HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-10/17/2018 Michael J.Domino,President ���rjf SOUryOI Town Hall Annex
John M.Bredemeyer III,Vice-President ~ 54375 Route 25
P.O.Box 1179
Glenn Goldsmith Southold,New York 11971
A.Nicholas Krupski �pQ Telephone (631) 765-1892
Greg Williams `,oU Fax(631) 765-6641
REC
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES �F0ED
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CP
NOV 1 9 2018 ir�3
Q.
Minutes -9®uold Town clerk
Wednesday, October 17, 201'8',
5:30 PM
Present Were: Michael J. Domino, President
John M. Bredemeyer, Vice-President
A. Nicholas Krupski, Trustee
Glenn Goldsmith, Trustee
Craig Williams, Trustee
Elizabeth Cantrell, Senior Office Assistant
Damon Hagan, Assistant Town Attorney
CALL MEETING TO ORDER '
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: Wednesday, November 7, 2018 at 8:00 AM
NEXT TRUSTEE MEETING: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 5:30 PM at the Main
Meeting Hall
WORKSESSION: Friday, November 9, 2018 at 4:30 PM at the Town Hall Annex 2nd
floor Board Room, and on Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 5:00
PM at the Main Meeting Hall
APPROVE MINUTES: Approve Minutes of September 19, 2018
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Good evening and welcome to our Wednesday,
October 17th, 2018, monthly meeting. At this time, I would like
to call our meeting to order and ask you stand for the pledge.
(PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: I would like to introduce the people on the
dais. To my left is Trustee John Bredemeyer, Trustee Glenn
Goldsmith, Trustee Nick Krupski and Trustee Craig Williams. To
my right is the Town Attorney Damon Hagan, Senior Clerk Typist
Elizabeth Cantrell, and also with us tonight is Court
Stenographic Wayne Galante. And we should have a CAC member
here Caroline Burghardt. Agendas are located on the podium and
out in the hall.
I would like at this time to announce postponements. We
Board of Trustees 2 October 17, 2018
only have a few. On page nine, number five, MARTIN &JULIE
REGINE request an Administrative Permit to clear the overgrown
brush on the sound side; remove two (2) overgrown shrubs; trim
up the brush along the property fence line; with no removal of
trees on the sound side of the fence line, only trimming and
cleaning up.
Located: 675 Hillcrest Drive North, Orient. SCTM# 1000713-2-8.19,
has been postponed.
And number six, OLIVER FRANKEL requests an Administrative Permit
for a Ten (10) Year Maintenance Permit to hand-prune the vegetation
located landward of the top of bluff; and to top-off trees by hand.
Located: 975 Hillcrest Drive North, Orient. SCTM# 1000-13-2-8.21,
has been postponed.
On page 17, we have number 16, LAZARUS ALEXANDROU requests
a Wetland Permit to construct a 16'x32' gunite swimming pool in
the side yard with a cartridge system and a pool drywell, all
landward of existing non-turf buffer; construct an 18" high by
65' long retaining wall; and construct a 700sq.ft. on-grade
permeable patio seaward of pool.
Located: 2700 Sound Drive, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-33-1-11
has been postponed.
In addition, on page seven, we have number four,
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on
behalf of ALISON BYERS requests,a Wetland Permit to construct
400' of low profile rock revetment on west beach area to match
previously installed 230' section; fill void areas landward with
excavated materials; regrade areas and revegetate with Cape
American beach grass; remove 155' of existing rock revetment on
south beach area and reconstruct in new configuration west of
present location; construct 22' of new vinyl bulkhead as a
continuation of existing sheet steel bulkhead's south return;
fill void area landward and regrade as needed; construct beach
access stairs consisting of landward ±3' wide by 4' long
sections of terracing steps leading down to a set of±3'x10'
steps with handrails to bottom of bluff; construct±3'x3'4"
steps with handrails off bulkhead to beach; and to mulch balance
of walkway to top of bluff.
Located: 10335 Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-119-1-14.1 & 14.2
S.E.Q.R.A. POSITIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE:
I
WHEREAS, on October 15, 2018 the Southold Town Board of Trustees
found that the application of ALISON, BYERS is to be classified
as an Unlisted Action Positive Decision pursuant to SEQRA Rules
and Regulations. A Short Environmental Assessment Form and a
field inspection have been completed by the Board of Trustees
and it is hereby determined that it will have a significant .
effect on the environment, and;
WHEREAS, the Southold Town Board of Trustees are familiar with
this project having visited the site on October 10, 2018 and
having considered Costello Marine Contracting Corp. Plans for
Board of Trustees 3 October 17, 2018
this project dated June 26, 2018 showing the proposed revetment,
bulkheading, terracing and bluff stabilization, and the January
6, 2012 topographical survey prepared by Robert H. Fox showing
the existing bulkheading and water depths, and;
WHEREAS, in reviewing the project plans dated June 26, 2018, it
has been determined by the Southold Town Board of Trustees that
not all potentially significant environmental concerns have been
addressed as noted herein:
Existing rocks or boulders are to be utilized, moved, or
relocated on the beach.
Access to the site for construction.
Vegetative, non-structural measures may be capable of
stabilizing the erosion of the bluff alone.
Reconstruction and relocation of the existing 155-foot rock
revetment has not been shown to be necessary.
As time progresses, continued soil loss at the toe of the
proposed 22 feet of new vinyl bulkheading may lead to complete
loss of bluff stability. "
A site inspection by the Southold Town Board of Trustees on
October 10, 2018 did not recognize severe erosion on this
property and questions the need for bluff stabilization/erosion
control plan.
THEREFORE, according to the foregoing, the Southold Town Board
of Trustees Approve and Authorize the preparation of a Notice of
Positive Declaration pursuant to SEQRA for the aforementioned
project.
We will strike this entirely from the agenda, subject to
determination of the lead agency. We will not be acting on that.
I'll also announce, under Town Code Chapter 275-8(c), files
were officially closed seven days ago. Submission of paperwork
after that date may result in a delay of the processing of the
application.
At this time, I'll entertain a motion to have our next field
inspection on Wednesday, November 7th, at 8:00 AM at the town
annex.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So moved.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
I'll entertain a motion to hold our next Trustee meeting Wednesday,
November 14th, 2018, at 5:30 PM, at the main meeting hall.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So moved.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: I would like a motion to hold the next
work session at the town annex board room, second floor, on
Friday, November 9th, at 4:30, and 5:00 PM, Wednesday, November
14th at main meeting hall.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So moved.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
Board of Trustees 4 October 17, 2018
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: At this time I'll entertain a motion to approve
the Minutes of our September 19th, 2018 meeting.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So moved
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
I. MONTHLY REPORT:
The Trustees monthly report for September 2018. A check for$4,434.75
was forwarded to the Supervisor's Office for the General Fund.
II. PUBLIC NOTICES:
Public Notices are posted on the Town Clerk's Bulletin Board for review.
III. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEWS:
RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold hereby finds that the
following applications more fully described in Section IX Public Hearings Section of the
Trustee agenda dated Wednesday, October 17, 2018, are classified as Type 11 Actions
pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations, and are not subject to further review under
SEQRA:
Harry Bashian & Haykuhi Bashian SCTM# 1000-44-2-15
Bim Strasberg &Alexandra Lewis SCTM# 1000-135-1-1
Antonios Dagounakis & Maria Siskos SCTM# 1000-44-1-13
Lawrence Holfelder SCTM# 1000-126-11-1
Steven Starroff& Nancy Rickles SCTM# 1000-136-1-50
Susan Wachter SCTM# 1000-53-4-15
Brendan & Mindy Dooley SCTM# 1000-67-3-11
8100 Hortons Lane, LLC SCTM# 1000-54-4-31
240 Windjammer, LLC SCTM# 1000-71-2-11.2
TRUSTEE DOMINO: That's my resolution.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So moved
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of the Town
of Southold hereby finds that the following applications more
fully described in Section IX Public Hearings Section of the
Trustee agenda dated Wednesday, October 17th, 2018, are
classified as Unlisted Actions pursuant to SEQRA Rules and
Regulations, and it is hereby determined that they will not,have
a significant effect on the environment:
Sally Coonan SCTM# 1000-80-1-4
Board of Trustees 5 October 17, 2018
Suffolk County; c/o Cornell Cooperative Extension
SCTM# 1000-93-2-2.4
FHV, LLC SCTM# 1000-115-17-11
Gregory & Nellie Ramsey SCTM# 1000-70-12-29
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So moved.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: RESOLVED that the Board 'of Trustees of the
Town of Southold hereby finds that the following applications
more fully described in Section IX Public Hearings Section of
the Trustee agenda dated Wednesday, October 17, 2018, are
classified as Unlisted Actions pursuant to SEQRA Rules and
Regulations and it is hereby determined that they will have a
significant effect on the environment:
Alison Byers SCTM# 1000-119-1-14.1 & 14.2
Byers has been dropped. So that is stricken on account of
dual agency coordination.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER:
IV. REVISED - ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE PURSUANT
TO NEW YORK STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT NYCCR PART
617:
'DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of KAREN & CAREY
FLAHERTY requests a Wetland Permit to remove existing fixed dock and steps to
beach, and replace with a proposed 4'x68'fixed dock supported with 10" diameter CCA
piles; install a seasonal 30"x16' aluminum ramp; install a 6'x20' seasonal floating dock
with un-treated timber decking situated in an "I" configuration and supported by two (2)
10" diameter CCA piles.
Located: 1077 Bay Home Road, Southold. SCTM#,1000-56-5-39
S.E.Q.R.A. POSITIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE:
WHEREAS, the Southold Town Board of Trustees found that the application of KAREN
& CAREY FLAHERTY is to be classified as an Unlisted Action Positive Decision
pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations. A Short Environmental Assessment Form
and a field inspection have been completed by.the Board of Trustees and it is hereby
determined that it will have a significant effect on the environment.
WHEREAS, the Southold Town Board of Trustees are familiar with this project having
visited the site on March 14, 2018 and having considered plans for this proposed dock at
their March 19, 2018 work session, and;
WHEREAS, having considered the plans dated January 1, 2018 with water depths and a
K.M. Woychuk survey dated September 5, 2016, it has been determined by the Board of
Trustees that potentially significant environmental concerns have been addressed and
noted herein:
Navigation: The proposed dock does not meet the standards as set forth in
Chapter 275-11(d)[2] "whether the dock will interfere with the public use of waterways for
Board of Trustees 6 October 17, 2018
swimming, boating, shellfishing, water skiing, and other water dependent activities."
Coastal erosion: Chapter 96 of the Town Code Boats, Docks, and Wharves
regulates new construction or placement of dock structures in order to locate them a
safe distance from active erosion of the impacts of coastal storms. The proposed dock
is located in an area with a 10,000 foot plus fetch, a vey active high energy
environment. The Board of Trustees recognize the entire physical aspect of the
proposed dock lies in a high energy, high wave, high erosion zone due to a greater than
180 degree exposure to an open fetch greater than one mile.
Scope in relation to riparian rights of shellfishers: The plan of a 68 foot long
catwalk, 16 foot long hinged ramp, and 6 foot by 20 foot floating dock has no provision to
allow the public use of the foreshore. Chapter 111 of Town Code defines nearshore as
1,000 feet from mean low water or to a low-water depth of 15 feet, whichever is greater
and determines minimization of dock structures is paramount to preserving public use
and access of the area. Chapter 275-11 C-F is generally not accepting of development
in undeveloped coastal landscapes nor areas historically absent of dock structures.
Habitat degradation: The Southold Town Local Waterfront Revitalization Program
states construction of docks in Peconic Bay impacts vegetation through direct
construction impacts, chronic shading, habitat degradation, loss and disruption, and
leaching of harmful contaminants.
Scope in relation to Town Goals and Policies: The Southold Town Board of
Trustees acknowledge Town goals and policies support long-term protection with
consideration of economic and cultural associations, and further reflects existing laws
and authority regarding environmental protection including but not limited to the Peconic
Estuary Program Comprehensive Management Plan and Local Waterfront Revitalization
Program used to find the appropriate balance between development and conservation.
THEREFORE, on account of the foregoing, the Southold Town Board of Trustees
approve and authorize the preparation of a Notice of Positive Declaration pursuant to
SEQRA for the aforementioned project.
So moved.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO:
V. ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE PURSUANT TO NEW
YORK STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT NYCCR PART 617:
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: En-Consultants on behalf of FHV, LLC; c/o GARY
SALICE requests a Wetland Permit to construct a fixed timber"T" shaped dock
(elevated 4' above grade of marsh and constructed with open-grate decking), consisting
of 4'x5' steps at landward end; a 4'x39' catwalk; and a 4'x10' fixed seaward platform.
Located: 3400 Deep Hole Drive, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-115-17-11
S.E.Q.R.A. NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE:
WHEREAS, on October 15,'2018 the Southold Town Board of Trustees found the
application of FHV, LLC; c/o GARY SALICE to be classified as an Unlisted Action
Negative Decision pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations. A Short Environmental
Assessment Form and a field inspection have been completed by the Board of Trustees
and it is hereby determined that it will not have a significant effect on the environment,
and;
Board of Trustees 7 October 17, 2018
WHEREAS, the Southold Town Board of Trustees are familiar with this project having
visited the site on October 10, 2018, and having considered En-Consultants plans for
this project dated July 16, 2018, showing the proposed dock and water depths,
and John C. Ehlers survey dated September 18, 2017, last revised August 1; 2018, and;
WHEREAS, in reviewing project plans dated July 16, 2018 and water depths, it has
been determined by the Board of Trustees that all potentially significant environmental
concerns have been addressed as noted herein:
Navigation: The proposed catwalk meets standards and does not extend beyond
1/3 across the water body. Depths for the dock terminus are within Town Trustees, New
York State Department of Environmental Conservation and United States Army Corps.
Of Engineers guidelines and there is no recognized Federal/New York State/Town
navigation channel in the immediate vicinity of the proposed structure.
Scope: The proposed catwalk is comparable to docks on neighboring properties
in an area where docks historically are used for commercial and recreational purposes.
Scope in relation to the riparian rights of shellfishers: The plan allows a standard
elevated design that will not impede access for those seeking shellfish and crustacea in
season.
Scope in relation to view sheds: The seaward end of the proposed dock will not
extend appreciably beyond neighboring docks and as such the perspective will not be
discernibly different from the existing view.
Environmental upkeep: The dock design projects a usual lifespan of 30 years with
limited pile replacement so as to minimize disturbance of the bottom.
THEREFORE, according to the foregoing, the Southold Town Board of Trustees
Approve and Authorize the preparation of a Notice of Negative Declaration pursuant to
SEQRA for the aforementioned project.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH:
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of GREGORY & NELLIE
RAMSEY requests a Wetland Permit to remove existing storm damaged dock and
replace with a proposed 4'x44' long fixed dock using un-treated decking and supported
with 8" diameter piles; install a proposed 30"x14' aluminum ramp; and install a proposed
6'x20' floating dock using un-treated decking situated in an "L" configuration and
supported by two (2) 10" diameter piles. Located: 1160 Oakwood Drive, Southold.
