-3 Dear Ms. DiSalvo, It has come to our attention that the above docket proposes to construct a dock on Great Peconic Bay. We will not be able to attend tonight's meeting but want to go on record for opposing this proposal for the following reasons: There are no other docks along the Great Peconic Bay shoreline in the area of Mattituck and the surrounding communities. Permitting this dock would set a precedent for opening up even more docks to be built in the area. In light of the above, this could also lead to more commercial development along the Great Peconic Bay shoreline adversely changing the character of the area. Also, the construction of docks on Great Peconic Bay will have an adverse ecological effect as well. Therefore, we ask that you vote to deny this proposal. Sincerely, Thomas & Evelyn Bass 15 Park Avenue Ext. Mattituck, NY 11952 I i 0 DiSalvo, Diane From: David Ross <dross1730@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 4:57 PM To: DiSalvo, Diane Subject: Trustee meeting 8.16.14 To Whom It May concern, I am writing to express my opposition to the wetlands permit submitted by Paul Pawlowski. This is the second hearing before the trustees and I urge them to deny the requested permit. My opposition is based on three factors: 1. A dock of 120 feet in length will interfere will boat traffic in the Bay. 2. The environmental impact is likely to be severe during the construction process and could possibly disrupt the normal pattern of sand movement along the shore in the future. 3. There is no need for such a facility as there are a number of marinas close by that can handle any boats owned by the property owners. Please deny this permit. David Ross 170 Park Ave. Ext. Mattituck NY DiSalvo, Diane From: diane Jeffrey <dianejeffrey2@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday,August 15, 2017 5:48 PM To: DiSalvo, Diane Subject: Pawlowski request for dock Dear Ms. DiSalvo: I am writing to express deep concern regarding the proposal by Pawlowski to build a dock into Peconic Bay. I reside and own property at 520 Park Ave. extension, directly on Peconic Bay in Mattituck and have been summering here for 65 years. The building of the proposed dock would cause serious and detrimental conditions disturbing the environment and ecological systems in the bay. In addition, dozens of others will wish to build docks into the bay and will also have to be granted permits and our peaceful paradise will become commercialized and changed forever. I am hoping that the Trustees will understand the ramifications and will act accordingly by denying Mr. Pawowski's request. Thank you. Sincerely, Diane Jeffrey i DiSalvo, Diane From: Kristen Powers <ninethhole@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday,August 15, 2017 3:39 PM To: DiSalvo, Diane Subject: Permit by Pawlowski for dock Dear Ms. DiSalvo, I am writing to express my objection to Mr. Pawlowski's request to build a dock at 100 Park Ave. Allowing a dock to be built will completely alter the serene character of our beautiful bay and potentially create an avenue for many more docks extending out into the,bay. The Great Peconic is one of Southold's most important assets. We should not change its character for the sake of a commercial endeavor. After 17 years of enjoying our property at 220 Park Ave Extension,we believe it would be and absolute travesty to alter the unspoiled beauty of this very unique piece of nature and trust that you will continue to deny such permits. Sincerely, Kristen and Steve Powers Sent from my iPad 1 DiSalvo, Diane From: Tony Helies <tony@helies.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 1:45 PM To: DiSalvo, Diane Subject: Permit by Pawlowski for dock Dear Ms. DiSalvo I am writing to express my objection to Mr. Pawlowski's request to build a dock at 100 Park Ave. Such a dock will change the character of Mattituck and damage the quality of the bay, one of Southold's great assets. There are few if any docks protruding into Great or Little Peconic Bay in Southold. Should such an extraordinary permit be granted many property owners in Southold on the bay will make the same request. Such requests will be hard to deny, and should they be denied,will result in lawsuits. It will be hard to convince a judge that such requests shouldn't be granted if the Pawlowski dock has been approved.So this decision will have far greater impact than one dock. Our property at 2500 Park Avenue would benefit greatly in value from such a dock. But I believe it is in the interest of Southold to continue to deny such permits. Sincerely, Brenda and Tony Helies 1 ! `1 I DiSalvo, Diane From: Barbara klos <littlewyngl@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday,August 15, 2017 9:46 AM To: DiSalvo, Diane Subject: Paul Pawlowski's dock request My name is Barbara Klos. I am a lifelong resident of Southold Town. I am writing this letter of concern to you regarding the request by Paul Pawlowski for a large dock to be built on his property. I am against any commercial expansion in Southold Town that would encourage the landing of helicopters or the use of seaplanes in our area. The number of helicopters and loud, low-flying, seaplanes that have disturbed the peace and tranquility of this area is appalling. I can't even sit in my backyard and enjoy a cup of coffee with my husband before he goes off to work in the morning without having a plane fly overhead. Some days they fly overhead every five minutes. I am happy to share the beauty of the area with tourists,but I draw the line when the tourists disregard my right to enjoy the property I own and pay taxes on. Please express my concerns to the trustees who we have given the responsibility to protect what is left of our area. People come here because of its beauty. Planes have no place in this environment. There is enough pollution and traffic. We don't need planes, helicopters, or McMansions! Sincerely, Barbara Klos 150 Grigonis Path Southold,NY 11971 631-765-3460 i DiSalvo, Diane From: Beth Lestrange <bslestrange@gmail.com> Sent: Monday,August 14, 2017 3:55 PM To: DiSalvo, Diane Subject: Mr. Pawlowski's wetlands permit, 100 park ave corp., c/o paul pawlowski We received a letter today regarding a second hearing for the above captioned. We were unaware that there was a prior hearing. We have read in the Suffolk Times that when he purchased this property he would not be using it for commercial purposes. We have lived on the Peconic Bay near the above's captioned property since 2004. We have seen/heard a tremendous increase each May-September of the helicopters/sea planes right over our home utilizing the south forks airports. Many North Forkers have tried to have the routes of these helicopters/seaplanes changed with no avail. Even our political representatives have not helped. There was an article today online from the Northforker addressing this exact issue, stating the complaints end up in the garbage can. When we did the renovation on our home we filed ever permit, had all the inspections and received the proper sign offs on all including the Certificate of Occupancy permit. We realize that there are residents/contractors in this town that either break the rules by not getting the required permits or receive a permit because of who they know.(Trustees, DEC, Health Dept. & Bldg Dept). SEEMS TO SOME OF US THAT THE RULES ARE NOT THE SAME FOR ALL. IT WOULD BE A REAL SHAME IF MR. PAWLOWSKI WAS ABLE TO OBTAIN THIS PERMIT. Please add this email to the agenda this Wednesday. Thank you, Concerned resident wanting the North Fork to NOT become the South Fork i J DiSalvo, Diane From: holmanbg@aol.com Sent: Monday,August 14, 2017 11:10 AM To: DiSalvo, Diane Subject: Peconic Bay Dear Ms. DiSalvo: My wife and I live at 350 Park Avenue in Mattituck, just a few hundred yards due east of the appalling 4 by 121.7 foot dock on the Bay proposed by 100 Park Avenue Corp c/o Paul Pawloski. We are seriously troubled by such an ill-advised diminution of so valuable a community asset - the Peconic Bay in Mattituck. A dock would significantly impair the community use and enjoyment of the beautifully unspoiled bay. Over the years, we have regularly seen waders, canoers, kayakers and small boaters passing close to the shore in an easterly- westerly direction and then back. We also fear what a dock would do the beaches, a special joy to us and so many others. In the exercise of care for the environment and the community, the dock request should be denied. When we purchased our beach front Mattituck property from Frank Abrams in 1968, Frank assured us that the Airbase, then owned and operated by Parker Wickham, had not diminished his or his neighbors' enjoyment of their bayfront homes because the,Wickhams cared about their neighbors and the community environment. We were introduced to Parker and Edie Wickham and soon learned that Frank was right. This did not change when Jay Wickham took over. Our two children grew up here and the Bay was an important part of their daily lives. Our daughter now lives in Cutchogue 4 miles away and whenever she visits, she always has to go out front to view the Bay she loved and loves. Just yesterday, our son and grandchildren, ages 9, 7 and 4, came to visit from Sag Harbor and, first thing after arrival and lunch, all went down to the beach to wade and play and we ail heard again how our son enjoyed the beach with his friends. At 15, he took the Coast Guard Safe Boating Course and at 16 mastered a 15 foot Boston Whaler. We had no thought of damaging and spoiling the Bay with a dock, nor have any of our neighbors over the years. We wonder whether 100 Park Avenue Corporation plans a commercial venture with respect to the dock and a consequent adverse effect on the Bay and the quiet enjoyment of it and the beaches by the community as a result of the corporate activities. l An intrusion of a dock, private or commercial, into a community enjoyed bay should not be permitted if the environment and the community is considered. Most sincerely submitted, Bud and Kathleen Holman and family z i 1 S DiSalvo, Diane From: Paula <pj1231@gmail.com> Sent: Monday,August 14, 2017 3:07 PM To: DiSalvo, Diane Subject: Paula Pawlowski request for 121' dock into Peconic Bay. We vehemently oppose it. It's ridiculous. Very audacious on his part. Paula and Kevin Flaherty 1250 Lupton Point Mattituck, NY 11952 1 Dave Corieri From: Dave Corieri Sent: Tuesday,August 01,2017 11:07 AM To: Dave Corieri Subject: FW: [Ext] Application of 100 Park Avenue Corporation to build a dock on the Great Peconic Bay Town Of Southold Board of Trustees Town Hall 53095 main road 'Southold New York 11971 RE:Application of 100 park Avenue Corporation to build a dock on the great Peconic Bay Dear Members of the Board: Further to our objection letter submitted at the board on the evening of July 191h,2017 we would like to comment on Mr. Pawlowskis verbal rebuttal. 1-The construction of a 122.7 ft. dock will impair our Riparian Rights for access traversing the bay and land. Mr Pawlowskis response was to provide a stairway over his proposed dock to allow us to cross.That is unacceptable. 2-The dock is a hazard to navigation...Mr Pawlowski stated it is not a high traffic area.That is NOT the case.Strong's marina located a few hundred yards west of the dock is highly trafficked, both day and night. In addition wakeboarders and skiers travel close to the shore and a dock protruding well over the length of a consitant jetty line is sure to produce a catastrophic event over time.There is no SMPH-no wake zone-down the coast like you would find in a lagoon or inlet. 3-We mention in point#4 of our prior letter to'the board of the questionable future use of this dock. Mr. Pawlowski stated it for his personal use only and the airport is his PARTNER but he has no connection.That does not make sense to me.What is the definition of a Partner? "a person who takes part in an undertaking with another or others,especially in a business or company with shared risks and profits"So based on this definition is there an ultimate plan to provide commercial dock space for visiting seaplanes,yachts and planes/helicopters?This should be taken into consideration and the future use if this dock were to be approved. 4-The wave and tidal action is turbulent and this is a high energy stretch of coastline with migrating shoals. Mr ,.Pawlowski acknowledged that fact but rebutted with'he will "build a dock stronger than most"...is that really a solution to the problem of nor'easters, hurricanes and everyday wave and wind action against the shore?'No it is not. 5-Lastly with respect to pollution of lubricants,gas and oil Mr Pawlowskis statement was he would be careful and that's not really a_problem . It is a problem when the vessel is crushed against the dock and coast allowing pollutants to enter the ecosystem...his rebuttal was off the cuff and made no factual sense: Once again please,reject this dock proposal in its entirety and any future amendments proposed for the town and our community. Regards c - EC El V E David an nn Corien 412 Park Avenue AUG 9 2017 Mattituck, New York Southold Town �- Board of.Trusteei Dave Corieri To: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BOARD OF TRUSTEES Subject: Application of 100 park Avenue Corporation to build a 'dock on the Great Peconic Bay d , p S Town of Southold Board Of Trustees - - CE E Town Hall 53095 Main road Jul. 19 2017 Southold New York 11971 Dear Members of the Board, SOUthold Town Bar of Trugtsrg We,Ann and David Corieri,are the owners of 412 Park Avenue on the easterly side of the corporate applicants property at 100 Park Avenue. We are not supporting this permit and strongly object to the new construction of a 122.7 foot dock jetting out into the Great Peconic Bay! Our objection is also shared and supported by most of the community !11 Outlined below are points to be considered in your review of the application: 1- Attached is an engineering report prepared by First Coastal Corporation .Although this report is not directly applicable to the proposed dock it exemplifies the impact of structures on the coast and points to the fragile nature of our ecosystem. Note the direction of the longshore transport(littoral Drift)that should not be obstructed.The impact of a newly constructed dock is predictable but the consequences are avoidable. 2- A 122.7 foot dock will block walking access down the beach on land and bay. 3- A 122.7 foot dock will be a hazard to navigation on the bay. NOTE:Strong's Marina is just to the west with heavy boat traffic by day and night . In addition skiers and wakeboarders travel the coast and other than the Norris dock (assume grandfathered-in) a new dock obstruction would be unexpected and pose a potential bodily injury. 4- How many boats could be docked at a 122.7 foot dock?Since the application is in the name of 100 Park Avenue CORPORATION could future use be utilized for seaplanes, boats that dock to board helicopters and/or planes? Could this dock be used for commercial proposes? We have noticed is definite uptick in air traffic...not just small planes but more helicopters and louder and larger planes. 5- Most docks are confined to inlets...the wave action on the widest portion of the Great Peconic Bay would devastate an dock structures from nor'easters to hurricanes and cause significate property damage to bulkheads along the coastline. 6- The docking of a vessel on that widest portion of the bay would be very risky.As an alternative Strong's Marina is only a few hundred yards to the west of the proposed structure....that's not only convenient but damages no one!!! 7- As mentioned in point#3 above the only dock that exists is the Norris dock.There is not ONE STRUCTURE that compromises the beautiful shoreline from New Suffolk to Laurel within the Town Of Southold. 8- Last but not least if this application was approved or any amended configuration of the application approved then that would open the flood gates to dock structures throughout the Town Of Southold's coastlines. Please reject this dock proposal in its entirety and any future proposals. Sincerely Ann and David Corieri t ,� ,9AA Q c vG� 412 Park Avenue 1 Mattituck, New York dcorieri@corieri.com apmc5@aol.com E � � 8 � JUL 1 9 2017 Southold Town 2 u L 1 9 2017 sou:��ifc3 io�vn �1 C I IlI \ E' C E I V E JUL 1 9 2011 ( Southold Town F1f B a f Tri e y ' � Illl r Reil 011�0*;1- f Environmental -Technologies - Analysis - Coistruction - Remediation - - Permitting J The Impact of the Holman Groin On the Corieri Property 350 Park Avenue E G E N E Mattituck Town of Southold JUL 19 2017 . Suffolk County State of New York Southold Town Bard of TAstoos Coastal Geology Coastal Process Analysis Prepared For White & Cirrito, LLP Prepared By Aram V. Terchunian, MR. First Coastal Corporation Post Office Box 1212 Westhampton Beach. Long Island New York 11978-7212 516 288 2271 516 288 2271 FAX www.firstcoastal.net aram@firstcostal.net June 6 2001 FLRST Impact ofthe Holman Groin-Mattitudc,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Cirrito,LLP 616101-Pago 1 of 19 JUL 19 2011 Table of Contents _ Southold Town 1. PROJECT SCOPE,ENVIRONMENTAL&GEOLOGIC SETTING.........................................4 1.1. PROJECT LOCATION&SCOPE... ....................... ..........................................................................4 1.1.1. Proiect Location.................................................................................................................4 1.1.2. Proiect Scope.....................................................................................................................5 1.2. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING..........................................................................................................5 1.2.1. Site Description&Location...............................................................................................5 13. COASTAL GEOLOGIC SETTING................................ ....................................................................5 1.3.1. Generalized Coastal Geolo-y.............................................................................................5 1.3.2. Surficial Sediments and Soils..............................................................................................5 1.3.3. Generic Littoral Transport Beach Bluff and Dune Processes.......................................6 2. GEOMORPHOLOGY,INLETS,CHANNELS,AND SHORELINE STRUCTURES.................8 2.1. AREA GEOMORPHOLOGY AND SHORELINE SHAPE.........................................................................8 2.1.1. Shorehne Compartments Inlets &Channels................_......_............................................8 2.2. COASTAL&LITTORAL PROCESSES..............................................................................................9 2.3. SHORELINE STRUCTURES................. .........................................................................................10 2.3.1. Groins and Jetties............................................................................................................10 2.4. THE HoLMAN GROIN.............................................................. ..................................................14 2.4.1. Reconstruction of the Holman Eastern Groin...................................................................16 ( 3. CONCLUSIONS AND FINDINGS...............................................................................................19 t —3I . 1. COASTAL GEOLOGY&L=RALPRocEss................................................................................19 32. GEOMORPHOLOGY INLETS &SHORELINE STRUCTURES............................................................19 3.3. THE IMPACT OF THE HoLMAN GROIN.........................................................................................19 3.4. POTENTIAL REMEDIAL ACTIONS................................................................................................19 Table of Figures l Figure 1:Location Map of the&4 Area...........................................................................................4 Figure 2: USDA Soils map of the project site showing the Riverhead and Beach soils .................6 Figure 3: Generic illustration ofLoingshore or Littoral Transport which moves the sand along l the beach in response to waves striking the shoreline at an oblique angle. ..............................6 Figure 4 Typical cross section ofdune/bluff beach and nearshore system identifyingspecific zones................................................... ............................................................................................7 Figure 5. 1999 Aerial Photograph ofShoreline (Source•Suffolk County Planning Department). Note the well-defined navigation channels offshore of both James and Deep Hole Creek. Also note the nearshore bar system and the buildup ofsand on the west side of each inlet. l All of these features confirm the littoral/longshore transport direction to the east reported byEisel, 1977..................................................................................................................................8 Figure 6•Littoral Drift Map showier the dominant direction ofsand transport within the study_ area�isel MT 1977 Special Report 5 Marine Science Research Center. Reference 77- . ....................................................................................................................................................9 FMT Impact ofthe Holman Groin-Mattituck,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Cirrito,LLP 616101-Page 2 of 19 Figure 7• Typical layout and impacts of single groin on a beach (Source Shore Protection Manual US Army Corps of Engineers 1984, Page 5-36)........................................................10 Figure 8 tical layout and configuration ofa multiple groin field. (Source US Cors 1984)10 Figure 9• Groin taper design recommended by the US Army Corps of Engineers(Source,US Army Corps o f aineers 1984 Shore Protection Manual, Page 5-45).................................13 Figure 10• Close up aerial photograph showing the groins and bulkheads in the study area. .....14 Figure I1•NYSDEC Permit# 1-4738-02089/00001 &Survey of&lman Property......................15 Figure 12• Photograph looking west(u t) from the Corien property showing the reconstructed eastern Holman groin and the western Holman groin. Note the new PVC on the eastern Holman groin and the lack o sand in front of the Corien property. ...................16 Figure 13• View of the Holman groins The photograph was taken while standing yd agent to the Holman easterly groin and looking updri ft towards the westerly groin...................................17 Figure 14 View to the east(downdrift) from the west side of the western Holman groin. Note theheight of the timber groin. .....................................................................................................17 ffCE D f 17 Southolo fTu CO r l , r Eek Impact ofthe Holman Groin-Mattituck,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Cirrito,LLP 6/6/01-Page 3 of 19 i 1. Project Scope, Environmental & Geologic Setting 1.1. Project Location & Scope 1.1.1. Project Location The study area is located in the Hamlet of Mattituck in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County,New York. The study area is bounded to the south by the Peconic Bay(Figure 1),to the north by Dexter, and to the East by Sheehey and West by Holman. Z1UADRANGLE NEW YORK—SUFFOLK CO. 