HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-07/15/2026 Glenn Goldsmith,President �4QF so Town Hall Annex
Nicholas Krupski,Vice President ��� Old 54375 Route 25
P.O. Box 1179
Eric Sepenoski Southold,New York 11971
Liz Gillooly G Telephone(631) 765-1892
Joseph Finora • �O Fax(631) 765-6641
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES RECEIVED
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD It
G 14
Minutes
L �
Wednesday, July 15, 2026 SOUt old Mown Clerk
5:30 PM
Present Were: Glenn Goldsmith, President
A. Nicholas Krupski, Trustee
Eric Sepenoski, Trustee
Liz Gillooly, Trustee
Joseph Finora, Trustee
Elizabeth Cantrell, Administrative Assistant
Lori Hulse, Board Counsel
CALL MEETING TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Good evening, and welcome to our Wednesday,
July 15th, 2026 meeting. At this time I would like to call the
meeting to order and ask that you please stand for the Pledge of
Allegiance.
(The Pledge of Allegiance is recited) .
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I'll start off by announcing the people on
the dais. To my left we have Trustee Krupski, Trustee Sepenoski,
Trustee Gillooly and Trustee Finora. To my right we have the
attorney to the Trustees, the Honorable Lori Hulse, we have
Administrative Assistant Elizabeth Cantrell and with us tonight
is Court Stenographer Wayne Galante.
Agendas for tonight' s meeting are out in the hallway and
also posted on the Town's website.
There are a couple of postponements tonight. In the agenda,
on page eight, numbers 11 and 12, as follows, are postponed.
Number 11, En-Consultants on behalf of 8100 INDIAN NECK,
LLC requests a Wetland Permit to remove and replace in-place
approximately 118 linear feet of existing concrete seawall and
15 linear foot return with vinyl bulkhead and return; backfill
with up to 25 cubic yards of clean sandy fill trucked in from an
approved upland source, to be replanted with native vegetation;
Board of Trustees 2 July 15, 2026
and construct a 41x5.5' cantilevered wood landing with 3'x±6'
steps to beach in place of existing 31x5' steps to beach.
Located: 8100 Indian Neck Lane, Peconic. SCTM# 1000-86-7-9
Number 12, En-Consultants on behalf of FARLEY FINE ARTS,
LLC requests a Wetland Permit to remove and replace in-place
approximately 157 linear feet of existing concrete seawall with
vinyl bulkhead; backfill with up to 25 cubic yards of clean
sandy fill trucked in from an approved upland source, to be
replanted with native vegetation; construct a 41x5.5' wood
landing with 3'x±6' steps to beach in place of existing 3.51x4.5 '
steps to beach; and remove and replace in-place and in-kind
3.5'x5 .8' platform and 2.3'x4 .4' bank steps within the area of
disturbance.
Located: 7940 Indian Neck Lane, Peconic. SCTM# 1000-86-7-7 .2
So those won't be heard this evening.
Under Town Code 275-8 (c) , files were officially closed
seven days ago. Submission of any paperwork after that date may
result in a delay of the processing of the application.
I. NEXT FIELD INSPECTION:
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: At this time I'll make a motion to have our
next field inspections on Wednesday, July 29th, 2026 on Fishers
Island, and on Wednesday, August 5th, 2026, beginning at 8: OOAM.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
II. NEXT TRUSTEE MEETING:
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion to hold our next Trustee
meeting Wednesday, August 12th, 2026 at 5:30PM in the Town Hall
Main Meeting Hall.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
III. WORK SESSIONS:
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion to hold our next work
sessions Monday, August loth, 2026 at 5:OOPM at the Town Hall
Annex 2nd Floor Executive Board Room, and on Wednesday, August
12th, 2026 at 5:OOPM in the Town Hall Main Meeting Hall.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
IV. MINUTES:
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion to approve the Trustees
Board of Trustees 3 July 15, 2026
Minutes of the June loth, 2026 meeting.
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
V. MONTHLY REPORT:
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Roman numeral V, Monthly Report. The
Trustees monthly report for June, 2026. A check for $21,362. 93
was forwarded to the Supervisor' s Office for the General Fund.
VI. PUBLIC NOTICES:
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Public Notices are posted on the Town Clerk' s
Bulletin Board for review.