SCTM# 1000-70-12-29
S.E.Q.R.A. NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE:
WHEREAS, on October 15, 2018 the Southold Town Board of Trustees found the
application of GREGORY& NELLIE RAMSEY to be classified as an Unlisted Action
Negative Decision pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations. A Short Environmental
Assessment Form and a field inspection have been completed,by the Board of Trustees
and it is hereby determined that it will not have a significant effect on the environment,
and;
WHEREAS, the Southold Town Board of Trustees are familiar with this project having
visited the site on September 9, 2018, and having considered Jeffrey Patanjo plans for
this project dated June 10, 2018, revised on September 18, 2018, and a hydrographical
survey dated November 14, 2017 showing the water depths provided by Robert H., Fox,
and;
Board of Trustees 8 October 17, 2018
WHEREAS, in reviewing project plans dated September 18, 2018 and water depths
dated November 14, 2017, it has been determined by the Board of Trustees that all
potentially significant environmental concerns have been addressed as noted herein:
Navigation: The proposed dock meets standards and does not extend beyond 1/3
across the water body. Depths for the dock terminus are within Town Trustees, New
York State Department of Environmental Conservation and United States Army Corps.
Of Engineers guidelines and there is no recognized Federal/New York,State/Town
navigation channel in the immediate vicinity of the proposed structure.
Scope: The proposed dock is comparable to docks on neighboring properties in
an area where docks historically are used for commercial and recreational purposes.
Toxicity: The proposed dock decking shall be constructed entirely of non-toxic
materials.
Scope in relation to the riparian rights of shellfishers: The plan allows a standard
ramp to float design that will not impede access for small vessels at low tide, and those
seeking shellfish and crustacean on foot in season.
Scope in relation to the rights of small human powered water craft to navigate the
waters adjacent to the proposed structures: At low tide a kayak might be able to paddle
around this proposed structure as it projects only 40 feet beyond mean low water.
Scope in relation to view sheds: The seaward end of the proposed dock lies
landward of all existing docks that frame the view shed. As such the perspective will not.
be discernibly different from the existing view.
Environmental upkeep: The dock design projects a usual lifespan of 30 years,
and with limited pile replacement so as to minimize disturbance of the bottom.
THEREFORE, according to the foregoing, the Southold Town Board of Trustees
Approve and Authorize the preparation of a Notice of Negative Declaration pursuant to
SEQRA for the aforementioned project.
That's my motion
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).`
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI:
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Christopher Pickerell on behalf of SUFFOLK COUNTY;
c/o CORNELL COOPERATIVE EXTENSION requests a Wetland Permit to install four
(4) 4-inch HDPE seawater lines to be run from the new shellfish hatchery to a location in
Peconic Bay approximately 135' offshore of the Mean Low Water mark; the total run of
pipe is 500 feet;,the HDPE lines will be installed by trenching a 3' wide by approximately
300' long by 3-4 foot deep area in which the lines will be buried; the material excavated
from the trenching (2,700-3,600 cubic feet)will be used to fill in the trench as the lines
are laid out; efforts will be'made to reconstruct the original grade/sediment surface angle
to match the original condition of the trenched area and adjacent undisturbed areas; the
installation from the Mean High Water to the offshore location of lines' intake ends will
be completed by using a water jet system to bury the lines approximately 3-4 feet deep
in the Bay bottom within the delineated area, allowing the HDPE lines to be "sunk" into
the sediment; the completion of the HDPE line:installation will result in approximately
10-15 feet of HDPE line extending out of the Bay bottom into the water column at an
estimated depth of 10' Mean Low Water; the seawater line ends will be secured in place
by the installation of two (2) helical anchors.that will be installed on either side of the
emergent lines; the helical anchors will be no more than 3' apart and will be connected
by two galvanized steel cross pieces that will "sandwich" the four HDPE line ends,
Board of Trustees 9 October 17, 2018
securing them in place; the helical anchors will be 10' long and will be driven into the
bay bottom until 3' remains above the sediment surface; the ends of the HDPE lines will
have custom-made, low-suction strainers attached to prevent the incidental attachment
of materials (natural or man-made), or the accidental entrapment of marine animals.
Located: 3690 Cedar Beach Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-93-2-2.4
S.E.Q.R.A. NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE:
WHEREAS, on October 15, 2018 the Southold Town Board of Trustees found the
application of SUFFOLK COUNTY; c/o CORNELL COOPERATIVE EXTENSION to be
classified as an Unlisted Action Negative Decision pursuant to SEQRA Rules and
Regulations. A Short Environmental Assessment Form and a,field inspection have been
completed by the Board of Trustees and it is hereby determined that it will not have a
significant effect on the environment, and;
WHEREAS, the Southold Town Board of Trustees are familiar with this project having
visited the site on October 10, 2018, and having considered Stephen Schott, Cornell
Cooperative Extension Habitat Restoration Specialist plans for this project dated
September 28, 2018 showing the proposed seawater line route and water depths, and;
WHEREAS, in reviewing project plans dated September 28, 2018 and water depths, it
has been determined by the Board of Trustees that all potentially significant
environmental concerns have been addressed as noted herein:
Navigation: The proposed pipeline meets standards and will be buried 3-4 feet
deep across the Bay bottom. The Town Trustees, New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation and United States Army Corps. Of Engineers guidelines
find there is no recognized Federal/New York State/Town navigation channel in the
immediate vicinity of the proposed structure.
Scope: The proposed HDPE lines sunk into the sediment of Noyak Bay will
provide seawater to cultivate millions of oysters and clams that will return to the Bay
cleaner than its original location in Noyak Bay.
Scope in relation to the riparian rights of shellfishers: The plan allows a standard
design that will not impede access for small vessels at low tide, and those seeking
shellfish and crustacean on foot in season.
Scope in relation to view sheds: The entirety of the proposed pipelines will be
buried 3-4 feet below the Bay sediment, and as such will not be visible to the public.
Environmental upkeep: The design projects a usual lifespan of 30 years, and with
-limited replacement so as to minimize disturbance of the bottom.
THEREFORE, according to the foregoing, the Southold Town Board of Trustees
Approve and Authorize the preparation of a Notice of Negative Declaration pursuant to
SEQRA for the aforementioned project.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is my motion.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS:
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Cole Environmental Services, Inc., on
behalf of SALLY COONAN requests a Wetland Permit to construct a
4' high by 15' long timber retaining wall with a 10' easterly
return and a 12' westerly return; the top or filled area of the
retaining wall to be vegetated with native beach grass and other
salt tolerant coastal plant species; create a 6" earthen berm
Board of Trustees 10 October 17, 2018
along the landward edge of the property scarp; add two (2) 4'
wide by 6' deep dry wells to collect surface and roof runoff
from dwelling and patio interconnected to a 4'x24' French Drain;
add two (2) 8'x12' deep storm drains in the middle of the
property to contain runoff emanating from adjacent properties;
install 6" to 8" earthen berm within property lines and install
three (3) 8'x12' interconnected storm drains with drains to be
installed slightly below grade; and install a 2'x16' trench
drain at the entry point of storm water coming from the road and
surrounding properties. Located: 2662 Paradise Shores Road,
Southold. SCTM# 1000-80-1-4
S.E.Q.R.A. NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE:
WHEREAS, on October 15, 2018 the Southold Town Board of Trustees found the
application of SALLY COONAN to be classified as an Unlisted Action Negative Decision
pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations. A Short Environmental Assessment Form
and a field inspection have been completed by the Board of Trustees and it is hereby
determined that it will not have a significant effect on the environment, and;
WHEREAS, the Southold Town Board of Trustees are familiar with this project having
visited the site-on September 12, 2018, and having considered Cole Environmental
Services, Inc. Plans for this project dated July 7, 2018, and a Michael J. Salice Land
Surveying survey dated July 6, 2015, it has been determined by the Southold Town
Board of Trustees that all potentially significant environmental concerns have been
addressed as noted herein:
No existing rocks or boulders are to be utilized, moved, or relocated on the
beach.
Access to the site will be landward of the existing bulkhead.
Vegetative, non-structural measures capable of stabilizing the bluff without storm
water mitigation is insufficient to control erosion.
A September 18, 2018 review of the drainage plans prepared by Cole
Environmental Services, Inc. Dated July 7, 2018 conducted by the Southold Town Office
of the Engineer suggests that the proposed French drains and berms may create the
potential for increased erosion but recognizes the need for an engineered bluff
stabilization/erosion control plan.
THEREFORE, on account of the foregoing, the Southold Town Board of Trustees
Approve and Authorize the preparation of a Notice of Negative Declaration pursuant to
SEQRA for the aforementioned.project.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: That is my motion.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All-in favor?
(ALL AYES).
VI. RESOLUTIONS -ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS:
TRUSTEE, BREDEMEYER: Number one, SARAH TREMAINE requests an
Administrative Permit for the as-built 8'x16' deck installed on the seaward side of the
dwelling. Located: 12244 East Main Road, Fishers Island. SCTM# 1000-3-2-6.'
The Board of Trustees inspected this deck on August 18th and found that it was a
minimalist type of construction of a deck.
The LWRP coordinator did note that the project is inconsistent with the Town's
coastal policies in that the applicant did not first seek a permit from the Town before
Board of Trustees 11 October 17, 2018
constructing this activity.
The Board, in reviewing the application, sees it as not having an impact,
significant impact on the environment, being tucked in close to the house, and that by
virtue of granting a permit for this small deck it will bring it into conformity and
consistency with the LWRP.
Accordingly, I move to approve bringing this application into consistency with the
LWRP. That's my motion.
'TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number two, DAVID & STEPHANIE SACK request an
Administrative Permit for a (10) Ten-Year Maintenance Permit to
trim and maintain the bluff vegetation growth to no less than
two (2)feet in height on an as-needed basis.
Located: 445 Glen Court; Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-83-1-5
The Trustees did a field inspection on 10/11/18, the form filled out by
Trustee Krupski. This application was straightforward.
The LWRP coordinator found it to be consistent. As such, I
move that we approve this application as submitted.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI': Number three, CHARLES & BRENDA GRIMES request
an Administrative Permit to install an on-grade 13'x23'x17' (350sq.ft.) bluestone
patio in 6" concrete base to prevent shifting; install drains leading to drywells to
facilitate proper rain water drainage; install a 64 diameter fire pit on
top of the patio and add stepping stones from patio to the front of the home.
Located: 4145 Wells Road, Peconic. SCTM# 1000-86-2-12.6
The Trustees have visited this property for prior
applications and met multiple times, including one for a dock
and this patio. It should be noted on the record that this
application has been pulled from the full application, which
we'll see later, and for this portion of it no longer includes the dock.
MR. HAGAN: There is a letter to that effect in the file.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Correct.
The LWRP coordinator found this to be consistent.
After a review, I make a motion to approve this application as submitted.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number four, PAUL & CHRISTINA CUTRONE request
an Administrative Permit to install approximately 90' of 6' high'fencing located 20'
to 25' landward of the water's edge; and to install 10-15 3'x3' stone steps leading
down from top of slope to fence.
Located: 940 Marratooka Lane, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-115-3-17
This was found to be consistent on October 14th, noting that the fence is to be
a minimum of 20 feet landward from the water's edge.
So I make a motion to approve this application.
Board of Trustees 12 October 17, 2018
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
VII. APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS/TRANSFERS/ADMINISTRATIVE
AMENDMENTS:
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Under Roman numeral seven, application for extensions transfers
and administrative amendment. In order to simplify our meeting, I make a motion to
approve as a group items one through three, six, seven and eight, and ten and eleven.
They are listed as follows: '
Number one, MARGERY & REUBEN DAVID request a One-Year Extension to
Wetland Permit#8901, as issued on October 19, 2016.
Located: 1130 Glenn Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-78-2-29
Number two, En-Consultants on behalf of 18975 SOUNDVIEW AVENUE, LLC
requests a One-Year Extension to Administrative Permit#8888A, as issued on October
19, 2016, and Amended on April 18, 2018.
Located: 18975 Soundview Avenue,`Southold. SCTM# 1000-51-1-16
Number three, Joseph P. Romano on behalf of JOSEPH P. ROMANO AS
TRUSTEE OF THE ROBYN ROMANO 2015 FAMILY TRUST & ROBYN ROMANO AS
TRUSTEE OF THE JOSEPH P. ROMANO 2015 FAMILY TRUST requests a Transfer of
Wetland Permit#8138 from Sean Fahey to Joseph P. Romano as Trustee of the Robyn
Romano 2015 Family Trust & Robyn Romano as Trustee of the Joseph P. Romano
2015 Family Trust, as issued on.April 17, 2013. Located: 1415 North Parish Drive,
Southold. SCTM# 1000-71-1-14
Number six, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of FOROSICH FAMILY
IRREVOCABLE TRUST requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit#7180
from Anthony Forosich to Forosich Family Irrevocable Trust, as
issued on September 23, 2009.
Located: 1405 Anchor Lane, Southold. SCTM# 1000-79-4-4.1
Number seven, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of FOROSICH FAMILY
IRREVOCABLE TRUST requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit#1652 from
Anthony Forosich to Forosich Family Irrevocable Trust, as issued on July 25, 1983.
Located: 1405 Anchor Lane, Southold. SCTM# 1000-79-4-4.1
Number eight, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of KARLA SALADINO requests a
Transfer of Wetland Permit#244 from Howard Shapiro to Karla Saladino, as issued on
October 30, 1985. Located: 1515 Anchor Lane, Southold. SCTM# 1000-79-4-5
Number ten, Ernest Lazio, Jr., on behalf of JOHN DEMPSEY requests an
Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit#3754 for the as-built electrical power
supply leading to the dock.
Located: 387 Wood Lane, Peconic. SCTM# 1000-86-6-29
Number eleven, Patricia Moore, Esq., on behalf of FLORENCE VASILAKIS,
ALEXANDER VASILAKIS, & DEMETRIOS VASILAKIS requests an Administrative
Amendment to Wetland Permit#9268 to reconfigure the proposed 4'x6' middle platform
to be a 6'x4' middle platform (same size landing but constructed in a different direction)
that is connected to the bluff stairs in order to maintain the proposed, pitch of the stairs.
Located: 21625 Soundview Avenue, Southold. SCTM# 1000-135-1-6.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
Board of Trustees 13 October 17, 2018
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number four, Joseph P. Romano on behalf of
JOSEPH P. ROMANO AS TRUSTEE OF THE ROBYN ROMANO 2015 FAMILY
TRUST & ROBYN ROMANO AS TRUSTEE OF THE JOSEPH P. ROMANO 2015
FAMILY TRUST requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit#8547 from
Sean P. Fahey to Joseph P. Romano as Trustee of the Robyn Romano
2015 Family Trust & Robyn Romano as Trustee of the Joseph P.
Romano 2015 Family Trust, as issued on December 17, 2014.
Located: 1415 North Parish Drive, Southold. SCTM# 1000-71-1-14
The most recent inspection of this property is October 9th,
2018, by myself, and I recommended at that time to address this
application individually to ensure that the new owners
understand and comply with the terms of the permit#8547, which
states wherein that the -- I won't read the entire permit, but that the
permit will be a fixed, seasonal timber dock to be installed no earlier
than April 1 st and removed no later than November 1 st of each year,
constructed entirely of untreated materials.
Having said that, I make a motion to approve this application.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Next item, number five, William Goggins,
Esq., on behalf of GAIL JADOW AND E.J. INVESTMENT HOLDINGS, LLC
requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit#7206 from Robert O'Brien to Gail
Jadow and E.J. Investment Holdings, LLC, as issued on November 18, 2009,
and Amended on July 21, 2010.
Located: 3655 Stillwater Avenue; Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-136-2-11
This project was inspected on October 11th, and with the field report
completed by Trustee Krupski. What was noted as missing was a ten-foot
non-turf buffer landward of the bulkhead. And it's the Board's policy that where
the non-turf buffers or the plans do deviate from the,specifications of the permit
that the Board will not,permit a transfer until the ten-foot non-turf buffer has been
installed landward of the bulkhead.
