Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-12/17/2003 Albert J.Krupski, President 0�� C�� Town Hall `Z O James King,Vice-President h y� 53095 Route 25 Artie Foster co : P.O.Box 1179 Ken Poliwoda Z Southold,New York 11971-0959 Peggy A.Dickerson �,fi� Telephone(631) 765-1892 Oj �a Fax(631) 765-1366 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MINUTES Wednesday, December 17, 2003 7:00 PM Present were: Albert J. Krupski, Jr., President James King, Vice-President Artie Foster, Trustee Kenneth Poliwoda, Trustee Peggy Dickerson, Trustee E. Brownell Johnston, Esq. —Assistant Town Attorney for Trustees Lauren Standish, Secretarial Assistant CALL MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: Monday, January 19, 2004 at 8:00 AM TRUSTEE KING moved to Approve, TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES NEXT TRUSTEE MEETING: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 at 7:00 PM WORKSESSION: 6:00 PM TRUSTEE KING moved to Approve, TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES APPROVE MINUTES: Approve Minutes of November 19, 2003. TRUSTEE DICKERSON moved to Approve, TRUSTEE FOSTER seconded. ALL AYES I. MONTHLY REPORT: The Trustees monthly report for November 2003. A check for $5,719.36 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. 2 III. APPLICATIONS FORAMEN DMENTSMAIVERS/CHANGES: 1. Garrett A. Strang, R.A. on behalf of NANCY CARROLL requests a One-Year Extension to Permit#5481. Permit is to modify and reconstruct the existing deck with a new configuration, increasing the setback from the existing bulkhead, to construct a second-floor addition over the existing dwelling, and for an addition of a new garage on the northeast corner of the premises. Located: 350 West Lake Dr., Southold. SCTM#90-1-21 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Does the Board have any comment? TRUSTEE KING: Nothing has changed. It's just a simple extension. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to Approve the One-Year Extension. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES 2. Richard MacMurray on behalf of CROSS SOUND FERRY SERVICES, INC. requests a One-Year Extension to Permit#5408 to complete the work required under permit. Located: Route 25, Orient. SCTM#15-9-15.1 TRUSTEE FOSTER: I looked at this and it is substantially underway. I don't know what they want the extension for. I would say there is no problem. I'll make that motion. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES 3. STEVEN T. &ANDREA KOLYER request a Transfer of Permit #5672 from Helen Didrikson to Steven T. & Andrea Kolyer to construct a fixed dock, ramp, and float. Located: Robinson Rd., Southold. SCTM#81-1-9&10 TRUSTEE POLIWODA: We approved the original application so I don't see how we could deny it right now. I'll make a motion to Approve it. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES 4. PETER COSOLA requests an Amendment to Permit#5798 to add a 3'X 30' extension to the front of the house based on the footprint of the previously granted permit. Note: application to install a new septic system has been withdrawn. Located: 2880 Minnehaha Blvd., Southold. SCTM#87-3-43 TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Did anyone see this? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Wasn't there some sort of a controversy over this? LAUREN STANDISH: It was Tabled last month because of the septic system, but he withdrew that request. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Okay. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: The CAC recommends Approval. Does anyone else have any comment? TRUSTEE FOSTER: What's the disposition of the septic system. Is it just withdrawn or is it going to be applied for in another location? TRUSTEE DICKERSON: It's just withdrawn. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do they show drywells? TRUSTEE DICKERSON: It's a wetland permit to construct a second-story addition to the existing dwelling with the condition gutters and drywells are installed to contain the roof run-off and silt fence. 3 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there a stamped plan in there that shows the gutters and drywells? TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Yes, October 9, 2003. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Okay, good. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I'll make a motion to Approve. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES 5. BARBARA A. BRUNJES requests an Amendment to Permit#5194 to remove and reconstruct in same location 70' of existing bulkhead. Located: 975 Arshamomaque Ave., Southold. SCTM#66-3-5 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What is the amendment? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: It has a bow in it. I was just concerned with the bow, and maybe they should pull it back and make it in-line with the neighbors' when they do the work. TRUSTEE KING: Why are they amending it? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: It was something like 14'X 14' also. Maybe that was the addition. JOHN HOCKER: Kenny, if you need any in-sight on that, I did the work. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Okay. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What is the amendment for? JOHN HOCKER: She had originally gotten permits...actually her DEC permit allows for replacing the entire bulkhead. The original permit you gave her is for the 14'X 14'jog, which has been replaced. At the time, she didn't have the money and she didn't think the rest of the wall was a big enough problem to do the rest of it. She would like to replace the rest of the wall. It's not 70', it's about 55'. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Can you straighten that belly out when you do it? JOHN HOCKER: What belly are you referring to? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It shows as a straight line on the drawing but Ken inspected it and saw there was a belly in it. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: It was in the 14'X 14' area. (talking) The two neighbors are tied into together. It might be part of the neighbor's wall because it seems like there is more than 55'. JOHN HOCKER: (inaudible)...it will be straight. TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to Approve the amendment. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES 6. Mark K. Schwartz, AIA on behalf of AGNES S. COMBS requests an Amendment to Permit #5646 for the proposed additions and alterations to the existing single- family dwelling. Located: 6525 Indian Neck Lane, Peconic. SCTM#86-6-24 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The original permit was for a complete reconstruction. The original permit was October 16, 2002 to remove the existing dwelling and construct a new dwelling, etc. and this, I believe, is just to amend that to add onto what would be south side, the landward side of that. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: It's very minor compared to what it was. 4 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I just want to look and make sure we included drywells. I'll make a motion to Approve the amendment with the Condition that drywells and gutters be added to contain the roof run-off and then...how is the DEC permit written? Do you need a silt fence or a barrier, or hay bales? MARK SCHWARTZ: We don't have a permit from DEC yet. We applied. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Okay, I guess a row of staked hay bales near the top of the bank during construction. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: With the amendment, where is the septic system in relation to the wetlands? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Good question. MARK SCHWARTZ: To the south of the house. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It's more than 100'. You can just draw it in on one of the copies we have here. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES 7. Proper-T Permit Services, Inc. on behalf of GREGORY MAZZANOBILE requests an Amendment to Permit #5631 to allow the new proposed location of the sewage disposal system and the necessary fill and retaining wall. Located: 1460 Lake Dr., Southold. SCTM#59-1-21.6&21.7 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Did you see that memo in there Artie? TRUSTEE FOSTER: No. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It's a memo from Mark Terry. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Oh, I met Mark out there on site. Do you want me to read this? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes. TRUSTEE FOSTER: As we discussed, 1 had a telephone conversation 11119103 with Greg Mazzanobile regarding the setback to the septic system. Mr. Mazzanobile questioned my recommendation that the setbacks be set to the maximum extent possible. 1 explained to Mr. Mazzanobile that the community he has chosen to build within is adjacent to and most likely within; is in a rare community and that all mitigative measures to reduce impacts, habitat loss, erosion, water quality impacts, and so forth will be taken. Mr. Mazzanobile acknowledged that he was aware that the community is unique. He proceeded to explain his situation with the neighbor's well. The well location is unknown and therefore in an attempt to meet SCDOH standards, has requested that the Trustees decrease the setbacks to the wetlands. I explained to him that the Trustees have already compromised the setbacks and the distance to the well is solely under SCDOH jurisdiction and a Board of Appeals variance from that department should be sought. He agreed. 1 pointed out to him that he already holds a valid permit for the septic system in the front yard from the Trustees and based upon the sensitive nature of the community, it would be difficult to justify a decrease in setbacks. The house could be resized or re-orientated. He indicated that he would pursue the SCDOH route. Based on such, 1 would recommend that the Trustees not produce an impact assessment report for the septic system at this time. I would recommend that the Trustees issue a letter to the agent referencing this telephone conversation and verifying the intent of the applicant. 5 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I read that and I didn't see why it was the Town's responsibility to make contact between the applicant and his agent. So, I didn't respond as Mr. Terry suggested that we respond. TRUSTEE FOSTER: The Health Dept.? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, he suggested the Trustees issue a letter to the agent referencing this telephone conversation verifying... E. BROWNELL JOHNSTON: His own agent. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Oh, I'm sorry. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I thought the applicant should be responsible. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Well the Board's position is, if I understand it correctly, in meeting with Mark Terry and discussing it as we had, that it was our position that we were going to deny the amendment because he has a permit from our agency already to place a septic system there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But we really wanted something from a professional stating the reasons why it was denied. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Okay, I understand. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't know if Mr. Fitzgerald has any comments on this matter. JIM FITZGERALD: I didn't hear a word either of you said. So, I'm kind of at a disadvantage. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Did you hear the letter? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Can everyone else hear us? AUDIENCE: We hear you fine. JIM FITZGERALD: First of all, I would like to indicate that Mr. Mazzanobile was not agreeing with Mr. Terry to eliminating our application for an amendment. He was having a telephone conversation with him and I would like for us to do our business here instead of the two of them on the telephone. Secondly, with regard to Mark Terry's report, I assume you are all familiar with the Natural Heritage Manual and where all that stuff came from that he's talking about. No? The Natural Heritage Manual, which is a thing issued by the DEC in 1990, has a so-called double filter method for selecting a particular community in this case, and you go to letter "A" and it says is it, and I'm just making things up, is it wet or is it dry? If it's dry, you go to "B" and if it's wet you go to "C" and then there are two more choices there and it keeps going further and further down, until you finally get to a point where you look up in the manual a list of descriptions of a number of different communities and you pick out the one that looks right. The one that includes the community that he has indicated has a global significance of four or five "G" and a state significance of two, indicates that it must be wet soil and they must be populated mainly by hydrophobic plants. Now, I don't think anybody has looked at that soil. I don't think it was looked at which regard to the inspection. I don't think he's chosen the proper community and therefore I don't think that the S2 designation for the state values, state ranking, is valid. It might be the same number but, as I said, I think he's got the wrong community. The Corp. of Engineers in their wetland delineation manual indicates that there are three categories of indicators; vegetation, the soil, and the hydrology. As far as I know, the only thing that we heard anything about was cranberries. The mere 6 presence of a cranberry bush does not a wetland make, in my humble opinion. So, I think what I'm saying is that the Trustees are protectors of our wetlands and not just our cranberries and I think you ought to take that into account. I think also that the fact that the sanitary system we are proposing now is 50' from the edge of the wetland, which I'm sure Kenny is not thrilled about, or Peggy, but I think it's far enough away so that it would be difficult for us together, the Trustees and Jim Fitzgerald, to figure out what would be the adverse affect on that wetland, if indeed it is a wetlands, if the septic system were put where we're proposing it. Do you think it would die? Would the cranberry bush die? I don't think so. That's why I don't understand the concept of protecting it by staying away from it because your mandate includes regulating the use of our wetlands for recreation, aesthetic appeal, commerce, and things like that, not just conservation. Conservation is one of the items in the paragraph that describes the Trustees activities. So, the last thing is that if we move the septic system further away from the wetlands, where I don't think it's going to have any adverse affect on the wetlands, we're moving it closer to somebody's lawn, and I think the chances of there being an adverse affect there are greater. What I'm suggesting is, it would really be a good idea to approve the amendment. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Let me�ust read the letter that Mark Terry sent to us that we received on November 18t . JIM FITZGERALD: If you're reading it for my benefit, I have a copy of it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No. (Trustee Krupski read letter dated November 18, 2003 in file.) JIM FITZGERALD: I have a point with regard to the letter. I'm going to read what one of the lines that's in the letter, and then I'm going to read where the quotation came from. This had to do with the state ranks. S2-typically 6 to 20 occurrences, few remaining individuals, acres or miles of stream, with factors demonstrably making it very vulnerable in New York State. The quotation in the manual is "typically 6 to 20 occurrences, few remaining individuals, acres or miles of stream, or very vulnerable to extirpation in New York State for other reasons". They are different. Or for other reasons is a separate and unspecified magical category. One of the points that you ought to take into account is these rankings in the manual are based upon New York State. This community would be very rare to a person who lived in Buffalo, or Albany. There is a lot of New York State other than where we are so that the rarity of this particular community is spread out all other the entire state, and ends up with an S2 rating. So again, what I'm suggesting is that I don't think he has any reason to say it is locally rare, or whatever the words are. I don't that's so, or I don't think he has any basis for making that statement. That's all. Thank you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Does the Board have any comment on this? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: My comment is, I denied the original permit application so I don't see any reason why I would change my stance on this project and approve the amendment. JIM FITZGERALD: Would anybody on the Board be comfortable telling me what they think would happen to that small area of wetland, that cranberry bush, if we put that septic system 50' away from it? What would happen to it? Would it die? 7 Would it get sick, turn yellow, stop giving cranberries? That's what I don't understand. I agree that you should protect the wetlands but I don't think requiring that the distance between the septic system, and in this particular case, this wetlands, is going to afford any more protection than putting it 100' away. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Well let me ask you something now. What do you think the difference between putting that septic system 75' from that neighbor's well as opposed to 100'? JIM FITZGERALD: Personally, I don't think there would be any difference at all. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Then how come it can't be done? JIM FITZGERALD: It can be done. If you deny this amendment, it will be done. But, when you deny the amendment I would like to know what the reason is. Not just for this. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well our concern here is...if we make a decision on this tonight, the decision is going to be based specifically on this site, and not referencing any other site. This is a very unusual site and I don't want to say, we'll we think the setback should be here and then it should be the same everywhere. I want to address what Artie just said. You said, well what's the difference between...or you think this septic system is going to impact the neighbor's well more than the cranberry bog, but I don't understand...what do you base that on? JIM FITZGERALD: What do I base what on? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You said you thought the septic system is going to affect the neighbor's well more than the cranberry bog. JIM FITZGERALD: Based upon not anything that I am familiar with, other than the fact that the Health Dept. gets very itchy about things like that and I would think that the Trustees would, but on the other hand, it's not your thing, the neighbor's well. I would think given a choice between putting a septic system closer to a well and closer to a wetlands area, that most people would chose to put it closer to the wetland area, if it's not going to harm it. I have a septic system on my property that's been 60' away from the well for 20 years and I'm more or less okay, as a result. So, I don't think it's a significant thing. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I think we should go with what our Environmental Consultant is saying. We've got Mark Terry's rational behind the denial. TRUSTEE FOSTER: When we request the opinion of a qualified person and you don't accept it, that ought to tell you something. That's why we asked for it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Make the motion. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Any further discussion on this application for an amendment? I'll make a motion to Deny the amendment. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Give a few reasons why. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Well the Board discussed this and the reasons we decided to Deny this was because of all the things you've heard tonight. We had an environmental consultant look at it, made his recommendation, and we did approve the septic system in the originally requested position. At that particular time it met all of our criteria and it was Denied because the amendment wanted to move it closer, which was going to infringe on our rules and regulations and 8 we decided not to allow that. They have to make an application to the Board of Review for the Health Dept. I did speak with the owner of the property who has the well on it and he's not opposed to having his well moved if somebody wants to pay for it or even hook up to public water. He said he would be acceptable to that. JIM FITZGERALD: Which neighbor was that Artie? TRUSTEE FOSTER: There is one well involved that's too close to the septic system. That man was in the office one day when I was in there and wanted to know the disposition of this and I'm not sure if the gentleman is here tonight. I don't see him here. But, he was not opposed to hooking up to public water, as long as he didn't have to pay for it. He just spent $3,000 plus dollars having that well put in there not long ago and didn't feel he should have to sacrifice that money and then have to pay for public water. 8. En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of SANDRA & FRANK CURRAN requests an Amendment to Permit #4666 to install a 3'X 12' double-hinged ramp and 5'X 12' low-profile kayak float off existing fixed dock. (No pilings to be installed.) Located: 560 Fisherman's Beach Rd., Cutchogue. SCTM#111-1-16 MORATORIUM TRUSTEE DICKERSON moved to go off the Regular Meeting and onto the Public Hearings, TRUSTEE FOSTER seconded. ALL AYES IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS: THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING IN THE MATTER OF THE FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS UNDER THE WETLANDS ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. I HAVE AN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION FROM THE TRAVELER WATCHMAN. PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE MAY BE READ PRIOR TO ASKING FOR COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMMENTS ORGANIZED AND BRIEF. FIVE (5) MINUTES OR LESS IF POSSIBLE 1. PETER'S NECK ASSOCIATION requests a Wetland Permit to replace, in-kind, approx. 560 linear ft. of old and decayed wood bulkheading on both sides, on a raised access road. Fill on each side of roadway to be removed, stored on site, then re-installed. Located: Peter's Neck Rd., Orient. SCTM#32-1-3 TRUSTEE FOSTER: Is there anybody to speak in reference to this application? RITCHIE LATHAM: I'm Ritchie Latham for the Peter's Neck Association. It's all a family compound there and mostly old people, real old people, like me, and we need the access road. It's the only access we have to get out and in, for emergency trucks and everything. I think we made a slight error. It's 540'. 