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) SOUTHOLD 6.2 ML 72°3�' 08 2 410 000 FEET CUTCHOGUE I-1 M,� 41'00' �'-�� ��y ter, _ `•�,� _l -`�• II C• � �},fir'' C 3 MAlN • • '' •;s r , W" . I IIS �,= t, Im 241! �Pfl d '> SOF,FOLD" 5—rf•^"ar,, ,:. a! � W � _�r=� `j .• }I, ''•,` i'��6' 7 1. ,t 'r t:'�i. -err•• rl n:, i_ 4 I�No i jl� it k.}23 1'r NZ_ ill JI fly I, ';+: '^ - \r,.�?•� �"\_ DR'j; , R ;Airport ' Y �L',,•1Marratooka a,M oint 260000 ����' \�•<,;,-",l}r� ;c- -���\ a �;,-r t.�a�� '�-1 .� ;FEET Project Si 6 - - JUL 1 9 2017 s 4539 t Jo B a ' Trus`ces Figure 1:Location Map of'the Study Area FC. aL Impact ofthe Holman Groin-Ivlattituok,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Cirrito,LLP 616101-Page-4 of 19 1.1.2. Project Scope The scope of the project is the Corieri property and the surrounding beachfront properties to the east and west. This report will evaluate the impact of the Holman groin on the Corieri property and the potential alternatives to alleviate any adverse environmental impact. FF-,c I V1.2. Environmental Setting 1.2.1. Site Description & Location UL 1 9 2017 1.2.1.1.Shoreline Features Southold Town The study area of this project includes beaches,bluffs, dunes,inlets, groins, and jetties along the Great Peconic Bay shoreline in the vicinity of the Corieri and Holman properties (See Figure 1). 1.3. Coastal Geologic Setting 1.3.1. Generalized Coastal Geology The study area is a recent beach deposit on the Great Peconic Bay shoreline of the North Fork of Long Island. The spine of the North Fork was formed by glacial activity during the Pleistocene Glaciations,which left behind an assemblage of sediments to form the Roanoke Point Recessional moraine. As the glaciers gradually receded approximately 18,000 years ago,the meltwater and wind processes transported sand and sediments to the south forming an outwash plain that is today recognized as the Great Peconic Bay shoreline of the North Fork(Sirken, 1995 and Eisel, 1977). Gradually sea level rose and coastal processes reworked the sediment along the shoreline into the current configuration. 1.3.2. Surficial Sediments and Soils- The surface soils of the study area are,identified on the Soil Survey of Suffolk County (USDA Soil Conservation Service, 1975) (Figure2)as: Be-Beaches: Sandy, gravely, or cobbly areas between water and mean sea level and dunes or escarpments. All of the beaches along Long Island Sound are very gravely and cobbly. Covers 1.2% of ground in Suffolk County. Rd A—Riverhead: Deep,well drained,moderately coarse textured soils that formed in a mantle of sandy loam or fine sandy loam over thick layers of coarse sand and gravel. These soils occur throughout the county in rolling to steep areas on moraines and in level to gently sloping areas on outwash plains. F[1tS� �jttf sL Impact ofthe Holman Groin-Mattifuck,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Cirrko,LLP 616101-Page 5 of 19 F (Joins sheet 7 7) }�• �'. x',tif. .K'f 4 �''�' +,y+',t 'di+r°':1•'S r• hP• •' •xSJ,�f;,°,`�' � �',`y' rs�as:r->" ^fid.'r;".�`'. #.:' �� ,(�' ;• p'�� `"rr,,(`'�` �`°'`; Y<�'✓�� '�+r^ - _1 '. - #r�'iS,�tr, `r rr,.5 a , ,�+ rs�?':•zM;• 'ccs.,;'. ,y' �; �• yA� rty #.r '���.ff ,may _Ty .�. 4 i�j.��m •��F� t� �p � 1 G� .h •A i' '� _ '4�L,'''tyA' YI.• S YJ J ,�7 t{'. d*.x r}yL�� a'•' SSV• t Figure 2: USDA Soils map of the project site showing the Riverhead and Beach soils 1.3.3. Generic Littoral Transport, Beach, Bluff, and Dune Processes" The coastal processes of littoral(longshore)transport, driven by the wind,waves, and tides have gradually reshaped the underlying sobs into a characteristic beach and low bluff/dune system common to the Peconic Bays. Littoral transport or drift is the alongshore movement of sand along the beach in response to wind,waves, and tides. Ordinarily,waves will strike the beach on an angle and move sand in one dominant direction(Figure 3). The supply side is called the updrift and the receiving side is called the downdrift. ZiGzaq mwmart of?ncct5(littoral driff) r6poM irq to runup and raivm Wwndr�fi of via vcf i • 3jT,s�}, `s•�.v^ ';Y �'� � b�kN, � -� ,y .� sT{'avi��� '�4" r r `{" +'1 u;F'—�r s• s s; •.`,Ff✓'.r't��'�ie ..,� ��,+5ti'�ijwll'�C.+.} l G, tom` •�^ �,t � '�Y Figure 3: Generic illustration of Longshore or Littoral Transport,which moves the sand along l the beach in response to waves striking the shoreline at an oblique angle. FIRST Impact ofthe Holman Groin-Mattituck,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Chrito,ILP 616101-Page 6 of 14 l t A large amount of sand is also moved along the shoreline as submerged nearshore sand bars. These sand bars break wave energy and this helps protect and stabilize the beach. They also supply large volumes of sand to the beach. Inland beech or 5hort 6reArr Zone. p�x�or� fore re- S u i OMIT r N - ;! Nigh rmfrr'Icvd bUm� Lr05f - n z 0 Figure 4: Typical cross section of dune/bluff, beach and nearshore system identifying specific Zones i Sand on the beach is moved by wind into dunes and stabilized by seaside vegetation, including American Beach Grass,Dusty Miller, Seaside Goldenrod,Bayberry,Beach ` Plum,Rosa Rugosa, and other salt tolerant grasses. Dunes typically form of accretionary or,stable shorelines. The dunes on the Peconic Bays are typically low profile,usually not more than 10 to 12 feet above sea level. f The source of some of the sand on the Peconic beaches and dune are the eroding bluffs. f Sand eroded from the bluff is entrained in littoral transport and moved laterally to maintain and nurture the beaches end dunes as described above(Figure 4). I ' - t FTE1VEE JUL 1 9 2011 Southold Town Ma of Trus ees l ( F^IRS�T aL Impact of the Holman Groin-Matfituck,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Cirrito,LLP 616101-Page 7 of 19 ZZ Coastal$ Littoral Processes On the subject site,the sand moves dominantly from west to east as demonstrated above, and as reported in the scientific literature for this area(Eisel, 1977 -Figure 6). Normal day-to-day processes and storm processes move the sand to the east in littoral transport as described earlier. As a consequence of this dominant littoral sand transport, sand builds up against the west side of James Creek and Deep Hole Creek. Simultaneously, sand is eroded from the west side of James Creek. I i Project Site 1,1 ms i a r n •f j, E Yr'J• �yir i � 1 4 41 a A YM 0 ilk �@ Alf ' YES - ■ m ss a:. �� � �Q� ��• 1 In Is 10 Wr F 4Ae em'-I. s x Y F �YF�.�• Direction of lo F,l� Transport Indicated by =E1 Arrows Southold Town, Board of Trustees I Figure 6:Littoral"Drift Map showing the dominant direction of sand transport within the study area. (Eisel,M.T., 1977,Special Report S,Marine Science Research Center,Reference 77-1) I • I ' I _ I FIRST (> k Impact ofthe Holman Groin-Mattituck,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Cirrito,LLP 6/6101-Page 9 of 19 I ± /1e,.� �,s-�t�f17'i�rp�'"�< •�njjr �/rr� ��rr/r _ 'f� `�fRr.ff1,4.,, %!Fr ✓+�{.�rtt r'`�tr n r•t �s`-" r�.rsf s'-'$`r a.1ry It Y�:,*'F- dJf; "'' w?1t }�' 65 i fit `•F:Jtj+ `f•j-,• c2- _.✓s r c t •x't.•!'ty tMj>R r .1ti. �f 1SS tr .� lAh3 Pr S � �dZrl AM �y*� *A�`laa,�ga i' rr �yr3rztC�3A� ii s 'k ri .w ' k f a✓z/ `tri7 .•st. - 4 rr 4 u Y x , 7 r' ;5i r '� tY° .11e r. �.,.�r a 5 Rc t ��1/ YI♦ Fk. -,5+1 ? zaLt w f A, S, /i�„etY ! f'+r f.�r i'��'��' �� �•T � '+; fn.xv �y Rrr � i `�F "y' �,., n • "'43t. �fa, { cnJ/,tZTCx i/ ilf`n�'1' GFC q J_,„r� t r '', r , fi'�,'Srrrr/����,,,r,t'S .. •xj• 7 s��, ,�+♦Ki.>ay7-��t s��. c t .. >!.. r rF n . . / P y /f�'- -M 1r lh+wt�a4A-h-`L47; i.Y'♦'t i F8 � .�"`'1Ft; 11 j s� �+i`+�s ager f" "' '•i"!3..T ER'gg r r..,,Tr,,• Jr .--. �, �-lalman Property{ F'1 yr t >y : l �Q .. " 1 3- a ir.� ✓ � yr.k-,L''�.? 9' t4 V^ ?fid' r, rr, Ce yreek�;(,'' r�,.fr�['} n Y i"/r r1' .fie .�r„' -< J'7,} G' ♦ .rr > N t '>..,.t �'�; f <�� f,`, ♦ Cp4�n p"" r�'�l d��rti��t7`ypJ,l.z f�„S' '1 y� s sfa :, --. t 1 -,�e'''s'j J"• ''a-s/, sof > is �'•t` - �. `Z 1../ r !/ r ^•r 'r', >r er jJ,r .ki 7 Ki.p u:+' �3/ a f r n e r e Sp .yil '�a a .J�1 fir�Y yra? Gbt'�en�P�operty � r.�"�.� �>: •� h �. ;. ( +. l 'r �*n,7� fl r -". „> 4.Trrv� r1t b�"ls�•r -lrr s7 ej�.. tr' r > JI �.Y,-��, .k�'vl £Jiv ''fi'J - i a i E.`k S a9,"�`br< *r v" '•`£y'rx'* '�� ,W fir-/rt > -:"•+ f �f/ �i r ;c h lr tv rtkW,.. T ''1a.1 t,fi7 1: ;Jct x s�rr- •-1: ♦1 -� cq %'lj.ly J`r c „W �' 'r tiA 7f a�c'Y•� 4�y 9 q�tqf' ' r v3 `F1'� •,�.�- ri1� r �,.d/ x -+c�?r+�t�f Tye/ � �.f�' S��y y1�'� t s�P y ar .y;Y.•',� °s-•�' ..3 tf' + '-�"s ._P i - r �' / t rf rey icy f. rh,v ✓ t� •'?'^`f`vF #7jo iy sc? r fi{,`�`' &@Cry ,e�� �'+I L .4 - On QT L t a• ` .slC i'�'i�}. .f•f Ch05/aOln� r � fl'� �. ! F. Y! �T =•SQL 1J h! .i I t"14 ,�,L�"(J�:. 4°6 ,,.. 7 James Creek. Nearshore Sand `� Deep Hole1CreekN ` a' �,,a ry�'_i � r r�iaa��}�h+i,+a•-.:,:..`s± k�yw,�l.;!�'rt-"ri,'s�., 7?+2.:'�._ .�f#'�tta.:;r�' '�j: II 2.3. Shoreline Structures 2.3.1. Groins and Jetties Groins and jetties are similar structures,which are used for very different purposes in coastal stabilization. Jetties are used at inlet entrances to block the flow of sand into channel and thus preserve navigation. Groins are used on the open beach to deposit sand for a recreational or protective beach. Either structure can be constructed of wood,metal, plastic, rock, or similar structures. Although the uses of groins and jetties are different, their impacts are similar, and thus the reason that they are often grouped together. Groins may be used either singly(Figure 7) or in groups(Figure 8), depending on the desired condition and the site-specific configuration of the shoreline. 8ERCH Q Groin- Adjusted LU Shoreline - cwt M �- Original j Groin Shoreline N `° Adjusted ShorelineLU Direction of Net Longshore Transport ` Figure 7: Typical layout and impacts of a single groin on a beach (Source,Shore Protection Manual, VSArmy Corps of Engineers, 1984,Page 5-36) 8£ACH Original Shoreline - Groin __ 10- Adjusted --� Shoreline Direction of Net Longshore Transport Figure 8: Typical layout and configuration of a multiple groin field (Source, US Corps, 1984) Impact ofthe Holman Groin-Mattituck,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Cisito,LLP 616101-Page 10 of 19 1 In either case,the object of groin construction is to cause sand to deposit in one specific location(the updrift side) and to prevent sand from depositing in another location(the downdraft side). It is this specific function of groins,which has prompted the US Army Corps of Engineers(the primary federal agency responsible for coastal stabilization engineering the United States)to develop very specific design, construction, and reconstruction rules. For example,the Shore Protection Manual(which is the recognized design standard in coastal engineering) developed and written by the Corps outlines six rules for groin design: RULE 1: Groins can only be used to interrupt longshore transport. RULE 2: The beach adjustment near groins wilt depend on the magnitude and direction of the Zongshore transport. 1 RULE 3: The gratin-induced accumulation of Zongshore drift on the fore- shore Will modify the beach profile, Which mill then try to reestablish its naturat'shape. RULE 4: Water pushed by waves into a groin compartment will sometimes 1 return offshore in the form of rip currents along the sides of groins. RULE 5: The percentage of the tongshore transport which bypasses a groin P will depend on groin dimensions, fillet dimensions, water level, and wave climate. Rule 6: The longshore drift that is collected in the updrift fillet is prevented from reaching the downdrift area, where the sand balance is upset , Source, Shore Protection Manual, US Army Corps of Engineers, 1984,Page 5-35 to 37 In particular,Rules 4 and 6 warn of erosional consequences from poor groin design, including diversion of sand offshore and erosion of the downdrift beach. The Corps also 9 developed engineering standards for the length and spacing of groins: The spacing between groins should equal two to three times the groin Length from the berm crest to the seaward end. 1 Source, Shore Protection Manual, US Army Corps of Engineers, 1984, Page 5-450 J D E1VE JUL 1 9 2017 FIRST Impact of the Holman Groin-Mattituck,Southold,New York SmTnid?n+.•in IPrepared For White&Cirrito,LLP 616101-Page 11 of 19 Boar of ir;!stvs l 1 In addition,the Corps has gone as far as to advise coastal engineers and other professionals of potential legal consequences from failure to follow the fundamental design principles,including prefilling the groin compartments with sand, proper spacing and length, and constructing the entire project in order: 11. Legal Aspects. The legal considerations discussed previously in Section V,3 of this chapter are also applicable to the construction of groins. Legal problems are 1 varied and often complex, due to the diversity of legal precedent in different J jurisdictions and the application of the factual setting to a particular body of law. 1Previous information on the functional design of groins emphasizes the J fact that adverse downdraft shore erosion can be expected if the updrift side of the groin is not artificially filled to its impounding capacity at the time l of groin construction. Liability for property damage insofar as the Federal I Government is concerned will be determined with reference to the Federal Tort 111 Claims Act. it is therefore incumbent on the owner of groin-type structures to recognize the legal implications of this coastal structure in order to plan, design, construct, and maintain the structure accordingly. it is thus prudent to seek legal counsel at the earliest stages of formulation. Source, Shore Protection Manual, US Army Corps of Engineers, 1984, Page 5-56 � The Corps developed a detailed procedure for the order of groin construction,to ensure that an adequate supply of sand is supplied to the downdrift beach. Furthermore, the Corps recommends that all groin compartments be prefilled with beach compatible sand to 1 facilitate the bypass of sand to downdrift beaches and minimise downdrift beach erosion. 8. Order of Groin Construction. LU At sites where a groin system is under consideration, two possibilities arise: either the groin system is to be filled artificially or longsbore � h transport is to be depended on to produce the fill. With artificial fill, the UA o , only interruption of longshore transport will be the period between the time the groin system is constructed and the time the artificial fill is made. For : economical reasons, the fill is normally placed in one continuous operation, 1 especially if 'it is being accomplished by hydraulic dredge. Accordingly, to LU reduce the time, period between the groin construction and the deposition of the fill, all groins should preferably be constructed concurrently. Deposi- tion of the fill should commence as soon as the stage of groin construction �u 1 permits. When depending on longshore transport, no groin will fill until all the preceding updrift groins have been filled. This natural filling will reduce the supply to downdrift beaches. The time period required for the entire system to fill naturally and the material to resume its unrestricted J movement downdrift may be so long that severe downdrift damage may result. J Accordingly, to reduce this damage, only the groin or group of groins at the downdrift end should be constructed initially. The second groin, or group, l should not be started until the first has filled and material passing around or over the groins has again stabilized the downdrift beach. Although this J method may increase costs, it will not only aid in reducing damage, but will also provide a practical guide to the spacing of groins. JSource, Shore Protection Manual, US Army Corps of Engineers, 1984, Page 5-56 FIRST Impact of the Holman Groin-Mattituck,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Cirrito,LLP 616101-Page 12 of 19 1 i, I 1 Finally, the Corps developed a detailed engineering procedure for reconstructing existing groin fields, which includes tapering of the downdrift groins to minimise disturbances to 1 the downdrift shoreline and to reintegrate the flow of beach sands into the natural system (Figure 9). 1 �Norma! Spacing • s� s� 51 s2s3 Original Shoreline 13 Groins Y 60 1 Adjusted Shoreline Normal Length Figure 9: Groin taper design recommended by the US Army Corps of Engineers(Source US 1 Army Corps of Engineers, 1984,Shore Protection Manual,Page 5-45) In addition to this detailed design standards developed in the "Shore Protection Manual', J the Corps also prepared a more simplified"Coastal Engineering Technical Note: Groins— J Their Applications and Limitations" (attached), for use in design and permit guidance. This Technical Note of eight pages reinforces the guidance in the"Shore Protection Manual" and stresses the fact that "the accumulation of material(accretion) on the updrift side is accompanied by a corresponding amount of erosion on the downdrift side of the groin". (Page 1-2) This Technical Note also includes a section on"Functional Limitations", which underscores the problems with inadequate sand supply, the order of groin construction, and the recommended practice of prefilling groin compartments with beach compatible sand(see Pages 2—3). 1 Repeatedly, the Technical Note specifies that groins will only work where there is an adequate supply of sand, entrapped sand can lead to downdrift erosion, the groins height and length must be chosen to maximize updrift filling and minimize downdrift erosion, 1 groins must be stable against earth pressures and resist scour, and constructed to be J prevent flanking (see page 6 & 7—Design Considerations). fJD ECE111E JUL 1 9 2017 Boar(, Impact of-the Holman Groin-Mattituck,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Cicrito,LLP 616101-Page 13 of 19 I •11 1. 11' 1 • '.. � � 1 II" 1 I /• f'. '1' 1 1 •1 i 1II •I • I �,tr •tr „v Ma rYs"ysx5rN.eE�•7Y,r.d-,b� r�xx-..Ss'yyai.ne.eST1E t.G(a rriy:I " �r V_ 1 "' rt o�nfLT y: - — r `twf' 3r ?a { to J ° 7 '� •f r�!' i�'�u t I;J 4'! }"4"��r "�r� •! - v c >•r' t r �'i v '51.1 t �{Y,�".iY r'r v� as is` z s ,_. $ .,•• v rw; .w= ..y wr ''.,tires i t s _ �n5A ' Ig 4 d` 4� 't°� f�� �'>�-� -".' k �'�.'�k���r'c fL` �'� } "•o,.'r'�.�i1.'Nr•✓ _ .,�t...N- d rF`� Jfr r a ! h �Y �7*yr at. r _�fsy�h� S s tui t ` ���, ����$'-/.:�,���un�„�'y�.�•r`�_1�'" ?' *�� iir�jE�'�i '..l'��ss�-� .>� s �����#'s?`,`'i��`«�1�!� ----- � 57 '^"ffl y3 +�3-i 'tt�'t� .F:f Fz "''rs .ti y.5� ,i.• �,.:� k'r F t. •`T 1�. 'Jnr `1 x v'1 -� t � ' { KLk. a 1 6� M�w . a.tm i�?.xn � � -`�' Li�!j•-''* .�'.` �� �: lY "". .� tq �.it." •o�rnC�nt"Y '�,�jA'nc aL•Lr �T ME �$140"a'% 0.�1�1 Wlli( t ''s v �`r n"4 " �?".r" f r��$r�•y"�'rr kJt"gA•„,,��'i+'7�'�.ra'4�"e�'�' �k�"�;y � F.Y ..^ ` `M.c �x„��L ✓`� 4 n' OW, Jrh!a„ 6 ° au +."*' X ya t•'"'"`�"�'2� �EJ t t> � R s.Mu..r'� "s .���* Fit 7 r � 5 '�, olma �Propert ,°v O , f "5h3 � g r >1• i ''�tz 73�i� { �' tF_ � .r J .' �.,, •�` E`^�� '�i � -i s pr (a "i' 6�rH ., r r•rs� ,h- `tj� w y . Ir i mac€Fu ra s., t rkrnt a w v x 6, go dq:: r �' q > i� rHOlm�n '�, is, f4i i M 'N ' " y� jti3� ro L } �� ; roan x '�� r:.t t � �-- ..r�'..ag'-�'i� 1 �r`t�> "A' � a,� �, `t�'� k d�'.W t��y'��'.,L,y :r•d 'e� -� ��^},y,�, z �. as r ►Y �� ° t �` y��:r 7.. F' �'kxha�g�i't�s.. � '•:r �,y '�' '�` :Xj rY.�nN,��.:"yt� - ;4� J. �,.� n rb la�f�, f Y L lyu�J�,F�.'vr_-4 � ) A'X r -.�`�.•�tG r�of�,nss� � C - yy�,'�, �”",�,,�'�'�L s�wk�'d Sf i".%''�F'�'`�,'a�`"z d'k' a 1�� r^'yrv'� x`r.�'.•.4 -kNt ...�''k...r, ,�`2'�-•[�,a•�'f t� e 3�, f i,� ,;,��s''�i ,. i" 3''k�Y-�.`# `�w� {L'''�f�.�fi�ir' a.� •Kf£ Sr'' i�.�t /��-��"5y,->�r,��t..Y����c„� ta.0 ��i'',Y�° 5- �� Ara•,.�� !f' „1rr,ar at.. �`xY_j'L' z ra� s'` tom` •G�. ''�- z '� •r 't t�.,,1 i'`k� �.3'y r a e�-'."''>}DIY;'��, ,`��'.�S A :���..i�'+ `�rd��f._'?z�'t''v�.'. _.,.at��'����"��� .,,..ii5.'�,, '►,�. �i��r.�.'�i �,�C,'� �>x.."z`�^,fx��,.w.��;",i,'.;.,#,,: 1• '1 1' 1 1 • • 1 1 '1 • � • . • • '1 • 11 1 1 • • 1 } 'i".o.evx.. y,2t�• mer we. 1194•$ ' } � : Mr.auo ffe4.rRy�L • •rb.�oli-'tea Mw rrU"v,uC I I%& t (rnrcw ;iri.tins. •� t Ill , ® .CLW��-tx-AS�,�• � n�� a ~ + CO►fOl:t'iONd) � � �.t T 't►ws IJ"1 1"Porn u t. 7ett'iaA . eH 04 LG►tb } k+r �� •a1�tw rororalluL�tWW Qni mv� Grbpr'Zst Ac s►ew7r.+ac ro raaTAl1I awWlVl'1�?/ a7YtEtNOV 4 rawftecamsTaue.r -ash W4K4a.Ko(14 FT.� .. waTv4M� YIV-'K11'��r IAhrLAefr 1E 7t a'n a 0 APFkCVM AW Vim TER30 ' • axaat�r tKa►-� -OaoSq•�,p000l AIL- J,�,N[W►R1r 1� X74"7 Figure 11:1VPSDECPermit#1-4738-02089/00001 &Survey of Holman Property l _ Impact ofthe Holman Groin-MatLrtuck,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Cirrito,LLP 616101-Page 15 of 19 _I The distance between groins is 55 feet, which yields a groin length to spacing of 1 to 1, not the 2 or 3 to one recommended by the Corps. A groin length of 18 to 28 feet would Ibe consistent with the Corps engineering standard. 2.4.1. Reconstruction of the Holman Eastern Groin Apparently Mr.Holman reconstructed the eastern(downdrift) groin to the specifications of the NYSDEC permit, but took no action on the updrift(western) groin(Figure 12). The easterly groin was apparently of the style and materials consistent with the area, Jwhich is timber tongue and grove, similar to other still existing groins. Two features of the reconstructed groin are different than the old groin and especially noteworthy are the Iincreased groin length and the interlocking, impermeable PVC sheathing. The longer length of the reconstructed groin is a matter of record. The permit states that 1 it is four feet longer and the field examination by the NYSDEC between July and September 2000. Clearly, a longer groin will intercept more sand and thus cause more erosion downdraft. Holmen West 1 (Down ) Grain CD o. - - _ Eli I xr r� s _mss, �t 1 Figure 12: Photograph looking west(updrift)from the Corieri property showing the J reconstructed eastern Holman groin and the western Holman groin. Note the new PVC on the eastern Holman groin and the lack of sand in front of the Corieri property. 1 1 Impact of the Holman Groin-Mattituck,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Cirrito,LLP 616101-Page 16 of 19 1 Figure 13: View of the Holman groins. The photograph was taken while standing adjacent to the Holman easterly groin and looking updrift towards the westerly groin. No action was apparently taken on the updrift or westerly groin, or on the intermediate groin(Figure 13 & 14). The westerly(updrift)groin rises to the full height of the bulkhead and extends seaward beyond the frame of the photographs. The groin compartment between the eastern and western Holman groins is full of sand. • iy LLB 1 Figure 14: View to the east(downdrift)from the west side of the western Holman groin. Note J the height of the timber groin. Impact ofthe Holman Groin-Mattituck,Southold,New York IPrepared For White&Ciaito,LLP 616101-Page 17 of 19 I lThe reconstruction of the eastern groin, including the seaward extension and the use of impermeable, interlocking PVC, coupled with the lack of action on the western(updrift) Holman groin has had a devastating and highly erosive impact on the Corieri beach. Moreover,this impact was entirely predictable. 1 In addition to extending the groin seaward and increasing its sand trapping capacity, reconstructing the groin with modem PVC materials (to replace old,probably deteriorated wooden materials)makes the groin more"sand tight". In other words, older structures J tend to"leak" sand through the groin and thus a rebuilt groin,which does not allow this J sand through will decrease the sand supply,will cause increased downdrift erosion. 