VII. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEWS:
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Roman numeral VII, 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 X Public Hearings Section of the Trustee
agenda dated Wednesday, July 15, 2026 are classified as Type II
Actions pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations, and are not
subject to further review under SEQRA, as written. That is my
motion.
Theodore & Carissa Stratigos SCTM# 1000-57-1-27
Francis J. Kelly & Elizabeth G. Kelly SCTM# 1000-145-4-3
Patricia Peck SCTM# 1000-99-3-5
622 Church Lane, LLC SCTM# 1000-99-4-18
Bryan & Tracy Kappenberg SCTM# 1000-128-2-7
Pamela Valentine SCTM# 1000-17-2-14
Elizabeth Gardner SCTM# 1000-47-2-30
Patricia Bogen Revocable Trust SCTM# 1000-87-1-3.3
8100 Pine Neck, LLC SCTM# 1000-86-7-9
John M. Miller Lifetime QTIP Trust SCTM# 1000-118-1-18.4
Farley Fine Arts, LLC SCTM# 1000-86-7-7.2
Danielle & Joseph Monaco III SCTM# 1000-123-5-33
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
VIII. RESOLUTIONS - ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS:
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Roman numeral VIII, Administrative Permits.
In order to simplify our meetings, the Board of Trustees
regularly groups together actions that are minor or similar in
Board of Trustees 4 July 15, 2026
nature. Accordingly, I'll make a motion to approve as a group
items One, Two, Three and Five, as follows:
Number 1, North Star Engineering on behalf of JATIN GORADIA
& RAJA RAJALAKSHMI requests an Administrative Permit to install
two window wells, one to be used as a basement egress window;
install I/A OWTS system and sanitary leaching field; install
propane tank; relocate asphalt driveway.
Located: 960 Willow Terrace Lane, Orient. SCTM# 1000-26-2-21
Number 2, GARY DOROSKI requests an Administrative Permit to
remediate and legally abandon a 550 gallon buried oil tank;
install 350 gallon above ground oil tank on slabs on west side
of dwelling.
Located: 425 Monsell Lane, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-97-8-27
Number 3, THE STIRLING EASTERN SHORES ASSOCIATION INC.
requests an Administrative Permit to install five (5) 12" x 12"
signs along property boundary line.
Located: 3550 Sound Drive, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-33-1-3. 1
Number 5, SUSAN M. BRAATZ requests an Administrative Permit
for a Ten-Year Maintenance Permit to hand-cut Common Reed
(Phragmites australis) to 12" in height by hand, as needed on
the upland portion of the property; and to hand-cut Common Reed
(Phragmites australis) to below water level by hand, as needed
in the pond.
Located: 7615 Hortons Lane, Southold. SCTM# 1000-54-5-47
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 4, BODENSTEIN FAMILY 2012 IRREVOCABLE
TRUST requests an Administrative Permit to install 35-50 pieces
of rip rap and a slight berm.
Located: 6145 Indian Neck Lane, Peconic. SCTM# 1000-86-6-19
The Trustees conducted a field inspection, notes that the
condition of the berm height not to exceed 18 inches.
The LWRP found this to be consistent.
I will make a motion to approve this application with the
condition that the berm height does not exceed 18 inches.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
IX. APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS/TRANSFERS/ADMINISTRATIVE
AMENDMENTS:
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Roman numeral IX, Applications for
Extensions, Transfers and Administrative Amendments.
Again, in order to simplify the meeting, I make a motion to
approve as a group Items One through Five, as follows:
Number 1, NAR DEVELOPMENT CORP. requests a One (1) Year
Extension to Wetland Permit #10463, as issued September 13,
Board of Trustees 5 July 15, 2026
2023.
Located: 49900 Route 25, Southold. SCTM# 1000-70-5-24. 1
Number 2, Patricia C. Moore, Esq. On behalf of REINHOLD
TREMBA & STEFKA NAZARKEWYCZ requests a Transfer of Wetland
Permit #10571 from 600 Glenn, LLC to Reinhold Tremba & Stefka
Nazarkewycz, as issued April 17, 2024.
Located: 600 Glenn Road, Southold. SCTM# 1000-78-2-24
Number 3, Patricia Moore, Esq. On behalf of DAVID & LINDSAY
LEVIN requests a Transfer of Wetland Permit #8263 and Coastal
Erosion Permit #8263C from Oliver Frankel to David & Lindsay
Levin, as issued on August 21, 2013, and Amended on November 19,
2014 .