Accordingly, .I would approve this transfer with the stipulation that a prior
inspection to confirm it has been installed. It was on the plans. It's just a matter of--they
have to fill as per the permitted plan. So move to approve, subject to
inspection that the ten-foot, non-turf buffer has been installed. That's my motion.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number nine, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of
240 WINDJAMMER, LLC requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit#222 from
Bruce Romboli to 240 Windjammer, LLC, as issued on August 28,
1985, and Amended on February 25, 2004.
Located: 240 Windjammer Drive, Southold. SCTM# 1000-71-2-11.2
On February 25th, 2004, a resolution was passed and
approved by the Board to repair the existing bulkhead, and there
is a stipulation that a ten-foot non-turf buffer landward of the
bulkhead as depicted on the plans prepared by James E. Fitzgerald, Jr.,
dated February 23rd, 2004. The non-turf buffer was never installed and
Board of Trustees 14 October 17, 2018
therefore in order to transfer this, we approve this with the stipulation that
the transfer not occur until the ten-foot, non-turf buffer is installed.
That's my motion.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
VIII. RESOLUTIONS - OTHER:
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Roman numeral VIII, Resolutions - other.
Number one, Set 2018/2019 Scallop Season:
RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Board of Trustees open the
following dates to scallop harvesting and pursuant to Chapter
219 (Shellfish) of the Code of the Town of Southold: From
Monday, November 5, 2018 from sunrise to sunset through
Saturday, March 31, 2019 inclusive, in all Town waters, as per
Town Code.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Roman numeral IX, public hearings. At this
time I'll take a motion to go off our regular meeting agenda and
enter into the public hearings section.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So moved.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
This is a public hearing in the matter of the following
applications for permits under the Wetlands Ordinance for the
Town of Southold. I have an affidavit of publication from the
Suffolk Times. Pertinent correspondence may be read prior to
asking for comments from the public.
We ask you please keep your comments organized, relevant
and brief, five minutes or less, if possible.
WETLAND & COASTAL EROSION PERMITS:
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number one, Bulkhead Permits by Gary, Inc., on behalf of
HARRY BASHIAN & HAYKUHI BASHIAN requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal
Erosion Permit to replace all existing 41' long, 41.5' long and 61.5' long navy
bulkheading in-place with new navy bulkheading using vinyl sheathing; along the 61.5'
long bulkhead section, install (1) one 61.5' row of toe armor stone using a minimum of
>18"x18"x18" and (1) one-ton stones with geotextile filter fabric placed underneath;
replace existing 12'x26.4', 12'x26.4' and 15.5'x61.5' sections of"U" shaped decking with
new decking in-place using untreated lumber and supported by 30 new 10"x20' pressure
treated timber piles; under the ±20'x61.5' deck area add approximately 125 cubic yards
of clean beach sand backfill from an authorized upland source; and for the existing
26.4'x36.3' two-story dwelling.
Board of Trustees 15 October 17, 2018
Located: 58425 North Road, Greenport. SCT'M# 1000-44-2-15.
The Trustees' most recent field inspection of this property occurred on October
10th. The field notes are as follows: The proposed bulkhead is some 12-feet seaward of
the mean high water. Suggest the bulkhead be landward of the apparent mean high
water. And in addition, bringing up fill to the top of the bulkhead.
Also suggested, that the bulkhead have stone armor and hardwood sheathing.
The LWRP coordinator found this to be inconsistent.
The Trustees permit issued in 1,985 for retaining walls of 40-foot deterrence was
issued in 1982 for the principal structure and deck. The current deck does not comply
with building permit which shows a ten-foot wide deck seaward of the construction. The
principal structure and deck as built did not have Trustee permits. The proposed dock is
residential and is located within the FEMA VE velocity hazard flood zone elevation.
Structures located within these areas are subject to repetitive loss from storms.
Finally, the reconstruction of structures to seaward advancement on or over
public trust lands below the average high water mark is unsupported by this policy.
The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this application, and
voted unanimously October 15, 2018.
Is there anyone here to speak to this application?
MR. MOSES: Hi, Scott Moses from the company Bulkhead Permits by
Gary. Basically, what we want to do is replace what is there. I
understand there might be some issues with the deck, but at the
moment, really, our main concern is the bulkhead.
You visited the jobsite and it's in really rough shape, .as
you can see from the photos. This is horrendous. We already had
the DEC and the Army'Corps of Engineers permits. My main
concern is to really avoid further delaying the project, with
hurricane season coming. And I think you mentioned that you
recommend that we use hardwood sheathing. On the plans what we
proposed is Shore Guard 950. And the rating for that is
excellent. It's pretty similar to steel, if that's a concern.
And really our concern is this'project is really dragging out.
We already have permits from other federal agencies. I'm here today
to answer any questions to help move forward.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Who wants to go first?
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: 'I'll jump in. I walked the beach again this
last weekend to survey houses in a similar situation. The high
tide mark is clearly underneath the nonexistent bulkhead some
nine or ten feet. And although the other governmental agencies
may have granted permits, the Town Board of Trustees is obliged
to write permits under the New York State Coastal Erosion Hazard
Area ordinance, which is Chapter 111 of our code. But it is
authorization that comes directly from the DEC. So the,Board, in
general, would not approve any structure within the Coastal
Erosion Hazard Area that is seaward of mean high water. The
'natural curvature of the beach in this particular location has
most adjoining homes with bulkheads, with those bulkheads' faces
at or above the mean high water mark. So this particular
location and the damage that it incurs stands out because of it
being so much further seaward and having endured the onslaught
from Storm Grayson of almost three days of 65 miles-per-hour
winds, that-the Board is very familiar with having been out and
Board of Trustees 16 October 17, 2018
doing field inspections during the course of the storm. So the
suggestion concerning armoring, we have other applications that
have just come in, and one is actually pending tonight that is
going to steel. Based on our experience, we only recommend it,
but we do recommend either steel or going with hardwood
sheathing, because 60 to 80-foot long trees that came across the
Long Island Sound from Long Island and the Connecticut River,
punctured bulkheads, causing fails, and so much of the ruins
ended up on County Route 48.
So it's a matter of our experience in the matter that we
make that recommendation. But with respect to the coastal
erosion hazard ordinance I don't think the Board is in
possession of, having discussed it and having been out there
several times, the chairman and myself have been out several
times, that I don't think we could approve that. And it might
be able to be dialed back, might help bring it into conformity
with our codes. It also might help address the issue with the
decks.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: I want to re-enforce Trustee Bredemeyer's
statement about the need to armor these, in this area. These
homes, east and west of this particular location, we visited
them during the storm Grayson he referenced, and we noticed
several of the vinyl bulkheads punctured by trees, that I'm not
sure where they came from, but carried by the waves as missiles,
went right through the vinyl.
In addition, using 18"x18" stone is totally insufficient.
The energy in that storm was moving around one-ton stones,
two-ton stones. I would suggest that you modify that if you want
this structure to survive the next nor'easter of that magnitude
MR. MOSES: So, what's the recommendation for the stone size?
This is a concern with the DEC as well, and their big thing is they
want the stones be to be at least one ton to comply with their
regulations.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I think you should go with three to four. And
some other proposed projects further down the beach are
proposing three to four ton as well.
MR. MOSES: All right. And also I understand the concern you want
us to pull back the bulkhead but, frankly, I don't think it failed because
of the location of the mean high water mark. I think it failed because the
original construction was built on 12-feet on center, something ridiculous.
If you go down and measure, the piles are really far apart. Whereas our
plans suggest the structure should be six feet on center. If you see
what I mean.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So, I understand what you are saying,
construction wise, but the structure is too far out into the
water and the permit you have is not even replacing what is
permitted there. So if you pull back to what is permitted there,
you would be able to conform to the code. But as of now, it's a
structure jutting out into the water.
MR. MOSES: Okay, so what's the next step?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Come back to us with new plans, um, dialing the
Board of Trustees 17 October 17, 2018
deck back to what was currently permitted.
MR. MOSES: Currently permitted. Because, frankly, I thought I
followed the original plans quite closely. Unless I overlooked
something.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Your plan may have tried to conform with an
original bulkhead permit but the owner built decking material
that exceeded limitations, if I'm correct, ten feet from the
seaward side of the house. So there is too much deck. And of
course no bulkhead at this time, with the waters of Long Island
Sound underneath the house essentially, all the way up
underneath the house. So to bring it into conformity it would
be a matter of dialing back the bulkhead location so it would be
landward of mean high water, and the deck would have to be no
further seaward than ten feet from the house, and it might be a
foot or two in there that might end up being a splash pad or
something different.
The Board, although we understand your need to move
forward because of storm weather, but the Board also does
perform field inspections where we do meet with applicants such as
yourself, as the agent for the owner, to firm up the, stake the
locations of the proposed deck or the bulkhead, would be another
option.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: One last point, the amount of fill presently,
the septic system is five to six feet, maybe seven feet from the
edge of the source that was excavated by the storms. And you'll
need to put a lot more than the 125 cubic yards in order to have
a reasonable distance for the effluent to travel before it gets
to the Sound. So, essentially, recalculate that.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Based on drawing the bulkhead back some
whatever, nine, ten, eleven feet, so it's landward of the
apparent high water mark, the calculation should be the cubic
yardage of sand material that would bring the sand up to near
the high top height of the bulkhead.
MR. MOSES: Okay.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Does anyone else wish to speak to this
application?
(Negative response).
MR. MOSES: So basically we resubmit and we have to come back for
another hearing?
TRUSTEE DOMINO: I'm inclined to table this so you have the
opportunity--
MR. MOSES: Sorry?
TRUSTEE DOMINO: I'm inclined to table this application so you
have the opportunity to revise your application.
MR. MOSES: Okay.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Any other comments or questions from the Board?
(Negative response).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Hearing none, I make a motion to table this
application.
,TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
Board of Trustees 18 October 17, 2018
(ALL AYES).
MR. MOSES: Thank you.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: The next application, number two, Patricia
Moore, Esq. on behalf of BIM STRASBERG &ALEXANDRA LEWIS
requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit to
replace a 30' long storm damaged section of existing ±51 linear
foot long bulkhead with a new 30' long and 11' high galvanized
steel bulkhead in order to match the height of the bulkheads to
the east and west; if needed add ±200 cubic yards of clean fill,
regrade'and revegetate disturbed areas; remove the concrete
block at bottom of bluff stairs; and at bottom of bluff stairs
install a 4'x4' stone slab landing with 4' wide stone slab steps
down to a pervious stone and gravel landing landward of bulkhead.
Located: 21225 Soundview Avenue, Southold. SCTM# 1000-135-1-1
The LWRP has deemed this project to be consistent with the
Town's coastal policies, there being no alternative means to
protect the property in this high wave energy area. The
proposed structure is located landward of mean high water.
The Conservation Advisory Council supports this application
subject to the installation of a ten-foot non-turf buffer.
The Board of Trustees visited this site on October 10th, at
a field inspection.
This is one of those high energy areas of Long Island Sound
that you have heard in other hearings, and the installation of a
steel bulkhead is becoming customary and ordinary for this
location. Construction standard matches up with the neighbors.
It's very straightforward.
Is there anyone here that wishes to speak to this application?
MS. MOORE: Good evening. Patricia Moore. Thank you. The Board
was the one that originally pointed out there was some failure
to the original bulkhead when we were going through the stairs
access. So the applicant thanks you for pointing that out, and
he's ready to move forward. Thank you.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It would be no problem with a ten-foot
non-turf buffer?
MS. MOORE: No, I think that's part of, it's sand and some stone.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It was an extensive planting plan that was
seaward of the bluff. This would be a ten-foot non-turf buffer
that would be landward of the crest of the bluff to preserve the
crest of the bluff. You had proposed, the proposal is for
American beach grass. This would be landward of the top of the
bluff. A typical ten-foot non-turf buffer.
MS. MOORE: I don't think that's a problem. There is just not a lot of
room.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It's about 30 feet. It's not a lot of room.
Usually that's the minimal. They didn't ask for 15 or more.
MS. MOORE: Non-turf is fine. Thank you.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak to
this hearing?
(Negative response).
Board of Trustees 19 October 17, 2018
Motion to close the hearing on this matter-.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I'll make a motion to approve this
application -- I'll move to table this application subject to
submission of plans with a non-turf buffer.
MS. MOORE: Wouldn't it be approved subject to?
MR. HAGAN: The procedure -- ,
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It would not. We have the procedure
changes.
MR. HAGAN: You need to reopen the public hearing and then table.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Move to withdraw my motion to approve.
Motion to reopen the public hearing.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
MS. MOORE: I guess in the future if you have a suggestion like
that, just let me know after your inspection that way I can have
the drawings redone.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: We will. We are working out a couple of
hiccups here, yes.
MS. MOORE: I know they were trying to get the contractor in
line. But a month I think should,be okay.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: My apologies. And we do regularly try to
call those that need a field inspection. That fell through the cracks.
Anyone else wish to speak?
(Negative response).
At this time, I'll table this application for the submission of
revised plans showing a ten-foot non-turf buffer.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number three, En-Consultants on behalf of
ANTONIOS DAGOUNAKIS & MARIA SISKOS requests a Wetland Permit
and a Coastal Erosion Permit to construct approximately 200 linear
feet of corrugated vinyl bulkhead (faced with 3"x10" untreated
hardwood) in place of existing storm damaged timber bulkhead and
backfill with approximately 200 cubic yards of clean sand fill
to be trucked in from an approved upland source; relocate
approximately 118 cubic yards of 3-4 ton stone from area
landward of bulkhead to form a single row of stone toe armor
seaward of bulkhead (remaining stone to be buried by backfill
landward of reconstructed bulkhead; and to install a 10' wide stone
splash pad along the landward edge of the reconstructed bulkhead.
Located: 55585 County Road 48, Southold. SCTM# 1000-44-1-13
The LWRP found this to be consistent based on the
following: There was a Trustee permit that was issued for the
bulkhead as long as the bulkhead will not project further
seaward than the existing flanking bulkheads, and the stone
Board of Trustees 20 October 17, 2018
armor is located above the mean high water line.
The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this
application.
The Trustees conducted a field inspection on October 10th,
noting there is a definite need, and it seems a pretty
straightforward replacement.
Is there anyone here who wishes to speak regarding this
application?
MR. HERRMANN: Rob Herrmann of En-Consultants on behalf of
the applicant. Joe Fischetti, who is the design engineer, is also
here.
This application is sort of a continuation of a
storm-damaged restoration. There was a bulkhead previously
existing on the property, timber bulkhead that was issued
Southold Trustee permits 279 and also, well, 279 in 1985 and
then 6655 and 6655(b) in 2007. Those permits were transferred to
the applicants after they bought the property. That transfer
occurred in December of 2017. And not long after, a significant
portion of the bulkhead was avulsively lost during the winter
storm Grayson on January 4th, 2018. The Board may recall issuing
emergency wetlands permit 9141(e) earlier this year, which was
issued to fortify the area of shoreline where the bulkhead had
been lost with stone. So now we are proposing the in-place
replacement of the previously existing bulkhead with ten-foot
wide stone splashpad behind it, reutilizing or repurposing some
of that stone as a row of stone armor in front of the wall, as the
Board has in practice on similar applications in the past. And
the rest of the stone would remain and be covered with backfill.
It's a pretty straightforward application for the
situation. Again, Joe Fischetti is here, if you have any
questions of him or for me, we are happy to answer them.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Glad you could make it.