1 l rJULECO �� � 2017 I 1 Southold Town I 1 NEEL Impact ofthe Holman Groin-MaWtuck,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Cirrito,LLP 616101-Page 18 of 19 l 1 3. Conclusions and Findings 3.1. Coastal Geology& Littoral Process 1 The Holman and Corieri properties are located along the shoreline of Great Peconic Bay 1 where the prevailing littoral transport of sand is from the west to the east. The shoreline consists of glacially derived soils that have-been reworked by coastal processes and thus 1 the beach consists of a veneer of sand coating the glacial sediments. 3.2. Geomorphology, Inlets, &Shoreline Structures The shoreline is defined by natural compartments, delineated on the east and west ends by inlets at Deep Hole Creek and James Creek,respectively. The shoreline been modified by the construction of jetties at James Creek and a series of groins and seawalls along the shoreline east of James Creek. The length and spacing of these groins as well as the 1 construction are highly variable, although most of the older groins are constructed of I timber. These groins are also in various stages of repair. The Holman property contains three groins and the downdraft(eastern)groin was reconstructed and lengthened in 1999. 1 ' 3.3. The Impact of the Holman Groin 1 The impact of the Holman Groin is to block littoral sand transport from reaching the Corieri property and thus causing the beach to erode at an accelerated rate. This impact was easily predictable, and avoidable,if the specifications of the US Army Corps of l Engineers— Shore Protection Manual were followed. J 3.4. Potential Remedial Actions 1 Shortening and lowering the updrift(west) groin would allow more sand to enter the groin J compartment on the updrift(west) side, since the sand impounded there would be released to the downdraft (east). Establishing a uniform groin length and spacing(consistent with the Corps of Engineers design standards) along the entire beachfront would be logical if the remaining groins to Ithe east, in this case the Corieri groins (and others)were of equal length and spacing. If the remaining downdrift groins were shorter,than the US Army Corps of Engineers formula for groin tapering and spacing would be most appropriate. l Adding beach compatible sand to the Corieri property is also recommended,but only in 1 combination with the other structural changes to the groins described above. EIV .E 77J U L 1 9 2017 Impact ofthe Holman Groin-Mattituck,Southold,New York I BurO ut -Wza'WUS Prepared For White&Cirrito,LLP 616101-Page 19 of 19 ARAM V. TERCHUNIAN, M. Sc. Curriculum Vitae � a Areas of Expertise (fid ti * Geomorphology, coastal processes, coastal hazard and erosion analysis o *Wetlands delineation, permitting and erosion control construction a, * Environmental science and resource managementLJJJ J * Endangered species monitoring and management J �, *Zoning analysis and interpretation l Experience J � * 1990 to Present, First Coastal Corporation- President 1 Responsible for all aspects of the firms consulting and construction services for coastal property owners, municipalities, and associations. * 1988 to 1990 Coastal Stabilization, Inc. - Regional Manager of Development Market development and technical sales for the development of a proprietary beach stabilization product. Prepared and executed marketing strategy, prepared and presented technical results at national and international conferences, and presented,'proposals and RFP responses to local, State, and Federal agencies. * 1984 to 1988, New York State, Department of State, Division of Coastal Resources- Coastal Hazards Supervisor- Responsible for review and recommendations for improvement of existing coastal hazard area management J programs in New York State, including coastal erosion hazard areas, flood protection, and disaster relief. Represented the Secretary of State in post coastal disaster survey, assessment, and evaluation teams. Reviewed erosion control and coastal area development actions within coastal hazards areas in New York's coastal zone. l * 1982 to 1983, University of Delaware and Ecuadorean Remote Sensing Agency 1 Technical Advisor- Instructed Ecuadorean nationals in the use of remote J sensing techniques for natural resources mapping including-mangroves, coastal erosion, sea surface temperatures, and Amazon land use changes. Prepared 1 grant application for Space Shuttle Imaging Radar mission. Education J *M. Sc. Marine Studies (Coastal Geology), University of Delaware, 1984 M. Sc. Thesis: Hen and Chickens Shoal, Delaware: Evolution of a Modern Tidal 1 Shoal CM9rl z aC Impact ofthe Holman Groin-Mattitudc,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Cirrito,LLP 616101-Page 20 of 19 I ! ` B. S. Environmental Science and Resource Management(Geology), Lehigh 1 University, 1980 1 Publications *Daley, W., C. Jones, T.G. Mootoo, A.V. Terchunian, and G. Vegliante, 2000, A Blueprint for Coastal Management: The West Hampton Dunes Story, IShore and Beach, January 2000, V68, N1, pp 25-29. *Terchunian, A.V. and J.A. Smith, 1998, An Economic Snapshot of Long Island's 1 Barrier Island System, Shore and.Beach, October 1998, V66, No. 4, pp9-11. I * Spencer, R., and A.V.Terchunian, 1997, The Sand Thieves of Long Island's J South Shore, Shore and Beach, July 1997, V65, No. 3, pp 4-12. l * Terchunian, A.V., and C.L. Merkert, 1995, Little Pikes Inlet, Westhampton, New York, Journal of Coastal Research, V 11, n 3, pp 697-703. * Psuty, N.P., P.A. Gares, M. Kearney, and A. Terchunian, 1992, Coastal Environments.A Field Symposium of the Mid Atlantic Bight Coastal Zone. Guidebook, Center for Coastal and Environmental Studies, Institute of Marine land Coastal Sciences, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, 79 pp. Terchunian, A. V., 1990, Pertormance of Beachface Dewatering: The STABEACH System at Sailfish Point(Stuart), Florida, in Proceedings of the 1990 Conference on Beach Preservation Technology, St. Petersburg, FL. * Ball, Sally, F., P. R. Lanza, and A. V. Terchunian, 1989, Coastal Hazard Area Management in New York State, in Proceedings of Coastal Zone '89, Charleston, South Carolina, pp. 4749-4760. J *Terchunian, A. V., 1988, Can Seawalls and Beaches Coexist?, in Journal of J Coastal Research, Special Issue 4, Autumn, 1988 Kraus, N. and 0. H. Pilkey (eds.) 1 *Terchunian, A. V., and C. H. Fletcher, III, 1984, Current and Shoreline Effects of Shore Perpendicular Structures, in Proceedings of the 10th Annual Coastal Society Conference, Atlantic City, NJ * Terchunian, A. V., V. Klemas, A. Alverez, B, Vasconez, and L. Guerrero, 1984, 1 The Effect of Shrimp Pond Development on Mangroves, In Environmental J Management, v10 n3 . � F- .u. �c si 1�,;7 r, f 1 4. Professional Affiliations ��, ` - ''- 1 Association of Field Ornithologists � L JUL 1 9 2017 American Littoral Society, Member American Ornithologists Union Sa tt 1d Town bid of Th es Impact ofthe Holman Groin-Mattituck,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Cirrito,LLP 616101-Page 21 of 19 l American Shore and Beach Preservation Association, Member Association of State Floodplain Managers, Member Coastal Education Research Foundation, Member Florida Oceanographic Society, Member Florida Shore and Beach Preservation Association, Member Group for the South Fork, Member I Lehigh University Earth & Environmental Sciences Alumni Advisory Board, Member Long Island Coastal Alliance, Member I Long Island Shore and Beach Preservation Association, President I Northeast Shore and Beach Preservation Association, Board of Directors Peconic Land Trust, Member Surfrider Foundation, Member The Coastal Society, Member f I 1 D E C E, E JUL 1�Town 7 ' Southold [Ward of Imtees 1 Impact ofthe Holman Groin-Mattitu&,Southold,New York Prepared For White&Ciaito,LLP 616101-Page 22 of 19 J Jun/2012017 5ksdden Arps 917Jun/2012017 4,00,31PM ---, , 08 213 OIAIVXr OAK ,Tuna.-20;-2. 017'< E ,a•. TbVV s Of 80ui=h614, ToVv ,:&A a'x. OW 543% o4i 2 :. 'Q6rai1"r�geeZ' .'�;, ;'�• SIbuth4Il.,; '•31071 Apia datibn o o ' a k•etre u z�aQx as c�,t�uii a'. k aril aia . v� �.l ?a �a tl aye i vv yrs 640 . ;• . • �. �. ext�ig�aii�e g��n��a���co �a��y•s�i�ral�n��(a�o�t� r�irh �s��a��.��'t ' . . , atc.44. c�xt: foo, ax `A.vn �? xazri'hasp �ti`# ii a:dc `, o£apitez .•� 1t:xn.lei snd `izQ �` ie ax}d ; livi at tho Pro' 4'40foaoh ager, Under the Dust and the Leaso vwi have cO, troi oi.O i�+'� .protect ii from problemsiuh as r1 b biiik atth,-,�Uf *Aioo eulo*i4c•sAoftlytta 90 (9t: " i�''b Oatiuse df-tapir hOa6 oto th61'4p6W*d.3� Will lil�e0 impirod.CK �10al ; As.lt Asnlberme.6ilmated-and.imuAble 4s,a b &'af el t*3 ifthe,.daei 3 i:• ; cf aWon'Is'er�eted.'• Thi�rwr1l b** dt��`#o t�+F�s�x i�ix of'•th�9a>«d�iOr�'atorig�he ' toith' ilore�iflho Peami ba�+:ba�v�e�: a�ta����ii�i�a��.6�o Pari:�vpim%:..' Te�tt►ic41��MC1Ep.. p ` ! 604 vwwx. ed . • •• �1c?�otated:�t$� f�}I+�'� ae1i�.�47� ��duet,•;1�ut,'�aw•�m��,th,'c'�!o ixeee���• • . • „ t t T.M4 lthw, power tq 40tfox.�?Q= �3►�t�ss,ros u�id�r a / Jun/20/2017 4:0031 PM Skadden Arps 8175101108 3/3 1060d of Truste@§ Sum:2,0,201-7. .. ;. X9t on6y.Cfir ago,We iz Vs tod reIt-ovor,$100, aci to,;repa aAd r6p1'-:00 My.,*cmr bu1�rlie :a tl�e'l��y ah&eline, :: 'lax f arms.in�rog �)u to,?npxoye•tha 640'T� & Avoiue r erg �uvoEuida ;Have' e '.mada . �'faiv .tk@ ahc3fievud°;soon.• o&th GOl1A LLyi ( 55 f� iia er iii :'c f v , zs� eziy. o aG 'ha to b�eeu 1Q ei. � hei d f a g tl4'iwa�.: t1 day arld . :.••.::;; •; �•;;,,•,;• •••, •:... .erg .. �ecaus®••�li�,�•����x���ti���h,tkio���i�®�;:ez�,aeri���ad.` �so���'� i�x$,�� . ' ' . '. . . . aad'�oa�bn� P1600 turn dor the • • look;•• .. • ... .. � . .' � ' Neither,my vinfe, 4r.Icin b*s at t o „v, tie ;as-0 12we t Fork Pity and�a�e abl��stic�ug�i�t �xn�d�3 i�the�it�► • . ' PI, t s••OW6,o&t:120'CTarl�,'S�est;�et�.�o�lc; ..,,1dt���6��t? , •••• ...;.past�Qx�e�•�,r"�.dd��ia�al�e�r3�i�'Q�,�ti�rs. t�ter:•...., � • ' ' • •,. ..:. .. ...... . .....•, .�.esg ••'liy�su�r*teci, bed C . . • ..... ..•••'• '��, '•T'z`'tii4ie ofthe.Mliab�&>1kT. h�ehaT:-.:: " ; Michael J. Domino, Preside �'•QSCo Town Hall Annex John M. Bredemeyer III,Vice-Pres,-dent 4��o Gam,, 54375 Route 25 Charles J. Sanders � P.O.Box 1179 Glenn Goldsmith (r Southold,NY 11971 A. Nicholas Krupski 4,1 �p��jif Telephone(631)765-1892 l `1Fax(631)765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD `r Date/Time: 6�i�/� '� oo Completed in field by: G. �ot�S-1-A 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 CH. 275-3 - SETBACKS WETLAND BOUNDARY: Actual Footage or OK=4 Setback Waiver Required 1. Residence: 100 feet 2. Driveway: 50 feet 3. Sanitary Leaching Pool (cesspool): 100 feet 4. Septic Tank: 75 feet 5. Swimming Pool and related structures: 50 feet 6. Landscaping or gardening: 50 feet 7. Placement of C&D material: 100 feet TOP OF BLUFF: 1. Residence: 100 feet 2. Driveway: 100 feet 3. Sanitary leaching pool (cesspool) 100 feet: 4. Swimming pool and related structures: 100 feet Public Notice of Hearing Card Posted: Y / N Ch. 275 Ch. 111 SEQRA Type: 1 II Unlisted Action Type of Application: Pre-Submission Administrative Amendment ✓ Wetland Coastal Erosion Emergency Violation Non-Jurisdiction Surveys 5 years: Y/N Wetland Line by: C.E.H.A. Line Additional information/suggested modifications/conditions/need for outside review/consultant/application completeness/comments/standards: tt ' �..ic��'T ti✓�t\c� �✓��h ,,.i�►��C, e.a�s qr.� 1nc�a� -hc��Gl�' Present were: J. Bredemeyer M. Domino ✓ G. Goldsmith N. Krupski C. Sanders Other Page 1 of 2 Michael J. Domino, Presider � Town Hall Annex John M. Bredemeyer III,Vice-President 4�� �� 54375 Route 25 Charles J. Sanders P.O.Box 1179 Glenn Goldsmith 0 Southold,NY 11971 A.Nicholas Krupski '�y,�0( p ,, Telephone(631)765-1892 Fax(631)765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Date/Time: Completed in Work Session by: 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 Ch. 275-12 - STANDARDS FOR ISSUANCE OF PERMIT MET=X or Comment=* A. Adversely affect the wetlands of the Town: B. Cause damage from erosion, turbidity or siltation: C. Cause saltwater intrusion in the fresh water recourses of the Town: D. Adversely affect fish, shellfish or other beneficial marine organisms, aquatic wildlife & vegetation or the natural habitat thereof: E. Increase the danger of flood and storm-tide damage: F. Adversely affect navigation tidal waters or the tidal flow of the tidal waters of the Town: G. Change the course of any channel or the natural movement or flow of any waters: H. Weaken or undermine the lateral support of other lands in the vicinity: I. Otherwise adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of the people of the Town: J. Adversely affect the aesthetic value of the wetland and adjacent areas: Ch. 111-9 - ISSUANCE OF PERMIT MET=X or Comment=* A. Is reasonable and necessary, considering reasonable alternatives to the proposed activity and the extent to which the proposed activity requires a shoreline location: B. Is not likely to cause a measurable increase in erosion at the proposed site and at other locations: C. Prevents, if possible, or minimizes adverse effects on natural protective features and their functions and protective values, existing erosion protection structures and natural resources: D. :525% Expansion/Calculation Work Session Notes Application Complete SEQRA Classification Confirmed Coordinated Review Y/N Pos/Neg Declaration CAC: LWRP: Additional information on comments/to be discussed/Public Hearing: Date: Completed By: Present: J. Bredemeyer M. Domino G. Goldsmith N. Krupski C. Sanders E. Cantrell D. Di Salvo Other Page 2 of 2 IJ PARK AVENUE N 85'31'0" W 1 � SCTM: — 1000-123-07-5.3 e^I mob PHOTO 1 PHOTO 2 n x o • 0 N SCTM: + 1000-123-07-06 SCTM: —123-07-02 1 ' ' _ woo + — GOP r PHOTO 3Ln 1 Ln + # o O a_ o a • Ln y SCTM: 1000-123-07-7.3 N + > 2 a' A qr 0 a 0 _o o V 120.7 0 tovi N O SCTM: 1000-123-07-03 U 100 PARK AVENUE, PEC 0 N I C BAY MATTITUCK, NY CI MW PHOTO PLAN � 0 i N Prepared By: o so 160 L.K. McLean Assoc., P.C. o Feet Consulting Engineers 0 437 So.Country Road Brookhaven,NY SCALE: 1 " = 80' Aril 2017 �e rt _ EXISTING 4'X25' STAIRWAY 1 PROPOSED 4' WIDE x 30' LONG LOWER PLATFORM W/ (4) 10" MOORING PILES •,, PROPOSED 4' WIDE DOCK 100 PARK AVENUE �, TO MEET EXISTING BEACH AT ELEV. 4.0 EXISTING 1 -112 STORY DWELLING, INGROUND POOL, AL_ GRAVEL DRIVEWAY, AND MASONRY PARKING AREAS (CONSTRUCTION AFTER 04/06/2011 ) 50 P ARK AVEN�' y 3 O . O Y o Rr' • c `o L � � wT U 7 O 7 C N 0 CS� ` o NORR15 O r,, EXISTING DOCK 0 0 .x. t .: SCTNI: 1000-123-07-03 N 100 PARK AVENUE MATTITUCK,NY PROPOSED DOCK AERIAL VIEW J y a Prepared By: j o SUFFOLK COUNTY L.K. McLean Assoc., P.C. N GIS PIC TOM E TR Y Consulting Engineers 437 So.Country Road,Brookhaven,NY 04/06/2011 ` _ ►i. APRIL 2017 a �fea1 Pr`e' `Tax Sent rs'A r _ t] F - - i0i91iK4t°Fjytt'ppS,yp; Y FF �e. •6`` Q f"4wl�lo ' `�' "� l(", Y _ .r•.,, '" .�. N,stamm MATCN UNE y MATCN ..T- ~ �"� - xuT'Ul ura' - .2Z— FOR PCL NO } i 4 O,rA 1. 1 Qat _ SEE SEC NO 31 , .q'. :, m�.m$•aut ' 4 P �A ,m Nom. y a t15-U9°M 1 •0.1 •6 < 'N � � 4,4�' q � 4 : LE nR 13 a, 9 �, rs• r B n''9 .r,0 PrP p 'wi t O 4 •Sl ss 12� t N13A 2 11A �\i•uY' ^' FOR PCL NO ¢ r $1 ,ro r ,• �^ ,3 +.fin=` 43 m(c) \e 6 9 1 OA(c) 14A(c) 0 t0 11 t 5l1)c) o+ 'N SEESEGNOP t` e n N' w ,a a ,m 9 2fiA(c) a' ,p B r o s N o?. < a $ , ,,, Ho � a s o9 �s j 161 ,6a+s` <� TOWN OF 'S 21 ,6 1t dxt.n SOw . 00f ® _�— B ,'a• \t.$ 5 s 6 •0 I 30 C4 ' 22 O pyil 8 S'( ® , , ns CRE, � �,t J tseA � GtiNS�� ^° ,e ,s ,6 c c• nn st e' � " \\ a �/ RN O � ,a P „•,t1� 13 a°] `^ \ < its" '_� 0 1�Iy� § iu a w n a�� � e m iea, &�x •4 g� �4'�a r�6 �3Q�a/ 48 - 45 R6 g g 3, 37• ,'? ,187' Y 10p��; ]31 ,- 1t'R �4�.T��'+o 6] e] ai ,§ '$?816 30 ao Pm `., 9 pt,A7' 46 AS X018 56p 63 T ,w pPptt. . t ; ^1,' ® e6 i 9 °A .,n` a• "/ 413 3 a'+ pNaKw 53 34A 6 e „e / a 6' Sig) y l N / - pmLO 40 s ,6 ata 12°' tat VO t]] •jp wa W -rg 1 � o w° ,6Alc t t8:t t14 �xs Mx i I BA NOTICE aw,r COUNTY OF SUFFOLK © K or SOMOLD SECTION NO �� I21j — -- _ _—_"—_—_ Real Property TaxSernceAgency E N m..ar.w. �,�, m ma,,: __�__ oen�.—_.-- ], eonntYesnmrw.emeaaNrttOot M `aAGEO` 123 E _—rt _— 0.—•m,2tntalvRu =•• ---- ocuu. --r-- oww--vm-- nvw • A t,e(q ----- c r cnNc x '•'ey�rs•` P siaiei w- 1000 PROPERTY MAP - >S i. hr Cantrell, Elizabeth From: Charles Cuddy <CharlesCuddy@Optonline.Net> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 3:01 PM To: Cantrell, Elizabeth Subject: 100 Park Avenue Corp., c/o Paul Pawlowski-Wetland Permit, SCTM#1000-123-7-3 Dear Ms. Cantrell: I represent Paul Pawlowski. He is unavoidably detained as a result of an airplane schedule problem. I respectfully request that the hearing scheduled for tonight be adjourned until your next meeting. Thank you. Charles R. Cuddy Attorney at Law 445 Grilling Avenue Riverhead, New York 11901 631-369-8200 631-369-9080 fax charlescuddv@optonline.net Cantrell, Elizabeth , From: paul pawlowski <pawlowskibiz@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 6:46 PM Southold Town ; To: Cantrell, Elizabeth; Cantrell, Elizabeth Board ofTrustees Subject: please pass along to the board members Thank You Attachments: 100 Park Ave Proposed Dock(1).pdf, Scale of Proposed Dock.pdf; dock scale 2 .pdf Dear Board of Trustees I wanted to reach out to you to show you the scale of the proposed dock, positioning of the proposed dock compared to the neighboring dock. Please see the attached The blue line is the proposed location and is 120' long dock, It only extends 20' past the current "groin" that is a few feet to the west of the proposed dock,the highlighted in yellow line is a straight line that runs along the coast showing that the proposed dock doesn't even come close to the nearest pre existing dock that is 3 properties to the west. Also attached is a picture with two bamboo sticks showing were the dock would start and end I point this out as the structure itself will not be much further into the bay then the existing groin, there will be no effect on kayaking, boat and walking traffic at all. If you compare this dock to the most recent proposed dock and the application process they are very similar applications. The dock that was approved was 150' verses mine would be 120' long, They have the same water depts, they both were supported by the CAC, they both were not supported by the LWRP report, they both have similar environmental concerns and they both extend into the bay. From the meeting and site visits it seems your main concern is with high energy and safety With safety I would be very pro active to remove the boat if a storm is coming, the boat is only used from May through September and then taken out of the water, this same boat already is being tied to a mooring in this area which is harder to do then pull up to a dock and would be less likely to break free from a dock then a mooring. High Energy Concerns, this I feel in every day weather is not much different if at all compared to the Diveto location as their location has much more boat wake action and traffic. I would build my proposed dock much stronger to mitigate that concern, the dock allows water to pass through it compared to the bulkheads that my neighbors have to the east and west take a a brunt hit and are standing strong even through "Sandy" I would be pro active in relocating in a storm as I currently do when it is on the mooring. There is a a great case study with my neighbors dock which has been there since the 1950's Since the dock most recently approved is into the bay as a resident and an applicant I ask you to approve this application, I ask this because there is precedent before us all, the are comparable and most importantly I am asking for something that is permitted under the code and is a basic right as a land owner. This right gives me the strength to ask you for this approval as I am not asking for anything that hasn't already been approved and enjoyed by residents within out town For full transparency I have also attached a letter that my neighbors received as I wanted to make sure they had the facts verse someones opinion on this proposed dock and what it will be used for . Please know that the I r 1 F� immediate neighbors to the east and west support this application as they are the onlyy ones thatw ould see the dock from their homes I respect that we may have a difference of opinion however since that is the case I ask that we point to the code when this is the case. The code allows for it to be approved. If this was not in the code and permissible I would not have even applied for it. My goal is to simply enjoy the waterfront with my family while at the same time respecting this great natural asset that we are all fortunate to enjoy. Thank You for your time and consideration in this matter Paul Pawlowski 631-445-4348 cell 631-850-5452 fax D r SEP 1 1 2017 L —southolMw—n - Boarl of Trus eeL. 2 i Dear Neighbor, First, I would like to say that I respect your opinion and understand why you may have concerns about my application to construct a dock adjacent to my residential property at 100 Park Avenue. Please know the intention of this letter is not to persuade you to agree with my position,but I feel it is important to point out some facts regarding the proposed dock that I applied for and my involvement with the Mattituck Airport. I also would like you to know that I am not new to this area. I was raised in Cutchogue. I most recently lived with my wife and two children on Lupton's Point Road prior to being fortunate enough to move to 100 Park Avenue. Since the property on Lupton's was creek front, I was able to have a dock and keep my boat at my home. Proposed Dock This dock is being proposed for personal use only. I currently have a mooring,which I tie my boat up to on the weekends. I have a 34' Pursuit boat and it would be much easier and safer for me and my family to enter and exit the boat on a fixed dock versus a mooring.Visually there will be no change in your view.The proposed dock I have applied for is within code and I am not asking for variances of any sort. I am simply asking for something that is the right of every waterfront property owner in our town to request. I am not asking for anything special or outside the code. This is a basic right and I would like you to know I would never try and affect anyone's basic property rights as owners. Size of Proposed Dock The attached photo will provide a good understanding of the size of the dock I have proposed. It is 120'long and 4'wide.This is the minimum length necessary to accommodate a boat the size of mine, and no larger. I have proposed to put the dock next to the "groin" on the west side property line of my property, the dock will start where the "groin" currently starts on the beach and will finish roughly 20'past the groin into the water. This is important to realize, as it will basically be the same size structure in length of what's already there as it runs parallel to the "groin". My neighbors to the west have groins and a dock that protrude farther than my proposed dock. I point this out because it will not extend into the bay any farther than current structures along that area, it will not affect foot traffic,boat traffic and kayaking. Please see attached and outline in pink is the existing groin next to the proposed dock.The dock will only be visible to immediate neighbors and via the beach. p f 'r 1 SEP 1 1 2017 Southold Tcwn _.