Located: 29821 Main Road, Orient. SCTM# 1000-14-2-1. 9
Number 4, En-Consultants on behalf of ADF VENTURES, LLC
requests an Administrative Amendment to Wetland Permit #10691 to
reconfigure a portion of the approved 4' tall pool enclosure
fencing located landward of the covenanted 20' vegetated
non-turf buffer.
Located: 1775 Point Pleasant Road, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-114-1-6
Number 5, Cole Environmental Services on behalf of 5415
SKUNK LANE LLC requests an Administrative Amendment to Wetland
Permit #10733 to increase the height of previously approved
landward stairs and fixed dock from l'-10" to 4 ' minimum above
grade; landward stair to increase to 4' x 5' and seaward stairs
to increase to 4' x 4' due to elevation increase.
Located: 5380 Skunk Lane, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-138-2-16
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 6, Sol Searcher Consulting on behalf
of OSCAR & BETH BLEVINS requests an Administrative Amendment to
Wetland Permit #5405 to install a 4"x4" post and continuous
handrail to one side of existing catwalk (top handrail to be 36"
above catwalk) ; as-built gate; repair weak and damaged catwalk
surface boards as necessary.
Located: 275 Mason Drive, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-104-5-1.2
Trustee Krupski conducted a field inspection July 13th,
2026, notes to discuss with Board at work session concern about
public viewshed versus safety. This is an extensive structure,
over 100 feet across the wetlands. We are not looking to put
any additional structure in the wetland at this location.
I'll make a motion to deny this application for an adverse
environmental impact for additional structures in the wetland,
and also would adversely affect the esthetic values of the
wetlands and adjacent areas, and obstruct public viewshed.
That is my motion.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
Board of Trustees 6 July 15, 2026
X. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Roman numeral X, Public Hearings.
At this time I make a motion to go off our regular meeting
agenda and enter into Public Hearings.
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: This is a public hearing in the matter of the
following applications for permits under Chapter 275 and Chapter
111 of the Southold Town Code. I have an affidavit of
publication from the Suffolk Times. Pertinent correspondence may
be read prior to asking for comments from the public.
Please keep your comments organized and brief, five minutes
or less if possible.
AMENDMENTS:
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Under Amendments, number 1, Nigel Williamson
on behalf of THEODORE & CARISSA STRATIGOS requests an Amendment
to Wetland Permit #10483 to demolish existing dwelling, relocate
it to be landward of the pier line, and construct additions to
the one-story 2, 475sq.ft. Dwelling with 133. 65sq.ft. Open
covered porch, a 1, 080sq. ft. Seaward wood deck with two sets of
stairs to remain and construct 41x38 ' and 41x16' deck extensions
to connect deck to relocated dwelling, a 47.236sq. ft. Hot tub,
and a 214.56sq. ft. Metal awning on the deck; remove the roof on
existing dwelling and construct a second-story over existing
first story; construct a 618sq.ft. First-story addition onto
landward side of dwelling; construct a 254sq.ft. Second-story
addition to the northeast corner of dwelling; construct a
133. 65sq. ft. Addition over existing covered porch; construct a
17.375sq.ft. Set of stairs to the southwest corner of deck;
remove existing metal awning and install a 241.38sq. ft. Fixed
structure awning with retractable operable louvers; install a
16sq.ft. Outdoor shower; remove existing chimney; pump and
remove existing block septic system and install a new I/A OWTS
septic system landward of dwelling; install gutters to leaders
to drywells; install a buried 500 gal. Propane tank; install a
generator; and existing pervious driveway.
Located: 550 Blue Marlin Drive, Southold. SCTM# 1000757-1-27
The Trustees conducted a field inspection July 8th, 2026,
note the home must be pulled back to conform with the 75-foot
setback from the bulkhead.
The LWRP found this project to be consistent.
Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this
application?