MR. HERRMANN: Thank you.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Anyone else here wishing to speak to this
application?
MR. HERRMANN: Couldn't pass that up.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: No.
Are there any questions or comments from the Board?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Just curious why you are going with facing over
the vinyl versus the steel.
MR. HERRMANN: That would be a question I would put to Joe. There
were a couple of different alternatives that were discussed with
the applicant. And I think he had those discussions with Joe, so
I'll let him respond to that.
MR. FISCHETTI: Good evening.Joe Fischetti, engineer. Money. I
mean you can always build out of steel but my feeling, after
Hurricane Sandy, I started to design these 3x10 armor, and I
think it's just efficient. The armor will get hit, it will
protect the vinyl. It can be very easily replaced. And it's
maybe half the price of steel. I think it's more efficient.
I would like to see what happens in the future. I mean,
Board of Trustees 21 October 17, 2018
again, if it gets hit by a ten foot or 20-foot long pile, I'm
assuming that it will absorb a majority of that. I don't think
it's going to happen, so we'll have to see in the future. So
that's my opinion, and my client agreed with me at that point.
And I think if will be fine.,
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you. Anyone else here wishes
to speak regarding this application?
,(Negative response).
Any other questions or comments?
(Negative response).,
Hearing no comments, I'll make a motion to close this hearing.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion to approve this application
as submitted.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE,DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
WETLAND PERMITS:
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Under wetland permits, number one; Christopher Pickerell on
behalf of SUFFOLK COUNTY; c/o CORNELL COOPERATIVE EXTENSION requests a
Wetland Permit to install four (4) 4-inch HDPE seawater lines to be run from the new
shellfish hatchery to a location in Peconic Bay approximately 135' offshore of the Mean
Low Water mark; the total run of pipe is 500 feet; the HDPE lines will be installed by
trenching a 3' wide by approximately 300' long by 3-4 foot deep area in which the lines
will be buried; the material excavated from the trenching (2,700-3,600 cubic feet) will be
used to fill in the trench as the lines are laid out; efforts will be made to reconstruct the
original grade/sediment surface angle to match the original condition of the trenched
area and adjacent undisturbed areas; the installation from the Mean High Water to the
offshore location of lines' intake ends will be completed by using a water jet system to
bury the lines approximately 3-4 feet deep in the Bay bottom within the delineated area,
allowing the HDPE lines to be "sunk" into the sediment; the completion of the HDPE line
installation will result in approximately 10-15 feet of HDPE line extending out of the Bay
bottom into the water column at an estimated depth of 10' Mean Low Water; the
seawater line ends will be secured in place by the installation of two (2) helical anchors
that will be installed on either side of the emergent lines; the helical anchors will be no
more than 3' apart and will be connected by two galvanized steel cross pieces that will
"sandwich" the four HDPE line ends, securing them in place; the helical anchors will be,
10' long and will be driven into the Bay bottom until 3' remains above the sediment
surface; the ends of the HDPE lines will have custom-made, low-suction strainers
attached to prevent the incidental attachment of materials (natural or man-made), or the
accidental entrapment of marine animals.
Located: 3690 Cedar Beach Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-93-2-2.4.
The Trustees visited the site on the 10th of October and noted that it was a very
straightforward application. Okay as submitted. And may actually improve the water
quality of the creek.
The LWRP coordinator found this project to be consistent. Just asking to verify
that the water section of the line will not be a hazard to beach goers, which we
Board of Trustees '22 'October 17, 2018
determined it would not be on our inspection.
Is there anyone here that wishes to speak to this application?
MR. RIVARA: Good evening, I'm Gregg Rivara, Cornell' Extension,
here to answer any questions you may have.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Seemed pretty straightforward at our site
visit. Is there anyone here to speak to this application or
comments from the Board?
(Negative response).
Hearing none, I'll make a motion to close this hearing.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I make a motion to approve this application as
submitted.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Number two, under Wetland,Permits,
Steven Kramer on behalf of LAWRENCE HOLFELDER requests a Wetland Permit to
demolish side walls and pier foundation of existing 300sq.ft. sunroom located on the
seaward side and construct a 300sq.ft. seasonal sunroom in-place; and to replace two
(2) 2'x8' brick entry steps and repair existing 4'x8' gravel and stone platform at base of
steps if needed:
Located: 6600 Great Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel. SCTM# 1000-126-11-1
The LWRP coordinator found this project to be consistent.
The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support the application.
On October 14th, 2018, Trustee Glenn Goldsmith visited the site and he found
the project to be a straightforward replacement of the sunroom. Noting that gutters to
leaders to drywells were absent from the plan. Is there anybody here who wishes to
speak to this application?
MR. KRAMER:,My name is Steven Kramer, I'm a professional engineer. If you have
any questions regarding this renovation, I'll be happy to answer them. Regarding roof
runoff and stuff, there were drywells installed in the four corners of this
building. During construction the leaders for those runs were
dismantled. We intend to reinstall them on the four corners.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Okay.,Is there anybody else here who wishes to
speak to this application?
(Negative response).
Questions or comments from the Board?
(Negative response).
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS': What I would suggest is that we table the
application pending new plans showing leaders to gutters.
MR. KRAMER` Do you want a stormwater collection plan, per se?
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: I just need to see the leaders to gutters and drywells
on the plans you submitted. Does that sound correct, gentlemen?
(Affirmative response).
Any other questions, sir?
MR. KRAMER: No.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: At this point I'll make a motion to table the
application pending new plans.
Board of Trustees 23 October 17, 2018
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number three, En-Consultants on behalf of
MATTHEW MIRONOV & BARBARA LICHTENBERG-MIRONOV requests
a Wetland Permit to construct additions and modifications to existing 1.5
story dwelling consisting of on seaward side of dwelling constructing a new
13.7'x15.3' sunroom in place of existing sunroom over and within footprint of
existing deck to remain; replace decking on existing 84sq.ft. uncovered deck
to remain; reconstruct±2.8'x4' steps off deck; remove existing fence and
install new 4' high pool enclosure fencing; remove 26sq.ft. portion of existing
pool patio, and remove and replace in-place remaining 508sq.ft. on-grade
masonry pool patio around existing 16'x32' pool (to remain); on south side of
dwelling, construct 18'x20' addition to on-grade masonry pool patio; construct
3.4'x5' landing and steps, and install 4'x8' outdoor shower and new pool
equipment area; on north side of dwelling, construct an 11'x24.2' second-floor
dormer addition; on landward side of dwelling construct an 8'x14.5' one-story
addition, a 4'x13.6' one-story addition in place of existing porch, and a new
4'x13.6' porch with steps; reconstruct and modify approximately 709sq.ft. of
existing dwelling roof; install a drainage system of leaders, gutters and
drywells; install approximately 1,035sq.ft. portion of asphalt driveway with
catch basins; abandon existing sanitary system and install new sanitary
system beyond Trustee jurisdiction; and establish and perpetually
maintain a 5' wide non-turf buffer to be planted with native vegetation in
place of existing lawn adjacent to the top of bank.
Located: 2900 Beebe Drive, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-103-3-15
The Trustees most recent field inspection of this property
was on October 10th, and the notes note that the applicant
addressed all the concerns from the previous September 12th
field inspection requesting a drywell for the pool and ten-foot non-turf buffer.
The LWRP coordinator found this to be consistent and inconsistent. The
inconsistency arises from the fact that the structures were built without a
Trustee permit.
The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to unanimously to support
this application on September 12th of this year.
Is there anyone here to speak to this application?
MR. HERRMANN: Rob Herrmann of En-Consultants, on behalf of the
applicants. As Mike just mentioned, that was, this was a hearing
that was opened on September 18th, at which time we discussed
the LWRP coordinator's recommendations and the substance of the
project in general. The hearing was adjourned until tonight for
the purposes of submitting a revised site plan showing a
ten-foot wide non-turf buffer, wherein we had discussed that the
first five feet adjacent to the top of the bank would be
revegetated from lawn to native vegetation, and then there would
be a pool enclosure fence at the midpoint of that non-turf
buffer, which would then continue an additional five feet to the
house side of that fence. The Board had asked to show a proposed
drywell for the existing swimming pool and then also a notation
that the outdoor shower drainage would be plumbed to the
Board of Trustees 24 October 17, 2018
proposed drainage system.
A revised site plan prepared by Kenneth M. Woychuk Land
Surveying last dated September 25th, 2018, was submitted to the
Board on or about October 3rd, so hopefully that site plan the
Board finds satisfies its requests from the last hearing.
If so, that's all we have.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Anyone else wish to speak to this application?
(Negative response).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Questions or comments from the Board?
(Negative response).
Hearing none, I make a motion to close this hearing.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
I make a motion to approve this application as submitted.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All.in favor.
MR. HERRMANN: Thank you.
MR. HAGAN: When you say "as submitted", you mean as submitted
with new plans?
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Absolutely. I'll restate the motion. I'll
clarify for the record, that I'm making a motion to approve the
application according to the new plans submitted October 4th, 2018
MR. HAGAN: Thank you.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: The next application, number four,
En-Consultants on behalf of FHV, LLC; c/o GARY SALICE requests a
Wetland Permit to construct a fixed timber"T" shaped dock
(elevated 4' above grade of marsh and constructed with
open-grate decking), consisting of,4'x5' steps at landward end;
a 4'x39'_catwalk; and a 4'x10' fixed seaward platform.
Located: 3400 Deep Hole Drive, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-115-17-11
This project has been deemed consistent with the Town's
LWRP by the LWRP coordinator.
The Trustees inspected the site on October 10th, noting
that it is within the current pier line and does not exceed more
than one-third of the way across the creek, and will be
constructed with appropriate open-grate materials.
The Conservation Advisory Council voted to support the
application subject to it not going more than one-third the way
across the creek, which had been determined on the Trustees'
inspection.
And the clerk informs me that due to the change in title of
the property during the course of the application process, that
the permit applicant on behalf of the FHV, LLC, Gary Salice
owner, might want to formally request that the name change be
made for the public record in conformity with the e-mail we
received today.
Is there anyone here who wishes to speak to this application?
MR. HERRMANN: Yes, Rob Hermann of En-Consultants. And for the
record, both on behalf of the original applicant FHV, LLC, and
Board of Trustees 25 October 17, 2018
now also on behalf of the new owner, the property was
transferred on Friday, this past Friday, to Frank Martorana,
Mindy Martorana and Bryan Martorana. We have submitted an agent
authorization form and the other Trustee authorization form
signed by all three of the new owners. So again, for the
record, we are representing and speaking on behalf of the new
owners as a continuation of the application originally submitted
for or on behalf of FHV, LLC.
Damon, did I get all that right?
MR. HAGAN: Yes. And you are requesting the permit issued is
issued to the new owner?
MR. HERRMANN: Yes. So we would ask in effect that the
applicant's name on the application be effectively changed to
the new owner so the permit be issued to the new owners, which
obviates the need to seek a permit transfer after the permit
that was issued.
With respect to the substance of the application, this site
had actually had a Trustee permitted dock on it in the past
pursuant to permit number 1741 that was issued in 1983. You have
can see some remnants of that, very' few remnants of that dock
out there, by my assessment of aerial photography, shows that
dock structure has not been intact probably for more than ten -
years. But similarly configured T-shaped docks have been
recently permitted by the Board on the surrounding properties
including across the way pursuant to permit number 7718 in 2012,
and the adjacent property -- actually, I got those backward. The
adjacent property is permit number 7718, issued in 2012. And the
property located to the southeast across Deep Hole Creek, permit
#7671 issued in 2011.
I know the Trustees did get to see the staking. I don't
think we had had any photographs of the dock being staked, so I
did, after the Trustees left the inspection, I did go on to that
adjoining T-shaped dock and took that photograph looking down in
the direction so you could see that between the dock I'm
standing on and then the dock further down the creek, that
basically the shoreline and this dock would sit well within the
pier line created by those two docks, and otherwise meets the
other dock construction criteria in terms of the overall width
of the waterway, et cetera, as was mentioned in your SEQRA
determination.
So with all that, if the Board has any questions, beyond
that, I'm happy to answer them, otherwise that's all I have.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Not hearing any questions, is there anyone
else who wishes to speak to this application?
(Negative response).
Seeing no one else here to speak to this application, I would
make a motion to close the hearing in this matter.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I make a motion to approve this application
Board of Trustees 26 October 17, 2018
as submitted in the name of the new owners Frank and Mindy
Martorana and Bryan Martorana. That's my motion.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second. _
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor? .
(ALL AYES).
MR. HERRMANN: Thank you.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number five, Michael Kimack on behalf of
STEPHANIE TEICHER requests a Wetland Permit to remove the
existing bluff stairs and construct a new 51'5" long set of
bluff stairs beginning at,proposed masonry pad consisting of a
1'10"x4' top step to a 4'x3' top landing to 11'7"x4' steps to a
4'x8' upper middle landing to 11'7"x4' steps to a 4'x8' lower
middle landing to 11'7"x4' steps to a 4'x4' landing seaward of
retaining wall with 8'4"x4' steps to area between bulkhead and
retaining wall; and for the existing 8.33'x4' set of steps to
beach off bulkhead to remain; remove 223sq.ft. of existing brick
patio and replace with lawn; install a 7'x8' masonry pad for
utilities; for the as-built t805sq.ft. seaward side deck, remove
40sq.ft. bump-out section of decking and construct new 68sq.ft.
area of decking to southerly side of existing deck for a total
of 833sq.ft. of seaward side decking, and to replace all of the
existing decking; replace all decking on existing 40'x24.92'
main deck; replace all decking on existing 6.5'x22.8'
second-floor deck; replace decking on existing 6.5'x22.8' first
floor deck and replace existing 1'x20.5' steps; replace existing
6'x6' access steps to main deck with new steps,; for the existing
three (3) 1.33'x4.5' benches at lower retaining wall to remain;
existing 3.75' diameter concrete table at bulkhead to remain;
relocate existing 19sq.ft. storage bin; existing lighting
fixtures and hose bib to remain; remove 488sq.ft. of existing
wood deck/boardwalk in between bulkhead and retaining wall, and
revegetate 220sq.ft. with Cape American beach grass and
269sq.ft. of sand; construct a 99sq.ft. wood deck to connect to
the new bluff stairs and to the steps to beach; reconfigure
existing stepping stone path continuing along the waterside of
the deck along the new planting area to the new platform
comprised of 2'x4' stepping stones from northerly steps to
connect to adjoining deck steps; and a proposed on-grade
68sq.ft. masonry pad situated 5' from top of bluff which will be
at level grade at beginning of down slope to tie into a two-step
riser and small 12sq.ft. landing to maintain elevation.
Located: 6825 Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-111-15-8.2
This is a continuation from the tabled hearing last month.
The LWRP found this to be inconsistent. The inconsistencies
are that the area between bulkheads located in the VE zone. VE
zones are defined as areas with special flood hazards associated
with high velocity waters generated by storm surges and
hurricane wave wash. Accessory structures located these areas
have the potential to suffer high rate of loss and posses
hazards to life and property during storm surge events and
Board of Trustees 27 October 17,,2018
should be minimized in area and placement.
Also,,according to Town records, the structures or portions
thereof were constructed without obtaining board of Trustee
review and regulatory permit.
The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this
application.
Trustees conducted a field inspection, most recently
reviewed the new submitted plans on October 10th.
Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application?