__Qard of Trus'ees V E SEP 1 1 2017 Safety Southold imn 0-11 Af Trllqtppl The proposed dock will be built to sustain any wave action from the Bay.The dock located a few properties to the west has been there since the early 1950's, and sustains the wave action well. Further, it will be safer to pull up to a dock versus the mooring and I plan on being proactive in taking it in if a storm is coming. Use The proposed dock is for residential use only for my family.In NO WAY will this be used for any commercial purposes, nor will it be used in conjunction with the airport. I would never permit any plane or helicopter to land at the dock. My family moved here to enjoy the waterfront and all that it has to offer, in no way to offer any additional airport services on our property. I would like to point out that by code and law there is no way to use this residentially zoned property for commercial use. Further, I would assume almost every pilot would prefer to land on a physical runway,which lies just a few hundred feet from our property. Most seaplanes in the northeast have proper landing gear for runways. Landing on the water is the last option for pilots in this area. My property and the vacant land next to my property are zoned residential and separate distinct pieces of property from the airport and have entirely different zoning. So I can say by fact that the dock will not be for commercial use ever and will never have a connection to the airport. Airport I would like to point out that I have no ownership at all in the airport itself and no ownership interest in the LLC that owns the airport.The newspaper and other reports that I am an owner are false.The only ownership I have in this area is the 1.7-acre property where my house is located, and my family resides year-round.The owner of the airport is my friend, and he is my business partner on a completely unrelated project,but I am not an owner of the airport. Since I am a contractor by trade, I do help him with improvements such as the deer fence, removing some old buildings and repaving the runway. I do this because I have a true appreciation for the airport; I support the function of the airport and how it serves our community. If you do a Google search it will come up in airport/pilot information that I am a manager/owner, the reason for that is because the DOT and FAA need a contact for the airport and I am willing to be that contact in order to help the owner.There is no need for a hired manager, and since I live at the end of the runway, by default I keep my eyes on things and feel that it is appropriate to be the contact for the airport. None of this gives me any ownership interest, and I repeat that I have none.To be clear, I will never speak for the airport owner but I will point out a few things that have taken place since it was recently purchased.There have been several safety improvements such as a deer fence was installed around the property,gates were installed at each entrance, and the runway will be repaved so pilots have a smooth surface with which to land.The new owner removed roughly 35,000 square feet of industrial zoned buildings, 8 hangers removed and a full service garage removed. Very importantly,the owner also recently applied to the FAA to designate the airport as private versus public,which means permission is required to land there unless it is for emergency needs. It is important to allow local agencies such as the police dept., fire dept. etc.to use the airport if needed.There are currently 10 pilots whom keep their planes at the airport and most of them live locally and have used the airport for over 25 years,this use is important to keep up and the airport while privately owned and funded is instrumental to our town and our local pilots. I point these things out because the commercial use is trending down versus up. As a neighbor I want you to know that the proposed dock is simply for my family to enjoy, as many others do that own a private dock.The airport has no bearing on our desire for a dock whatsoever. I realize some may disagree with the proposed dock for their own personal reasons, and this is fair. I am not asking for anything special or outside the code. This is a basic right and I would like you to know I would never try to affect anyone's basic property rights as owners. If you would like to discuss further,please feel free to reach out to me at 631-445- 4348 Regards Paul Pawlowski nD EC t P E SEP 1 1 2017 Soutiio{d Town B and of Trustee \ EXISTING STAIRWAY +00 APPARENT HIGI EL.= 2.20± i PROPOSED DOCK (SEE PROFILE) /X-028 X .26 X-149 X-2.53 _y X-2.78 X-,?i76 X-3.50 1+00 APPARENT LOW y�gTER ��w-----� o PECONIC BAY EL.= —1.20± ! r' l •.-- � X-2.41 -3.61 X-3.68 X-3.75 X-3.77 X-3.90 � ----3.0 4'X30 LOWER ---4.0' (� � PLATFORM W/ (4) X-3.86 X-3.8 -3.44 X-389 X-3.97 X-3.96 E D + 10" MOORING PILES -3.91 / a 2017 X-4.08 X-4.15 X-4.08 X-4.04 X-4.07 X-4.07 X4.02` J SEP 1 1 Southold Town B ar of Trus ees w 100 Ave Of ,rr r � -loom ra, A w �y -t 1 0 E LK EE S E P 1 1 2017 Southold Town ir ♦ 1r f J ♦ � 'AW 10 • .a.. I. ! r • �. 46. b s } CHARLES R.CUDDY ATTORNEY AT LAW 445 GRI FFING AV E NUE RIVERHEAD,NEW YORK Mailing Address TEL: (631)369-8200 P.O.Box 1547 FAX: (631)369-9080 August 30, 2017 Riverhead,NY 11901 E-mail: charlescuddy@optonline.� r �s Board of Trustees Southold Town PO Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 • n Re: Paul Pawlowski—Proposed Dock Dear Board Members: I am writing in connection with the application of Paul Pawlowski to construct a dock at his home at Park Avenue in Mattituck. The letter dated August 12, 2017, not signed by any individual and directed to your attention, is distressing in that it is entirely speculative. It refers to activities which may occur and relies upon pure conjecture in support of its claims. More troubling is the claim that Mr. Pawlowski's property includes an air strip. Mr. Pawlowski has no ownership in the airport. He has no control over the airport and it is highly unlikely that helicopters and sea planes will be coming to the airport in the future. For the record, the proposed dock is for Mr. Pawlowski's family's personal use and will allow him to dock a boat that is currently moored, The application.before you should be addressed on its merits and not on crass speculation. Very truly yours, CRC/pc Charles R. Cuddy . - . _.•r, ' � l Cantrell, Elizabeth From: paul pawlowski <pawlowskibiz@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday,August 24, 2017 12:34 PM To: Cantrell, Elizabeth; Cantrell, Elizabeth; Charles Cuddy Subject: 100 Park ave proposed dock Attachments: IMG_2914.JPG;ATT00001.txt Hello Can you please pass this email and attachment along to the board The attached letter was passed out to residents in my neighborhood recently.This was the person that showed up at the first hearing against the application. This letter could not be further from the truth. The proposed dock is for my family's personal use only and is for the same boat that is put on the current mooring. My property is R-40 zoned and is separate from the airport entirely. I have no ownership in the airport at all, I would like to point out that my partner on another project who owns the airport in fact reduced the commercial activity at the airport by removing over 30,000 square foot of industrial used buildings a month after purchase and now all that remains are some storage barns and a hanger for the pilots that have been therefor 20 plus years. He has made the airport private verses public however is allowing the existing pilots to remain and any emergency vehicles to use the runway as needed. So major efforts have been put in place to keep a simple airport The attached letter has no basis at all and no seaplane or helicopter will ever use the dock. This letter is a way to discourage the board based on complete lies and no facts. To say the least I feel this is far reaching Regards PD � (�� I ®�Paul Pawlowski ! � AUG 2 40 I 2 17 Southold Town _ t3oard of Tru ees x ; 15,41-61 to forkOUT �C�j 2uh �Iq Air, 1%,2Z was 14 qn, 0 gig, "m oil lots t_?"k V*,O� 7n, 809• c qi 1 wqj��, j ben EF wi&!1 .4 l•� iw it toil h pw eyvf V-Qu, we-,JA, jmtm n4,'ru., �rq e't, 4i 1,'91 T O,T?�,pu ]II • • "q 7'�71 Fvi: inp Nib! ;x a,lot, RUSTYS, 11"il-A crn 14 vWxy, rW I`t�r Ov&ft kA,6UAIM'*4 9 WO K"we tv •v `,Tv MmPT,vfj,Emil-ilop-411w" "T J--- Dq AUG 2 4 2017 5q;m TP DOW d Me I YUMMM3,17 S-T PPA T4 # I -1-9 AV I UCCVqP KFpD4,, da I"'r 1-4iftie q-d-N-4,4NI in�m f4i vxmo f upwas.0 4 sl%r-�Nt-,5 1�. L!Age p �P;� lit pan WO"a jpd WD Oil vj�wy"i VIAUP MA641 he 4401 LAWN Cantrell, Elizabeth From: paul pawlowski <pawlowskibiz@gmail.com> Sent: Friday,August 11, 2017 12:11 PM To: Cantrell, Elizabeth Subject: Re: 100 Park Avenue Corp. ok thank you yes I would like to table it please Sent from my iPhone On Aug 11, 2017, at 11:57 AM, Cantrell, Elizabeth<elizabethcktown.southold.ny.us>wrote: Paul, Yes,that would not be a problem if you want to table it. Our next meeting is scheduled for Wed., September 20, 2017 at 5:30PM in the Main Town Hall Meeting Hall. Field Inspections are on Tuesday, Sept. 12, 2017. Please confirm you would like to table it to Sept.201H I don't expect you will need to stake the dock again for September's field inspection unless you modify your plan. If the current project plan is modified,the new project must be staked out. Elizabeth From: paul pawlowski [mailto:pawlowskibiz@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 11:18 AM To: Cantrell, Elizabeth; Cantrell, Elizabeth Subject: Hello In reference to the upcoming hearing for my proposed dock at 100 Park Avenue, I was wondering if I could table it once more till the next meeting and not this one coming up this week? Please let me know if this is ok to do? Thank You Paul Pawlowski 631-445-4348 cell 631-850-5452 fax 1 OFFICE LOCATION: � ® MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex `�® l P.O.Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Telephone: 6317,65-1938 Southold, NY 11971 P C®U�19�,� ,f LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM . TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM L To: Michael Domino, President Town of Southold Board of Trustees From: Mark Terry, Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Date: July 17, 2017 Re: Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coastal Consistency Review for 100 PARK AVENUE CORP., c/o PAUL PAWLOWSKI SCTM# 1000-123-7-3 - 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 The LWRP"Consistency forms received on May 9, 2017 and June 9, 2017 by the Planning Department are incomplete and deficient with no written analysis for the answers provided. -The proposed action has been reviewed to Chapter 268, Waterfront Consistency Review of the Town of Southold Town Code and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) Policy Standards. Based upon the information provided on the LWRP Consistency Assessment Form submitted to this department, as well as the records available to us, it is our recommendation that the proposed action is INCONSISTENT with below LWRP policy standards: 1, 3, 4, 6.1, 9.1, 9.3, and 10, and therefore is INCONSISTENT with the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan. Page 1 of 18 ✓ I Policy 1. Foster a pattern of development in the Town of Southold that enhances community character,preserves open space, makes efficient use of infrastructure, makes beneficial use of a coastal location, and minimizes adverse effects of development See answers below regarding the adverse effects of locating permanent, private dock structures in public waterbodies. Policy 3. Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of Southold. The Peconic Bays comprise the most significant open space areas under Town control. The aesthetic impact of dock structures upon these areas is relative to one's viewpoint and perspective. However, studies have found that in general, aesthetic preferences are for open/distance water views, enhanced water access, historic or generic coastal development, water related development, and diverse, well maintained vegetation. It is important to recognize that docks impede and obstruct visual access of scenic vistas associated with open space from private and public abutting properties along the waterfront, including road ends. The future dock would be visible from the Maratooka Road end beach area. Studies have shown that the preservation of such visual access is important to private property owners. Correspondingly, social studies have repeatedly confirmed that interruptions of scenic view sheds are perceived as detrimental to the experience. The proposed dock structure and vessel would extend 124.5 feet into the water body interrupting scenic view sheds important to public and the community and does not preserve the scenic quality of open space, therefore, the action does not meet Policies 1 and 3. Further, the community character of Peconic Bay in this area is uninterrupted, sweeping views of the waterbody with one existing, permitted, dock structure that predates the adoption of the Chapter 275 rewrite and the LWRP in 2004. Policy 4. Minimize loss of life, structures, and natural resources from flooding and erosion. Waves that affect the Town shores are generated by local winds. Wind waves on the shoreline are determined by the fetch, wind characteristics, decay distance, and water depth. In general, increases in fetch, wind speed, and duration result in larger wind waves. Water depth, if shallow enough compared with the wave height and period, will affect wave characteristics, with wave breaking beginning when the wave height is roughly 80 percent of the water depth. The uninterrupted fetch in this location is six miles. Impacts from wind and waves on the proposed dock structure and vessel (note boat lifts are prohibited by Town regulations) are expected to result in frequent structural damage and loss. Major storm events could result in hazardous conditions threatening life and property due to the structures becoming a floating debris and or a projectile. This was the case with "Superstorm Sandy". Shoreline structures damaged and lost created a hazardous debris field above and under water following the storm. Page 2of18 _ t r The parcel shoreline is located within a Coastal High-Hazard Areas (V-zones) defined as areas with special flood hazards associated with high-velocity waters generated by tidal surges and hurricane wave wash (Figure 1). V-zones are located seaward of the A- zones and both zones are contained within the 100-year floodplain. The risk to dock structures within these areas should not be underestimated. As indicated, dock structures located within these areas together with the associated vessels have the potential to suffer high frequency of loss and pose real hazards to life and property during high wind and storm surge events. Town of Southold '' Coastal Erosion Hazard Area .r VE Flood Zone L C Surface Waters ° ° „q/, � C Tax Parcel Q LWRP Reaches .v Subreaeh Boundary Polyds \ �` Map Prepared by Town of Southold GIS , August L5 41 'Bay Ais itit it ri 1�I•Y'„ti!, y�;,yr,p: 't;Pia,i'''ilii;'i;;'�:;,�'•Ii J�','�p 1Flt,i pisi;;;41', kS t'h . '. � _ A: .•{t ��4 Hifi i, ii �tilj�ii;7i"' ,';�',;'iG f t 9e ti' i45 $qe, u 1 i, .l ri till Figure 1. Town of Southold VE Flood Zone Map (2008) with parcel area location (black circle). Policy 6.1. Protect and restore ecological quality throughout the Town of Southold. Town goals and policy and protect public and environmental values such as; public access and use, navigation, aesthetics and ecological value of Peconic Bay. Peconic Bay is a National Estuary with high ecological significance. The area where the dock structure is proposed is a designated NYSDOS Significant Coastal Fish and Page 3of18 f Wildlife Habitat North Fork Beach Complex, NECAS—USFWS Northeast Coastal Areas Study Significant Coastal Habitat, and a NYSDEC Critical Environmental Area. Although the ecological complexes and individual habitats of Southold continue to support large assemblages of plants and animals, over time, human activity has fragmented, or otherwise impaired many of the significant habitats. The impacts that generally result from the construction of dock structures in the Peconic Bay include: Vegetation (Physical Loss) • Structure placement • Construction practices (jetting) • Chronic shading Wildlife (Physical and Functional loss) • Loss and/or impairment of habitat • Disruption of habits and migration patterns (structure and activity) • Introduction of harmful contaminants (including from boat washing, fueling etc...) The LWRP categorizes three types of impairments to the ecological complexes and individual habitats of Southold, they include: Physical loss: Immediate physical loss of elements within ecological complexes is the most obvious impact and also may be referred to as a primary impact. Degradation: Degradation of elements within ecological complexes does not refer to the outright physical loss of these elements, but rather to a negative change in the quality of these elements, caused by factors within or adjacent to a complex. This degradation usually occurs over a more extended period of time than with a physical loss and also may be referred to as a secondary impact. Functional loss: Functional loss results not from major physical changes or even from changes in the basic quality of elements within a complex, but rather from inappropriate adjacent or internal uses (homes, marinas, various recreational uses) that are disruptive to certain species of animals and cause a change or shift in their activities. The three types of impairments have had, and continue to have, negative impacts on the Town's coast. The historic and current threats to the North Fork Beach Complex and Orient Island Complex include impacts to nesting birds and Northern diamondback terrapins due to human disturbances (basically, any activity within 150 feet within the vicinity of the nesting sites) during the nesting season. Such disturbances can lead to destruction of eggs and individuals as well as the seasonal or permanent abandonment of the site. Vegetation succession, resulting in the loss of bare sand for nesting, also is a factor in reducing the suitability of nesting beaches for terns and piping plovers. In addition to human activity that interferes with established nesting sites, the physical loss in habitat or potential nesting areas due to cumulative development that occurs along the shore-line is a recognized problem. This type of development also poses threats to water quality and the sustainability of these waters for prey and predators alike. Page 4 of 18 1 � The long term survival of beach-nesting bird species, particularly piping plovers and roseate terns, requires full protection of current and recent historical nesting beaches. The identification, definition and protection of main feeding and nesting areas should be given high priority. Protection measures may include closing off beaches during the breeding and nesting season, fenced enclosures around specific areas, posting of signs against trespassing, predator and pet trapping, beach warden patrol and public education. Identification, delineation and protection of main feeding and nesting areas should be a high priority. Several sites may require restoration,(through careful placement of dredge spoil and control of vegetation)to enhance their suitability as nesting sites. Ongoing and long-term protection of specific beach sites can be accomplished by a variety of management mechanisms, including reducing human intrusion, cooperative management and conservation agreements, conservation easements, land use regulation and acquisition. (LWRP 2005). In addition to the potentially adversely impacting wildlife, the construction of a dock structure and vessel use results in damage to submerged aquatic vegetation, degrades water quality through the re-suspension of sediments/turbidity and introduction of contaminants, and poses a disturbance to wildlife including the continuity of habitat along the foreshore. Impacts from construction practices also result from the use of equipment to construct docks. Most frequent impacts are compaction of vegetation and soils resulting from the use of equipment traversing and accessing the construction area and the installation of pilings in the water column using high pressure water pumps or"jets" in a method referred to as "jetting". Sea grass once occupied this section of Peconic Bay but has since vanished. However, it was found that once pilings are installed in an area where sea grass once occurred, the sea grass would not re-establish. Damage to the ecosystem from vessels operating in shallow water depth areas are a concern. Turbulence and prop dredging generated by vessel traffic significantly increase turbidity levels, impacts the substrate, shellfish and benthic organisms. High turbidity levels attenuate the sunlight necessary for photosynthetic processes responsible for the primary productivity and oxygen regeneration of the water. The suspended sediments settle on shellfish beds, smothering existing shellfish and altering the quality of the sand bottom essential for spat (mollusk larvae) settlement. Re- suspension of bottom sediments causes redistribution of sediments, alteration in sediment grain size distribution, changes in bottom topography relief, elevation and grade, including creation of depressions in the bottom. More detail on the ecological designations discussed above follow: NECAS— USFWS Northeast Coastal Areas Study Significant Coastal Habitats 1991. In 1990, Congress appropriated $150,000 for the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) to conduct a study that would identify those areas in Long Island in need of protection for fish and wildlife habitat and the preservation of natural diversity. Page 5of18 The final product is a compendium and individual description of regionally significant habitats and habitat complexes in need of protection. The list of habitat areas was developed after extensive consultation with regional biologists in Federal and State governments and numerous conservation organizations and universities. Nevertheless, differences in interpretation may exist among regional biologists and land managers as to what constitutes "significance" or"importance" and to what extent an area may be viewed as needing protection. As used in this narrative, "significance" of a site or resource refers to its relative regional importance to one or more life history stages or seasonal use periods of Federal trust species For example, the presence of a population, regardless of size, of a U.S. Endangered or Threatened species, the occurrence of an exemplary and undisturbed stand of a regionally scarce community type, a large wintering concentration of waterfowl in numbers or densities considerably greater that what is generally encountered in the region, areas with a high diversity of trust species, a highly vulnerable breeding or spawning area of a fish or bird species that has been substantially reduced or qualitatively degraded from historical times, may all be considered "regionally significant" sites or resources. NYSDOS Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats (SCFWH) NYS DOS Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats data set consists of areas designated under the Waterfront Revitalization of Coastal Areas and Inland Waterways Act. These areas have been determined to be of statewide significance, based on a quantitative evaluation of a combination of ecological factors. These factors include