MR. WILLIAMSON: Nigel Robert Williamson on behalf of Theodore &
Carissa Stratigos. And to pull it back beyond the pier line, the
3. 9 feet, and also to construct the 4x38 and 4x16 deck
Board of Trustees 7 July 15, 2026
extensions to connect the existing deck to now where the house
is going to be moved to, and know everything else was as per the
original permit.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: And, Mr. Williamson, the structure for the
house itself, 76. 6 feet away from bulkhead
MR. WILLIAMSON: The house is 75. 1 feet.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Yes, sir. Oh, yes, sir. I apologize.
MR. WILLIAMSON: On the west side.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Yes..
MR. WILLIAMSON: And then 76. 6 feet on the east side.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: So all of the house structure is more than 75
feet away from the bulkhead.
MR. WILLIAMSON: Correct.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Okay, is there anyone else here wishing to
speak regarding this application?
(No response) .
Any questions or comments from the Board?
(No response) .
Hearing none, I make a motion to close this hearing.
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion to approve this application
as submitted.
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
MR. WILLIAMSON: Before I leave, may I just approach Elizabeth to
give her one card.
(Handing) .
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Have a good night.
MR. WILLIAMSON: Thank you. You, too.
WETLAND & COASTAL EROSION PERMITS:
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Under Wetland & Coastal Erosion Permits:
Number 1,. CONTINUED FROM 5/13/26 & 6/10/24 AS PER REVISED
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SITE PLAN RECEIVED 7/7/2026
Jeffrey Patanjo on behalf of STEPHANIE & IOANNIS LAGOUDIS
requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit to remove
existing concrete bulkhead and replace it with a 71 linear foot
long vinyl bulkhead landward of existing, aligning with
neighboring bulkhead with a raised height of 12" above existing
bulkhead height; install 60 linear feet of rock revetment
against seaward face of new bulkhead; remove existing 141x50'
seaward deck with steps to beach and construct a 7 'x50' deck
landward of proposed bulkhead using new un-treated timber
decking.
Located: 22615 Soundview Avenue, Southold. SCTM# 1000-135 .-1-25 .1
This was originally found to be inconsistent by the LWRP
Board of Trustees 8 July 15, 2026
coordinator. The proposed actions include installation of stone
rip rap revetment seaward of wetland boundary and does not meet
the definition of a "revetment" below, and therefore is not a
permitted activity.
In addition the proposed plan calls for replacement of the
concrete seawall, which does not appear to be legally installed
and therefore should not be replaced with new structure.
It should be noted that I am in receipt of new plans stamped
received by the office July 7th, 2026, which show reducing the
seawall by seven feet landward, bringing that above the mean
high water line. The addition of some rip rap boulders, rather,
in front of the sea wall, and with no cantilevered deck or
structures projecting past that line.
Additionally, that bulkhead to be tied directly in line
with the neighbor to the east.
Is there anyone here that wishes to speak regarding this
application?
MR. PATANJO: Jeff Patanjo, on behalf of the applicant.
As mentioned in the description, we revised the application
to meet the requests of the Board at the last work session.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Is there anyone else here wishing
to speak regarding this application?
(No response) .
Hearing no additional comment, I make a motion to close the
hearing.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second. All in favor?
(ALL AYES) . .
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I make a motion to approve this application
with the stipulation that no structures are further seaward than
the seven-feet from the house, cantilevered or otherwise; that
the new bulkhead is in line with the neighbor to the east, to
perform a direct tie-in; that the new structures are now well
above the high tide .line, thereby bringing this into conformity
with the LWRP coordinator.
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
WETLAND PERMITS:
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Under Wetland Permits, number 1, FRANCIS J.
KELLY & ELIZABETH G. KELLY request a Wetland Permit for the
as-built 101x18 ' floating deck against bulkhead, as-built
81x10'x8 ' high storage shed, and as-built RV storage and parking
and/or 28-foot-long office trailer.
Located: 1900 Great Peconic Bay Blvd. , Laurel. SCTM# 1000-145-4-3
The Trustees most recently visited the site on the 8th of
July. Notes from our visit read: Review deck, shed and existing
RV/proposed trailer.
The LWRP coordinator found the project to be inconsistent
Board of Trustees 9 July 15, 2026
with its Policy 4 and Policy 6.
Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this
application?
MR. KELLY: Francis Kelly, 12 Bayview Avenue, East Islip.
I believe it was three structures that were in the
application. Did any of those pass at all?
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Tonight will determine whether or not those
pass.