1 9 made the error. It's a little less. Other than that, I think you've seen it and I think we've done everything we were supposed to do and we just await your pleasure. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We asked to plans and we received a cross-section, which is in the file. TRUSTEE FOSTER: I think it was the general feeling of the Board...we all looked at this and felt that the method in which it was going to be done, as well as the project itself, was something that we agreed upon. Do we all agree with that? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I agree with that statement. I just appreciate the low- profileness of the project. RITCHIE LATHAM: Well we're going to replace it in exactly the same place. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: It would be the same height. RITCHIE LATHAM: It would be the same height. We're not going to change anything. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: That's fine then. RITCHIE LATHAM: All the work would be done from the roadway. We won't go in the meadows or in the water. It would be done right on the road. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Okay. RITCHIE LATHAM: We're hoping not to disturb anything at all. The less the disturbance the better, for us. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Any other Board comments? Any public comments? I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE FOSTER: I'll make a motion to Approve the application. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES 2. JOSEPH P. ULRICH, DOROTHY C. ULRICH & SUSAN B. ULRICH request a Wetland Permit to construct a second-floor addition to the existing single-family dwelling. Located: 2345 Mill Creek Dr., Southold. SCTM#51-6-39 TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Is there anyone who would like to comment on this application? PHIL ULRICH: I am Dorothy and Joseph's son. This is my sister Susan. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Would you like to comment? PHIL ULRICH: We wish to install a dormer on the second floor of the existing attic location, just so we could have some additional living space in the house. The footprint of the house is unchanged as this is a second-floor. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Any other public comments? As for Board comments, I visited the site and I found this to be very minor in nature, as stated. It doesn't change the footprint. It's just a simple dormer with no environmental impact. With that, I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. TRUSTEE DICKRESON: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'll make a motion to Approve the application to construct a second-floor addition. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES 10 3. HENRY HUECKER requests a Wetland Permit to expand the existing cesspool system landward of the existing system. Located: 3300 Deep Hole Dr., Mattituck. SCTM#115-17-12 POSTPONED UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE AS PER THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST 4. JOHN HURTADO, JR. requests a Wetland Permit and Coastal Erosion Permit to re-shingle the roof, replace wood siding with new wood siding, replace windows and re-build bluff stairs. Located: 19725 Soundview Ave., Southold. SCTM#51- 4-1 TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Is there anyone here who would like to speak to this? CHUCK BOWMAN: I'm from Land Use Ecological Services representing John Hurtado, Jr. This is a simple application. Under Article 34, the Coastal Erosion Hazard regulations, the reconstruction, or maintenance of a dwelling is certainly a permitted activity. The dwelling is not going to be expanded. New roof, new siding, new windows, and other renovation type work. Mr. Hurtado is here to answer any question and I'd be happy to answer them as well. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Are there any other comments from the public? Any comments from the Board? CHUCK BOWMAN: Mr. Hurtado is here. E. BROWNELL JOHNSTON: For the record, would he indicate that you're authorized to speak? CHUCK BOWMAN: I'm sure he will. JOHN HURTADO: I'm John Hurtado, Jr. That's fine. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: The CAC recommends Approval of the application with the Stipulation that the stairs are rebuilt in-kind and with no treated lumber. Do you have a problem with that? CHUCK BOWMAN: None whatsoever. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It looked pretty straight-forward to me. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I'll make a motion to Approve the application. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES 5. Land Use Ecological Services, Inc. on behalf of JOHN HURTADO, JR. requests a Wetland Permit to cut and remove existing vines that are killing mature trees, remove dead or diseased shrubs, and non-native species, in order to improve the health of the vegetation located within the buffer area. Located: 2670 Grand View Dr., Orient. SCTM#14-2-3.6 TRUSTEE KING: Is there anyone here that wishes to comment on this application? CHUCK BOWMAN: This application, and the subdivision, certainly most properly requested that a buffer be established at the top of the bluff. The purposes of buffers are generally to keep intrusion to the bluff edge to keep fertilizers from running down the bank and to prevent erosion to the bluff itself. In the case of the vegetation within this bluff, there are certainly a lot of native plants and trees, 11 however, there are some evasive species that are adversely affecting especially some of the mature trees, Virginia Creeper primarily, and Bittersweet. With very close supervision, because I know the Board probably has concerns on how this is done, and it would only be under close supervision, the vines would be cut, some of the non-natives, there's privet in there, there's a few other species, would be removed by hand. There would be no mechanical equipment, no bulldozers, if you will, and it would be just some pruning of dead trees, removing the vines, removing some of the non-natives, and that way, and if you look at the project description, there is a type-o on it. It says it would increase the "greenhouse", and it should be "greater light penetration". But, you would get more light coming into the under-story, which is actually going to end up being a healthier under-story at that point. So, if the Board has any questions on how it would be done, I would just like to re-iterate it would be under strict supervision. I had already talked to John about actually getting an arborist or myself and we could go in and actually mark and supervise the work that was going to be done there so we wouldn't have a problem. TRUSTEE FOSTER: So, you're going to supervise it? CHUCK BOWMAN: Either myself or a qualified arborist would have to supervise it. I have no problem doing it. John and I work together all the time. Specifically, we're going to pick the trees, take them out by hand, prune this dead limb off here...it's going to be that selective. In fact, I think you're going to end up with a better buffer. TRUSTEE KING: Any other comments? The Conservation Advisory,Council recommended Approval with the Stipulation that non-turf zones be maintained and no mature trees are to be removed. CHUCK BOWMAN: I can just tell you from my own experience, it has to be supervised. That's when you get into trouble because then the guys from the landscaping company go out there with chainsaws and that's a problem. But, if it's done properly with hand tools, we're going to end up with a better buffer. I'm sure that would be a condition of the permit. TRUSTEE KING: Any other comments or comments from the Board? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We always rail about the integrity of the buffers and whatnot, and normally the buffers on a creek, where you're really buffering the human habitation with the habitat of the native species of the plants and animals that live there, and it's a buffer to the wetland itself. In this case, the top of the bluff, and we scaled it off, it was about 100' from the high water mark and so the buffer here isn't really a wetland issue, because I believe, technically, it's non- jurisdiction as far as wetlands. The buffer here is more of a coastal erosion issue and so this is completely different than any kind of a buffer that we address on the creeks or the wetlands, whether it is freshwater or inter-tidal. So, in this case, when we first went out, we looked at this buffer, I know I did, as a buffer to the wetland inter-tidal of freshwater wetland area, which this really isn't and as long as the pruning, and obviously it's pruning for a view, as long as that pruning is done selectively so as not to damage the integrity of the bluff, then it would satisfy both needs, one, maintaining the bluff, and two, providing a view. 12 CHUCK BOWMAN: You have to understand the topography goes up from the house up to the bluff so we don't have a drainage problem. It's all going the other way and I really do believe that with the selective pruning, you're going to get a better under-story and you're going to get a better habitat. You're going to get rid of some of these invasive species and it's pretty innocuous. You're actually going to add to the stability of the bluff by promoting better root growth. TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to Approve the application with the Stipulation that all the trimming is done by hand, no machinery in there, and it's monitored so it's done correctly. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We'll we can put in for one inspection at the end. Do you want to put a time limit on this? CHUCK BOWMAN: Well it should be done during the dormant season. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Say now until April Vt? CHUCK BOWMAN: April 1st is great. E. BROWNELL JOHNSTON: An inspection on April 1st? CHUCK BOWMAN: That's fine. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES 6. Jonathan S. Foster, AIA on behalf of SANDRA SCHPOONT requests a Wetland Permit to construct a second-floor addition to the existing single-family dwelling. Located: 630 Ruch Lane, Southold. SCTM#52-2-26 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak on behalf of the application? JONATHAN FOSTER: What we've proposed is a one and a half story house where there is now a presently a one-story house. A half story means that the roof starts exactly where the roof starts now with a one-story house and it comes up so you don't have a whole second-story of vertical walls going up. The house . is about between 23' and 24' tall and we've taken some pictures of other houses on the street. This house is probably about 32'. This is a one and a half story house at 24'. This house right next door is about 20'. It's sort of a one and a quarter and at the end of the street there is a 30' house and a 25' house, nearby also. These houses are on a street where basically they were cottages and cottages were near each other and they are all being upgraded. Almost'every one of these houses has been upgraded or started out to be a taller house. So, the idea here was to be a friendly neighbor on the street, and to have a sensitive house. I also looked at the orientation of the house and we have a survey here, which shows the orientation of the house. North is at the top of this board and south is at the bottom, of course. Where it's yellow is the summer sun from sun up to noon and where this blue part is, this is the winter sunrise until winter noon. By that I mean this is the longest day of the year, June 21st, and this is the shortest day of the year, December 21st. So, on December 21st the sunrise comes right across here. By sunrise it means that the sun is at water level and it's not going to hit anything. It's going to hit the ground and the trees. By 8:00 AM, the sun is right here at this angle coming in at 14 degrees from the so-called 13 level. At 8:00 AM the sun comes in and hits the front of the house and hits back into this back area. At sunrise, the sun is right here. So from sunrise when the sun starts to hit something, it will always be hitting this house, even on December 21St, the shortest day of the year. At noon, sunrise just happens to be at 8:00 AM here. At noon, which is just four hours later, it's coming in at 28 degrees, which is twice this and is going to be hitting everything. So what I'm saying is even at sunrise, it will hit the whole southeastern part of the house. I also did a little sketch, which you didn't get earlier of the one and a half story dwelling. This is just the idea sketch and it's got more detailing to go. But, showing the nature of house, the roof starts exactly in the same place and in actuality, we moved it back on this side 5' so the roof actually starts 5' further away from the property line. This little addition stays. That's all I have to say for now. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Any other comment? ANN CLEMENTS: I am the immediate next door neighbor at 560 Ruch Lane. I feel sure that the reason for Mr. Foster's presentation about the light was my comments to Sandy not to long ago when she informed me of what their plan was, and that I was very concerned it was going to block my light. What I've done, you should be in possession of a fax that I sent 1:48 PM on December 10th. Do you have that? Do you want me to read it into the record or do you want me to? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Go right ahead. ANN CLEMENTS: Dear Board Members: This letter is in reference to the proposed addition my immediate neighbor is planning. In speaking with Ms. Schpoont as well as reviewing architectural drawing she supplied me with, I have serious concerns regarding this addition. If a second story is added to her small cottage, my home will suffer a significant decrease in eastern morning light as well as my view of the pond, the pond, which both homes are located. Both of my bedrooms are located on the eastern side of my home and this wonderful morning light is a big part of why I enjoy this home so much. It's also of major value to the property and would be very important where I to sell this home. Losing this light and having a large home within a few feet would significantly decrease my properties market value. Our homes are only 30'apart. In fact, the land upon which the Schpoont cottage is located was until 1974 my cottages side yard. The previous owner sold off this land in 1974 and their boat house was pulled up from the pond and turned into what is now the Schpoont cottage. I will attend the December 17th meeting and provide photographs, which clearly show how close these homes are. The proposed addition to their cottage will reach a center ridge-line height of approximately 24; significantly blocking my light. Most of the homes on this side of the private road are low bungalow type structures and the few one and a half and two-story homes that have been built have large side yards that separate them from their neighbors. In closing, I would like to say that as much as I regret upsetting my neighbors, as I'm sure this is, I must protect my properties value and the quality of life I enjoy in it and I respectfully submit to the Town Trustees my request that this permit request be denied. I would like to bring the pictures up. They are all clearly labeled. The houses are very, very close together. I'm not really sure, technically Mr. Foster, you quality at 14 one and a half story even though there is a full bedroom, full bath, fireplace, everything up there, and that is not a half a story, that's a story. JONATHAN FOSTER: A full story means that they are going from edge to edge and you're taxed as a full story. If you don't build inside, if you don't build all the way to the edge, which we're not, we're maintaining the roof-line, the actual usable space is taxed...it's a percent less (inaudible). ANN CLEMENTS: My concern is that the houses are so close together and there are six cottages right in a row. There's mine and then there are five more. (inaudible) There are six little tiny cottages right in a row and if theirs go up it will be very odd looking, especially with the fireplace in the front. JONATHAN FOSTER: There is no fireplace. ANN CLEMENTS: Well if these aren't the correct plans, well then I'll have to get the correct plans. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'm going to ask Trustee Poliwoda, who clams regularly in front of these houses if he thinks this change is going to have any kind of an affect on the environment. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I don't believe there would be much of an environmental impact upon creating an addition to this home. ANN CLEMENTS: Environmentally I'm not addressing that. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Well that's why we're here. ANN CLEMENTS: The Building Dept. said I had to come to this if I had a problem with it being built. I was notified by certified letter with the plan so what's the redress? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Well we give an environmental decision. ANN CLEMENTS: Well where do I take it from here? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't know. I would imagine they would have certain ability to build a certain size structure on that certain size land through the zoning code. Our concern is how any change here would affect Arshamomaque Pond. ANN CLEMENTS: That's fine. I was just doing what I was told. There's got to be a redress somewhere. What if my neighbor decided to cover their house with neon? TRUSTEE KING: Do you need any kind of a variance from the Zoning Board? JONATHAN FOSTER: Not yet. TRUSTEE FOSTER: What's the projected increase percentage wise? JONATHAN FOSTER: The percentage increase is less than 50% of usable space. TRUSTEE FOSTER: You'll probably have to go before the Zoning Board of Appeals. You might have to go there but we just deal with environmental issues. ANN CLEMENTS: Well I apologize for taking up your time but the Building Dept. told me this is where I should go. This is very confusing. TRUSTEE FOSTER: This really doesn't create any environmental issues with us. ANN CLEMENTS: That's not my concern either. That's fine. So when you guys got that letter, I wish you would've called me and tell me I didn't have to come. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But we don't know. That's why we have the public hearing because all kinds of things come up. Lot's of things come out at the hearing. We would never call and say don't bother coming. 1 15 ANN CLEMENTS: What about setback and stuff? TRUSTEE FOSTER: That's the Zoning Board of Appeals and Building Dept. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'm going to ask the applicant to provide us with drywells and gutters to contain the roof run-off. You can just put them on the plans later. I don't know of you want hay bales here. JONATHAN FOSTER: The DEC suggested hay bales or something during construction. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If there is no other comment, do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE KING: So moved. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to Approve the application with the condition that drywells be installed to contain the roof run-off and that the line of hay bales be placed at the top of the bluff during construction. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES 7. Agnieszka Drozkowska on behalf of JOHN F. BETSCH requests a Wetland Permit and Coastal Erosion Permit to construct a two-story single-family dwelling with a two-car garage in place of the existing one-story, two-car garage and dwelling, and to be built on wood pilings. Located: 2325 North Sea Dr., Southold. SCTM#54-4-24 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would anyone like to speak in favor of the application? JOHN BETSCH: I'm John Betsch. At the November 17th meeting, I had presented my request to rebuild and replace my 55 year-old summer bungalow with my new primary residence and that meeting you had Tabled it for additional information. You had suggested I contact the DEC, which I contacted the DEC both on Albany and in Stony Brook and they provided me with an aerial map showing the location of the Coastal Erosion line. I annotated with the present owners and I made copies to make it easier for you to see. You can see that the Coastal Erosion line on that very first page is basically the road, North Sea Dr., and only as it approaches Kenny's Beach at the other end of my property, and I'm close to McCabes Beach, that it begins to gradually cross into some of the property lots as North Sea Dr. becomes in a more southerly direction. As shown on that aerial map, there are 21 houses and four undeveloped lots on what I would call the north side of North Sea Dr. Of these 21 houses, 20 are on the seaward side of that coastal erosion line on that map. Since that map was photographed, I believe three houses closest to Kenny's Beach have been moved. Unfortunately it is not possible for me from where the location of the coastal erosion line is on my aerial. In my present spot though, since my house was built 55 years ago, my summer has faced numerous hurricanes and storms. I remember Donna in 1960 and the good old perfect storm in 1991. There has been no appreciable damage to my house or property to speak of and while it has not been pertinent to the Board, I would like to note that just due to the age and proper maintenance, this 55 year-old bungalow is in need of significant repair due to proper maintenance from it's original owner, and is also built on a cement block foundation, which makes the option of building on this structure not 16 an option or a consideration I can consider. Of these 20 houses I spoke of, I am aware of five that have been built, re-built, or considerably altered in recent history as late as being worked on today down the road. I enclosed in that booklet some pictures of these houses as well as the Southold Town tax records to document the increase in percentages of those rebuilding. I discussed the definitions of the coastal management regulations provided by the DEC, and they gave me this blue book, which I believe the Southold Town Code is based upon, with Rob McDonough of the DEC in Albany. There are several definitions that are pertinent to my request but in discussion with Mr. McDonough, he said it appeared that the area that my house is in, is more of a bluff area, rather than...and we had discussed at the last meeting, calling it a dune, more of a bluff area rather than a dune, even though there is no precipitous or steep bluff like Horton's Point Lighthouse drop. I would like to