whether the area serves one or more of the following functions: is essential to the survival of a large portion of a particular fish or wildlife population. supports populations of species which are endangered, threatened, or of special concern. supports populations having significant commercial, recreational, or educational value . exemplifies a habitat type which is not commonly found in the state or in a coastal region. The US Fish and Wildlife Service identified two regionally significant ecological complexes within Southold (US Fish and Wildlife Service, 1991). The delineation of these ecological complexes in Southold is based on the information on ecological communities and habitat requirements of various species presented in the Department of State's Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat Rating Forms (DOS, 1987) and the Northeast Coastal Areas Study(US Fish and Wildlife Service, 1991). • North Fork Beach Complex • Orient Point- Islands Complex The North Fork Beach Complex extends along the Peconic Bay shoreline from Jamesport (in the Town of Riverhead) to the Village of Greenport in the Town of Page 6 of 18 r Southold. It includes a narrow, linear complex of beaches, salt marshes, tidal creeks and nearshore baywaters. In most instances the space occupied by the habitats is quite narrow, rarely more than a few hundred feet wide, except for several tidal creeks and marshlands. Included in this complex are at least 22 individual areas of regional fish or wildlife significance that are in need of protection, management or enhancement. The significance of this complex is in its value, both actual and potential, as nesting, feeding, migration and recovery habitat for colonial beach nesting birds, principally the roseate tern, least tern, common tern and piping plover. The wetland habitat is important to Northern diamondback terrapins both as feeding and nesting areas. The complex also provides valuable feeding areas for ospreys and herons, while the creeks and baywaters are productive for finfish, shellfish and crustaceans. Although many of the individual habitat sites are small and separated from one another as a result of both natural and human-caused habitat fragmentation, the distances between these individual sites are not very great, and they can collectively be viewed as part of a single, functioning ecologically interrelated, linear shoreline system. It is essential to attempt maintain the full geographic and ecological continuum of these habitats in order to provide for the long term survival of these beach dependent species. Critical Environmental Areas The Peconic Bay and environs were designated Critical Environmental Areas (CEA) in 1989. To be designated as a CEA, an area must have an exceptional or unique character with respect to one or more of the following: a benefit or threat to human health; a natural setting (e.g., fish and wildlife habitat, forest and vegetation, open space and areas of important aesthetic or scenic quality); agricultural, social, cultural, historic, archaeological, recreational, or educational values; or an inherent ecological, geological or hydrological sensitivity to change that may be adversely affected by any change. Policy 9.3 Preserve the public interest in and use of lands and waters held in public trust by the state and the Town of Southold. The policy states: The Town of Southold has numerous access points to its shoreline and waterfront recreation facilities. The main objective of the Town is to improve these facilities, providing increased public access to the shoreline and waterfront recreation facilities for residents and visitors. Southold's shoreline has the potential to offer a continuous right of access along the shore. Given the increase in shoreline development, the opportunity to walk the shoreline of the Peconic Estuary is a valuable public asset. It remains, however, an unrealized asset because the right of continuous access is useless without the ability to get to the shore and, once on the shore, to walk unfettered. As noted earlier, there are stretches of Southold's shoreline where the public's rights in the foreshore have been constrained, and sometimes precluded, by the design and nature of private residential development. This is a major public policy concern. Page 7 of 18 Small private docks in coastal areas occupy public waters and extend across lands where the public has certain rights of access and usage. Therefore, all docks, extending out into a public water body adversely affect the public use and access along the foreshore and nearshore areas of such water bodies to certain levels. Public access along the foreshore and Town waters has been identified as one of the most important liberties within the Town. Similarly, the legal use of New York's beaches, tidelands, and lands underwater is defined by the Public Trust doctrine which holds that the public has certain rights of access along the shore, typically for fishing, shellfishing, and navigation. Under the public trust doctrine, the foreshore and underwater lands are held in trust by the state or local government for the benefit of the public. These rights of access must generally be balanced against the riparian rights of landowners adjacent to the water's edge. Riparian rights of waterfront property owners mandate that they have access to the adjacent waterbody. This does not, however, necessarily authorize a dock that extends into public waters or across lands where public trust rights exist. The Courts have found that the requirement for riparian access may be met by the establishment of a dinghy or canoe launching area—with no structure (NOAA 2008). An offshore mooring would also gain pubic access to public waters. The applicant retains no ownership rights to the public waters or bottomlands where the dock is proposed. Further, ample opportunities exist for public access, use and enjoyment of the Peconic Bay and other waterbodies. Throughout,the Town, public and quasi-public access points have been established to allow for access to the foreshore and navigable waters. These access points include, boat launch facilities, road ends, managed parks and Town owned properties. Maratooka Road is located to the east of the parcel and provides access to public waters. A. Limit grants, leases, easements, permits or lesser interest in lands underwater in accordance with an assessment of potential adverse impacts of the proposed use, structure, or facility on public interest in public lands under water. Use the following factors in assessing potential adverse impact. 1. Environmental impact; The ecological significance of this area of Peconic Bay is very high. Impacts to wildlife and marine species are expected with the physical loss and degradation of elements within ecological complexes and functional loss from use by the placement of a dock structure which have been found to be disruptive to certain fish species and cause a change or shift in their activities and behavior. Impacts to bottom sediments and benthic organisms are also expected to occur through the construction of the dock structure and operation of a vessel with an undetermined draft. The water depth where the dock is proposed is shallow with varying water depths and sandbar formations (migrating). Page 8 of 18 4 INI i Google Figure 2. Subject area showing shallow water depth and sand bars (migrating) Propeller scouring or scarring and turbidity from initial construction of the dock structure and vessel operation in this very shallow area of Peconic Bay is expected. Additionally, the disposal of sanitary waste onboard the vessel and washdown chemicals and has not been identified. 2. Values for natural resource management, public recreation, and Commerce,- The ommerce,The values for natural resource management are high and catalogued through the ecological designations and the goals and policies of the ecological designations and the Peconic Estuary Program Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP); a blueprint to restore and protect the waters of the Peconic Bays. The CCMP promotes a holistic approach to improving and maintaining the estuary and its watershed. Priority management topics include Brown Tide, nutrients, habitat and living resources, pathogens, toxic pollutants, and critical lands protection. These six priority topics, together with the need for public education and outreach, form the basis for the CCMP action plans. The CCMP identifies a framework to address estuary-wide impacts of all kinds that can potentially result from the accumulation of localized changes to the system including Brown Tide, and small scale physical changes (i.e., propeller scour, addition of individual docks and piers) that Page 9 of 18 cumulatively, can have reverberating effects throughout the Peconic ecosystem. The Peconic Bay, a public waterbody, provides a high level of public recreation and commerce (aquaculture, fishing, clamming) opportunities. 3. Size, character, and effect of the transfer in relation to neighboring uses, The proposed dock references an historic dock structure to the west of the subject parcel that received a permit in 1997 prior to current Chapter 275 Wetlands and Shoreline regulations and adoption of the LWRP in 2004. 4. Potential for interference with navigation, public uses of waterway, and riparian rights, Riparian rights: 1. Are appurtenant to and arise from the proximity of the land to the water. 2. A riparian owner has no direct property interest in either the adjacent water or underwater lands, but merely the right to use such water and land. A riparian owner has the right of access to navigable waters for navigation, fishing and other uses, exercised in a reasonable manner. Temporary, seasonal vessel moorings are available to the applicant to access and use public waters. The proposed dock structure would impede navigation of small manual powered vessels (public use of public waters) along the nearshore. Vessels would be forced to operate around the dock structure or seaward of the dock structure. The construction of a permanent, dock structure in public waters removes and or hinders the public use waters and bottomlands of where the dock structure is located. Public use in the area under and around the dock would be diminished. 5. Effect of the transfer of interest on the natural resources associated with the lands, The dock structure would transfer the interest of the public to utilize the area where the dock structure would occupy, effectively reducing the ability of the public to access the area. 6. Water-dependent nature of use, The private residential use is not water dependent, however, recreational boating requires water access (e.g. mooring, public boat ramp). Alternative water access points are available Town wide. 7. Adverse economic impact on existing commercial enterprises, Page 10 of 18 The private dock structure would remove the area occupied by the dock structure and vessel from public use including any commercial uses that occur in Peconic Bay. L 8. Consistency with the public interest for purposes of navigation and commerce, fishing, bathing, and access to navigable waters and the need of the owners of private property to safeguard development. The proposed private, dock structure in this location would extend into public waters resulting in a net decrease in public access to public underwater lands the beach and the nearshore area. Policy 9.4. Assure public access to public trust lands and navigable waters. E. Provide access to, and,reasonable recreational use of, navigable waters and public trust lands under water. 1. Provide for free and unobstructed public use of all navigable waters below the line of mean high water for navigation, recreation, and other public trust purposes, including the incidental rights of public anchoring. The proposal would obstruct and/or reduce the public use of the beach area and could hinder or obstruct public access along the beach. From the bottom of the stair to the beginning of the dock 15' is proposed where no structure would occur. This area currently has 82' of unimpeded beach from the bottom of the stair to apparent mean low water. The proposed dock structure would occupy approximately 76' from the apparent mean low water mark landward over the beach and all of the beach seaward of the apparent high water mark. Throughout Peconic Bay and Gardiners Bay (Reaches 5 through 9) two hundred and forty five (245) public and quasi-public access points have been established to allow for public access to the foreshore and nearshore (navigable) waters. These public access points include; public and private marinas; park district, town and state boat launch facilities; town and state road ends and private parks and road ends. Currently, there are approximately forty (40) public and private marinas and nineteen (19) boat launch facilities available to the public to gain access to Peconic Bay and Gardiners Bay. Public access can also be gained by utilizing numerous rights-of-way at the end of public roads. This is an effective means of gaining access to the public trust lands along the foreshore. In addition to public road ends, certain residents can access water bodies via properties owned by the Mattituck Park District in the Town of Southold. The Park Districts are supported through tax levies and the use of their respective facilities is restricted to the residents of each particular District. The Park Districts have developed to serve the recreational needs of local area communities and have generally been oriented toward providing beach areas and waterfront activities. Page 11 of 18 1 � Private dock structures extending into public trust lands and waters obstruct public use of navigable waters and other public use in the area where the dock is located and does not meet this policy. 3. Obstruction of navigable waters and underwater lands is limited. Boat travel in coastal waters is a public right established through the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution which gives the Congress regulatory power over navigable waters—an authority that has been delegated to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE). The USACOE identifies typical impacts to navigation due to small docks as: i. Extension into designated federal navigation projects or traditional navigation passages through the waterways. This impact is particularly important in Peconic Estuary which contains shallow areas and narrow navigable channels. Small watercraft navigate all areas of Peconic Bay including along the nearshore. ii. Federal navigation projects occur on waterways where taxpayer dollars have been invested to create or maintain a designated channel, turning basin, or anchorage. iii. There are instances where a proposed dock would not affect a designated navigable channel or a federal navigation project, but could adversely affect passage by paddle craft(e.g., canoes and kayaks) through traditional passageways along the shore. In some situations, a dock may force small paddle craft into the dangerous situation of entering a channel (or open water) utilized by larger, powered boats. For safety's sake, the smaller craft typically remain close to the shore—the same portion of the waterway where docks are generally proposed and constructed. iv. In some instances, the design of the dock (e.g., its height over the water or structures at the water end) may impede safe navigation by obstructing views along the waterway. Structures may obscure oncoming boat traffic or boats leaving docks and navigation aids. v. Private docks constructed too close to existing public or private docks or boat landings may impede safe navigation to, and use of, those existing facilities. Boats need room to maneuver around docks; the amount of room necessary is dependent on the size, configuration, and powering mechanism of the boats (i.e., size of engine; sail versus engine powered, etc.) Docks that are too close together may lead to difficulties in launching or landing vessels. a. To the extent that it interferes with commercial navigation. The right of commercial navigation is superior to all other uses on navigable waters and may not be obstructed. Page 12 of 18 The action is not expected to interfere with commercial navigation. b. To the minimum necessary for access to navigable waters. The minimum is determined by evaluating the following factors: (i) The extent of the use's dependence on access to navigable waters, The use is a private residence and the applicant currently enjoys access to navigable waters from the property. Numerous facilities are available throughout Town to gain access to navigable waters for recreational boating from various locations. (ii) The range of tidal water level fluctuation, Water depths have been provided, however, it is unknown what tide they have been calibrated too. The tidal range in this area fluctuates depending on several factors (lunar, wind direction). The difference between average high water and average low water as shown on the plans is 1'. The water depth at the dock terminus is shown as -3.86'to -3.88' (undefined) respectively. It is important to note that Mobilegraphics tide information shows a tidal fluctuation greater than 3'+from high to low tides using a random date of May 12, 2017 and the South Jamesport, Riverhead station located to the west of the property. The greatest difference in tidal fluctuation is closer to the new moon lunar cycle where the level of tide falls up to 3.6'from high tide (Saturday June 24, 2017 AM). Based on the tidal regime the threat of damage to bottom sediments and benthic organisms from a future vessel is moderate to high (depending on draft and vessel use timeframes). The tidal fluctuation at the South Jamesport station for May, June and July information are provided below. Page 13 of 18 n ;o n abed ounj :Aeg olu000d jeaaE) `uoijejS.podsewer y�noS ayl aoj slanal apil E ein id ICA Wd9Z 0 lag WV LZSeuenblsnd 461/103WdLZ911Z0l103Wd9LZL 119Z/103WVC4 OCP a3 Wd 9Z 03 WV LZ'S 4 0 1103 Wd E5 L1 11OC/103 Wd 9Z 5 1100/103 WV CZ 11 S LC/103 WV E4 6Z n 03 Wd 9Z 09 WV OZ £01103 Wd Z4 0 L S 0£1103 Wd 9Z L 0-/lag KV BZ 0 L 114 E/lag WV 44 Z PO 03 Wd 9Z 03 WV OZ S 11 L 01103 Wd LS 110 E/103 Wd BZ E 11 E 0-!103 WV 4E 11 L E!103 WV 84 LZ an lag Wd9Z a3 WV6L'S 800/lag WdC58 SLE/103WdZEZ 1140-1lag WVLV9 116E/103 WV C9L9Zu0 03 Wd 9Z a3 WV 6 L 5 4 L O-/103 Wd 95 11 L C/103 Wd LE L 115 0-1103 WV 64 S 0 4!103 WV 00 L 9Z un lag Wd9Z 03 WV6LS 4L0'/103WdZ0 LE/la3Wd£YZL 550-/103 WV 99 9 9L4/ICA WV 9061 4Z la 03 Wd 9Z 8 a3 WV 8 L S uooW MON S L O-/103 Wd 90 0£1103 M OS L L UtO-1lOAWVLO9 cZ P 09Wd9Z 9 103 WV8LS 3 O4/lag WdSLLL1100-1103Wd%9 9 6Z/103 WV990L 1160-/103 WV 9LZZn 03Wd5Z 03 WV9L5 9E/laWd£ZOL 11LO1103Wd9Z 9Z/103WVLOOL 11L0-1103WV4Z LZ Pe 09Wd5Z a3 WV SLS 119E/103MM611Z0/103Wd9E 11LZ/103WVS06 SLO/103WVZE OZ an 03Wd9Z 03WV9L5 114E/103Wd8E911C0/la3Wd84 4LZI103WV900 1140/103WV9C 6Luo 03Wd9Z8 a3WVLL 111E/103Wd 94 11401103Wd991 SLZ/103 WV SOL 1190/103 WVZ4L BLuns ICA Wd4Z 03WVVLL 81=0Isel 116ZlICA WdL59 840/ICA Wd 901 SLZ/ICA WV4094L0/ICA WV 94ZL LL3es ICA Wd4ZB a3 WVLL9 11LZ/109WdLSS1140/lag Wd9LZ1 89Z/103WVL0 UP 03Wd4Z8 03MLLS 901103Wd64LL 119Z/103Wd8041140/103WVBZLL 116Z/la3WVSL 9Ln agWdEZB a3WVLL 90/lo3Wd4501 4M103Wd91kUCO/IO3WVOM SOC/103WVBZ LPO 03WdU a3WVLL 90/103WdCO01 49Z1103WdCCC 11Z01103WV45 9LE/103WV94 £Lan 03Wda 03WVLLS 11L0/109Wd41 49Z/103Wd94Z 11Z01103WVOL 9ZC1103WV90 ZLuo ICA WdZZ a3 WVLL9 11901lag Wd8Z8 49ZlICA Wd90Z 1110/lag WH 9Z 11Zc/la3WV8ZLLLuns lag WdLZ9 a3 WVLL9 3150/ICA Wd 84 119Z/103WdSZL 1110/la3WV44 £E/la3WVZSZL OLIe 09Wdv a3 WVL6S uOOW11nj 99011a3WdC0 5Z/103Wd 94ZL 4L0i103WVCO C£1lag WVLLZI 6P ICA WdM6 03 WV 9 VS 4401103Wd6Z 9 0 9Zll03Wd60ZL 010/103 WV ZZ 9 nufl a3WdOZ8 lagWV0VG 3 ZC/ICA WdLVIL 440/103Wd14 9 8 5Z/103 WVZ£LL 4Z0/103 WV 14 LPO 09Wd6L' a3 WV0L8 ZClICA Wd901L 840/ICA Wd 69 9ZlICA WVE90L 4Z01ICA WV99 San LOA Wd9L 03 WV6LS LE/lag Wd LZ 01 840/ICA Wd 5L 5Z/103 WV010L 4C01ICA WHLL guo ICA Wd9L 03WV6L9 11L£l103Wd94611C0/103Wd6Z 115Z/103WVLZ6 11£01103 WV OZ 4uns lag WdLL 03WVU9 110EIlag WdL58 SCO/103Wd6E 49Z/lO3WVEZB 1140/103 WV EZ cies 03Wd9LB a3 WVOZS MUM SZOIla3Wd94L SLZ1lagWV6L 1140/103WHZZL ZP 03Wd9L8 03WVOZSeuenblsnd 96Zl103Wd699 La1103WdO9ZL 116Z/1031NVLL9UtO/IO3wMZ1 Ln Lasuns asPuns uooW 401H Mol 461H Mal 461H FOO LOZ aunt AeyV :Aeg o►uooad jeaaE) `uggejS podsewef, y4noS eyl aoj slanal ap!l .Z ain6;id 03Wd4L8 lag WVLZS 9CO1iOAV4dCM 116Z1103Wd054 ZO-/la3WV450L 115E/la3WVE0 ocon 03WdE18 MINVZZS UZ01iO3WdOM u6Z1103Wd9461160-/103WVL56 118C/103WV40" 6Zuo 03WdE18 LOA WVZZ9 800/103WdOl 310E/109Wd05Z 1150-/103 WV Z0 6 1104/103 WV 60 Z BZunS lag WdZLB ICA WVEZ9 ULO-UGAMUG 11LE/103Wd45L 890-/103WV80B ul4/103WV9VL MOS lag WdLVU 103 WVCZ9 11LO-/1a3WdOZ SLE/103WdLOL 1190-/103WV% L4/103WVGZZ 9ZP 03 Wd 018 L03 WV 4Z 9 UGOW MON 4 L 0-/103 Wd 6Z 9 3 L£/103 Wd 90 ZL 115 0-/103 WV SZ 9 9Z n 03 Wd 60 8 LC3 WV 5Z 5 9 0 4 1103 Wd 5E•L L u L 0-1103 Wd 04 9 9 L£1103 WV L L I L 11£0-/lag WV 9E 9 In Pe ICA Wd 90 8 lag WV 5Z•9 4 8£1103 Wd LVO 1 8 0 0-l 1(13 Wd C9*V 4 0£/103 WV 5Z 0 L u L G-/103 WV 96 V EZ an ICA Wd 80 9 tag WV 9Z•5 u 5£/lag Wd 65'6 8 VO/lag Wd 90 V 116 Z/la3 WV E£6 UZ'0/lO9WVL9E ZZ uo lag WdL09 lag WVLZ5 SZE/la3WdOV6 UZOUCAMOZE 118Z1103WV9C9 440/109WVWC LZunS 03 Wd 90 9 Lag WV 8Z•S 8 6 Z/103 Wd LZ 8 UCO/iCAMEEZ 4 L Z 1103 WV 06 L 4 9 0/lag WV CL Z OZ Les 03Wd908 lag WVBZS SLZ/103Wd 6Z.L 1140/la3WdGPL 4LZ/103 WV 049 SBO/103 WV6LL 6L 03 Wd 40 8 03 WV 6Z S Bent)lsel 4 S Z/lag Wd 5C:9 9 VO I la3 Wd 55 Z 9 L Z 1103 WV L4 5 116 0I lag WV ZZ A 8 L n ICA Wd£OB lag WV005 u4Z/laBWdLPG 1140/la3Wd60ZL 118Z/103 WV Wt UPO ICA WdZ08 tag WV LES 9 6'0/ICA Wd9Z•LL 114Z1103WdL4411401ICA WVKLI )J6Z/iC3WVL9E 9Lan ICA WdW9 ICA WVZE5 9 B'0/lag WdCCOL 110Z1109Wd99CUC0l109WVGZ01 u0£/103 WV VVE 9L UO ICA Wd008 ICAWV££S 13L01ICA WdZ46 119ZI103WdZL£ uZ0/lag WV B£6 1116/103 WV 4E Z 4L un 03Wd65 L 103 WV 4£S u901103Wd998119Z/109Wd0EZ 1110/la3WV£911ZC11a3WV95L MOS 03Wd99 L lag WV 5£9 11901103WdC18 1192/lag Wd64L 11LO1lag WV0L 11ZE/103WVOZ ZLP 03WdL5 LJLU9 WV 9E 9 840/ICA Wd LE L 119ZIICA WdUL 11LO11a3WV9Z ZE/103WV44ZLLLn 03 Wd 95 L lag WV LE•5 uooW ilnd 8 E 01103 Wd 05 99 9 Z/103 Wd SE ZL 110 0/103 WV L4 9 9 Z E/103 WV 60 ZL OL PO 03 Wd 85 L 109 WV 9E S 11 E 01103 Wd 60 9U 9 Z/lag WV 65 L L 110 0 I lag WV 50 9 6 en 09Wd45 a3 WV 6£9 3 Z£/lag Wd EE LL 11Z0/ICA Wd6Z 9 9 9Z/103 WV OZ LL 11L01lag WVLZ 9 8U 01Wd£5 L.La3 WV 06 9 4 LE/103Wd 95 OL 11Z01-LOA Wd94 0 0 LZ/103 WV8£OL 11L0/103 WV 4£V 1unS 03 Wd Z5 L lag WV Z4•9 4 0 E/la3 Wd 410 L 8 Z O 1103 Wd 00.0 u L Z/103 WV 64 6 u Z 01103 WV E4 C WS lag Wd15 L lag WV E4• 1166/103Wd5Z6 IJZO/-LO3V4d LLC 11LZ1103WV059 11Ea/lag WV 94 Z 9P 03Wd05 4ag WV 44.9 u8Z/lag Wd8Z 9 11L0/103Wd9L Z 99Z/103 WV 441 840/103 WVE4L nqj a3 Wd W1 Lag WV 54 5 u L Z/103 Wd£Z L 8 101103 Wd B L L 8 0 E 1103 WV EE 9 114 0/103 WV LC-Z L c PO ICA Wd"'i lag WV 94 g joijano ls/Id 9 L Z 1103 Wd 4L 9 4 0 0-1103 Wd LL Z )JZC/IOaV4VVZ9 Zen 09 Wd L44 L09 WV 84.5 9 E 01103 Wd L£L tj S L Z 1103 Wd 90 8 4 Z O-/lag M%9 I S S E/103 WV OZ V L uo ZesunS asPuns uooW 401H Mol 401H Mol 4BIH Aea LM AEW July 2017 Day High Low High Low High Moon Sunrise Sunset Sat 1255 AM EDT 104 fi 6 46 AM EDT/26ft 1.13 PM EDT/03ft 726 PM EDT 129It 22 AM EDT 8 26 PM ED Sun 2 1.55 AM EDT/0.5 it 7 48 AM EDT 12 4 ft 2 06 PM EDT 10 4 It 8 22 PM EDT 13 Oft .22 AM EDT 8 25 PM ED Mona 2 51 AM EDT 104it 845 AM EDT 124ft 2 56 PM EDT 104ft 912 PM EDT 13.Oft 23 AM EDT 825 PM ED ue4 3 42 AMEDT/04ft 9 37 AM EDT 123ft 3 44 PMEDT/05ft 