MR. KIMACK: Michael Kimack, on behalf of the applicant. As we
tabled it, as I understand, basically, the only open was the
fact that you wanted a replacement for the 68-square foot
concrete pad on the top of the bluff, which it was done, and
removed, and in its place put bluestone, step stones up to the
proposed new set of stairs going down to the beach. And you
have that set of plans in your file. And I believe all the other
issues had been discussed at the prior meeting.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Is there anyone else here wishing to speak
regarding this application?
(Negative response).
Any questions or comments from the Board?
(Negative response).
I make a motion to close this hearing.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion to approve this application
contingent on the new plans-submitted September 25th, 2018 by
Peconic Surveyors, thereby bringing it into consistency with the
LWRP.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Number six, Michael Kimack on behalf of 8100
HORTONS LANE, LLC requests a Wetland Permit to demolish existing
one-story dwelling with garage, foundation, outdoor shower,
porches, steps, cesspool, water well, shed, and stepping stones;
backfill disturbed areas; construct an elevated three-story,
2,205sq.ft. dwelling with 68sq.ft. of 4' wide on-grade boardwalks;
proposed 199sq.ft. of on-grade masonry landings; proposed 48sq.ft. raised
equipment platform; proposed raised 4'wide by 196' long (784sq.ft.)
boardwalk using thru-flow decking; install a sanitary system; and install
gutters to leaders to drywells to contain roof runoff, and in accordance with
Chapter 236 of the Town Code-Stor'mwater Management.
Located: 8100 Hortons Lane, Southold. SCTM# 1000-54-4-31
The Trustees visited this location most recently on the
10th of October. We discussed restrictions on possible
vegetation and sod being possibly front yard only, and also
discussed the proposed IA system, which I do believe is already
in the plans.
Board of Trustees 28 October 17, 2018
The LWRP coordinator found this to be consistent due to the
following reasons: The proposed new residential structure is
located more landward than the existing structure. There
is no practical way to locate the proposed structure further
from CEHA due to lot size and natural features. New construction
will be flood compliant. Innovative Alternative onsite water
treatment system is recommended due to proximity to surface
waters and highly permeable soils, which is sand. Installation
of boardwalk and decking is unsupported in the FEMA VE flood
zone. The addition of structure in high energy wave action areas
results in debris and projectiles during storm events.
The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this
application.
Is there anyone here that wishes'to speak with regard to
this application?
MR. KIMACK: Michael Kimack on behalf of the applicant. To take
you back a little on this, you had visited this project
initially about, maybe two, two-and-a-half years ago, for a
pre-application determination as to whether or not the structure
would be subject to Chapter 111. And as a result of that, since
part of it was, even though it was the uninhabited porch area,
since it touched any portion of the house, the determination was
made it was in fact the entire structure was subject to Chapter 111.
That basically limited my clients in terms of what their
desired needs were for the structure. As a result of that they
did make the decision to tear that house down, remove.the
foundation and move it back.
If you look at the Nathan Corwin survey, primarily, at the
beginning, you'll see primarily where that CHL line is. We
chose basically to represent it as a ten-foot wide line. There
had been some discussion since most of the CHL line is done by a
fairly high scale that if we basically sort of see the line that
close it would not necessarily represent the active SEQRA line
itself.
The architect Meryl Kramer, who is here to answer some
questions, but she basically located that landward of that line
by about an extra 5.7 feet from the five-foot setback,
essentially.
The new structure basically is going to be about 2,500
square feet. The existing one that is being taken down with the
porch, et cetera, is about 2,000 square foot. So in a sense the
footprint is not that much larger than what it is.
Also, seaward of the CHL line, all the walkways will come
out, the shed will come down and the existing septic system will
be removed. So everything as you can see if you are looking at
that particular drawing, the property that we have to work with
is fairly truncated in terms of where the house can be put. And
I think Ms. Kramer located it as far landward as she reasonably
could.,When you went out to take a look you can see the stakes
that were there, basically, and that still allows enough room to
put a pool in with a reasonable parking space. And on that side
Board of Trustees 29 October 17, 2018
will be the drywell system, and adjacent to it will be the septic system.
We do propose a walkway from there, it's about 220 some odd
feet of a four-foot wide with through-flow about a foot above
the ground. It's fairly low, on the six-inch pilings. That's on
the site plan structured on that particular one. In order to get
to the beach area, essentially. That's pretty much the only
thing that is within the CHL. Everything else is being removed.
And as you had suggested, it's raised in order to meet the AE-12
line. Basically, it's just outside the 13. So it might as well
be the 13 line. Are there any other questions of me?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And just to clarify, you are proposing an IA
septic system to the location?
MR. KIMACK: That would basically be --
MS. KRAMER: Yes.
MR. KIMACK: Yes. It would be a proposal.
MS. KRAMER: I was not supposed to shout out. But, yes, we'll do
an IA system.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Comments from the Board?
(NEGATIVE RESPONSE).
I know there seemed to be some concern about the walkway in
terms of it being seaward of the line.
MR. KIMACK: Can I give you some comment on that. We had applied
to DEC. I know that their regulations and rules are sometimes
incompatible with the way you look at it.
The DEC's recommendation for that, as bizarre as it is, is
that it be elevated three feet and that it be a through-flow
situation. We did not see, number one,,the requirement or the
need of it. I think the clients were not taking it as an
elevation at that line. Primarily, number one, it would be really
subject to the wind in a section like that. We did through-flow
as they had recommended, basically, which we would have done
anyway, and we kept it about a foot over. So it doesn't really
represent a high profile, basically, and it's on six-inch
diameter piers, and it's well constructed. It really doesn't
stick up very much, primarily, as it walks up.
The land is fairly flat, Nick, all the way through, going
up their way, and there has not been in that particular area,
has not been really a lot of damage from the storms coming
through there.
The elevation of that land is not too much lower than the
existing house now. The house was not subject to any damage
during Sandy and the other storms.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: The problem we are having is not the method
of materials or construction, it has do with the Coastal Erosion
Hazard Area ordinance as adopted by the Town, which went through
the DEC. There is a limitation of 200 square foot of open
constructed decks, catwalks and docks seaward of the Coastal
Erosion Hazard Area line. So we are up against a code prohibition.
MR. KIMACK: If you are basically, then I would suggest that we
would remove it, as not to impede the application. Meryl?
MS. KRAMER: Agreed. So I would just--so in the Town you are
Board of Trustees 30 October 17, 2018
saying there will be no boardwalks from the house to --
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: The Board would have to deny it and then it
would have to go on to appeal to the Town Board if you didn't
like our determination.
MR. KIMACK: Been there, done that.
MS. KRAMER: We don't want to hold up the permit for the house
because of the boardwalk. We would much prefer to not have a
boardwalk.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Okay. And we are held with the code
restriction. Is there anyone else here that wishes to speak
regarding this application?
(Negative response).
Any comments from the Board?
(Negative response).
All right so we are going to need new plans on this depicting
removal of the boardwalk.
MR. KIMACK: Do you also want to see on the plans showing IA
system, specifically?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That would be ideal.
So hearing no other comment, I make a motion to table this
application for this submission of new plans depicting the IA
system and the removal of the boardwalk.
MS. KRAMER: Can I ask a question, please. I guess it's a
procedural question, about the new procedure?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: One moment. `
MR. HAGAN: Do you want to withdraw your motion? It has not been
seconded. The public hearing has not been closed.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll rescind my motion.
MR. HAGAN: There you go. Now you can ask your question.
MS. KRAMER: Sorry. The question is the new policy is to table
all applications pending any changes that you are requesting as
contingencies upon approval, correct?
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: In days,of old we used to approve applications
pending new plans. We cannot do that. Now plans must be
completed. At the hearing, the plans must be complete and
correct. So if there is a change, we have to table, awaiting new plans.
MS. KRAMER: Okay.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any issues with that policy, please contact the
Town Attorney.
MR. KIMACK: I have a question for clarification. If in fact the
boardwalk was not an issue but you did basically require an IA
system, would that in and of itself trigger new plans?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Say that again?
MR. HAGAN: I heard the question.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I thought your question during the course, I
was wondering.
MR. HAGAN: This should be a question, I believe the Trustees --
MR. KIMACK: It would be helpful to come before the Board in the
future.
MR. HAGAN: This is a question I think the Trustees should
discuss in executive session.
Board of Trustees 31 October 17, 2018
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: You asked a very good question and we'll get
back to you on that.
MR. KIMACK: I appreciate that because it will help form future
applications and perhaps save the client the additional time.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: We understand.
MR. KIMACK: I understand it's a new policy.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: And also with the revised plans submitted
a week before the public hearing, it does afford the public an
opportunity to comment on the plans so we are not take making
determinations in the dark. That's one of the concerns.
MR. KIMACK: I appreciate letting me know on that one. I think I
know the answer, but that's okay.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any other questions or comments?
(Negative response).
MS. KRAMER: Thank you, very much.
MR. KIMACK: Thank you.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I make a motion to table this application
pending new plans depicting the IA system and removal of the
boardwalk.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Number seven, Cole Environmental Services,
Inc., on behalf of SALLY COONAN requests a Wetland Permit to
construct a 4' high by 15' long timber retaining wall with a 10'
easterly return and a 12' westerly return; the top or filled
area of the retaining wall to be vegetated with native beach
grass and other salt tolerant coastal plant species; create a 6"
earthen berm along the landward edge of the property scarp; add
two (2) 4' wide by 6' deep dry wells to collect surface and roof
runoff from dwelling and patio interconnected to a 4'x24' French
Drain; add two (2) 8'x12' deep storm drains in the middle of the
property to contain runoff emanating from adjacent properties;
install 6" to 8" earthen berm within property lines and install
three (3) 8'x12' interconnected storm drains with drains to be
installed slightly below grade; and install a 2'x16' trench
drain at the entry point of storm water coming from the road and
surrounding properties.
Located: 2662 Paradise Shores Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-80-1-4
The Trustees visited this site on September 12th, 2018. We
have notes in the file that all drainage plans must be reviewed
by Town Engineer, with a suggestion of coir logs before
construction of retaining wall.
The LWRP coordinator found this project to be consistent
with LWRP policies.
The Conservation Advisory Council did inspect the site and
they resolved to support the application.
Upon our request from the Town Engineer's office, we have a
letter from the Town Engineer. As per request from your office,
I have reviewed the drainage plan for the above-referenced
Board of Trustees 32 October 17, 2018
property. The survey was prepared by the Office of Michael J.
Salice, LS, dated 7/6/2015. And the drainage design was
prepared by CES, Cole Environmental Services, dated 7/6/2015.
Please consider the following: Drainage design does not provide
calculations that would allow me to review how the drainage
design was formulated. Number two, drywells number five, six and
seven are noted with an earth berm surrounding the downhill side
of the drainage. There berm should extend southerly on the
easterly side until it reconnected with the shown 18-foot
contour. The berm should also be established at or about 18-foot
contour height and be fully vegetated. Number three, there is a
proposed six-inch earth berm seaward of the proposed French drain
along with drywells number one and two on northerly side of the
residence. The location of this berm is basically the top of bluff. This
small berm will only serve to create an even greater potential for erosion
failure due to the potential build-up of water that may overtop
and then release at a single point. A five-foot wide vegetative
non-disturbance buffer would be more appropriate at this
location. Elevated non-contiguous walking path stone or other
permeable surface could be used to traverse the buffer area.
Number four, the face of the slope between top of berm and
existing bulkhead ranges from a four-foot contour to the 14-foot
contour within the horizontal distance of about 20 feet, which
would be about a 50% slope. This slope should be engineered in
more detail. Sand covered with peat moss and grass can not
support itself with this steep slope. Even with the utilization
of jute mesh. Any questions concerning this matter please
contact my office. Sincerely, James A. Richter.
Is there anybody here that wishes to speak to this application?
(Negative response).
Any questions or comments from'the Board?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think maybe we should table for a discussion
with the applicant.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: I agree with Mr. Krupski. I think we should
table this application. I'll make a motion to table this
application to discuss the engineer's report with the homeowner.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number eight, Costello Marine Contracting Corp.
on behalf of ALISON BYERS requests a Wetland Permit to construct
400' of low profile rock revetment on west beach area to match
previously installed 230' section; fill void areas landward with
excavated materials; regrade areas and revegetate with Cape
American beach grass; remove 155' of existing rock revetment on
south beach area and reconstruct in new configuration west of
present location; construct 22' of new vinyl bulkhead as a
continuation of existing sheet steel bulkhead's south return;
fill void area landward and regrade as needed; construct beach
access stairs consisting of landward t3'wide by 4' long
Board of Trustees 33 October 17, 2018
sections of terracing steps leading down to a set of±3'x10'
steps with handrails to bottom of bluff; construct±3'x3'4"
steps with handrails off bulkhead to beach; and to mulch balance
of walkway to top of bluff.
Located: 10335 Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-119-1-14.1 & 14.2
The Trustees did a field inspection on October 10th. All were present. The
notes read, Board questions the need for a rock revetment on the south side.
On the north side it appears the existing rock is similarly configured. Also
perhaps use stone instead of the new vinyl bulkhead.
The LWRP coordinator found this to be consistent.
The Conservation Advisory Council on October 15th voted unanimously to
support this application.
Is there anyone here to speak to this application?
MR. COSTELLO: Yes. My name is John A. Costello and I am the
agent for Alison Byers on this application.
One of the reasons the project appears to be excessive, we
did have permits of the entire revetment on the southwest side.
They were permits from the DEC and the Trustees for 600 feet
along that whole stretch. The need at that time we told her to
do the 230 feet and we'll see what the weather conditions
happen, and we can add onto that at some time in the future. If
you see the indentation on the cliff, the bottom of the cliff
has eroded to some minor degree. That rock you see in that photo
right there, that was basically above the spring high water mark
all the way down the line. There is a couple of areas there
where you can see clear sand. This goes all the way down to
Ingrelli's property, which is at the end of the road. Now, that
permit was one. We had it from the DEC. We had it from the
Trustees. The DEC knew that that portion of the rock revetment
was going to be segmented over a period of time. Still, they did
expire. They've expired. So when we put the new application in
for the southeast corner of the steel bulkhead, the DEC
immediately says we cannot segment anything. Make it as one
application. So they combined both. They cannot be segmented.
They have to be enjoined. So that's why --you see that is
working, right there. And we were going to continue it, never
did. Permits expired. That's one job. Was one job. And the, we
did have the Trustees permit for that at one time. So now that
the DEC is not segmenting, we had to put the whole application
in, and where the steel bulkhead is, there was a rock revetment
that was put in, I don't know how many years ago, Tom Samuels,
and Costello Marine, Rambo and Costello Marine, put the steel
bulkhead in front of the existing collapsing wood bulkheading with
the DEC permit and with the Trustees permit. And that is
eroding around the very far end. The southwest corner of the
bulkhead, it's eroding and is washing out. That's the only
reason we would put vinyl in there. First of all, it is not a
high impact area, but we are trying to retain the fill that,
when the storms hit that bulkhead, the water runs right overtop
and goes overtop the bulkhead and out the return. That's the
only reason I recommended sheathing it up, backfilling it, and
Board of Trustees 34 October 17, 2018
even though the description of the job sounds like a big job,
the stairway was there, still there, it's laying down. We put it
back up two or three times. And the pathway was going to be
mulched, has been mulched and remains mulched. And when
we did the bulkhead return, 22 feet, back fill it with clean sand, and
re-arrange the existing rocks that are on the beach, re-arrange
them landward, there is not enough. It needs a few more,
probably another hundred ton of rocks. Which is not a lot of
rocks. So to fill in some of the voids, put it on filter cloth,
and move it inland farther away from the water. She is afraid
that should some storm come through there and breach through
that, there will be a cut through. And she is probably right.