read just the definitions from that Code. Bluff means any bank or cliff with precipitous or steeply faced slope facing the adjoining beach or property. McDonough said that does not necessarily have to be. The limit of the bluff is the landward limit of the seaward protective feature. Where there are no beaches present, the seaward limit of the bluff is to mean low water. So, to make it easier to define, I am going to say there is no beach in front of my house, just to make it easier to understand. Therefore, the landward limit is 25' landward of the bluff's receding edge, or in cases where there is no line of erosion to identify the receding edge 25' landward to the point of inflection at the top of the bluff, and they define the point of inflection along the top of the bluff, where the trend of land slope changes the dissent to the beach. So the bluff begins where my vegetation ends, where my sea-grass ends. Based on this definition, and discussing it with Mr. McDonough, it appears that my house is not within a bluff. In addition, yesterday I received a letter from the NYSDEC Division of Environmental Permit Region 1 and I won't bother reading the entire letter except for one sentence, which is pertinent tonight. It says that the Department finds the proposed project to be generally approvable should your client chose to pursue a permit. The letter goes on to explain that not more than 20% of a lot may be covered and in this case that would mean 20% would be 5400 sq.ft. because I have a 26,000 sq. ft. lot and explains the next steps to be taken. I have one more set of pictures, which unfortunately I was not able to make copies, which shows the vegetation in the front and side of my house as well as the McCabes Beach parking lot, which is next to me and extends much further down towards the beach than my area. If I can address any questions you might have I would be more than happy to. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Could I get a copy of that DEC letter? Thank you. E. BROWNELL JOHNSTON: If you don't have an extra copy I can make one. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. I have a fax I received today from Robert McDonough and I have not read that yet. The DEC has reviewed your client's request for a tidal wetlands non jurisdiction determination for the above- referenced property and we have the following comments. The department staff has inspected the site and has determined that due to the dynamic nature of this changing shoreline, it cannot be determined if the 10'elevation contour line is 17 permanent. Therefore, if your client wishes to further pursue a non jurisdiction determination, winter elevations must be added to the project plan. Be advised that a non jurisdiction letter may not be approved even after the submission, however the department finds the proposed project to be generally approvable should your client chose to pursue a permit. In order to pursue a permit, the following information must be submitted. Please provide the percent adjacent area coverage for the existing and proposed structures and paved areas. As you are aware, pursuant to the development restrictions of 6NYCRR Part 661.6A4, Tidal Wetland Regulations, not more than 20% of a lot may be covered existing and new structures. Therefore this information is requested to ensure that the new structure will not exceed the maximum allowable coverage. You must show the coastal erosion hazard line on the plan. Regardless of the option, your client chooses the scale is incorrect and the plan is I"to 20'. The scale must be corrected. Additionally, the apparent high water line as shown on the survey is inaccurate. The department staff found that the apparent high waterline is located 98'from the existing deck. Please correct the plans and resubmit five copies. That's from the DEC. The fax I received today from Robert McDonough I will now read. Ms. Charlotte Cunningham representing the Town of Southold contacted this office requesting information regarding the designation of the natural protective in the coastal erosion hazard area within the Town. She indicated that you were interested in finding out which coastal feature existed as the basis for the natural protective feature area designation for the stretch of land along North Sea Dr., located just west of the Town Beach parking area. The properties found along this stretch of coastline are bounded by the Long Island Sound and the Coastal Erosion Hazard line, which runs along the edge of North Sea Dr. I have reviewed area photography and files for the Town of Southold in an attempt to identify distinguishing characteristics of a certain area. I found it difficult to ascertain which natural protective feature exists. After looking at aerial photography from 1983 to 2001, it appears that the area is either a beach or a primary dune. In the case that it was determined to be a primary dune, the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area line would've been established 25'from the landward toe of the dune. If the feature is considered a beach, the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area line would've been established 100'landward from the place where there is marked change in material of physiographic form, from the line of permanent vegetation, which is more seaward. Identification of the natural protective feature can be determined in such time that an appeal is made by an effected property owner challenging that the subject area was erroneously identified as a natural protective feature area, as written in 6NYCRR Part 505.10, Coastal Erosion Management Regulations. If an appeal is filed, the department will arrange a site visit in order to determine the natural protective feature that exists and whether or not the line has been properly placed, otherwise I will provide you with an answer after the next occasion the department staff is in the vicinity to distinguish which natural protective feature is found is that location. Mr. Betsch, the owner of the property adjacent to the beach parking area has also contacted the department for additional information about the CEHA designation. Mr. Betsch indicated that he was interested in reconstructing a 18 larger house on this site and wanted to know more about the specific natural protective feature that exists on his property and how the associated regulations might affect his development plans for the property. I discussed some aspect of the CEHA regulations with him, including how the CEHA line was mapped and a reconstruction or an increase of 25% or greater in ground coverage is prohibited and would require a variance. I explained to him that any addition to the pre- existing structure, including a minor addition less than 25% would have to meet the standards of issuance for a CEHA permit, which would likely locate the addition away from the seaward side of the house, in the least damaging location, in terms of protecting the natural protective feature. A reconstruction or major addition would require a variance and would have to meet all the variance tests including for hardship. A variance could be issued for reconstruction of a structure provided that the following criteria are met: 1) no reasonable, prudent, alternative site is available, 2) all responsible means and measures to mitigate adverse impacts on natural systems and the functions and protective values have been incorporated into the project design and will be implemented at the developers expense, 3) the development will be reasonably safe from flood and eroding damage, 4) the variance requested is the minimum necessary to overcome the practical difficulty or hardship, which is the basis for requesting it, and 5) when public funds are utilized, public benefits clearly out weigh the long term adverse affects of any proposed activities and developments. Upon requesting a variance the applicant will need to provide to the Town, information relevant to meeting the variance criteria. The department looks forward to the opportunity to continuing to work with and assist the Town of Southold in administering the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area regulations and protecting the Towns coastal resources. if you have any additional questions about this or any other coastal management, please contact me. Now, I had a conversation with Mr. McDonough also and he was under the impression, as he said in the letter, that it was either a low dune or the beach, but in either case it would result in the same sort of restriction on rebuilding. Either or, whichever the State and the Board decided to classify it as, it wouldn't matter. JOHN BETSCH: Except that, in trying to understand the definitions of primary dune and secondary dune, it talks about the landward toe. In trying to understand what toe meant, and he said the landward toe is where it begins to go down on the landward side. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes, at the end of where it goes down. JOHN BETSCH: Implying that it comes from the beach, it goes up to a dune, and starts to go down again. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Which would be about the road. JOHN BETSCH: Except my property, on the survey I supplied, it comes up from the beach and goes straight across. In our discussion, he said it's probably a bluff. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think it's either a dune or a beach, but it's kind of a subtle difference. JOHN BETSCH: I had faxed him my site survey to show the topographical marking on it to see if he could tell from those markings where things began and 19 where things ended but he did not come back to me with an answer. He said he had to respond to the Town. We also had discussed about whether or not the Coastal Erosion Hazard line is proper. He said I could appeal to have it moved, but to have a Coastal Erosion Hazard line moved, I would have to have all of North Sea Dr. moved because there is no way it's going to go like this and go back in. The likelihood of them saying or changing something is...I think that's moot. If there are any other additional questions...there are several houses, and I showed some pictures, some have been...and I tried to understand how the rational so what was done to have them approved or not, particularly the one next door to me, Mr. Pearlstein, which is very close to me, right next door, what was approved vs. mine to see if I could follow his logic to get the Board's approval. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't remember Mr. Pearlstein for some reason, but I did review three others along the stretch there on North Sea Dr. and one I don't think, VonZuben maybe, seemed to be a substantial house to start with. I don't think there was substantial change in footprint. JOHN BETSCH: Mr. VonZuben's house did primarily stay with the same footprint, if you will. He cantilevered so much it was a little bit off on each side, however he did build a garage, which was proposed as a 300 sq. ft. garage, and wound up being a 588 sq. ft. garage from his site plans, which is within the Coastal Erosion zone, on the wrong side, so I didn't know...I was trying to understand how that...the plans say one thing...the numerics on the plan say 300 sq. ft. but when you look at their footage they have down there, it's really 588 sq.ft. That was another one. He also presented to me that maybe I could move the garage to make it easier to bring my footprint down smaller to put it in front of the house but aesthetically for the neighborhood, I don't think it's a proper thing to do. I cannot put it under the house to reduce the square footage because the height of my area is such that the Code says I should be so far up on pilings. As it goes to Kenny's Rd., I guess it goes down and that those houses are up 15' up, if you will, and can put a garage underneath. So that's the rational of how we came up with it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The other ones I reviewed in the office. The Coastal Erosion line, they were substantially behind the Coastal Erosion line and it cut through the houses. JOHN BETSCH: They moved. The three houses, from the time, next to Kenny's Beach, from the time the aerial photograph was taken, before I was a resident there, they were moved. But, those properties are considerably longer than mine. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Now I did have a discussion with Mr. McDonough and one of his suggestions was that, and I never had any discussion with the Board yet because it was right after lunch, but what is the square footage of your current house? JOHN BETSCH: The present square footage is 1152 sq.ft. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And then if you put a second story addition on that and added 25% it would still represent a substantial increase in size and would that not be adequate for you? TRUSTEE FOSTER: What's the size of the proposed addition? 20 JOHN BETSCH: 1800 sq.ft. The square footage that I'm in now, you've seen the house, I have to change it and put it on pilings, so it would have to be torn down to do that. The house was explained, to leave a little bit and it becomes an alteration vs. a new house...that's playing games. The house is not worth it to start with. To build the garage in the front, I think that hurts the neighborhood aesthetics. If you look at the pictures of Mr. VonZuben's house, there have been many, many comments from the neighbors about what he is going to do with that. It appears very close to the road. He must have gotten a ZBA approval for that. It's just not aesthetically proper. Maybe it meets the rules and the intent of the regulations but it is a very large...Mr. VonZuben did go very high end on everything in his house. I'll definitely say that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Okay, what's the Board's feeling on this? JOHN BETSCH: Just two other points I would like to make. The letter from the DEC talked about the scale being wrong. What had happened, just to clarify it, the survey was created and then a second survey was created by John Ahlers adding the septic system plan and he reduced the drawing without reducing the scale markings on it. That was just an oversight. I have both drawings with drywells and such. There was one other question. I did talk to the permit advisor to understand the differences between non-jurisdiction and a permit to see if there were pros or cons either way and it's really just an administrative technique in which way to go with you. We had contours put on and I don't think the contours have changed. The only thing that's changed on my beach with this latest winter storm, there has been some reduced sand that's all blown up onto my property. I did go down today and the way here just to measure out of curiosity and my vegetation still is 76' from the edge of my deck, so it still has not changed at all. It's really just cut into the beach area. With the change of seasons, it really just comes and goes. TRUSTEE KING: My comment is I'm very sympathetic to him because I look at this area and the size of the houses that are here. JOHN BETSCH: This is a picture of another house on my block. (inaudible) TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We wouldn't have jurisdiction in 1991. Mr. Betsch, I don't see where we can deviate really from the 25% and whether we classify this as a dune or whether we classify it as a beach...before we go any further with new plans or whatever, there is an appeals process on our decision for coastal erosion, which is the Town Board, so if you wanted to appeal that decision, but I want to be straight-forward with you and I don't want to get you into a run around where you find out about the appeals process in three or four months. So, you should have all your options in front of you. JOHN BETSCH: Could I ask you to potentially research the house next door to me, which was a more than 25% increase too? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Pearlstein, yes. JOHN BETSCH: I did not find in the Trustees information that I copied, notes that talked about special things. It was just an approval. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What year was that? JOHN BETSCH: 1997. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes, we will look into that. 21 JOHN BETSCH: The resolution is dated June 25, 1997. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to Table the application. JOHN BETSCH: Before you close it, I'm not sure...what would you like me to do? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You have to consider all you're options. We'll take another look at this in the field in January just to familiarize ourselves again with the dunes or the bluff, or whatnot, but we'll also look into the Pearlstein file as well. In the meantime, I suggest you look into your options. Take a look at the fax we just got, that I read tonight, you can get a copy of that from the office, and get a copy of the Code and take a look through that. You can see your options as far as appealing to the Town Board. JOHN BETSCH: Not to be facetious but he just reiterated the Code back into the letter. That wasn't exactly our conversation the way he explained it to me about the words we had vs. what he read back, but I appreciate it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Do I have a motion to Table? TRUSTEE KING: So moved. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES 8. J.M.O. Environmental Consulting Services on behalf of GEORGE KAYTIS requests a Wetland Permit to resheathe, on the landward side, 125' of timber bulkhead, to reconstruct a 2'X 15' stairway, a 4'X 8'6" stairway, an 8'X 14'6" deck and shed, and to construct a 10'X 15' deck landward of the bulkhead. Located: 3740 Paradise Point Rd., Southold. SCTM#81-3-28 TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Is there anyone here who would like to comment on this application? If not, I'll comment because I visited the site this past week. I couldn't see any reason to deny, other than the shed, it actually sticks out seaward of the bulkhead. It's uncharacteristic compared to the neighboring property. I would appreciate seeing the shed pulled back behind the bulkhead. GLENN JUST: I was going to bring that up tonight. I actually got a phone call from Chris Arfsten of the DEC and he said the same thing, if the shed and the deck could be relocated landward of the bulkhead. Actually they had suggested that a 4'X 4' landing seaward of the bulkhead for the stairs down the beach, if we pulled everything back. I was agreeable to that but I wanted to speak to you guys tonight. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: That's fine. We'll stipulate that. If there are no other comments, I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. TRUSTEE DICKRSON: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'll make a motion to Approve the application to resheathe on the landward side, 125' of timber bulkhead, to reconstruct a 2'X 15' stairway, and a 4'X 8'6" stairway, an 8'X 14' deck and the shed, as well as deck will be constructed behind the bulkhead, with a 4'X 4' platform with stairs leading to the beach for access, and all on a new set of plans. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES 9. J.M.O. Environmental Consulting Services on behalf of CHRISTOPHER PIA requests a Wetland Permit to reconstruct in-place, 937' of timber bulkhead 22 utilizing vinyl sheathing, to reconstruct in-place, two 50' timber groins utilizing vinyl sheathing, to reconstruct in-place, two timber jetties (60' and 50) utilizing vinyl sheathing, and to dredge an existing 55'X 115' boat basin to —4 ALW. The resultant spoil, 300 cy. of sand, shall be utilized as backfill for the reconstructed bulkheading as needed, and to reconstruct in-kind/in-place, 4,000 sq.ft. existing timber walks. Located: 5900-6000 Vanston Rd., Cutchogue. SCTM#118-1-2 TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Is there anyone who would like to speak on behalf of this application? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: For the record, I'm recusing myself on this. GLENN JUST: I'm here for Christopher Pia and I also have Eugene Burger from Burger Construction who is Mr. Pia's general contractor on the remodeling of the house here if there are any questions. I think when we met there last week, Mr. King and Mr. Poliwoda had asked that the one section of bulkhead behind the greenhouse that we proposed to reconstruct inkind/inplace, perhaps use rock instead and Mr. Pia and Mr. Burger are fine with that. TRUSTEE KING: How would that change the footage on the timber bulkhead? GLENN JUST: 164' is the distance down there. TRUSTEE KING: So it would be 937 minus the 164. GLENN JUST: Exactly. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: When we took a walk to the entrance of the channel, to the north side, that piece... GLENN JUST: Oh, there was a 25' return that angled back and it had been in disrepair and inter-tidal marsh had grown behind it and Ken had asked when we walked out there that day if we could replace it with rock, but on the landward side, the inter-tidal marsh, there would be no problem with that either. The one thing I did not include in the plans is that when we were at the site, along the side of the boat basin, there was some old bulkhead that was totally non-functional, it's just tie rods and deadmen, and they don't want to reconstruct that but they want permission to remove that debris from the marsh there. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Have you depicted the rock on the new survey? GLENN JUST: It will be with you tomorrow. It's at the printer now. TRUSTEE KING: And the old remnants of the old bulkhead, whatever is there, will be removed? GLENN JUST: Yes. TRUSTEE KING: It will just be a single row of stone along the toe? GLENN JUST: Yes. And there also had been an application for a duck blind on the property, which I had spoke to Ken when we walked out on the spit out there. Would pitch pines work Ken? It wouldn't even be a permanent blind. It's on private property. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: It's a structure so it should be included. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: And you wanted to do the roof of the boathouse? EUGENE BURGER: It just needs to be re-shingled. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Does that need to be on here also? GLENN JUST: I think that was the questions we had in the field. I don't know if that's something that would come under the Trustee's jurisdiction or not. If needed, I can include it in a modified project description tomorrow. 23 TRUSTEE KING: Just include it in the description to re-roof the shed. GLENN JUST: And as discussed on site, they're going to remove that one section of the walk and just relocate it on the other side. We'll show that on the plan TRUSTEE KING: There was a lot to look at. Indicate everything on the plan. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Is there anyone else here who would like to speak to this application? I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I'll make a motion to Approve the application as per revised description and plans. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES 10.J.M.O. Environmental Consulting Services on behalf of W.L. LYONS BROWN III requests a Wetland Permit to construct a sunroom (14'X 14'), a screened porch (13'X 14') and an open deck (10'X 16') onto an existing single-family dwelling. Located: Hedge St., Fishers Island. SCTM#10-7-12 TRUSTEE KING: Is there anyone here who wishes to comment on this project? GLENN JUST: I didn't know if you were going to put this one on hold until you can do a site inspection or not, to be honest with you. Jim, I don't think you've ever been to this site. It's right next to Tom Doherty's house. TRUSTEE KING: Okay, no, I haven't seen this. If there's no rush on it, I would like to look at it. GLENN JUST: No, that's fine. They would have no problem with that if you have to take a look at it. TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to Table this until we make an inspection on it. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES 11.William A. Kelsey on behalf of BARBARA S. KELSEY & ELIZABETH CORYDON-APICELLA requests a Wetland Permit to install a foundation under the existing residence. Excavation spoil will be partially spread on site, and the remainder to be removed to an approved site. Located: 4000 Peconic Bay Blvd., Laurel. SCTM#128-6-2 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who would-like to speak in favor of or against the application? TRUSTEE KING: I looked at this. They're going to raise it and lower it back down on the new foundation. There really isn't much change in grade at all. I didn't have a problem with any of it. Any other comments? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Drywells and gutters. TRUSTEE KING: If there is no other comment, I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KING: The only thing is I'd like to see a row of hay bales at the top of the bluff during construction and drywells for the roof run-off. I'll make a motion to Approve with those conditions. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES 24 12.En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of DOROTHY FARNBACH requests a Wetland Permit to resheathe approx. 103 linear ft. of existing timber bulkhead (including return); backfill with approx. 15 cy. of clean sand to be trucked in from an upland source; and remove tree behind bulkhead. Located: 2600 Ole Jule Lane, Mattituck. SCTM#122-4-13 TRUSTEE KING: Is there anyone here who wishes to comment on this proposal? ROB HERRMANN: I'm here if the Board has any questions regarding the proposal. TRUSTEE KING: I didn't have a problem with anything there, Rob. The people were there when I went there and I told the lady that we'd like to see a 10' buffer. She didn't know what I was even talking about. ROB HERRMANN: I explained it to her. TRUSTEE KING: Good. I tried to explain it. It really pitches down there. ROB HERRMANN: Once she figured out what it was, she had no problem with it. Her position was that it's less grass to mow. I have a copy of a letter from the Croons, just because the return sort of over-runs the property. Just so you have something for your file, from the neighbor. TRUSTEE KING: The CAC recommended Approval. They wanted a 15' buffer but I think 10' is enough. It's not that big of a yard. E. BROWNELL JOHNSTON: Did they have a problem with taking the tree out? TRUSTEE KING: No. It's the only tree in the yard, and they're really not going to be able to do much behind the bulkhead unless the tree is removed. It's right in the way of construction. Any other comments? I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to Approve the application with the condition there's a 10' non-turf buffer. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES 13.En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of JOHN MORSE requests a Wetland Permit to replace (within 18") approx. 81 linear ft. of existing timber bulkhead with vinyl bulkhead and backfill with approx. 30 cy. of clean sand fill to be trucked in from an upland source. Replace existing one-story dwelling with two-story dwelling and attached deck and porch; construct second-story addition, shed and landing to existing one-story garage; and install a drainage system of drywells. Located: 820 Old Salt Rd., Mattituck. SCTM#144-5-15 TRUSTEE KING: Comments? ROB HERRMANN: Again, just if the Board has any questions regarding either phase of the project. The upland portion of it is basically just a vertical expansion of the garage for storage. The newly constructed house will, with the proposed deck, actually be within the footprint of the existing house. It will be a two-story but actually a smaller house. There is a drainage system proposed, drywells, with liters and gutters, usual conditions and that section of timber bulkhead immediately adjacent to the garage is being proposed to be replaced within 18". TRUSTEE KING: It's really a developed piece of property. ROB HERRMANN: I had a hard time finding a place to put the notice. 25 TRUSTEE KING: I had a hard time finding it after I found the notice. The CAC recommends Approval with Stipulations. The bulkhead should be replaced in- place only with no treated lumber, alterations to the dwelling should be within the existing footprint, slope all land away from James Creek and installation of roof drains and drywells installed on the landward side of the dwelling. I think it's going to be tough to put that bulkhead in in-place. ROB HERRMANN: Basically all those stipulations are being met. The only part of it that isn't is the in-place on the bulkhead. There is a section of octagonal deck proposed but I think that's pretty minor. But yeah, that was why I actually asked Tom to come in case there is any discussion about that because I think it would be very difficult. TRUSTEE KING: Especially with the garage right there. ROB HERRMANN: It actually will still be behind both the massive concrete seawall and the neighbors bulkhead so there is really no intrusion on the area. And there are no vegetative wetlands. TRUSTEE KING: The whole area is so developed. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I asked Rob about this and we had this conversation and I said it would be better if you put it in in-place. TRUSTEE KING: It's so tight in this area, I don't know. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You said Tom Samuels could do anything. ROB HERRMANN: That's what you said, Al. TRUSTEE KING: Any comments from the Board? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: If you don't think it can be done. TRUSTEE KING: I think it would be difficult. I would like to see you keep it as tight as you can. TOM SAMUELS: It will be framed from the bulkhead, as close as we can get it. ROB HERRMANN: They're showing the existing pilings to be taken out, correct? TOM SAMUELS: Yes. TRUSTEE KING: Try and maintain a 10' non-turf buffer, but it's impossible where the garage is, but wherever you can keep a 10', keep a 10' buffer. Did you show any drywells for the garage? ROB HERRMANN: Yes, John Ehlers designed a drainage system for the whole site. TRUSTEE KING: I have nothing else on my mind. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I just have one comment on the non-turf buffers. I know we are allowing decking, planking of certain types, just for your benefit, in the new code change, we are having the angle of repose installed on it so that any rain run-off goes back landward rather than straight over the bulkhead and into the creek. ROB HERRMANN: Okay. There is no decking proposed here but...point taken. TRUSTEE KING: If there are no other comments, I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to Approve the application with the Stipulation there is a non-turf buffer, 10', that can be maintained wherever it can be maintained. 26 TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES 14.J. Kevin McLaughlin, Esq. on behalf of JOHN & JOYCE SAMPIERI requests a Wetland Permit to construct first and partial second-story additions to the existing one-story residence and construct a 3.5 car garage at the easterly end of the property. Located: 1380 Bayberry Rd., Cutchogue. SCTM#118-2-12 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of the application? KEVIN MCLAUGHLIN: I'm here on behalf of the applicants, John & Joyce Sampieri. I think you have the site plan from Busch Associates, which is fairly detailed. Basically it's mostly a second-story addition but there is a small first- story addition as well. It's located about 70' from the existing bulkhead. We do show proposed storm water leaching basin, roof gutters and liters, and a row of hay bales at the 10' contour line. I'm here to answer any questions, as is Mrs. Sampieri. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. I think Mrs. Sampieri answered all our questions last week. If there is no other comment, I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to Approve the application. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES 15.Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of MONTE REDMAN (AS CONTRACT VENDEE) requests a Wetland Permit to construct 100' of bulkhead (with C-Loc Series 9000 vinyl sheathing) 15" face-to-face in front of existing bulkhead. Located: 4510 Peconic Bay Blvd., Laurel. SCTM#128-4-21 TRUSTEE FOSTER: Comments on the application? JOHN COSTELLO: We are the agents for Mr. Redman and he is in contract to purchase the property and he wants to be assured that the maintenance of the property is able to be done. Any questions the Board may have? It's quite a simple application where the existing bulkhead is failing and what we're trying to do is remove the piling, in order to keep it as close as possible, and re-build the bulkhead immediately in front of it. TRUSTEE KING: The only comment I had John, because I looked at this, is there's a real whoopee in the bulkhead. It goes way out. I'm hoping he can dig behind it and push it back and straighten it out. JOHN COSTELLO: If you see the plans on page 3, it shows that we are excavating behind it to relieve the pressure in order to get it in a straight line, which is normally the way we try to build them. TRUSTEE KING: That was the only comment I had. JOHN COSTELLO: It will be constructed in a straight line. TRUSTEE KING: The CAC recommends Approval with the Stipulation the bulkhead is replaced in-place only and a 10' non-turf buffer installed behind the bulkhead. There is no sod or anything there. It's typical bay front. Just one bump-out and that's it. Any other comments? I'll make a motion to close the hearing. 27 TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to Approve the application. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES 16.Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of THOMAS J. APREA, JR. requests a Wetland Permit to dredge the existing basin to a depth of 5' and deposit the spoil (approx. 