955 PMEDT/3.1ft 23 AM EDT 8 25 PM ED Wed 6 1 30 AM EDT/0 3 it 10 22 AM EDT/2 3 29 PM EDT 10 5 ft 10 35 PM EDT/31 q 24 AM ED 8 25 PM ED u6 14 AMEDT/03ft 11.03 AM EDT/24 13 PM EDT 105ft 1113 PM EDT/32 24 AM ED 824 PM ED Fn 56 AM EDT/028 1142 AM EDT/25 55 PM EDT 105ft 11-50 PM EDT/32 25 AM ED 824 PM ED Sat8 37 AM EDT/0181220 PM EDT/25 37 PMEDT/05ft 26 AM ED 824 PM ED Sun 9 12 26 AM EDT 13 3 18 AM EDT/0 1 It 12 59 PM EDT 12 6 20 PM EDT 10 5 ft Full Moon -27 AM ED 23 PM ED Mon 101 04 AM EDT!3 3 ft 59 AM EDT 101 ft 138 PM EDT 12 6 ft 8 03 PM EDT 10 5 ft 27 AM ED 8 23 PM ED ue l l 1 42 AM EDT!3 2 ft 40 AM EDT/01 ft 18 PM EDT/2 7 ft 47 PM EDT 10 6 ft 28 AM ED 8 22 PM ED Wed 1 21 AM EDT/3 2 ft 23 AM EDT/D 1 ft OD PM EDT/2 7 ft 34 PM EDT/0 6 ft 29 AM ED 22 PM ED Thu 13 3 03 AM EDT/31 ft 10 07 AM EDT/0 2 44 PM EDT/2 8 ft 10 25 PM EDT 10 6 29 AM ED 8 21 PM ED Fri'14 3 49 AM EDT/3 0 ft 0 52 AM EDT/0 3 31 PM EDT/2 9 ft 11 19 PM EDT/0 6 .30 AM ED 8.21 PM ED Sat 16 40 AM EDT/2 8 ft 11 40 AM EDT/0 3 22 PM EDT/3 0 ft :31 AM ED 8 20 PM ED Sun 16 1216 AM EDT/0 6 5 36 AM EDT/2 7 ft 12 30 PM EDT 10 4 617 PM EDT/31 ft Lest Quarte 32 AM ED 8 20 PM ED Mon 17 114 AM EDT/05ft 37 AM EDT/268 122PMEDT/04ft 714PMEDT/32ft 33 AM ED 8.19 PM ED Tue18 13AMEDT/gift '40 AM EDT/26ft 17PMEDT/03ft 812PMEDT/34ft 33A ME 818 PM ED Le 09 AM EDT/ 43AMEDT/26it 11 PM EDT 910 PM EDT 34AMED 818 PM ED u 20 4 04 AM EDT/-0.0 ft .43 AM EDT/2 7 ft 4 05 PM EDT 101 ft 10 06 PM EDT l 3 7 f -35 AM EDT 8.17 PM ED Fri 21 4 57 AM EDT/-02ft1040AMEDT/28 59 PMEDT/OOft 1100 PM EDT/38 f 36 AM EDT 8 16 PM ED Sat 22 5 49 AM EDT/-0 3 It 11 34 AM EDT/2 9 fi 5 53 PM EDT/-0 1 It 1154 PM EDT/3 9 f 37 AM ED 8:15 PM ED Sun 23 39 AM EDT/-0 4 It 2 28 PM EDT/3 0 6 47 PM EDT I-0 1 It New Moon .38 AM ED 8-14 PM ED Mon 12 46 AM EDT/3 8 29 AM EDT I-0 4 ft 1 20 PM EDT 131 ft 7.40 PM EDT I-0 1 ft 39 AM ED 8:13 PM ED ue 25 1 38 AM EDT/3 7 ft 19 AM EDT/-0 3 ft 11 PM EDT 13 2 ft 35 PM EDT I-0 0 It :40 AM ED 13 PM ED ed 2612 29 AM EDT/3 5 ft 08 AM EDT/-0 2 It 3 03 PM EDT 131 It 9 30 PM EDT 10 1 ft -41 AM EDT1812 PM ED Thu 27 3 21 AM EDT 13 2 ft 59 AM EDT/-01 ft 3 56 PM EDT 131 ft 10 27 PM EDT 10 2 :41 AM ED :11 PM ED Fri 28 4.15 AM EDT 13 0 ft 10 51 AM EDT 101 R 4 51 PM EDT 13 0 It 1124 PM EDT 10 4 f :42 AM ED 810 PM ED Sat 29 510 AM EDT/2 7 ft 11 43 AM EDT!D 3 47 PM EDT/3 0 ft .43 AM ED 8 09 PM ED Sun 30 2 23 AM EDT!D 5 07 AM EDT/2 5 ft 12 37 PM EDT 10 4 6 44 PM EDT I 2 9 ft Fust Quarte :44 AM ED18 08 PM ED Figure 4. Tide levels for the South Jamesport Station, Great Peconic Bay. July Page 16 of 18 1 August 2017 Day High Low High Low High Moon Sunrise Sunset ue1 2 17 AMEDT/05ft 805AMEDT/23ft 23PMEDTl06ft 832PMEDT/29ft 5A6 AM EDT 8 05 PM ED Wed 2 3 10 AMEDT/05it 9.ODAMEDT/23ft 313PMEDT/0.6ft 920PMEDT/29ft 5 47 AM EDT 804 PM ED Thu 3 3 58 AM EDT 10 4 It 9.49 AM EDT/2 3 It 4.01 PM EDT 10 6 ft 10 04 PM EDT 13.0 C 5 48 AM EDT 8 03 PM ED Fri 4 4 44 AM EDT I 0 3 it 10 33 AM EDT/2 4 fi 4 46 PM EDT 10 5 It 1044 PM EDT/31 49 AM ED 8 02 PM ED Sat 6 1 27 AM EDT/0 2 it 11 14 AM EDT 12 5 115 30 PM EDT 10.5 ft 1122 PM EDT 13 2 11 15 50 AM EDT 8 01 PM ED Sun 6 08 AM EDT/0 2 it 1152 AM EDT 12 6 1115 12 PM EDT 10 4 It '51 AM EDT 8 00 PM ED Mon 7 12.01 AM EDT/3 248 AM EDT/0 1 ft 12 31 PM EDT/2 7 1116 55 PM EDT 10 4 ft Full Moon 52 AM EDT 7.58 PM ED ue 8 12 39 AM EDT/3 3 29 AM EDT/01 ft 1.09 PM EDT/2 9 ft 37 PM EDT 10.4 ft 53 AM ED 57 PM ED Wed 9 118 AM EDT!3 3 ft 09 AM EDT/0 1 ft 1.48 PM EDT/3 0 ft 8.21 PM EDT/0.3 ft 54 AM ED 7 56 PM ED Thu 10 1 59 AM EDT/3 3 ft '50 AM EDT/0 1 ft :29 PM EDT 13 0 It 9.08 PM EDT 10.3 ft '55 AM EDT 7.55 PM ED Frill 241AMEDT132ft 932AMEDT102ft :12 PM EDT/31 ft 9.58 PM EDT 10 3 ft .56 AM EDT 7.53 PM ED Sat 12 13 27 AM EDT 13 0 ft 0*17 AM EDT/0 3 :59 PM EDT/3 2 it 1051 PM EDT 10 4 11 57 AM ED :52 PM ED Sun 13 418AMEDT129ft 1106AMEDT/0.3 '51 PM EDT/32ft 11:49 PM EDT/04 111 58 AM EDT 7,51 PM ED Mon 1 :14 AM EDT!2 7 ft 1159 AM EDT/0 4 :48 PM EDT/3 3 It Last Quarte .59 AM EDT 7.49 PM ED ue 15 12.50 AM EDT 10.3 fi 6:17 AM EDT/2 6 ft 12 56 PM EDT/0 4 116 49 PM EDT/3 3 ft .00 AM EDT 7 48 PM ED Wed 16 150 AM EDT/0.3 It 7.23 AM EDT/2 6 ft 1:56 PM EDT 10.4 ft '52 PM EDT!3.4 ft .01 AM ED :46 PM ED Thu 17 50 AM EDT/0 2 ft 8:28 AM EDT/2 6 ft 55 PM EDT/0.3 ft 854 PM EDT/3 5 ft .02 AM EDT 7.45 PM ED Fri 18 46AMEDT/00ft 9:30AMEDT/27ft 3.52PMEDT102ft 954PMEDT/36ft 03 AM EDT 7.44 PM ED Sat 19 40 AM EDT/-01 ft 10 28 AM EDT/2 8 *47 PM EDT 101 ft 10 49 PM EDT/3 B .04 AM EDT 7 42 PM ED IH n 20 30 AM EDT/-0 2 ft 1121 AM EDT/3 0 5:41 PM EDT 1-0 0 ft 1142 PM EDT 13 B .05 AM ED .41 PM EDn 21 19 AM EDT/-0 2 ft 12 11 PM EDT/3 1 ,33 PM EDT/-01 ft New Moon O6 AM ED 39 PM EDe22 12 32 AM EDT 13 6 07 AM EDT/-0 2 ft 1.00 PM EDT/3 2 It 24 PM EDT/-0 1 ft 07 AM ED 38 PM ED2 121 AM EDT/3 5 ft 53 AM EDT/-01 ft 1:47 PM EDT/3 3 ft 15 PM EDT/-0 0 ft 08 AM ED 36 PM EDu 24 2 08 AM EDT/3 3 ft 40 AM EDT/-0 0 ft 34 PM EDT/3 3 ft 9 O6 PM EDT 10.1 ft 09 AM ED .35 PM ED26 255AMEDT131ft 9 27 AM EDT/0.1 ft :22 PM EDT/3 2 It 9 59 PM EDT 10 2 ft 10 AM EDT 7 33 PM ED Sat 26 3 43 AM EDT/2 9 ft 1016 AM EDT/0.3 :11 PM EDT/31 ft 1052PMEDT/04q 11AMEDT731PMEDT Sun 27 33 AM EDT/2 6 ft 11*07 AM EDT104fl5.02 PM EDT/3 Oft 11 48 PM EDT/0 5 .12 AM EDT 7 30 PM ED Mon28527AMEDT/25ft 200PMEDT/O6 5:56PMEDT/29ft 13 AM EDT 7 28 PM ED ue 29 2'44 AM EDT/0 6 :24 AM EDT 12 3 it 12 55 PM EDT/0 7 116 53 PM EDT!2.8 ft Fnst Quarte :14 AM EDT 7 27 PM EDII Wed 30 40 AM EDT 10 6 It 7:24 AM EDT/2 3 It 1'50 PM EDT/0 7 ft 49 PM EDT/2.8 ft 15 AM EDT17 25 PM ED Thu 31 34 AM EDT 10 6 it 18722 AM EDT/2 3 ft 2 43 PM EDT 10.7 ft 8 41 PM EDT l 2.8 ft 16 AM Eat 23 PM EDTJ Figure 5. Tide levels for the South Jamesport Station, Great Peconic Bay: August (iii) The size and nature of the body of water, Due to the large size and fetch of the Peconic Bay in this area, small manually powered watercraft, navigate the waters close to the shoreline for safety. Docks in the bay impede this ability by forcing small watercraft to navigate around the dock structure in deeper, open waters. The Peconic Estuary Program has discussed with the Town of Southold establishing a Blueway Trail along this section of the Peconic Bay for public use of manual powered kayaks and canoes. Both require little water depth to operate in. The proposed dock structure would impede the navigation of small watercraft close to shore resulting in a dangerous situation for children and other less experienced individuals. The small vessels are Page 16 of 18 susceptible to currents, winds and waves; capsize risk increases as the exposure to these factors increase. Dock structures force these types of user groups to navigate deeper waters by forcing them around the dock structure(s) due to the inability to travel under the dock structure during higher tide events. If additional docks are permitted in the area, the subsequent dock line increases the risk. (iv) The nature of public use of the adjacent waters, Another consequence from private, residential docks is the potential of obstruction of navigation. Town regulations prohibit the obstruction of marked navigation channels and require a one-third rule for creeks and harbors. For boaters with engines, this prohibition fits their needs since the safe operation of these vessels could require the use of the channels for navigation. The proposed dock is not expected to impede navigation of motor driven vessels due to the shallow water depth in this area. However, for self-propelled vessels and small watercraft which use is not limited to navigation channels, docks are an impediment, often forcing these vessels to navigate around the structure or seaward of the dock line. (v) The traditional means of access used by surrounding similar uses, The traditional use of the waters included free and unobstructed access to the nearshore and foreshore for commercial uses and recreation by the public (vi) Whether or not alternative means to gain access are available. Piers, docking facilities, and catwalks must not result in an unnecessary'interference with use of public trust lands. Alternatives to long piers or docks include use of Page 17 of 18 dinghies to reach moored boats and mooring in nearby marinas. c. By extent and characteristics of the developable adjacent upland area and its ability to support in-water development for the water-dependent use. d. By potential adverse effects on natural resources and their uses, and See discussion above in Policy 6.1 e. By potential adverse effects on public safety. See above comments. Policy 10. Protect the Town of Southold's water-dependent uses and promote siting of new water- dependent uses in suitable locations. As discussed, physical limitations on the placement and use of docks structures in Peconic Bay include shallow water depth, wave energy, storm surge and ice damage. Based on the above review, the proposed action does not meet the purpose of Chapter 268 Waterfront Consistency Review item C. (referenced below) of the Southold Town Code. The chapter was adopted under the authority of the Municipal Home Rule Law and the Waterfront Revitalization of Coastal Areas and Inland Waterways Act of the State of New York (Article 42 of the Executive Law). C. it is the intention of the Town of Southold that the preservation, enhancement and utilization of the unique coastal area of the Town take place in a coordinated and comprehensive manner to ensure a proper balance between protection of natural resources and the need to accommodate limited population growth and economic development. Accordingly, this chapter is intended to achieve such a balance, permitting the beneficial use of coastal resources while preventing loss and degradation of living coastal resources and wildlife; diminution of open space areas or public access to the waterfront, disruption of natural coastal processes, impairment of scenic, cultural or historical resources, losses due to flooding, erosion and sedimentation; impairment of water quality, or permanent adverse changes to ecological systems. Alternatives to permanent, private, docks structures in Peconic Bay include temporary, seasonal mooring of boats in areas with adequate water depth and docking of vessels in nearby marinas. Pursuant to Chapter 268, the Board of Trustees shall consider this recommendation in preparing its written determination regarding the consistency of the proposed actions. Page 18 of 18 Cantrell, Elizabeth From: paul pawlowski <pawlowskibiz@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday,July 13, 2017 3:36 PM To: Cantrell, Elizabeth; Cantrell, Elizabeth Subject: 100 Park ave Dock Application Comments Attachments: Southold Town Trustees .docx; Race Engineering .pdf Hello Elizabeth Can you please pass this email and the attached letters along to the Trustees Thank you for your help Regards Paul Pawlowski 631-445-4348 cell 631-850-5452 fax D EEE J U L 1 3 2017 Southold Town a Tr e i P 4 �rS July 13,2017 Mr.Paul Pawlowski JUL 13 2011 100 Park Avenue Mattituck,NY 11952 Southold Town Reference: Proposed Dock at 100 Park Avenue Board of Trustees Mattituck,NY _ Dear Mr.Pawlowski: Per your request,RACE COASTAL ENGINEERING ("RACE"), has performed a review of the drawings of the proposed dock prepared by LK McLean Associates,PC. The purpose of this letter is to provide you with our opinion as Professional Coastal Engineers, registered in the State of New York, of the feasibility of a dock located on your property. This opinion solely addresses the exposure to waves and flood loads that such a structure would be subject to should it be installed at the proposed location. It is our professional opinion that a dock can be designed at the proposed location shown on the aforementioned drawings to withstand wave and flood loads generated during the 1% Chance Storm event (or 100-year recurrence). Based on the following information and the standard of care required to perform such a design, and provided construction complies with such design, the proposed structure can be anticipated to perform adequately under normal conditions remain in place and stable during extreme events such as the 1% Chance Storm event*RACE has not performed any analysis or modeling at this time and this opinion is based on our experience and professional judgment. The design of waterfront structures, i.e. flood compliant loads, assessment of impacts on wave transformation, coastal site plan regulation compliance,etc.,often requires engineering assessment by a coastal engineer. This assessment would normally provide the Client's Design Professionals the wave loading on foundation piles and structural members. The loads are determined using computational methods developed by the US Army Corps of Engineers,FEMA and others and as prescribed by ASCE. Load conditions are determined for the 100-year recurrence water surface elevation and wind generated wave conditions. Wave conditions are transformed to include the effects of refraction using the Army Corps of Engineers CMS-Wave transformation model. This assessment provides the data necessary to assure that the proposed structure does not result in an increase in the Base Flood Elevation (BFE), redirect waves or floodwaters, and can sustain such loads, be submerged, and remain in serviceable condition. The site is exposed to coastal flooding during storm events, i.e. hurricanes and nor'easters, which impact the region. The site is mapped on the FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)No. 36103CO482H and dated September 25, 2009 as a Zone VE with a BFE of Elevation+8.0 ft(NAVD-1988). The BFE is the computed elevation to which flood water is anticipated to rise during the base flood(100-yr flood recurrence),and includes the effects of stillwater level (SWL),wave heights,wave runup,and wave setup. Wave height and period are computed using the Automated Coastal Engineering System's(ACES) Windspeed Adjustment and Wave Growth, Linear Wave Theory module, and the Irregular Wave Runup module is utilized to determine the wave runup elevation along the property. The wave crest elevation is also analyzed. 611 Access Road, Stratford, CT 06615 1201377 0663 1 racecoastal.com � I Mr. Paul Pawlowski July 13,2017 Proposed Agreement for Design Professional Services Page 2 of 2 It is anticipated that this document is acceptable for your records. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, RACE COASTAL ENGINEERING Y�� > E Ur" E � V E Timothy DeBartolomeo,PE, SECB Vice President- Structural Engineering J U L 13 2017 I Southold Town BQard of Trustees RACE COASTAL ENGINEERING From: Paul Pawlowski Reference: Dock application To: Trustees JUL 1 3 2017 Southold Town Dear Trustees a Trustee I wanted to reach out to you again as the public hearing is approaching. Over the past few weeks I have been thinking about my application as it compares to the recently approved dock into the bay known as the " Diveto Dock" Some factors that you consider when making your decision about a dock application are below and I would like to compare the two applications and the factors 1. Boat/ Kayak Traffic, comparing the two applications I feel that were my potential dock would be located has less boat traffic and potential kayak traffic, main reason is that the " Diveto Dock" is located closer to public access, and is in a much higher boat traffic area. When it comes to kayaks there is many groins near my potential dock and the proposed dock doesn't not go any further then the longest groin in my area and the existing dock that is a few properties to the west aka the " Norris Dock". Actually the dock just to the west goes much further out then my proposed dock 2. Pedestrian walking, again there is no public access that really allows for this to happen, near cedar beach there is much higher likelihood that there will be foot traffic, If this is something you feel could be an issue I am more then happy to add steps for people to walk east and west however since the dock proposed starts on the sand people will still be able to walk around it. The dock starts at the same starting point of the current groin and only goes about 2S' past the existing groin that is just a few feet west of the proposed dock. 3. Size of proposed dock, the one that I am proposing is 30' shorter then the Diveto Dock in length and basically mirrors the width and overall design and construction 4. Body of Water: both docks are into the bay the Diveto dock was approved and my application is pending. S. Environmental Impact, both applications are similar, as depth of water is the same, no boatlift and the boat that I would have on the dock would still be fine without touching the bottom in low tide. If a severe storm were approaching I would relocate the dock to a local marina, as not only do I want to protect the boat I would also want to protect the dock and property as well 6. High Energy and Fetch, applications are similar with regards to fetch and high energy,you mentioned that off paradise point there is less high energy but wouldn't that only impact the engineering of the dock? Having more or less energy should mean a better built dock verses a yes or a no on the dock being permitted or not, I am willing to work with you, my engineers on extra engineering needs if needed, there is no place in the code book that says a person can have a dock if the high energy levels are less then X? I respect that this may be a slightly higher energy area as you mentioned and willing to do what's needed to be proactive on your concern. The Norris dock has been is place longer then most docks off Paradise point and has not had any hazardess impact over the years. Please see attached letter from a consulting firm that specializes in Coastal Engineering. I realize I need to respect this area of the bay and am more then willing to do extra precaution necessary. 7. Immediate neighbors, while I know the neighbors to the immediate east and west of my property support my applications I would also like to point out that since the properties are elevated and how the homes nearby are situated it would not effect their view at all, I may be biased but even if they did see the proposed dock it is something you see throughout our North Fork waterfront properties and is a nice nautical look. It will also have no negative impact to my neighbors when it comes to kayaking and enjoying their waterfront rights as well. If this is approved my goal would be to remove the mooring as the mooring is not the best application for boat access. As an applicant and a resident of this town I realize that the code needs to be followed and there should be precedent as well. In this case my application follows the code entirely and there is precedent set forth as well, there is more then 30 plus docks into the bay, one that was recently approved by this board and one three properties to the west of my proposed dock that has been there for years. This " Norris dock" should really help with your concern on fetch and high energy. The factors I mentioned above are just a few however I feel that my proposed application has more pros then cons comparing the "Diveto Dock" to proposed dock. I ask you to support this application, as the goal is to enjoy the waterfront property that my family is fortunate to own. I will listen to your comments, I will work with you to mitigate any concerns you have. If others are permitted to have a residential dock into the bay then I feel that my family should as well as long as we follow the code. ® EEIE AUL 1 3 2017 Southold Tovun Thank you for your time and I look forward to the public hearing, I appreciate you taking the time to read my letters to the board and for your site visits as well Regards Paul Pawlowski FHECE � V/ E JUL 1 3 2017 ' Southold Town hTisto i _J CHARLES R.CUDDY ATTORNEY AT LAW 445 GRIFFING AVENUE RIVERHEAD,NEW YORK Mailing Address: TEL: (631)369-8200 P.O Box 1547 FAX: (631)369-9080 Riverhead,NY 11901 E-mail: charlescuddy@optonline.eoir June 23, 2017 p � E � VE r) ward of Trustees Du Town of Southold JUN 2 6 2017 PO Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 ouftld Town Board fTrustees Re: Paul Pawlowski-Dock Dear Board Members: I represent Paul Pawlowski who resides at 100 Park Avenue in Mattituck. He has made application for a dock. Upon reviewing the proposed dock,it appears virtually identical to a dock approved for Daniel and Gina DeVito at 750 Paradise Point Rd., Southold (Authorization attached). Not only are the conditions at the DeVito and Pawlowski sites markedly similar but both sites have docks nearby.In fact just three(3)parcels west of 100 Park Avenue is the dock at the Norris property which is appropriately permitted and has been in place for many years. Viewed objectively the Pawlowski dock application satisfies the conditions of the Town Code. Further, it coincides with the design of the DeVito dock and will have little impact on boat traffic. I am aware the Trustees have visited the Pawlowski site and, at this point, I believe you will conclude that there is nothing about the proposed dock, its size, relative location or desip that distinguishes it from the dock approved in October 2016. if you believe to the contrary, I would appreciate your placing your•concerns in writing so they might be addressed. Very truly yours, Charles R. Cuddy CRC/pc _ __ k x= a tea = 4..Y 's�`x>' c±ii,, aTM+ a r•Jril '+-'.� F .4 a'?a� i�4• tc..... - ,.P�S'�.—> ' - .d L'Y•A.��rAi?.i ,f'�a'�'° -.'7,°�:..�'-t.E�!4 �' I ag •z �, `'�*'�r� cd'a`T�. ;�. ``-li. �sf`` �� {ih, ��.y,.''„�,,,_t'��^; �• �;�.• � } � i;,i�f-' rte'-''.eci=lj�r:-�''mq ,�`,� ��,�drr�.�.�..ia� '"r J'�LL` '�r, .t-... azo.=e1:.✓, +•'�*fi'j-, �-r' It�•�j' �� �ar��s-_.:21,�"-�8n=4(4�t ?1- BOARD O'_F SOUTUO LO TWN TRUSI 1�:,�.:S UTjBO0:t)3 [NLPIV YOUZ7Kit , s ] I I � P13MARIF NO.9''at+U `L}ATS t OCTOBER 19, i , #y•� T°RO�P8RTIZ ADDIZE S: 7.si�p.,•Rs.rZA(i:t+T`gE P pi�`u�±r]FtO D.SOUT7c-il'i WL 7) , !I ,! __-AliP1,000414-26.1 - - - RI °� I Pesbalm 00 dig FmtisiqmOf CtoPCOT M15 'ot dL `town 'CO& of dips 7ti;an Asa•Somiln 9! vCC S"� JL the 1 �fuffwn of ft:Bonrd of•J.fftne"a}t+jswd a dam,�i.td9 Ul 06-aR h$�.�N(.�.a� . 