She is concerned. So if you have water coming over the top of
the bulkhead, washing out the fill, and the water washes past
those rocks, even though they are moved inland, she may have a
temporary breach in that whole point. And she wants to avoid
that.
There is vegetation back there. We are not going to touch
any of the vegetation. And we will probably revegetate it. It's
been revegetated two or three times with beach grass on top of
the bulkhead. The intensity of the storms and the amount of
water going overtop has washed out the beach grass on two
separate occasions so far. And I suggested that she not do it
except higher away from the water. Get it moved away from the
water 20 or 30 feet, then try to get some beach grass to grow.
But that is not part of the application, but that has been an
ongoing thing she has been doing, and she is a nice young lady
and she wants to try to maintain her property. That's only what
she is trying to do. I just want to get that on the record. That
is one of the reasons the job is being positive dec, because the
combination, it is quite a bit of work. And hopefully even at
the four-hundred feet on the west side if she doesn't do it all,
I hope she does a portion of it and as it needs, if it needs
more later, because there is no home, but it's a roadway, that
she would continue.
And the rocks do not pollute, and if you keep them above
-the spring high water mark, and when you excavate for the rocks,
and put them down to approximate low water, the fill that comes
out will'be used for the backfill behind the rocks and revegetated.
That's the description of the job and hopefully, this is not
going to occur quickly, but, for two reasons, it's being positive deed.
The DEC will react. They have to be probably the lead agency, and
to make their decisions, which are not going to be forthcoming quickly.
So gentlemen, I just wanted to try to get it on the record.
Any questions I'll answer them.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: For the record, access would be --
MR. COSTELLO: Well, the access will be right through her
property. Now, if we are going to do the rocks on the west side,
I would probably go right over top of the bank. There is one
area there that was a road down to the beach, approximately, the
first photograph you can see there is a light-colored spot. And
Board of Trustees 35 October 17, 2018
we revegetated that. Yes. You can see the light spot way down
there. That was a roadway that went down to the beach, and it
was vegetated back with pine trees and put back, and that's
where the rocks were brought in, and two loads of rocks were
brought in by barge. The other rocks on the other side will all
be brought in by barge. So you don't have to go over the
vegetation that is out on the point.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Another question for you. On this very nice
barbecue and patio area --
MR. COSTELLO: You can use it. She said if the Trustees wanted
use that for parties, that it's certainly available.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: I'll leave that to the younger guys.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Counsel is advising me not to do that. But
is there a permit for that?
MR. COSTELLO: Yes. A long time ago. But I think some of the
tile has been replaced. I didn't replace it, but it was damaged
one time, and there is a little dock, a little pier that is out
there. That was picked up and we just, all we did was level it
back down. That photograph doesn't show it.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: I just have one more question, John. We seem to
see -- here is the steel bulkhead that we thought it was
reflecting energy and scouring out over here where you have the
proposal for the 22 feet.
MR. COSTELLO: Yes.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: We are concerned that if you continued that,
that it would now concentrate energy here and maybe blow out the
whole thing.
MR. COSTELLO: No. Most of that erosion on that return is coming
from the front of the bulkhead overtop and going out, exiting
that hole.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It's coming from the east.
MR. COSTELLO: So the amount of water going overtop that bulkhead
is just exiting out there. It is not scouring out because of
wave energy. And that's one of the reasons we are going to
rebuild, reconfigure those rocks.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: I see your point. I understand that. But
wouldn't that still lead to the possibility that if you extend
the bulkhead, water overtops it, it will further erode at the
base of that vinyl?
MR. COSTELLO: They'll be sufficiently in the bottom, number one.
And secondly that material, as you well saw, it's very course
and it will percolate down through it. But it will also exit
when you give it an exit. And it has an exit now.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Thank you, for your expertise.
MR. COSTELLO: And I think the vinyl will outlast, even though
that is marine-grade steel, that bulkhead, mariner-type steel,
Corten, and the vinyl will outlast that.
And again, earlier in the night when you were talking about
some of the vinyls collapsing on the Sound and whatnot, if they
have timbers on both sides, front and back, I've investigated
several of those collapses, they don't have a following timber
Board of Trustees 36 October 17, 2018
on the back side of the bulkhead, which they should and they
need. Tom Samuels lost one at the Bitner estate with one 25'
timber punching a hole in. One hole. No timber clamping the
sheathing together, it emptied out. That can occur at any of
these. Fiberglass is stronger than vinyl, but we are trying to
figure out something that will last. But, we will. Any other
questions from the Board?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would it be possible to armor that face just to
alleviate some of our concerns, too? I mean, if you are going to
be doing some stone work there, I know you are going to rebuild,
or want to rebuild part of that armor pointing sort of south,
can you add that?
MR. COSTELLO: Yes. My suggestion to her was somewhere along the
line, before that bulkhead gets --that bulkhead is probably
maybe 12 to 15-years old. And I supervised the job for Tom
Samuels. He did half and I did half. And he was failing at that
time. And I supervised the entire job. And most of it has
helical screw anchors in it. And somewhere along the line she
will have to have two choices. She will either have to put rock
in front of the existing bulkhead because when that's in a
storm, it sprays up on her house, all of, every vegetation has
salt on it. So she is either going to have to armor it, to some
degree. One thing about armoring, you can put one ton per foot,
two ton, three ton, four ton. To get it up to the top of that
bulkhead you are probably talking seven or eight ton per foot.
So you do what you can afford to do. The other thing is, my
suggestion to her, is if she tried to build and got permission
from the Trustees and DEC, is to build an offshore reef. You go
out there and you can probably reclaim all the old oyster pods
out in the Sound, fill them with oyster shells, two on the
bottom, one on top. So that now you are only about four foot.
And if you put that parallel to the beach, you will see
dispersion of wave energy offshore slightly, and the sand will
stay. That's a common engineering knowledge, and they work
better, instead of jetties, they work better parallel. And they
will disperse wave energy and build up. And I think Cornell is
reclaiming a lot, going in the Sound, reclaiming a lot of those,
the old oyster platforms. You fill them with shells, I have one
in my office, and I tried to sell that to a group of people, the
ones at Beixedon, instead of the jetty, where you don't have a
jetty allowed in your code, there is nothing against a reef. You
know how you tie them, you tie them all together, and you take
bamboo stakes, and you stake them in place. So if you run a
boat into bamboo stake, no damage. All oyster grounds had bamboo
stakes on them at one time. That's because you can run into them
without -- and they bend over. So, it's something in the,
possibly in the future. And I'll probably end up presenting that
to the Trustees at some occasion. Okay? Thanks, for listening.
Appreciate it.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Any questions or comments?
(Negative response).
Board of Trustees 37 October 17, 2018
Hearing none, I make a motion to table this application.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: The next application, number nine, Patricia
Moore, Esq., on behalf of BRENDAN & MINDY DOOLEY request a
Wetland Permit for the existing 1,718sq.ft. one-story dwelling;
existing irregularly shaped deck consisting of 6'8"x7'8"
landing/steps to 6'8"x4'9" steps to 17'6"x29'9" upper deck to
6'x11' lower deck with steps to grade; existing 5'6"x5'2" shed;
and for the two (2) existing "bridges" (northerly bridge is
3'9"x10'2"; southerly bridge is 2'3"x8'3") over the stream in
rear of yard.
Located: 145 Dickerson Street, Peconic. SCTM# 1000-67-3-11
This project is supported by the Conservation Advisory Council.
The Trustees visited this site on October 10th. With
respect to the construction that we saw there, we felt it was
straightforward.
Dated today, October 17th, is the LWRP coordinator's
report, which has deemed this project inconsistent and made some
specific recommendations with respect to the house and property
and bridges that are notable in that they suggest some
protections that might be taken to protect Autumn Lake, which is
an enclosed lake, and the stream portrait, look at the bridges as
a feeder stream. Reading from his report, because this is new
to the Board, the first item deals with bringing the project
into consistency by granting permits, since most of the
structures there are all predating the Trustee jurisdiction.
With respect to the specific areas of policy concerns, in the
event the action is approved, to further policy six and protect
the water quality of Autumn Pond and Goldsmith Inlet, to
prohibit the use of CCA treated wood in structures, replacement
of bridges capable of coming into contact with surface waters
should be required. Meaning that the replacement of the bridges,
which are conventional lumber, should be limited to non-toxic
materials because of the enclosed nature of the Autumn Pond. And
that would be in keeping with the Board's standards that we
don't allow toxic materials on docks and decks over freshwater
ponds and freshwater wetlands, because they are poorly flushed.
And number two, to protect water quality in this sensitive area,
establish vegetative buffers on either side of the intermittent
stream where practicable, retain existing vegetation, meaning
trees with buffers, and prohibit the use of synthetic
fertilizers or herbicides on the property through the filing of
restricted covenants to further protect the water quality of
Autumn Pond.
Those are the recommendations of the LWRP coordinator.
Almost the entirety of the property we know does slope down
to that area. Have you any thoughts on behalf of the owner or
thoughts concerning restrictions of--
Board of Trustees 38 October 17, 2018
MR. HAGAN: You haven't opened the public hearing.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Sorry. Is there anyone here who wishes to
speak on behalf of this applicant?
MS. MOORE: Yes, Patricia Moore. This, if you recall, because I
had a pre-application inspection a long, long ago, then we went
to the Zoning Board because of the placement of the house is,
it's still pre-existing, that nothing there was conforming, so
we got Zoning Board approval for all of the decking and
structure as built there.
I don't really, if the Board places a condition that no CCA
treated wood be used when those little bridges are replaced. I
can't see a problem with that. That would be as part of your
permitting. Those bridges are I think handmade little platforms
that I can't imagine it being much more than that. The
properties are ready, as you recall. It is two lots on Peconic
Shores, and the house is two feet from the front yard. The
entire property and the rear is all wooded on the hill, so I
appreciate LWRP's comment, but the existing conditions of the
property are in fact more vegetated than most properties. It's
three quarters of it is treed and natural. The stream is, when
the subdivision was created that, what we call a stream is
actually a drainage basin, common drainage basin for the
subdivision. It has since, and that's the old ways that they
would drain subdivisions into natural water features. So it
does take runoff from all of the homes in that little
subdivision and then it just kind of goes into the Autumn Pond,
I believe. Or close to it.
So the synthetic fertilizers, C&Rs with no synthetic
fertilizers, again, it's very natural over there. There is very
little grass, if any. That area is very wooded and not a lot of
lawns are created in this area. I think the only lawn may be on
the side yard of this house. That's about it. Then you have the
neighbor that is almost directly, you can't really distinguish
the property lines over there. So I think most of the lawn is
the neighbor's. Ours may be on the side, but it is very
difficult, there really, the property lines are so off and the
homes are in completely --
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Based on your description, I think
the Board agrees and has seen that. It seems to me it's a natural
area, mostly wooded with already a low fertilizing requirement.
MS. MOORE: Exactly.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: But I guess the concern goes to the fact is
if an interpretation was made by a future owner other than what
you saw and what we saw, and they decide to put a sodded lawn in
right down to the stream, if they were to consider an already
existing landscaped yard, then I think the fears of the LWRP
coordinator, and frankly myself, after seeing his report would
be, in other words if it was left as is with the notion that any
landscaping and reseeding or work on the property, removal of
trees, comes within 100 feet of the stream corridor and you are
back before the Board, that would be, in other words if the
Board of Trustees 39 October 17, 2018
Board, you are saying as the attorney for an applicant on behalf
of the owner, that you recognize it's a naturalized area, I
don't know if we can stipulate all future activity on the
property. Other than use of, in other words using natural
fertilizers, in other words have them come back for future
activities. Because tree cutting will need a permit or tree
letter, and if we just put, I don't know if that's practical.
MR. HAGAN: Your code currently mandates that landscaping
activities within 100 feet of the wetland will fall under the
restrictions of the prior--
(Inaudible)
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So if we are acknowledging that it's natural
and it is not landscaped at this point, maybe that's a point of,
you know, the Board can agree with.
MS. MOORE: I'm not sure if I understand what you are telling me
to do. But, all right.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Meaning if the Board and you are all of the
mind it's a natural area, then landscaping and new lawn
installation would have to come in for permits.
MS. MOORE: Right. I can let the owners know that if they are
going to come back and do any work there, they need permits from
you, which is what you here for anyway, so.
MR. HAGAN: It doesn't matter if it's a stipulation on the
record. It's a matter of putting the applicant on notice. It
sounds that counsel for the applicant has verified that they are
aware.
MS. MOORE: That's why I'm here, pretty much everything on this
property is within your jurisdiction.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Okay, I'm a little long winded. Anything
else?
MS. MOORE: No, it's very straightforward, other than that, so.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Anyone else here who wishes to speak to this
application?
(Negative response).
All right, hearing no further comments, no one else coming up to
speak to this matter, I'll make a motion to close this hearing.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I move to approve subject to the stipulation
that any repair or replacement of the bridges over the stream be
non-toxic materials, and that per the provisions of Chapter 275
that the owners will come in for any work pursuant to provisions
of Chapter 275 of the town wetlands.
MS. MOORE: I understand. I'll let the owners know.
MR. HAGAN: Just so that I'm clear, so the application is to
approve the application as submitted, that any replacement or
repairs to the bridges is going to be non-toxic lumber.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: That's good. Okay, whereby bringing this
application into consistency with the LWRP, addressing the
concerns of the LWRP coordinator.
Board of Trustees 40 October 17, 2018
So I'll move to approve reconstruction of the bridges to be
with non-toxic materials whereby bringing the application into
consistency with the Town's LWRP. That's my motion
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion has been made and seconded. All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
MR. HAGAN: Just for the sake of clarification, all applicants
are aware if they are doing any work within Trustee jurisdiction
with regard to landscaping, that there must be a permit
application made to the Trustees prior to said work. That
applies to every applicant and every person within Trustee
jurisdiction within the Town of Southold.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number ten, STEVEN STARROFF &
NANCY RICKLES request a Wetland Permit for the existing 24.4'
wide by 40.4' long one-story dwelling and to construct an 11.9' wide
by 23.7' long two-story addition onto the landward side of dwelling; and
to construct a 23.7' wide by 24.3' long second-story addition
onto landward side of existing one-story dwelling.
Located: 260 Oak Street, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-136-1-50
The LWRP coordinator found this consistent, provided the
following: That the existing waste water sanitary system is
functional; if an upgrade is necessary, an installation of an IA
system is recommended due to proximity of the parcel to surface waters.
The Conservation Advisory Council resolved to support this
application.
The Trustees conducted a field inspection on October 10th,
noting that the addition was all landward of the house and no
change to septic or amount of bedrooms.
Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this application?
MS. RICKLES: Good evening, Nancy Rickles. It's pretty a
straightforward project, so I'm here to answer any questions
that anyone might have.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: One question I had. You've got a drywell on
the plans. Is that for the roof runoff, gutters to leaders?
MS. RICKLES: Yes.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Anyone else here wishing to speak regarding
this application?
(Negative response).
Any questions or comments from the Board?
(Negative response).
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It's pretty straightforward.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Hearing none, I'll make a motion to close
this hearing.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I'll make a motion to approve in application
as submitted.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
Board of Trustees 41 October 17, 2018
(ALL AYES).
MS. RICKLES: Thank you.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Number eleven, PAUL & SUSAN WACHTER
request a Wetland Permit for a Ten-Year Maintenance Permit to trim the
Phragmites and removal; and to install and perpetually maintain _
a 30' wide non-disturbance buffer along the landward edge of the beach.