MR. KELLY: All right, very good. And then, in the future, if
there is any kind of violations, I had a neighbor that was
cutting my dock, and he just basically -- all right. I would
like to just make sure that I still have Trustees -- all right.
Anyway.
MS. HULSE: Mr. Kelly, may I ask you a question. Could you just
please articulate for the record what you have a CO for on the
property?
MR. KELLY: That's the funny part, because the Town made me •get a
CO, they took my pre-existing CO and they found that there was
two ramps and it was two docks and it was one across the street
and one inside this parking lot. So they decided that the CO, I
think, Lori, you were there, I remember that. You actually
ripped it up in front of me, the old one, and you told me I have
to get a new one. And I got a new one by a Judge,, and then it
came down to the ZBA. The ZBA said would you like a CO. And
I'm like, of course I would like a CO. And with the CO I feel
safer.
MS. HULSE: So what is the CO for, particularly?
MR. KELLY: I'm sorry?
MS. HULSE: What is the CO for in particular?
MR. KELLY: The CO is for, it' s supposed to be for the structure.
I had a structure that was taken off, and a structure, like we
are in a structure now. Lights, you know, things that make
everything comfortable. That' s what a CO is supposed to be for.
It's not supposed to be a vacant lot. How did that happen?
You know, so the bottom line is the CO is for structure.
It's for a structure. And I thank God I got the ZBA and they
installed it for me. And they said, yes, you' re going to have
the RV, it' s medical use, you got a CO. And that' s what it was
for. I lost my CO. My pre-CO.
Anything else, guys?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do you have any other questions, Lori?
MS. HULSE: No.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you.
MR. KELLY: Okay, thanks.
MR. MORRISSEY: Hi, My name is Jerry Morrissey. I am the neighbor
next door, unfortunately. He never had, the question is he has
a Marine One status. That' s what he has. That' s what he has
from the day that he go the C of 0.
So with that being said, what he' s trying to apply' for, and
Board of Trustees 10 July 15, 2026
many people are here to speak as well, is to get all these
structures put on his 0.17 of an acre of land, which at its
furthest point, you probably have the survey, is no more than
like 60 to 65 feet from any water.
The idea behind him is getting all these structures built
is because he says he has a business. Well, three months ago,
back in state supreme court, Mr. Kelly had to testify under oath
he has not made one dime in the 12 years in business. Not one
dime. He has not rented one boat, he hasn't rented one kayak.
Nothing. He also, under testimony, under oath, says he doesn't
even have insurance, which 12 years ago he swore to this Board
that he would have insurance because he needs the insurance ,to
get a six-foot fence. Or he needs the insurance, to get the
insurance. Which he never did. He got the six-foot fence but he
never got insurance. That's another thing. Also, he has three
boats on the lot. One is a 30-footer which has been
shrink-wrapped since 2014. The second boat is a 22-foot or
23-foot pontoon boat, which according to the CO he cannot even
put in his dock. He has to have anything less than 21' or less.
His third is like a 12-foot Boston Whaler. You' re not even
going to rent that out. So all three boats have been sitting
there.
Right now he' s in contempt of court. We had a hearing
yesterday. It was postponed, because once again he has his RV
on the property. He was ordered three months ago to remove it
and he brought it back right after the court case. He has the,
well, you guys were there. He has a box truck that because it
has wheels it can be left there because it's considered a
parking lot. Well, that box truck has not left that spot in six
months to a year. Probably closer to a year.
So I can be up here a lot longer, I don't want to take up
any of your time but everybody up there on the Board knows
exactly who they are dealing with. He has been fighting the
system for 12 years. He has been fighting the state courts, he' s
been fighting the Town of Southold. He has been fighting the
Zoning Board. So, you know what you are up against. Smoke and
mirrors. That's what he's really good at. Smoke and mirrors.
Please don't allow him to build any structures. He has no
plans for sanitation, no plans for human waste. He' s right up
against the water. So. And, it' s a community. It's not a
commercial property. It should not be treated like a commercial
property. But he' s using it as a private man summer home. He
can't build a structure on it. It' s too big -- it's too small.
It' s 0.17 of an acre.
So, like I 've said, you've all been there, you've all seen
it. You all know who you are dealing with. Thank you, for your
time.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you. Anybody else?