4 Ll 3d car�i�a�=�idOlh aar.7pPji�"oO f,;#i�rite��;� �f O pip wj,(�anio1_�oin���lK� ffifijeei to> � r }�!I TS Crld Ca-AJ Ci b-hVed frt L11 'Rtgah ei Lbo So t;th old Town Bw-,rd of Trusimt wild rwrmiE.s P d€wn to u 4T.V301 ffxed la-sverplfttfvrn at offsho to end- ifigiftll Blue !W" � r ► I adT�meter�tti �,ooffw—p9ling .1nd lmstaM mer fend Al"trIc the dadk;mdd us depicted on i s fPt a T i j� iarc dp'�.Costel[,��� arly b oetrh -mg .' t� rs� t�? I , On October.'19, 016. h RV AIVI TRESS WFi EOP,vbg s*id BtdA 4f I'ruswcs In it caa" -iu Corpkaw stal tG be aftmed, and th h as w bu s�absmfl¢eC by a rsi4jof%i 6f�g d¢� �f r�i���it nJf-EI JUN 2 6 2017 1Southold Town Cantrell, Elizabeth From: paul pawlowski <pawlowskibiz@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday,June 20, 2017 11:10 AM To: Cantrell, Elizabeth Subject: Re: 100 park avenue Mattituck proposed dock and hearing thank you On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Cantrell, Elizabeth<elizabethc a,town.southold.n ��us>wrote: Ok. It is being tabled to the July 19, 2017 public hearings. From: paul pawlowski [mailto:pawlowskibizCcbgmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 11:06 AM To: Cantrell, Elizabeth Subject: Re: 100 park avenue Mattituck proposed dock and hearing Ok I would then like to confirm to please table my application till the next public hearing Thank you for your time On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Cantrell, Elizabeth <elizabethc@town.southold.ny.us>wrote: You will need to confirm by 4:00PM today in order for me to correctly notice your application on our public agenda of either being heard or tabled. Elizabeth From: paul pawlowski [mailto:pawlowskibizC-Ogmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 11:00 AM To: Cantrell, Elizabeth Subject: Re: 100 park avenue Mattituck proposed dock and hearing 1 J Hello last question can I confirm this by 9 am, I am going to continue to try and make this happen , if it can't wait till the am then I will confirm today On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Cantrell, Elizabeth<elizabethcgtown.southold.nv.us>wrote: Paul, Yes, if you wish to table the application I just need you to please confirm that you wish to postpone your application to our Wednesday,July 19,2017 public hearings. Regarding the LWRP,we have not yet received the report. This report can be submitted to our office up to the end of the day of the public hearings. If we do not receive it,the Board would be forced to table the application tomorrow as it is required the LWRP coordinator has 30 days for his review. Elizabeth From: paul pawlowski [mailto:pawlowskibiz@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 10:33 AM To: Cantrell, Elizabeth; Cantrell, Elizabeth Subject: 100 park avenue Mattituck proposed dock and hearing Hello I just got news that I have a closing tomorrow that I need to go to I was going to have my attorney handle it, Is there anyway I can adjourn my hearing for the proposed dock till the next meeting? z , f Also was wondering if the LWRP was finished for this application Please let me know and thank you for your help Paul Pawlowski 631-445-4348 cell 631-850-5452 fax Paul Pawlowski 631-445-4348 cell 631-850-5452 fax Paul Pawlowski 631-445-4348 cell 631-850-5452 fax 3 Paul Pawlowski 631-445-4348 cell 631-850-5452 fax 4 i ' t LWRP GENERAL POLICIES IN RELATION TO RESIDENTIAL DOCKS TOWN TRUSTEE CHECKLIST: Town Trustee Review of LWRP Consistency Review for L. K. McLean Associates, P.C. on behalf of 100 Park Avenue Corp., c/o Paul Pawlowski Proposed Situated at SCTM# 1000-123-7-3 , POLICY 1: "C"/ "IC"/ ?/ NA/ Elaborate Degree Of Enhances community character NA In dock area contributing to community character NA Community dock possible to preserve open space NA Makes efficient use of infrastructure NA Makes beneficial use of a coastal location IC Minimizes adverse effects of development IC POLICY 2: Dock itself a historic resource of local/national import NA Dock to be located area with history of docks IC limited dock area Pre "Sandy" POLICY 3: Located in area where docks dominate certain views No Located in area where dock will extend beyond pier line No established pier line Located in area with formal scenic'protections No Located in area/adjacent to "known scenic area" Yes Great Peconic Bay POLICY 4: Minimize loss of life from flooding/erosion IC w/serious concerns Unsafe area to board/disembark from vessels IC Meets USACE navigation "1/3" rule C In area suitable for emergency response/"safe harbor" No i POLICY 9: Provides public access NA Increases total access for boats/aquaculture in Town from favorable zoning provisions (two boat other than owner/aquaculture) NA Minimizes or prevents loss of riparian access Yes Minimizes loss of public recreation Yes POLICY 10: Protects water-dependent (WD) uses Yes Siting promotes new WD uses No WD use siting in suitable location No Provide access for licensed baymen No POLICY 11: Promotes sustainable use of living marine resources No Possible shellfish aquaculture/baymen access No POLICY 12: Protect agricultural lands NA POLICY 13: Promote appropriate mineral/energy use NA Above found "Inconsistent" by Town Trustees to be returned to "Consistency": (list policies from worksheet and means to return to consistency, use additional sheets as necessary) No policies enumerated above as "IC" appear to be able to be returned to consistency with standard modifications to the proposed structure. Scaled/sited to minimize loss of structure from flooding IC Scaled/sited to minimize loss of structure from erosion IC Located in area where loss likely from ice/wind/wave IC Minimizes loss of natural resources from flooding and erosion IC POLICY 5: Protects & improves water quality (WQ) IC Constructed to Chapter 275 & general practice Yes Dock in still-water area where 100% nontoxic needed No Siting allowing hanging filter feeders/aquaculture No Water service to dock impacting water supply No Located in area where vessel wastewater control needed Yes POLICY 6: Protects/restores ecosystem quality &function NA Located in officially designated CEA/Vital area Yes Area known to Trustees to contain protected species No Area of suspected protected species w/study needed No POLICY 7: Air quality (generally N/A) NA POLICY 8: Minimize environmental degradation from solid wastes NA Minimize environmental degradation from hazardous waste NA Stillwater area where bilge wastes an issue NA Additional toxic bottom paint controls needed NA Additional vessel wastewater controls/ban needed Yes LWRP report "Inconsistencies" not addressed by above to be returned to "Consistency": (list policies and means to return to consistency, use additional sheets as necessary) CONSIDERATIONS: 1)Are any "Inconsistencies" so substantial in relation to policies to preclude effectively mitigating to "Consistency." Is additional information needed? Policy#1 Site does not make beneficial use of a coastal site insofar as potential hazards associated with the site preclude most beneficial uses attributed to docks. Policy# 1 Site may adversely affect coastal development by establishing dock(s) in an area(s) potentially unsafe for most ordinary dock uses. Policy#2 Proposed dock is in an area of few docks that are infrequently used and where no new Chapter 275 permits have been issued since Tropical Storm "Sandy" Policy#4 Proposed siting has 180 degrees of uninterrupted wind fetch exposure of six miles and up to seven miles along the coastline from the prevailing wind SW direction of the boating season with the very real potential for unattended vessels becoming distressed and leaking fuel/sewage. Policy#4 Wind driven wave action tidal action and flooding during during modest breezes and storm conditions potentially making vessel operations hazardous to life and limb on approaches to the dock or in attempting to secure a vessel thereto. Policy#4 Facility cannot be scaled/designed with standard and allowed dock construction to reduce potential hazards from wind and wave. Prudent mariners likely to leave on calm day and not being able to dock safely on return. Policy#4 Potentially severe damage from wind and ice exists for Great Peconic Bay siting. Policy#4 Potential for fuel or sewage release due to siting puts natural resources at risk. No additional information appears to be needed at this time. 2) Do inconsistencies substantiate denial of the riparian right to wharf out? Southold Town Trustee members with substantial experience in vessel operations, vessel and personal safety on the water, fire and emergency rescue operations on the water and environmental protection are of the opinion experience and belief that the proposed dock and associated siting is imprudent and potentially hazardous to,boaters, first responders and the environment for which no remedy is foreseen or known to them for the proposed dock under its current configuration. Accordingly, the aforementioned inconsistencies from the Town's coastal polia outweigh the benefits associated with the landowners individual riparian right to wharf out. Additional Discussion: ,1 Prepared by: — v ` Date: f l �s�es cc: William Duffy, Town Attorney Mark Terry, LWRP Coordinator 10. _ RIC rr outhold Own--__w__ ® _z j 4` - �� - �'� --- Pe °° of 7r / _ a�W Ij "Si� Al / T VA 1 1_C Peter Young,Chairmany Town Hall,53095 Main Rd. Lauren Standish,Secretary 2 P.O.Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Telephone(631)765-1889 Fax(631)765-1823 Conservation Advisory Council Town of Southold At the meeting of the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council held Wed., June 14, 2017 the following recommendation was made: Moved by Greg Williams, seconded by Keith McCamy, it was RESOLVED to SUPPORT the application of PAUL PAWLOWSKI to construct a dock 607 sf. with a 4'X 30' lower dock. Access to the dock with be from an existing stairway. Located: 100 Park Ave., Mattituck. SCTM#123-7-3 Inspected by: Greg Williams, James Abbott The CAC Supports the application, however, the height of the dock and provisions for lateral access were not depicted on the plans. East/west lateral access should be indicated near Point "A". Vote of Council: Ayes: All Motion Carried Cantrell, Elizabeth From: paul pawlowski <pawlowskibiz@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday,June 13, 2017 7:05 PM To: Cantrell, Elizabeth; Cantrell, Elizabeth Subject: Fwd: Attachments: imagel.PNG; image2.PNG; Dear Board of Trustees.docx Hello Elizabeth, Can you pass along the attached and this email to the trustees please Thank You for your help i p � 0 EVE DUN 14 2017 Dear Board of Trustees Southold Town bard of Trustees First I want to thank you for your time today with your second site visit to the property, I hope this second submission in more in line with the code The reason for this letter it to help address some of your concerns, comparing this location and the most recent approval by your board for the "Diveto dock off paradise point" To a resident and not an coastal environmental engineer the applications seem very similar given the size of dock and the location the dock is off the beach into the bay. I bring this dock up because it is very close to what I am submitting for in many ways such as size, similar application and environment. There are pros and cons to both locations, You mentioned"fetch and high energy"while the paradise point offers a little less high energy as you can see by the attached overall pictures there is not much difference in protection and area were fetch and high energy come into play. Also the water depths are pretty much the same. While this is very important I feel the owner and applicant need to make sure they are prudent in relocating the boat in a potential storm,keeping the dock in good standings and strength. This I can assure you as the owner of the property and boat I will be on top of as the boat is expensive and the installation of the dock is as well. Other things you mentioned were or environmental concerns, my boat will not touch bottom even in low tide as it does not draw that much water and the depts.At low tide work well for my boat, I will never be fueling the boat at the dock as Strong's marina is close by and is the most efficient and effective way to fuel the boat, I get the boat detailed twice a year before it goes into the water. The boat is fairly new and all servicing happens while out of the water at a marina. Winter months, the boat is not in the water and I will do necessary de icing prevention if needed to reduce an issues with icing. Other concerns is kayaking and boat traffic, comparable my location has less potential boat traffic as the paradise point location is near public ramps,beaches and the Cornell building, there is much more going on there then my shoreline in a given summer day. We designed this dock so it does not exceed the groins in the area and the nearest dock which are two properties to the west on my property. I would like to also point out the "Norris" dock has been there since the late 50's and has stood strong even in this high-energy area. There are other docks in the New Suffolk area that have remained strong and are handling this high-energy area. I would like you to know that my goal is simple and that is to enjoy the bay as much as I can with my family while respecting the great property we are so lucky to live on. I will do what ever you suggest or recommend I do to allow this application to be approved. If there is anything that can be done to mitigate your concerns and get this more in line with the paradise point docks please let me know. I look forward to your comments and appreciate your time with my application and your dedication as trustees. Regards Paul Pawlowski nn JUN 14 2017 I Southold Town Evil J6 M c pw QN14 Ax"<jW ve� OW 7j Ai wry sm X 1,z� 1A P 7N X� Z q'A WV KIMi4g; t Z IT 4, Will CC E TM JUN IG' South., 'AfV, amm WM,- Too �-,1vIwo"% 4 �Ax 6� lit aL 00Le .,•i-" � t�4''. «Y'<Y 'M� f i� Y «ts^ y. •5::�.fi",'S&e• `.,'�.'^ :�Cl`n, ')`�.,i.•R,�.t . � a. fx-,S�W:�,. 'rr •.5 a'd &. Al ,..� .." ,r R, .; �Se• .•� :;t�.:sc-}.:`.1�;�-t't`�$R `'f 04 W!F-, Xf a �` .7r ,^ 1 � ...,..,.•r%"' �" .. ::� ;moi:,y, '¢ g3,.C'r+,a, ".'s �• 4x � Via , ,,,': ., k `;, ''T,�; fjj�pp`I rA�F N� 1'3 g• �. '';�. `ID 4 ;.". ".,6; "5 � )':�•.:. '.�+«`.er '° �a`t. Fc.. &,:sa�a�:� �„ y'. A "r�, � mr�r�"Q � ; m^�. °� �";3�`` �.... ,�;: '`�,�'' P��\. .°,.• i ,'�;;�>�,,` ,� •susZXM ,, ,- �¢` 20I��F tea•' `:` .` ;., a w'.td"ti ill Y!a .. Aa`.• ' "8£ 4aR:.":,,a_4...` .r. .i r r' ` a •3 96; ._ar ,.r ",b '�ry y.. �Y•i S+ � �� V Cyt ,� ':�`'t+W""K� `" �6 x �" 'Y j( �'e ,;k.s.g K ��,���} �^ -`^y^s°r m � •z`',.,aE.;K;�;.ar+ g e. .�a _. Vim: 4_. ;, ,yr,- �<' n� • *tF S � q Town Hall Annex Michael J.Domino,President ® l® 64376 Route 25 John M.Bredemeyer III,Vice-President P.O.Box 1179 Charles J.Sanders Southold,New York 11971 Glenn Goldsmith ® i� Telephone(631) 765-1892 A.Nicholas Krupski ���'OdlNrl,� f�� Fax(631) 765-6641 y BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD This Section For Office Use Only Coastal Erosion Permit Application Wetland Permit Application Administrative Permit Amendment/Transfer/Extension VRecepi ceived Application: ����•! ; ved Fee: $ 25ar ��omleted Application: S,2-2.17 / I ii` ''� it , SEQRA Classification: Type I_ Type Il Un Incomplete: listed MAY 1 201? Lead Agency Determination: Coordination:(date sent): LWRP Consistency Assessment Form Sent: CAC Referral Sent: Southold bwn Date of Inspection: Bo�rd�f Trustees . Receipt of CAC Report:_ Public Hearing Held: J I'7 a 1111 S 11� Resolution: 3 Legal Name of Property Owner(s): Paul Pawlowski Mailing Address: P.O. Box 783, Mattituck, NY 11952 Phone Number: pawlowskibiz@gmail.com Suffolk County Tax Map Number: 1000- 123-07-03 Property Location: 100 Park Avenue,, Mattituck NY 11952 (If necessary,provide LILCO Pole#, distance to cross streets, and location) AGENT(If applicable): L.K. McLean Associates PC Mailing Address: 437 South Counter Road Brookhaven,NY 11719 Phone Number: 631-286-8668 - so J 1 J L11AA L. K. McLean Associates P.C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is proposing to construct 121.7 long by 4' wide timber dock structure (single vessel)into the Peconic Bay at 100 Park Avenue in Mattituck,NY (SCTM# 1000-123-07-03). A similar permitted dock exists on the property directly to the west of the applicant's property. The proposed single dock structure would be constructed at a finished elevation(timber decking) of 4.50 that would extend from the existing shore (el 4.50) and extend seaward 121.7 linear feet. The dock will' also contain a 4' x 30 platform with four 10" mooring piles with a finished elevation (timber decking) of 2.50'. Two additional 10" mooring piles will be installed 12' off the lower platform. The platform will be located at the seaward end of the dock. No catwalks or ramps are being proposed with this application. All excess material from the installation of the pilings would be removed. All hydrographic topography and landward features are shown on the plan as obtained by survey on April 29, 2017. There are existing stairs that are situated in the shallow bluff that is supported by beach grass vegetation. No treated wood would be used in the construction of the dock. No disturbance to vegetated area or to the beach area will be required for the construction of this dock structure. JBoard of Trustees Applicat=- GENERAL DATA Land Area(in square feet): 74,052 SF Area Zoning:_ R-40 Previous use of property: Residential Intended use of property: Residential Covenants and Restrictions on property? Yes x No If"Yes",please provide a copy. Will this project require a Building Permit as per Town Code? x Yes No If"Yes",be advised this application will be reviewed by the Building Dept.prior to a Board of Trustee review and Elevation Plans will be required. Does this project require a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals? Yes x No If"Yes",please provide copy of decision. Will this project require any demolition as per Town Code or as determined by the Building Dept.? Yes x No Does the structure(s)on property have a valid Certificate of Occupancy? x Yes No Prior permits/approvals for site improvements: Agency Date NYSDEC Wetlands Permit Southold Trustees Permit USACOE Permit No prior permits/approvals for site improvements. Has any permit/approval ever been revoked or suspended by a governmental agency? x No Yes If yes,provide explanation: Project Description(use attachments if necessary): The proposed project will include a proposed dock (607 SF) with a 41x30' lower dock. Access to the dock will be from an existing stairway. -Board of Trustees Applicata.- WETLAND/TRUSTEE LANDS APPLICATION DATA Purpose of the proposed operations:, The purpose of the project is build a dock with stairway access from the bluff to the dock (607 sf) . Area of wetlands on lot: 15,000 SF square feet Percent coverage of lot: 20.25 % Closest distance between nearest existing structure and upland edge of wetlands: 75 feet Closest distance between nearest proposed structure and upland edge of wetlands: feet Does the project involve excavation or filling? x No Yes If yes,how much material will be excavated? cubic yards How much material will be filled? cubic yards Depth of which material will be removed or deposited: feet Proposed slope throughout the area of operations: Manner in which material will be removed or deposited: Statement of the effect, if any,on the wetlands and tidal waters of the town that may result by reason of such proposed operations(use attachments if appropriate): There will be limited disturbance during the installation of the dock. The existing beach grasses will be protected during the construction phase. There are numerous docks similar in construction that have been constructed in the area and one a few hundred feet away from the subject parcel (see plan showing the numerous permitted docks installed along coastline) . 617.20 Appendix B Short Environmental Assessment Form Instructions for Completing Part 1 -Project information. The applicant or project sponsor is responsible for the completion of Part 1. Responses become part of the application for approval or funding,are subject to public review,and may be subject to further verification. Complete Part 1 based on information currently available. if additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item,please answer as thoroughly as possible based on current information. Complete all items in Part 1. You may also provide any additional information which you believe will be needed by or useful to the lead agency;attach additional pages as necessary to supplement any item. Part 1-Project and Sponsor Information ; Name of Action or Project: 100 Park Avenue Project Location(describe,and attach a location map): 100 Park Avenue, Mattituck, NY 11952__ Brief Description of Proposed Action: The proposed project will include a proposed dock (1,010 SF) with boat lift. Access to the dock will be from an exiAing stairway. Name of Applicant or Sponsor: Telephone: 631-445-4348 Paul Pawlowski E-Mail: pawlowskibiz@gmail.com Address: P.O. Box 783 City/PO: - State: Zip Code: Mattituck New York 11952 1.Does the proposed action only involve the legislative adoption of a plan,local law,ordinance, NO YES administrative rule,or regulation? If Yes,attach a narrative description of the intent of the proposed action and the environmental resources that Q may be affected in the municipality and proceed to Part 2. If no,continue to question 2. 2.-Does the proposed action require a permit,approval or funding from any other governmental Agency? NO YES If Yes,list agency(s)name and permit or approval: ❑ 'M NYSDEC Tidal Wetlands Permit 3.a.Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? _ 1.70 acres b.Total acreage to be physically disturbed? 0.02 acres c.Total acreage(project site and any contiguous properties)owned or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? 1.70 acres 4. Check all land uses that occur on,adjoining and near the proposed action. ❑Urban El Rural(non-agriculture) ❑Industrial ❑Commercial ❑X Residential(suburban) ❑Forest ❑Agriculture El Aquatic ❑Other(specify):-- ___ ❑Parkland Page 1 of 4 1 \ 5. is the proposed action, NO YES N/A a.A permitted use under the zoning regulations9 ❑ ❑ ❑ b.Consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan? ❑ ❑ ❑ 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the predominant character of the existing built or natural NO YES landscape? ❑ ❑ 7. Is the site of the proposed action located in,or does it adjoin,a state listed Critical Environmental Area? NO YES If Yes,identify: Fx I ❑ 8. a.Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels? NO YES b.Are public transportation service(s)available at or near the site of the proposed action? ❑ ❑ c.Are any pedestrian accommodations or bicycle routes available on or near site of the proposed action? X❑ ❑ 9.Does the proposed action meet or exceed the state energy code requirements? NO YES If the proposed action will exceed requirements,describe design features and technologies: N/A ❑ ❑ 10. Will the proposed action connect to an existing public/private water supply? NO YES If No,describe method for providing potable water: ❑ ❑ 11.Will the proposed action connect to existing wastewater utilities? NO YES If No,describe method for providing wastewater treatment: X❑ ❑ 12. a.Does the site contain a structure that is listed on either the State or National Register of Historic NO YES Places? ❑' ❑ b. Is the proposed action located in an archeological sensitive area? ❑ ❑ 13. a.Does any portion of the site of the proposed action,or lands adjoining the proposed action,contain NO YES wetlands or other waterbodies regulated by a federal,state or local agency? El X❑• b.Would the proposed action physically alter,or encroach into,any existing wetland or waterbody? ❑ ❑ If Yes,identify the wetland or waterbody and extent of alterations in square feet or acres: _ There will be limited disturbance to the existing wetlands area to install a dock. If needed access can be limited to a barge. 14. Identify the typical habitat types that occur on,or are likely to be found on the project site. Check all that apply: ❑Shoreline El Forest ❑Agricultural/grasslands ❑Early mid-successional ❑x Wetland x❑Urban ❑Suburban 15. Does the site of the proposed action contain any species of animal,or associated habitats,listed NO YES by the State or Federal government as threatened or endangered? Ifl ❑ 16. Is the project site located in the 100 yeas flood plain? NO YES X 17.Will the proposed action create storm water discharge,either from point or non-point sources? NO YES If Yes, ❑ ❑ a.Will storm water discharges flow to adjacent properties? ❑NO ❑YES b.Will storm water discharges be directed to established conveyance systems(runoff and storm drains)? If Yes,briefly describe: ❑NO DYES Page 2 of 4 � t 18 Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that result in the impoundment of NO YES water or other liquids(e.g.retention pond,waste lagoon,dam)? If Yes,explain purpose and size: ❑ ❑ 19. Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the location of an active or closed NO YES solid waste management facility? If Yes,describe: -1 F-1 20.Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the subject of remediation(ongoing or NO YES completed)for hazardous waste? If Yes,describe: ❑ ❑ I AFFIRM THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant/sponsor name: Paul Pawlowski Date: Signature: Part 2-Impact Assessment. The Lead Agency is responsible for the completion of Part 2. Answer all of the.following questions in Part 2 using the information contained in Part I and other materials submitted by the project sponsor or otherwise available to the reviewer. When answering the questions the reviewer should be guided by the concept"Have my responses been reasonable considering the scale and context of the proposed action?" No,or Moderate small to large impact impact may may occur occur 1. Will the proposed action create a material conflict with an adopted land use plan or zoning regulations? M 1:1 2. Will the proposed action result in a change in the use or intensity of use of land? ❑ 3. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the existing community? ❑ 4. Will the proposed action have an impact on the environmental characteristics that caused the ❑ establishment of a Critical Environmental Area(CEA)? 5. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change in the existing level of traffic or ❑ ❑ affect existing infrastructure for mass transit,biking or walkway? 6. Will the proposed action cause an increase in the use of energy and it fails to incorporate ❑ reasonably available energy conservation or renewable energy opportunities? 7 Will the proposed action impact existing: ❑ a.public/private water supplies? b.public/private wastewater treatment utilities? ❑ 8. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of important historic,archaeological, ❑ architectural or aesthetic resources? 9. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change to natural resources(e.g.wetlands, ❑ waterbodies,groundwater,air quality,flora and fauna)? Page 3 of 4 No,or Moderate small to large impact impact may may occur occur 10. Will the proposed action result in an increase in the potential for erosion,flooding or drainage ❑ problems? 11. Will the proposed action create a hazard to environmental resources or human health? Part 3-Determination of significance. The Lead Agency is responsible for the completion of Part 3. For every question in Part 2 that was answered"moderate to large impact may occur",or if there is a need to explain why a particular element of the proposed action may or will not result in a significant adverse environmental impact,please complete Part 3. Part 3 should,in sufficient detail,identify the impact,including any measures or design elements that have been included by 4 the project sponsor to avoid or reduce impacts. Part 3 should also explain how the lead agency determined that the impact may or will not be significant. Each potential impact should be assessed considering its setting,probability of occurring, duration,irreversibility,geographic scope and magnitude. Also consider the potential for short-term, long-term and cumulative impacts. t Check this box if you have determined,based on the information and analysis above,and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action may result in one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts and an environmental impact statement is required. Check this box if you have determined,based on the information and analysis above,and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental 'mpa(7,61 Town of Southold-Board of Trustees Nal e o�d Ag ate 0 President Print or Type Na ie of R p isib] ffic�Leagency Title of Responsible Officer Signatuje of Respon6Ae OtTicer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer(if different from Responsible Officer) PRINT Page 4 of 4 APPLICANUAGENURE PRESENTATIVE TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE FORM The Town of Southold's Code of Ethics prohibits conflicts of interest on the part of town officers and employees.The purpose of this form is to provide information which can alert the town of possible conflicts of interest and allow it to take whatever action is necessary to avoid same. t YOURNAME: (Last name, ust name,.;ai dle initial,unless you are applying in the name of someone else or other entity,such as a company.If so,indicate the other person's or company's name.) NAME OF APPLICATION: (Check all that apply.) Tax grievance Building Variance Trustee Change of Zone Coastal Erosion Approval of plat Mooring Exemption from plat or official map Planning Other (If"Other',name the activity.) Do you personally(or through your company,spouse,sibling,parent,or child)have a relationship with any officer or employee of the Town of Southold? "Relationship"includes by blood,marriage,or business interest."Business interest"-means a business, including a partnership,in which the town officer or employee has even a partial ownership of(or employment by)a corporation in which the town officer or employee owns more than 5%of the shares. YES NO Ifyou answered"YES",complete the balance of this form and date and sign where indicated. Name of person employed by the Town of Southold Title or position of that person Describe the relationship between yourself(the applicant/agent/representative)and the town officer or employee.Either check the appropriate line A)through D)and/or describe in the space provided. The town officer or employee or his or her spouse,sibling,parent,or child is(check all that apply): A)the owner of greater than 5%of the shares of the corporate stock of the applic4ut (when the applicant is a corporation); B)the legal or beneficial owner of any interest in a non-corporate entity(when the applicant is not a corporation); C)an officer,director,partner,or employee of the applicant;or D)the actual applicant. DESCRIPTION OF RELATIONSHIP I U4 1Z Z Submitted this da 200 Signature Form TS 1 f Print Name 3oard of Trustees Applica; fin AFFIDAVIT '7�l /vim✓�� BEING DULY SWORN DEPOSES AND AFFIRMS THAT HE/SHE IS THE APPLICANT FOR THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PERMITS) AND THAT ALL STATEMENTS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE TRUE TO THE BEST OF HIS/HER KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF,AND THAT ALL WORK WILL BE DONE IN THE MANNER SET FORTH IN THIS APPLICATION AND AS MAY BE APPROVED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF TRUSTEES. THE APPLICANT AGREES TO HOLD THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AND THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES HARMLESS AND FREE FROM ANY AND ALL DAMAGES AND CLAIMS ARISING UNDER OR BY VIRTUE OF SAID PERMIT(S), IF GRANTED. IN COMPLETING THIS APPLICATION,I HEREBY AUTHORIZE THE TRUSTEES,THEIR AGENT(S) OR REPRESENTATIVES, INCLUDING THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL,TO ENTER ONTO MY PROPERTY TO INSPECT THE PREMISES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS APPLICATION, INCLUDING A FINAL INSPECTION. I FURTHER AUTHORIZE THE BOARD OY TRUSTEES TO ENTER ONTO MY PROPERTY AND AS REQUIRED TO INSURE COMPLIANCE WITH ANY CONDITION OF ANY WETLAND OR COASTAL EROSION PERMIT ISSUED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES DURING THE TERM OF THE PERMIT. Signature of Property Owner Signature of'Property Owner SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS-- DAY OF , 20_,!!!�� Notary Public DIANE DISALVO NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF NEW YORK No. O 1 D14 75593 Qualified in Suffolk County 1Q My Commission Expires April 30, 20/o Board of Trustees Applicat yin AUTHORIZATION (Where the applicant is not the owner) I/We, owners of the property identified as SCTM# 1000- in the town of /9'�q 12 lelog*li�- .New York,hereby authorizes r to act as my agent and handle all necessary work involved with the application process for permits) from the Southold Town Board of Trustees for this property. Property Owner's Signature roperty Owner's Signator SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS DAY OF 12 Notary Public DIANE DISALVO NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF NEW YORK No. O1 DI4 75593 Qualified in Suffolk County p My Commisslon Expires April 30, 20�0 PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICE ATTACH CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS Name: Address: STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ��z" ,residing at �� �4-i-� ✓j�i� `�� lt�, being duly sworn, deposes and says that on the /�_day of , 20Z deponent mailed a true copy of the Notice set forth in the Board of Trustees Application,directed to each of the above named persons at the addresses set opposite there respective names; that the addresses set opposite the names of said persons are the address of said persons as shown on the current assessment roll of the Town of Southold; that said Notices were mailed at the United States Post Office at ��it-mom _ _,that said Notices were mailed to each of said persons by CERTIFIED MAEURETURN RECEIPT. i Sworn to hefore me this Day of LAW, , 20 17 i Notary Public DIANE DISALVO NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF NEW YORK NO, O1 D1475593 Qua111ied in Suflolk County Q My commission Expires April 30, 20—t' j - - TM postal Service J ■ • ■ ■ 1 111 I , . rn Ir jJ I _ ° Tll14 i,7 ]T5 Ln �I� 1Y ,[$ all Fee .J] Certified M LO idE41 w ,K� ,. Certified Mad Fee 35 H ®3y 1952 O Extra Services&Fees(check box,add tee a te) D • U1 r) j t Extra Services&Fees(check box,add fee te) �0°"1 ❑Return Receipt(hardcopy) $ t Return Receipt(harcicopy) $ 'F O ❑Return Receipt(electronic) $ �,• O fk ❑Return Receipt(electronic) $ POStmar ! E]Certified Mall Restricted Delivery $ ui1. A ere L� 0 17 Certified Mall Restricted Delivery $�.�.[I—p1k—G f� ❑Adult Signature Required $ ,!�_•� '�p^ Q ❑Adult Signature Required �— 2 b� � []'Adult Signature Restricted Delivery$ n r� E]Adult Signature Restricted Delivery00 C3 Postage fll - -- �'a - -�`�•�} C3 Postage ,o O_ ca zr $ Al ■49—-- 06/05/201 v $ $I]w49—��t j .3 Total Postage a q 0 Total Postage and, o �`y / V O $ J t01,�LC $ VNHol ti� 1n Sent To PO Box 1653 2��89Ln Sent To 101 Park e,�®r a SfieetandApil r_q _ ____ �oy� Mattituck NY 11952 O Street and Apt.NOT, New York N C`- City Ststa,ZIP+ J1 ` ® ® ® 6 © ■ ■ I C3 •MA •1 I;TUY.1: 52 ,: ,^ I • ° TT Y I"' ; MATT TLI,Ck 1, 4V 144"b 2 I n _ 952 L) '.' M'£ ri; Certified Mad Fee rsq ,..a Certified Mail Fee X3.35 0952 } D $ ��•y5< 7 3 J,� '2� 07 Extra Services&Fees(checkbox,add lee 31 ' 07 1 i ul Extra Services&Fees(cnhdf box,add fee te) ❑Retum Receipt(hardcopy) - $ fA, ��� ❑Return Receipt(hardcopy) ..$ ti- '- 0 ❑ Return Receipt(electronic) $ F f POstma f C3 ❑Certified Receipt(electronic) $ P erk�,°,� g' (}� i ❑Certdied Mall Restricted Delivery $ y� []Certified Mail Restricted Delivery $ �0 - .. []Adult Signature Required $ ■ G?� r3 ❑Adult Signature Required $ /. r CA 1 ❑Adult Signature Restricted Delivery$ ❑Adult Signature Restricted Delivery$ ui�. C3 Postage C3 Postage •• •lam - zr --$G.-49- _ _� � — —moi , $ X0.49--- $ �j Total POatac `a Total Postage i UO/Ow o is Carey '� $ M �ISe In � �� � i u7 Sent To V' ThO��� &P Ln se°`To r_q272 Park Av ��' r PO Box 1530 �OZsL 8l L�9b��� c3 StreetandApt. C)`r� O §tleetaOdA) Mattituck NY 119 Mattituck NY 1 �'�����dgd - . N ''--- ------------- Crty :°° 1 •a 1rr•• Er • � .. • I%- Er Er to MAT ITU I£1,- Y 11952' • 3031 :7 •BEGMAR NJ' \ 0952 2 ..a Certified Mad Fee $3.35 3.35 3t� 07 .a Certified Mail Fee > I` $ $3.35- tS O $ add t o te) 6, Ln ate Extra Services&Fees(check box, Extra Services&Fees(check box,a s ) �` ..�xf ! ❑Return Recelpt(hardcoPY) 4 Posia� !r„ ❑Return Receipt(hardcopy) ��_ a 1pt(electronic) -He F1 Return Receipt(electronic) ,�f' Postmark(' 0 C3 Return Rece ❑Codified mail Restricted Delivery Here to � j � Q ❑Certified Mall Restricted Delivery � ■ Af�,� •.a O ❑Adult Signature Required (.$ ■� iii []Adult Signature Required �J •F "n Adult Signature Restricted Dehv ryr$ ` } •�°��5�= ❑Adult Signature Restricted Delivery ❑ E-_3 Postage -- - -,c "e $stage ---$0■4 $0049 _n $ \, 0b/t 5� TOtaI Postage a o 1ia O Total postage a , S �tit9e Cathleen WickhaO $ d/U9dm $Sent To 1905 Cre Dr In Sent To r•a 308 Park AvenuBelmar NJ 0 W60" S7reetandApt No Mattituck NY 11952 Streetandapt.l City State,ZIP+4! Cdy,State,ZtP+ -- :rr °° eor•e 1 PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICE ATTACH CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS Name: STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK residing at being duly sworn, deposes and says that on the day of , 20 , deponent mailed a true copy of the Notice set forth in the Board of Trustees Application, directed to each of the above named persons at the addresses set opposite there respective names; that the addresses set opposite the names of said persons are the address of said persons as shown on the current assessment roll of the Town of Southold; that said Notices were mailed at the United States Post Office at , that said Notices were mailed to each of said persons by CERTIFIED MAIVRETURN RECEIPT. 1 Sworn to before me this Day of , 20 Notary Public Michael J. Domino, President yo�0 CC' Town Hall Annex John M. Bredemeyer III,Vice-President �r'fy` ���� 54375 Route 25 Charles J. Sanderso P.O.Box 1179 ^� Glenn Goldsmith Southold'. � .. �C} ,NY 11971 A.Nicholas Krupski Telephone(631)765-1892 Fax(631)765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BOARD OF TRUSTEES: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD --------------------------------------------------------------- In the Matter of the Application of PAUL PAWLOWSKI COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STATE OF NEW YORK ' AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING TO BE COMPLETED AFTER POSTING REMAINS INPLACE FOR AT LEAST SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE I, /rah✓ , residing at/dba 1,9a �Z being duly sworn, depose and say: That on the day of !, G , 2017,,l personally posted the property known as by placing the Board of Trustees official poster where it can easily be seen, and that I have checked to be sure the poster has remained in place for eight days prior to the date of the public hearing. Date of hearing noted thereon to be held Wednesday,June 21, 2017. Dated: signature) Sworn to before me this )44 day o£jUvV20I,7 �vy A��ck Notary Public CONNI5 D.BUNCH Notary' Public,State of Now York No.01BU6185050 Qualified in Suffolk County Commission Expires April 14,2 u , NOTICE OF HL".mARINC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held by the Southold Town Board of Trustees at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, concerning this property. OWNER(S) OF RECORD: 100 PARK AVENUE CORP., c/o PAUL PAWLOWSKI SUBJECT OF PUBLIC HEARING : For 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 TIME & DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING : Wednesday, June 21, 2017 — at or about 5 :30P. M . If you have an interest in this project, you are invited to view the Town file(s) which are available for inspection prior to the day of the hearing during normal business days between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. BOARD OF TRUSTEES * TOWN OF SOUTHOLD * (631) 765-1892 Town of Southold LWRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM A. INSTRUCTIONS 1. All applicants for permits* including Town of Southold agencies, shall complete this CCAF for proposed actions that are subject to the Town of Southold Waterfront Consistency Review Law. This assessment is intended to supplement other information used by a Town of Southold agency in making a determination of consistency. *Except minor exempt actions including Building Permits and other ministerial permits not located within the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area. 2. Before answering the questions in Section C, the preparer of this form should review the exempt minor action list, policies and explanations of each policy contained in the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. A proposed action. will be evaluated as to its significani beneficial and adverse effects upon the coastal area(which includes all of Southold Town). 1 I£any question in Section C on this form is answered "yes" or "no", then the proposed action will affect the achievement of the LWRP policy standards and conditions contained in the consistency review law. Thus, each answer must be explained in detail, listing both supporting and non- supporting facts. If an action cannot be certified as consistent with the LWRP policy standards and conditions,it shall not be undertaken. A copy of the LWRP is available in the following places: online at the Town of Southold's website(southoldtown.northfork.net), the Board of Trustees Office, the Planning Department, all local libraries and the Town Clerk's office. B. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSED ACTION SCTM# 1000 - 123-07 - 03 . 00 PROJECT NAME 100 Park Avenue The Application has been submitted to(check appropriate response): Town Board ❑ Planning Board❑ Building Dept. ❑ Board of Trustees 0 1. Category of Town of Southold agency action(check appropriate'response): (a) Action undertaken directly by Town agency(e.g. capital ❑ construction,planning activity,agency regulation,land transaction) ❑ (b) Financial assistance(e.g. grant,loan,subsidy) (c) Permit, approval,license,certification: 0 Nature and extent of action: The proposed action is to construct a dock on the propep rtv located at 100 Park Avenue in Mattitick Location of action:_ 100 Park Avenue, Mattituck NY, 11952 Site acreage: 1 . 70 Presentlanduse: Residential Present zoning classification: R-40 2. If an application for the proposed action has been filed with the Town of Southold agency, the following information shall be provided: (a) Name of applicant: Paul Pawlowski (b) Mailing address: P.O. Box 783, Mattituck, NY 11952 (c) Telephone number: Area Code( ) 631-445-4348 (d) Application number,if any: Will the action be directly undertaken,require funding,or approval by a state or federal agency? Yes ❑ NoM If yes,which state or federal agency? C. Evaluate the project to the following policies by analyzing how the project will further supporfor not support the policies. Provide all proposed Best Management Practices that will further each policy. Incomplete answers will require that the form be returned for completion. DEVELOPED COAST POLICY Policy 1. Foster a pattern of development in the Town of Southold that enhances community character, preserves open space,makes efficient use of infrastructure,makes beneficial use of a coastal location, and minimizes adverse effects of development. See LWRP Section III—Policies; Page 2 for evaluation criteria. 0 Yes [:] No ❑ Not Applicable As stated earlier, the proposed dock would follow others in the same area that were given approval by the same Town & State agencies Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 2. Protect and preserve historic and archaeological resources of the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III—Policies Pages 3 through 6 for evaluation criteria ❑ Yes ❑ No 0 Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 3. Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III—Policies Pages 6 through 7 for evaluation criteria ❑ YesE] NoX❑ Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary NATURAL COAST POLICIES Policy 4. Minimize loss of life, structures, and natural resources from flooding and erosion. See LWRP Section III—Policies Pages 8 through 16 for evaluation criteria ❑ Yes,❑ NoEl Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 5. Protect and improve water quality and supply in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III —Policies Pages 16 through 21 for evaluation criteria ❑ Yes'E] No ❑Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 6. Protect and restore the quality and function of the Town of Southold ecosystems including Significant Coastal ]Fish and Wildlife Habitats and wetlands. See LWRP Section III—Policies; Pages 22 through 32 for evaluation criteria. ❑ ❑ a i Yes No Not applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 7. Protect and improve air quality in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III — Policies Pages 32 through 34 for evaluation criteria. Yes [] No x❑ Not applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 8. Minimize environmental degradation in Town of Southold from solid waste and hazardous substances and wastes. See LWRP Section III—Policies; Pages 34 through 38 for evaluation criteria. ❑ Yes ❑ No 0 Not applicable PUBLIC COAST POLICIES Policy 9. Provide for public access to, and recreational use of, coastal waters, public lands, and public resources of the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III—Policies; Pages 38 through 46 for evaluation criteria. ❑ Ye2 No❑ Not Applicable i Attach additional sheets if necessary b WORHING COAST POLICIES Policy 10. Protect Southold's water-dependent uses and promote siting of new water-dependent uses in suitable locations. See LWRP Section III—Policies; Pages 47 through 56 for evaluation criteria. 'I Yes ❑ No 0 Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 11. Promote sustainable use of living marine resources in Long Island Sound, the Peconic Estuary and Town waters. See LWRP Section III—Policies; Pages 57 through 62 for evaluation criteria. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 12. Protect agricultural lands in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III —Policies; Pages 62 through 65 for evaluation criteria. —] Yes ❑ No❑ Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 13. Promote appropriate use and development of energy and mineral resources. See LWRP Section III—Policies; Pages 65 through 68 for evaluation criteria. ❑ Yes ❑ No 0 Not Applicable PREPARED BY Christopher F. Dwyer TITLE Associate DATE 4/12/17 _ d L11AAL. K. McLean Associates P.C. 437 South Country Road • Brookhaven • New York • 11719 CONSULTING ENGINEERS (631)286-8668 • FAX(631)286-6314 Associates EUGENE F DALY,P.E,P.T O E TM,PRESIDENT and C E 0 CHRISTOPHER F DWYER RAYMOND G.DiBIASE,P E,P T O E.TM,PTPTM,EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT ROBERT A.STEELE,P E DANIEL P JEDLICKA,P L S,VICE PRESIDENT JAMES L DeKONING,P E. STEVEN W EISENBERG,P E ANDREW B SPEISER MATTHEW C JEDLICKA,LEED AP May 18, 2017 Town of Southold Trustees 54375 Main Rd. P.O. Box 1179 � 01;3 L Southold,NY 11971 RE: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD—100 PARK AVENUE MATTITUCK,NEW YORK LKMA No. 16029.003 To whom it may concern: As Consulting Engineers for Paul Pawlowski, we are submitting, on his behalf, an application for a Wetlands Permit to construct a dock as shown on the updated drawings. Enclosed herewith for your review, please find (1) original and (3) copies of the following: 1. Trustees Application 2. Proposed Dock Plan 3. Project description. 4. An aerial showing the proposed dock project including the nearby dock. 5. Survey 6. Photo Sheet If you have any questions or require additional information,please contact this office. Very truly yours, CFD:mf Christopher F. Dwyer,Associate L. K. McLean Associates, P.C. Enc. (6) Cc: Paul Pawlowski,w/enc, LKMA File Copy w/enc. W �` MAY 18 2017 it1 •Founded in 1950 • - `