Located: 2295 Bay Shore Road, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-53-4-15
The Board most recently visited the property on the 10th of
October. During this visit the Board flagged the limit of
non-disturbance. I would like to see it placed on the survey. Or
come in for a one-time permit to hand-cut phragmites to no less
than 12 inches.
The LWRP found this to be inconsistent. The buffer width at
30 ignores the value and extent of the wetlands on the property,
historically referred to as the flooded area. The
non-disturbance buffer proposal will not work. The activity will
be disturbance in itself. The method of removal is not
identified and should be clarified. It is expected that
vegetation will naturalize the area over time where phragmites
are removed.
The Conservation Advisory Council resolved tor support the
application.
Okay, is there anyone here that wishes to speak regarding
this application?
MS. WACHTER: I'm Susan Wachter. I don't really have anything to
add but I can answer questions, I could possibly answer
questions, if you have any.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: During our visit we observed that 30 feet is
not quite enough to cover the wetland area. And although it has
been mowed for quite some time, we did flag the established
wetland line while we were there. I'm not sure if you saw the flags.
MS. WACHTER: No. Since October 10th?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The day of October 10th.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: If you have lawn maintenance, maybe they
removed them.
MS. WACHTER: We don't have lawn maintenance.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We have a flag line we felt using pretty, it's a
pretty easy area to define, realistically, because it is a flood
area. So it might be appropriate to have an in-person meeting
there. Especially seeing as you have not seen the line yet.
Because we didn't feel the 30-foot would be quite appropriate,
considering what the property is there.
MS. WACHTER: Because that's what was recommended at our
pre-inspection. I think most of your gentlemen were there.
That's why a 30-foot buffer was, that was because of what you
had said.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: The LWRP coordinator on additional review,
than the Board going out, the flooding was apparent and there
were other wetland indicators existing in that area. So we,
upon reconsideration, and the LWRP report, we are trying to make
Board of Trustees 42 October 17, 2018
sure we have the protection necessary also so you can control
the phragmites without coming up against a problem with the bay
constable.
MS. WACHTER: So what do we need to do?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I mean, I think it would be appropriate to --
I'm sorry?
TRUSTEE DOMINO: I wonder if we could put the flags back in again
when the applicant is there.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: They might be there and might have been missed.
They are this tall, 12-,inches tall. Small yellow flags. It might
make sense as the president said to just meet and have a
discussion about where the line is. I mean the other option is
you could also look at where the flags are, if you don't have a
problem with that, we can just reconvene next meeting. But
since we have a field inspection in between anyway, it might
make sense to meet and discuss it. So, with the LWRP report in mind.
MS. WACHTER: Sure.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If that works for you.
MS. WACHTER: That's fine. We are really doing what was
recommended to us. So I'm not, you know, we'll do whatever is
recommended to us next time as well.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Okay. Is there anyone else here that wishes to
speak to this application?
(Negative response).
Hearing no comment, I'll make a motion to table this application.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: We'll take a five-minute break now.
(After a five-minute recess, these proceedings continue as
follows).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: We are back on the record.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Number 12, J.M.O. Environmental Consulting on
behalf of CHARLES & BRENDA GRIMES requests a Wetland Permit to
construct a 15'x24' bluestone patio on sand; stepping stone
paths; 4'x6' steps; a 4'x158' fixed dock utilizing "Thru-Flow"
decking; a 3'x12' ramp; and a 6'x20'float secured by two (2) piles.
Located: 4145 Wells Road, Peconic. SCTM# 1000-86-2-12.6
This is here for continuation on a previous table. We have
two notes in the application, one note is that JMO Environmental
Consulting is no longer the agent on behalf of this application.
I have a letter dated October 4th, 2018, from Charles W. Grimes:
Please be advised we are withdrawing the patio portion of the
wetlands dock permit application that is on file. Based upon the
advice of Trustees we filed a separate Administrative Permit
application for the patio so as not to get that hung up with the
more complicated dock portion of the wetlands dock permit
application. Accordingly, we currently have two permit
applications pending on the file. One, wetlands permit
Board of Trustees 43 October 17, 2018
application for a dock; two, Administrative Permit application
for a patio. Let me know if you need additional information
regarding either permit, either pending permit application.
Sincerely, Charles W. Grimes.
At this point I wish to open the public hearing. Is there
anybody here who wishes to speak to this application?
MR. PATANJO: Jeff Patanjo, on behalf of the applicant. You do
have the forms for this, I believe? Did they send them in?
(Negative response).
MR. PATANJO: Then I'm not here to speak on the application.
MR. HAGAN: If I can clarify some things for the record. Yes,
there was a request from the applicants to remove the patio
portion of this application, and they continued following with
the Administrative Permit portion of the application. That
Administrative Permit for the patio was approved earlier this
evening. I know there has been representations that Mr. Patanjo
was going to be brought on as expediter on this.
Sir, do you have --
MR. PATANJO: I'm working on revised plans for this application for
tonight, which is going to be different from what was originally
submitted.
MR. HAGAN: Okay. But don't have your authorizations in hand to
submit?
MR. PATANJO: I though they submitted them to you. I thought I
saw an e-mail.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: At this point I would make a motion to table
the application pending clarity as to the current agent and the
possible submission of new plans.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Number 13,Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of GREGORY
& NELLIE RAMSEY requests a Wetland Permit to remove existing storm
damaged dock and replace with a proposed 4'x44' long fixed dock
using un-treated decking and supported with 8" diameter piles;
install a proposed 30"x14' aluminum ramp; and install a proposed
6'x20' floating dock using un-treated decking situated in an "L"
configuration and supported by two (2) 10" diameter piles.
Located: 1160 Oakwood Drive, Southold. SCTM# 1000-70-12-29
The Trustees most recent field inspection was on September
12th. The notes are as follows: The present float
configuration impinges on the eastern property line
15-foot setback. Moving the float westward might still give
sufficient water depth but impinge on the westerly neighbors
right to wharf out. See previous field notes. Previous notes
from August 7th, 2018, the Trustees find that insufficient water
depth reached by the dock/float as proposed. Large sandbar
exists further seaward of the proposed dock. There is a
clarification, plans that we are now considering address that.
The plans are submitted received by the Trustees on this
Board of Trustees 44 October 17, 2018
September 24th, 2018.
The LWRP coordinator found this to be inconsistent. The
inconsistency rises from the fact that no permit can be found
for the existing dock.
And lastly, the Conservation Advisory Council voted
unanimously to support this application.
Is there anyone here to speak to this application?
MR. PATANJO: Jeff Patanjo on behalf of the applicant. As you see
on the revised plans, we did modify the original proposal to now
have a 14-foot shorter dock, which still maintains a ramp and a
float. The float is proposed to be held up in place, minimum of
30 inches off the bottom, by four piles of cross braces. And it
also gives more room in the channel area as recommended. And I
think it was originally, but the whole entire dock is
through-flow decking, the whole 30 foot.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: On October 10th we were doing field inspections
in that neighborhood when we saw the flagging. Question. Is the
flagging that see saw on October 10th for this dock
configuration or the previous one?
MR. PATANJO: It should have been this one. And Mr. Ramsey did
it. And I told him to go out the 30 feet plus the actual one for
the dock, the total. It should be 14 foot this way.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Questions from the Board?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Just to clarify, what's the total length of the
dock?
MR. PATANJO: The dock itself is 4x30 long. The ramp is 30 inches
wide by 14-foot long, and the float is six-foot wide. However
the ramp will be on the float by about three feet. So you'll
take eleven, six, 17. So 47 total.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: So that is very much in keeping with the
size of all the other docks that are there.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: I just scaled it off. I got about 48.
MR. PATANJO: Okay.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Any other questions from the Board?
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Just one question. Looking at this map that
we are looking at, you kind of see there is a natural channel
that follows the inside, more or less, it gets shallower the
further out you go.
MR. PATANJO: Correct.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: My concern is if we are going to allow this,
that there is sufficient spacing between the float, the boat, that will
still leave enough of that natural channel available for people to traverse
without having to go into that obviously shallower section
further out into the creek.
MR. PATANJO: Yes. Anybody who is using this channel knows where
it is. And if you look at the water depth survey that we
provided, we are going to be outside of that channel area. And
don't forget the boats here are going to be small because of the
bridge. So, you'll have small 17, 18 footers. Not a big boat.
Which they can be, they'll be easily able to get through that
channel area.
Board of Trustees 45 October 17, 2018
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Is there anyone else who wishes to speak to this
application?
(Negative response).
Hearing no further comment, I make a motion to close this
hearing.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE DOMINO: I make a motion to approve this application as
submitted and depicted on the plans, received September 24th, 2018
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
MR. HAGAN: Can we put a statement that the application reference
the new schematics, for the record.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What about not to impede the channel, should we
put that in?
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Okay, to modify my motion, to include the
dimensions of the dock which will now be 4'x30' long, fixed dock
with 30"x14' aluminum ramp to a 6'x20' float, and noting that
the depiction of the proposed vessel does not impinge upon the
channel.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Next application, number 14, Jeffrey Patanjo
on behalf of 240 WINDJAMMER, LLC requests a Wetland Permit to
remove and replace 15 linear feet of existing bulkhead with new
vinyl bulkhead, and to raise the height of the proposed bulkhead
an additional 12"; install a 6' wide by 15' long deck along the
landward edge of the bulkhead, and provide and perpetually
maintain a 10' wide non-turf buffer along the landward edge of
the bulkhead which will include the proposed decking.
Located: 240 Windjammer Drive, Southold. SCTM# 1000-71-2-11.2
This project is deemed consistent with the LWRP.
The Conservation Advisory Council supports this application
with the recommendation of the non-turf buffer which is included
in the permit application.
The Board has previously acted with respect to the permit
transfer in adopting a permit transfer that the Board stipulated
that the non-turf buffer would have to be installed prior to the
permit transfer.
Is there anyone here who wishes to speak on behalf of this
application?
MR. PATANJO: Jeff Patanjo, on behalf of the applicant. I'm a
touched confused. So prior to the permit transfer they are to
install a ten foot wide non-turf buffer?
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: To bring it into compliance. But I think
it's a matter of discussion for the Board because the permit to
construct or approve and the sod was removed. With the approval
of the Board, that might be subject to inspection. It's because
obviously the new bulkhead will remove more than ten feet. Or
Board of Trustees 46 October 17, 2018
certainly a full ten feet. I just mention it because you were
probably not present when the permit transfers took place that
we bring it into the discussion. It's a bit of a chicken and
egg thing here.
Is there anyone here to speak to this application?
MR. PATANJO: If you have any questions.
MR. HAGAN: The site inspection, the non-turf buffer that was
supposed to be there, was not there. So --
MR. PATANJO: Okay, now that makes sense.
MR. HAGAN: So the transfer of the permit was not approved at
that time, it was tabled and --
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Ten foot of wood chips would probably
satisfy it.
MR. HAGAN: You can't transfer the permit if you are not in
conformity with the permit. So that being said, this project
should have, when you get done with it, should have the non-turf
buffer reinstated.
MR. PATANJO: Okay.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: It was straightforward. The Board viewed it
as a straightforward project with the standard non-turf buffer.
Additional questions or concerns from the Board?
(Negative response).
Anyone else wish to speak to this application?
(Negative response).
Hearing none, I make a motion to close the hearing in this matter.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I'll make a motion to approve this
application as submitted.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Second.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
SCOPING SESSION:
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Scoping session, number one, Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of
KAREN & CAREY FLAHERTY requests a Wetland Permit to remove existing fixed dock
and steps to beach, and replace with a proposed 4'x68' fixed dock supported with 10"
diameter CCA piles; install a seasonal 30"x16' aluminum ramp; install a 6'x20' seasonal
floating dock with un-treated timber decking situated in an "I" configuration and
supported by two (2) 10" diameter CCA piles.
Located: 1077 Bay Home Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-56-5-39.
I'll defer to Trustee Bredemeyer to begin the scoping
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I'm sure counsel will give me some guidance.
So we are here pursuant to the State Environmental Quality
Review Act, and Minutes will be taken and there will be, the
Minutes will reflect the scoping session and items that the
Board is requesting get looked into in the creation of a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement so that you don't have to rely on
taking down notes at this time and have the discussion.
Board of Trustees 47 October 17, 2018
The Board members will state their concerns. So we have a
number of questions and concerns that are drawn from several
field inspections, work sessions and the Board's positive SEQRA
declaration, and some unresolved inconsistency with the Town's
LWRP coordinator report that he enumerated in his April 10th,
2018, report.
In this case, the applicant is proposing to place a
residential recreational dock consisting of a 68-foot catwalk,
16-foot ramp and 20-foot float into public lands and waters on
the northern shore of Southold Bay, New York. The northern
shore stretches from Conkling Point, so 1.6 miles to the east of
the proposed structure, and westerly, approximately 1.1 miles to
the entrance to Town Creek. There are two pre-existing docks
along this approximate 2.7-mile shoreline; one at the
residential property immediately to the west of the proposed was
built under Southold Town Wetland Permit#4485 that was issued
June 29th, 1995. This permit was approved approximately ten
years before major code revisions to Chapter 275 (Wetlands and
Shorelines) that were adopted and implemented, and does not
conform to the modern dock standards common to all the
regulatory agencies; the Town Trustees, the New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation, the United States Army
Corps of Engineers and New York State Department of State.
The second dock is located approximately 1.0 miles to the
west and appears to have been rebuilt since 2013 without a Town
Wetland Permit under the provisions of Chapter 275 and is
presently under investigation as a result of discovery during
developing this scoping list. ,
Okay, the first item is, to the maximum extent practicable,
the Draft Environmental Impact Statement should revisit the
issues of LWRP Coordinator Mark Terry in his April 10th, 2018,
report. We are not going to reiterate that. You can get a copy
of that report.
And then for the part of the discussion tonight, what I
have done is I have --the State Environmental Quality Review
Act is to try to find, in some cases, alternatives or better
alternatives to a project. And so in viewing the proposal
though also understanding typically what the Board does in its
activities, in order to determine the environmental suitability
of the proposed action, in relation to a range of alternatives,
and to mitigate the environmental impacts to the maximum extent
practicable, the draft impact statement, we are requesting that
the questions we ask be addressed and framed into three possible
alternative docking structures, if you will. And then a fourth
alternative would be the no-action alternative.
The three range of alternatives we are proposing is, number
one, would be as proposed largely unmodified. Number two would
be a scaled-down version of a fixed dock without a float but
possibly employing mooring whips or tie-off piles. A third
alternative would be to look at an offshore mooring with
conventional mushroom anchor tackle in the vicinity of the
Board of Trustees 48 October 17, 2018
homeowners. And then the fourth is the no-action alternative.
That's what I have in the beginning of the discussion.
MR. HAGAN: Are there any specific issues from any members of the
Board that they want to mention?
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Yes. I was just waiting for Jeff to finish
conferring.
The question I have with regard to this is what type of
vessel, beam, length, draft, fuel type, is intended; and if it
is currently owned, is there a registration available?
MR. PATANJO: Jeff Patanjo, on behalf of the applicant.
MS. FLAHERTY: I'm Karen Flaherty. And I thank you for having me
tonight. We have a Boston Whaler. The intention would not be to
store the boat there permanently. We understand that we get
storms, and it would be mostly for use during the day, drop
offs, pickups, tie up for a couple hours during the day. That's
the intention.
MR. PATANJO: So to clarify, Greg, it's a Boston Whaler Dauntless;
27 foot; eight-and-a-half foot beam; and it's going to be twin
outboard, gasoline engines.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Is that at a current slip,that you currently use
or is that trailered in or what is that?