160 cy.) onto the beach. Remove 88' of the offshore end of the southern most jetty and trim the remaining portion to beach level height and remove the top 6"X 6" timber from each of the eight (8)jetties. Located: 3140 Gardiners Bay Estate, East Marion. SCTM#37-7-9.1 TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Is there anyone here who would like to speak to this application? JOHN COSTELLO: Again, my name is John Costello with Costello Marine Contracting and we are the agents for Tom Aprea on this application and I'm sure it would certainly be helpful if I tried to explain the job in a little more detail. They have a small basin, which we're going to dredge. It's filling in because the Gardiner's Bay channel has not been dredged in recent years. There is a permit to dredge it. They will be dredging it and at that time, Mr. Aprea wants to remove the existing fill that has entered into that little basin he has. We met on site with Mr. Hamilton from the DEC and it was his recommendation that we remove the height of the existing jetties because he said a by-pass is needed in that area where the sand is building up on the east side and starving sand, the Gillette Dr. people, with a lack of sand, so he said to place any of the fill from the dredging operation of the channel and the basin above the high-water mark along this entire property would be helpful. He wants all the 6"X6"'s that were raised on top of the jetties removed and the last jetty that is in the poorest shape to the west, he would like to have the entire thing removed. I talked to him and convinced him that the inshore to low water, the sheathing should be left in the ground in order stabilize the beach, and the top cut off. So, one jetty is being removed, seven are going to be reduced in elevation, and the spoil is going to be placed all above the high-water mark. Of course, if we have a storm or a spring tide, that water will come and reclaim some of the fill and it will migrate towards the west, which needs it, acting as a by-pass. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Is that what we all discussed? This doesn't say remove one, does it? JOHN COSTELLO: Yes, it does. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Now what about the jetty number...) guess starting from the one you're going to remove the 88' from. JOHN COSTELLO: That's the 8th one. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Okay, so it's the #7 one. It seems kind of high. Was there any way of cutting that one down, or is that sand going to fill that compartment? TRUSTEE FOSTER: They're cutting all of them down, aren't they? JOHN COSTELLO: We're just taking the 6"X 6" off. Now the only thing that makes the 7th one appear a little higher is the starvation of fill. There is no littoral drift of fill. By entering and placing spoil, you will have that elevation immediately. 28 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Okay. Also, when you look at that little road ending to the north of his dock, there are all of these floats and docks and stuff sitting there. Is that all of his stuff? JOHN COSTELLO: No. That is a community...like a natural launching ramp. They're winterizing floats right there. I don't know whose they are. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Okay. We gave them permission last Spring to dig that out. TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Any other comments from the Board? I'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE DICKERSON: I'll make a motion to Approve the application for Mr. Aprea. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Seconded. ALL AYES 17.Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of RAYMOND B. STRONG III requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 3'X 30' fixed timber dock beginning at ALW with an 18' inshore ramp and 32"X 20' aluminum ramp to reach the existing float. Located: 2205 Bayview Ave., Southold. SCTM#52-5-2 TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Would you like to comment on this application? JOHN COSTELLO: Yes I would. There has been a previous permit issued by the Trustees and Mr. Strong is presently the new owner of the property. The only thing basically remaining except for a couple of stubs that are out in the water, they are like small, I believe they are probably almost like trap stakes, that are broken off and in the water. I don't know if you went there at low tide, but you can see a couple of them laying there. What he wants to do is to be able to get out to the existing float. I don't know what research was done on the application but you'll find out that this is very similar. I told him he probably should reduce the size in order to try to get a permit to 3' width, try to use untreated materials, and do the minimum. That's why he could do the aluminum ramp, so he can take it off. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: We all looked at this. With that in mind, he probably could secure some kind of a float and a docking facility there, but we were looking at the neighbors to the south, and that's what we would like to see. JOHN COSTELLO: Personally, I think the 3' width, where you're not a handicapped person, or an age where you feel insecure, I think that, plus I think that also using the untreated small 6" diameter oak pilings...you know that it's not going to be a stationery structure. They are not using it. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Did you take the dimensions down? JOHN COSTELLO: I can tell you the dimensions of the float. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: They are in the file. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: We found that the neighboring dock's total length was 62'. JOHN COSTELLO: This one is going to be basically 48' 1 believe. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: The float itself, what is that float out there? JOHN COSTELLO: 16'. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: 16' long. We would appreciate it if you would cut it down. 29 JOHN COSTELLO: I think he would. He said he didn't need it that wide but he wanted me to go out and inspect it and when it needs rebuilding, he said he would more than certainly would allow to have it reduced because it's not necessary. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: We measured 84' total. JOHN COSTELLO: 84' total? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Yeah, the 18', 30', the 48', plus the 20' ramp, and 16' float. That comes out to 84' less the 2' overhang. The neighbor is 62'. Maybe you could bring that back, overall, back to say, 70'. You can knock 4' off the offshore. There is plenty of room. JOHN COSTELLO: It drops right off. There is good water there. I certainly could reduce the ramp. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Now how do you want to work that float? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Do you want to turn it into a 6'X 16'? JOHN COSTELLO: Personally I think a 6'X 20' would benefit him much more and reduce the ramp. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: The reason I say 6'X 16' is because he is likely to store it on that little piece of beach up there. JOHN COSTELLO: He can leave it right out in the water. The Real floats are not bothered by ice. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Okay. That's a good idea. Would a 12' ramp work? JOHN COSTELLO: Yes. (talking) TRUSTEE POLIWODA: How about 18' fixed on the upland side and how about 22' on the fixed catwalk, to a 14' ramp... JOHN COSTELLO: Make it 24' because it's 8' on center. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Then a 6'X 20' float. JOHN COSTELLO: Right, a 12' space and a 6'X 20'. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: It would be 3' wide. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So what's the dimension you worked out down there? TRUSTEE POLIWODA: A 3'X 18' inshore ramp, a 3'X 24' fixed dock, a 14' ramp, 32" wide, and a 6'X 20' float, reducing from 12'X 16'. So it breaks it down to 72' less 2' of over-hang. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Can we actually do this now, under the moratorium? JOHN COSTELLO: There is a permitted dock and part of it is still there. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: That's the difference. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: For the record, this application has a valid permit from 1986. It was a grandfather permit application, which meant that the dock was pre-1986, claiming year of construction re-built in 1979 and this will replace the structure that was permitted in 1986 with a structure that's smaller and shorter. JOHN COSTELLO: The existing 30' section, which is going to be a 24', is going to start at low water. They'll be a ramp to it. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Technically there is no spartina in that location. JOHN COSTELLO: Not in that pathway. 30 TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Okay, let me read what I have. If there is no other comments, or no other Board comments, I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. TRUSTEE KING: Seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE POLIWODA: I'll make a motion to Approve the application to construct a 3'X 24' fixed timber dock beginning at apparent low water with a 3'X 18' inshore ramp, and a 32"X 14' aluminum ramp to reach the existing float and the existing float will be changed to a 6'X 20' float. I'll stipulate that it be no higher than 3' above grade and the pilings be all made of 6" diameter or less construction. Do I have a second? TRUSTEE DICKERSON: Seconded. ALL AYES 18.Richard Larsen on behalf of JOHN DICARLO requests a Wetland Permit to construct 150' of timber bulkhead, 18" in front of existing bulkhead, except for 50' of return to be removed and replaced inkind/inplace, and backfill with 50 cy. of fill from an upland source. Located: 1150 Terry Lane, Southold. SCTM#64-3-13 POSTPONED UNTIL JANUARY AS PER THE AGENT'S REQUEST 19.Harvey A. Arnoff, Esq. on behalf of JEFFREY HALLOCK requests a Wetland Permit to cut into ground of right-of-way for installation of underground utilities, permission to cut base of existing dirt roadway to upgrade with stone materials, and for the proposed driveway landward of the right-of-way. Located: Diachun Rd., Laurel. SCTM#127-3-9.1 POSTPONED UNTIL JANUARY AS PER THE AGENT'S REQUEST 20.Patricia C. Moore, Esq. on behalf of PECONIC DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION CORP. requests a Wetland Permit for selective pruning and planting of native wetland species. Located: 57908 Main Rd., Southold. SCTM#66-2-2.2 POSTPONED UNTIL JANUARY AS PER THE AGENT'S REQUEST 21.Flower Hill Building Corp. on behalf of HELEN RUST FAMILY PARTNERSHIP requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 13'X 16' addition to the existing boathouse. Located: 4680 Wunneweta Rd., Cutchogue. SCTM#111-14-36.5 APPLICATION WITHDRAWN AS PER THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to go off the Public Hearings and back to the Regular Meeting, TRUSTEE POLIWODA seconded. ALL AYES V. MOORINGS/DUCK BLINDS: 1. CHRISTOPHER PIA requests a Duck Blind permit to place a duck blind on land facing out to the bay. Located: 1455 Inlet Way, Southold. SCTM#118-1-2 (See Public Hearing #9.) 31 2. JAMES P. SWEENEY requests an onshore/offshore stake off his own property, for a 12' boat, on Corey Creek. Located: 2950 Minnehaha Blvd., Southold. SCTM#87-3-42 TRUSTEE POLIWODA moved to Approve the application, TRUSTEE DICKERSON seconded. ALL AYES Meeting adjourned at 9:45 PM. Respectfully submitted by, aaa-kj-n nd to lk--- Lauren M. Standish Board of Trustees RECEIVED 4-1J N 2 2 2004 Southold Tor jei��`' ,�°