MS. FLAHERTY: Right now, it's, in Port of Egypt. Right now.
MR. PATANJO: And I believe we discussed this the last time. The
purpose of the dock is for daily use, when friends come over for
a party, something like that. The boat won't be docked here
overnight. It will remain at another location overnight.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: And then on that.boat, if I may, does that
have, I'm assuming that size, it does not have portable gas
tanks; it has a'built-in fuel cell?
MR. PATANJO: Built-in correct.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Any idea what the gallon capacity is?
MR. PATANJO: Around 125 gallons.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Approximately 100 gallons?
MR. PATANJO: Yes.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Thank you.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Probably more than that. 27 foot boat has
more than a hundred gallons.
Now, as far as this proposed dock, will it impede
navigation in any way? Because that's a fairly busy area,
especially with'all the commercial marinas located just to the east.
MR. PATANJO: If you are heading east/west, let's say east/west,
you are running along the shoreline, I'll add, if you are
running along the shoreline, you have stone,jetties sticking out
just as far as this. The dock immediately to the west that is
currently in existence,,that sticks out approximately 30 or 40
feet further than the proposed dock. And I actually have, and I
believe I presented these in my application, these layout plans
that identify'how far out this dock, the proposed dock, is going
in relation to the neighboring dock. And if you see here, there
is a lot of stone jetties. We are only going out, which is
approximately the length of a float past those existing stone
Board of Trustees 49 October 17, 2018
jetties. So navigation will not be impeded.
MS. FLAHERTY: And also that the channel marker is closer to
Shelter Island, if you go out there. It's really far from --
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Now, with the stone jetties and rocks and
everything in that area, would it be wise to house a boat on a
dock if there is all these rocks right in the neighborhood?
MR. PATANJO: Well, we have very, very good water depth here.
And that was in the consideration when we designed the drawings,
to have adequate water depth at low tide. And water depth at low
tide right now under the float is four foot, at the low tide
point, which would be more than enough space.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Okay, what about the rock jetties that are --
MR. PATANJO: Well, I have not been out there, so, maybe Karen
can --
MS. FLAHERTY: We have been around there on a boat, and pulled up
and anchored outside the property. You turn your engines up a
bit. One of the reasons a mooring won't work, it's rocky if you
get too close to shore. But when you are out 60-plus feet out
from the shore, especially when you turn your engines. I would
not want an inboard engine, but an outboard, you turn it up,
it's not a problem. We've had friends come in. You just don't
want it right on the shore. That's where the rocks are the
worst. When you are out 60 feet, I have not seen it. My neighbor
has been boating there for two decades, so --
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Which neighbor, the one to the east or the
west?
MS. FLAHERTY: The one with the dock. To the west.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: From personal experience, the neighbor to the
east was a customer or is a customer of our marina, and for a
long time he did have a mooring out there with his 20-foot
center console boat, and he didn't, you know, didn't need a
dock.-He had the boat on a mooring for when he wanted to come in
and out. And then he would house it at one of the marinas if
there was overnight or any other time. He would pull it out,
hook it up to the mooring to use in front of his house for the
day, then he would put it back at the marina at night.
MS. FLAHERTY: I don't know the situation on that side of the
jetty. I know where we are, trying to get a boat all the way in
using a mooring ball is not really practicable where we are.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Mr. Patanjo, when you are referring to the
length of the dock versus in comparison to this rock jetty, were
you referring to this photograph that you submitted on February
15th, 2018?
MR. PATANJO: Yes. You see the existing jetties, that's the end
of the actual fixed dock. So it extends a little bit past it.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Here is the float.
MR. PATANJO: Yes. The float is further out. It's just referring
to the fixed dock, because that will be there during the winter.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: In terms of navigation and so forth, just note
that the dock and the boat greatly exceeds the length of the
rock jetties.
Board of Trustees 50 October 17, 2018
MR. PATANJO: Okay. But there is a lot shorter than the
neighboring dock.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: We are not discussing the neighboring dock. I
have a question for you. Have you done, will you complete a
study concerning the impacts to the marine organisms from the
bottom,coverage shading, mechanical imagery, in other words the
bottom coverage of the below mean high water and square feet for
the proposed dock with vessel, scaled back dock with vessel,
and standard mooring tackle. Because the chain from the tackle
scours the bottom and then --
MR. PATANJO: Something like that can absolutely be prepared. The
proposed, it may not be shown on these plans. Let me double
check. But the proposed application, and we don't have it, we
were going to go with a through-flow decking on the whole entire
dock, just for that purpose of letting light through.
Also, the dock needs to be in conformance with the US Army
Corps of Engineers, which is four-foot off sand bottom, which is
going to give plenty of light.
I am holding now a valid New York State DEC permit for this
application. So it's been approved by them.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Basically, my question is yes or no. I mean --
MR. PATANJO: Yes. -
TRUSTEE DOMINO: It's going to be a yes?
MR. PATANJO: Yes.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: In addition, the assessment of beneficial marine
organisms presently in the track of the proposed dock, we would
require a third-party assessment of the density of the
beneficial marine organisms by a competent marine biologist who
will provide the Trustees with a copy of his or her curriculum
vitae; one, Peconic Bay scallops, eel grass, hard clams,
oysters, blue crabs, etc.
MR. PATANJO: We would be happy to provide that. Would the
Trustees be able to provide an acceptable agency and/or person
that--
MR. HAGAN: We can't do that.
MR. PATANJO: Okay, we'll find somebody.
MR. HAGAN: We can't recommend.
MR. PATANJO: One other thing I would like to add just for the
purpose of some clarification'is, I know that part of the
application is concerns of storm damage of the proposed dock. We
have an alternative to what we are proposing, which is the
ten-inch diameter piles, that we would go with all untreated
wood, which is a Greenheart-type wood, which is a lot stronger
than a typical southern yellow pine, CCA treated pile. It will
be no treatment at all. We would go with the 12"-butt pile, put
the piles butt down, and go deeper than needed, which is going
to be structurally very strong, with probably 3x8 cross braces.
And on the last bent, I would propose three piles per bent. But
I know the regulations for use only, but the most seaward pile,
must seaward bent can have three piles. So we would propose
that in addition to cross braces, if that's approvable by the
Board of Trustees 51 October 17, 2018
Board. Cross braces between each vent for structural rigidity.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: This is a scoping session, so when we get
the document then we can respond with a mitigation strategy.
MR. PATANJO: Right.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I would like to just speak to what was briefly
mentioned there. Typically on applications for docks on the bay
in high wave energy environments with a massive fetch, probably
one of the larger that we have seen, the sustainability of a
floating dock, I'm not sure that that is a good idea-for anyone.
Whether it's seasonal or not seasonal, you know, I'm not sure
that it's a safe option. I think the fetch is around
six-and-a-half miles, and I don't know if you looked at other
options beside a float possibly, that would be more in standard
and best practice.
MR. PATANJO: The float option was presented for the client,
obviously is ease of getting on and off the boat. The kids can
jump off it easily for swimming and using the bay as they
purchased the property to utilize.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Speaking from experience, knowing this area
really well, on a normal day a floating dock will be dangerous,
no one is getting on and off, because it gets cranking in there,
and the wave action, and someone can get hurt trying to get on
and off that dock, whether it's a floating dock or a fixed dock.
It's dangerous.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I don't have much to add to that, but living
most of my life since being a 15-year old in Orient Harbor. And
you have about a 1.5 to two-mile fetch from Shelter Island, took .
a 6x20 float and basically destroyed it. And the owners then
converted to"a fixed dock. Particularly where Trustee Goldsmith
grew up there, and I, there is a six-and-a-half mile run, it's
straight six-and-a-half miles to the crest of the beach in
Noyack. It's a long --that's a long fetch with theAght kind
of summer southerly.
The next item in some of our preliminary discussions,is
this: The Budds Pond and Mill Creek and Hashamomuck Pond is on
an acre-rate basis, that's our most productive shellfish land in
the Town. When the Town first started a clam culturing program,
with an open rack system, it was in the Mill Creek by the
bridge, and this area on here-is where it does bump off scallops
is in an area where the commercial fishermen get hundreds if not
thousands of bushels,of scallops right from this area. So we
would, as part of the scoping we would want you to be in touch
with the Southold Town Baymen's Association and get their
position with respect to bottom gear that they regularly use
there and the prevalence of scallops in that area. We believe
that it is an important commercial shellfishing operation. In
fact the Trustees have had preliminary discussions with the
baymen's association to create a spawner sanctuary for shellfish
on the northern part of Hashamomuck Pond, and the productivity
from that pond dumps into Mill Creek and into Budds Pond through
the Port of Egypt channel. So this is an important marine
Board of Trustees 52 October 17, 2018
product to the area.
Also when the fall flag and the town had their shellfish
grow out in the area there, the growth rate of the shellfish in
the pond was the highest of all eastern Suffolk County. In other
words it's extremely high productivity land. So we can provide
you the information for contacting the head of the Southold Town
Baymen's Association.
MR. PATANJO: Okay.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Continuing in that vein, Budds Pond and
associated internal waters are closed administratively to
shellfishing by New York State DEC to protect human health from
accidental release of pathogens. So we would like you to explain
how you are going to handle vessel waste and how many marine
toilets are proposed on the vessel.
MS. FLAHERTY: We would only be dumping, getting rid of waste at
Port of Egypt. We would not dump in the bay at all. There is a
head on the boat. We actually never used it.
MR. HAGAN: Any other points that the Board had?
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Yes. A question. Has any assessment been
done as per soils under dock to ascertain a construction result
in turbidity?
MR. PATANJO: No. We can do soil sampling if you would like
that.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think another one of my concerns, just
circling back to mostly the float. I mean, and also the vessel,
which I understand best intentions, the boat is not going to
stay there overnight or is not staying there for long periods of
time. But things do come up, emergencies happen. All kind of
things could arise. So there is a potential for the boat to be
there, which is a little troubling in that location. But I mean,
if you were not there and the boat was there, or the float was
there, and a storm were to arise, or any basic weather that, any
small storm event, I don't know that you are going to be able to
get a contractor there to pull the boat out or pull the float ,
out if you are not onsite. Because people are going to be busy
taking care of their own things or getting contractors on the
water. You won't get Port of Egypt over there quickly if they
are packing up all the boats at the marina. It's just a general
concern of my mine with storm activity. And again, coming back
to the large fetch.
MS. FLAHERTY: I understand what you are saying for sure. What I
would say is on a perfectly calm summer night, maybe leave it
there overnight. I live in New York City full-time, but I would
never go back home and leave it there. That would just never
happen. It would boggle my mind. I know what you are saying
conceptually. I think in practice that of course would never
happen. If we are there overnight, you know, depending what the
weather forecast is, it's going to be a calm night. But I would
not leave the boat there if I were going to go back. That would
not make any sense to me. It's close enough to bring it back. I
don't see that as a risk. I understand what you are saying of
Board of Trustees 53 October 17, 2018
course, but in practice.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Again, to expand on what Nick said, the boat's
in, something happens, all of a sudden you are back on your way
to the city.
In a sense where you have a mooring tied to the mooring
latch on the boat in the bow plan of the boat, if it's a very
secure water, the amount of wind-that that can withstand is much
more than a rope tied to a dock. And our concern is public
safety, for yourself and your neighbors. If a`storm does come
and now we have a 23-foot boat free, it's going to do damage in
addition to God forbid the boat does sink in an area like that,
we are going to have 100-plus gallons of fuel, oils from the
engine. Where a mooring situation allows the boat to follow the
course of the wind and flow of the tide. When you have it tied
to a fixed dock with that amount of fetch, you know, you get a
two-foot wave come in -- and again, you could come in late, I
get it. You park the boat, all of a sudden out of the morning a
storm comes out, you've got three-foot waves coming in, you
might not be able to get the boat off the dock. It will be stuck
there. And they say Boston Whalers don't sink. I've seen a
few of them sunk. Go into SS Cooper Salvage, you'll see them for
sale. So that's just a concern I have.
MS. FLAHERTY: I mean I have been a boater for 39 years. I have
a lot of respect for boats. I think coming in late at night, you
just go straight back to Port of Egypt and walk a mile home.
Planning ahead is 99% of everything in my view.
TRUSTEE WILLIAMS: Again, just the other concern of public
safety. If the float does break loose, you-know, we have --
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Now, as far as no-action alternatives. Have
you considered a slip at the homeowners association marina right
inside Willow Pond there?
MS. FLAHERTY: Those are deeded to the properties. They are
not ours.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: You are not part of that property
association?
MS. FLAHERTY: We are not. We are the only ones in that complex
that are not part of that. Except for our neighbor who has a dock.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Okay. And as far as dockage with any of the
other marinas that are conveniently located right next to you,
is there any reason in particular you want to get out of there?
MS. FLAHERTY: I would still keep that, but it's very different
when you are hanging out and being able to wrap up the boat for
a couple of hours, go back in, it's not the same as having to go
to a marina. It's a different thing. Launching kayaks, all those
things. I tried launching kayaks from the rocky beach there.
It's not fun. It's hard to get out to the water. And, that's a
challenge of a mooring ball.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Again, because of the rocky shore, the rocky -- .
MS. FLAHERTY: Correct. But once you get out 60 feet, the rocks
are low enough that you are not--
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Okay, how about if as you stated this is
Board of Trustees 54 October 17, 2018
pretty much load,and unload, and, you know, just kind of not a
permanent base for your boat, have you ever considered an
onshore staking system? Because if you are just pulling in for
a quick unload/offload, have you considered having the stake and
pulley system or something similar?
MS. FLAHERTY: I think it's the same challenge with the rocks,
you try to pull the boat into shore, there are rocks when you
bring the boat in, within 20 feet from shore', the rocks are
shallow enough, it's hard to hit your boat. And I think that
creates a number of,challenges for that. And I have been, in the
morning usually it's very calm, so I swim every inch of that
with a snorkel and mask and I know where everything is, and
there are rocks pretty much on both sides when you come to the
shore. So getting a boat in.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: As part of your EIS we would like to see that
as a consideration and answer why or why not that might be
appropriate in that location. I think that is something to
include in that report, please .
Does anybody else have any other questions?
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: I guess we are pretty much --
MR. PATANJO: I have a question. One of the comments I read in
the SEQRA determination was access along the beach line. We
didn't discuss that yet but we are willing to install stairs if
they were requested. The shoreline is not easily accessible at
all due to the stone jetties. So stairs really would not be,
they would not serve a purpose, other than the homeowner
actually getting down to the beach, well, the rocks that are
down there.
MR. HAGAN: Just to clarify, this is just a scoping session. We
are trying to voice concerns. So those are things that you
would put into your draft EIS statement so this way it's not
like you are --this is not a permit session. So those are
things you can include in that draft EIS.
Anything further that anyone from the Board has for the
scoping session?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's all I have for now.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: That's it.
MS. FLAHERTY: I think you guys are raising some good concerns,
and I certainly think the dock that is built has to be built to
withstand potential storms. I know my neighbor's dock is
standing, and we are talking vinyl siding, thru-flow deck. All
things that should have stability in a storm.
TRUSTEE BREDEMEYER: Thank you, very much.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you for coming in.
MS. FLAHERTY: Thank you, for your time.
TRUSTEE DOMINO: Motion to adjourn.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second, aye
TRUSTEE DOMINO: All in favor?
(ALL AYES).
Board of Trustees 55 October 17, 2018
Respectfully submitted by,
0
Michael J. Domino, President
Board of Trustees