MS HORN: My name is April Lee Horn. I'm an attorney for the
Kelly' s. And there are certain things that were just said, which
Board of Trustees 11 July 15, 2026
I think the application covers most of it in that, you have the
two-inch of applications that you have.
And the thing is we are, the Kelly' s are not in contempt.
The Kelly' s have, most of what he said is just incorrect.
What we put in the application, the relevant portions of
the transcript of that very trial that happened, and the thing
is what most important thing, which I think undoes everything I
think that has been talked about with the Town for these years,
is Judge Hackeling said that if it' s covered by the DMV, it' s
covered by the DMV. It' s about their jurisdiction. So that' s
what was at the crux of all these issues for all those eleven or
12 years. And we put that portion of it in the application. Put
that portion of the testimony in there.
The things he said about Mr. Kelly, what he testified to,
that's incorrect. You could look at the transcript.
But the thing also is that he has the same rights as any
other marina. And anything he wants to do in the marina. And I
used to be a fire marshal and I inspected numerous marinas, over
and over. Took them to court when it was warranted. And the
thing is, anything that is even on the property right now is
consistent with its use as a marina, et al, boat storage, all
that. Drive to any other marina in the Town of Southold or maybe
surrounding towns. There is nothing that he has on the property
that is not consistent with marina use.
And just to, it' s a strange thing that happens, too, it' s
all over Long Island, but this idea of a C of 0. A Certificate
of Occupancy was, the purpose of a Certificate of Occupancy is
to ensure that a building or structure is in compliance with the
New York State Uniform Fire Protection and Building Code.
I enforced that code for years. I was around when we were under
the old .code. But everything changed in 2003. However, none of
the 13 towns, and I have been in all of them, spoke there or
litigated there, none of them kept track of that, that the code
changed in 2003.
And the idea that communities were making up things like a
pre-CO, a CO for things -- the idea that a stairway, some people
would think -- I inspected the Town of East Hampton. And they
had a great big set of stairs going up the bluffs. And the
thing is, I thought it was terrible. And the New York State
Uniforms Code says does it attach to a building. I go, no, it' s
like 30-feet from the building. But it's like a 30-foot high
stairway. And they go, not covered by the code.
As far as when the Town of Southold, when they testified at
that trial, they put a code enforcement officer up there, and
the judge, myself, it was just embarrassing. It was cringe
worthy.
When I asked them what, to define a structure, he said,
well, three walls and a roof. And I said, what is a swing set.
And that launched into a ten-minute explanation, which everyone
started feeling uncomfortable with.
Board of Trustees 12 July 15, 2026
But he's not asked for anything that any other marina would
ask for. And right down to even some of the things that people
are calling structures, they are not even really structures.
And they are certainly not covered by the New York State Uniform
Fire Prevention Building Code.
And the shed, you can have one that's 12xl2, 144 square
feet. That' s not covered by the code. And all his setbacks for
the structures they have there meet the code. But I just
couldn't let that pass. I was determined not to say anything,
but I couldn't let that pass.
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Ma'am?
MS. PALMER: Good evening, I'm Marilou Palmer, I'm one of the
neighbors with this problem.
I 'm questioning this wetland proposal of Mr. Kelly and his
wife to add additional structures and various items to the
parcel, when they haven't complied with the court' s decision in
prior litigation to remove items.
I recall that they were not allowed to bring in an RV,
which they did, in blatant violation.
Do they think somehow with this new proposal all the prior
litigation will be reversed?
In addition, this is a small, triangular parcel, zoned many
years ago as a marina, and has been grandfathered as such. With
their ownership, I believe the Kelly's are trying to change the
usage of this parcel. For several years it's been used only as
storage and there has been no boat activity.
Mr. Murray, Sr. , prior owner, and was the one to establish
this parcel as currently zoned because he operated a neighborly
boat dock for small boats and enough room for owners' parking.
Under Murray's ownership, families came with kids, coolers
and fishing gear. It' s not a social club. It' s a place that
should remain as a mini marina. This parcel is not a Block
Island or a Strong' s marina, and I am against approving this
proposal.
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Thank you.
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Is there anyone else who wants to speak
regarding the application?
MS. MORRISSEY: Linda Morrissey. I live next door to the
Kelly' s.
The day we moved into our property at 1780 Peconic Bay
Boulevard, they had signed a lease on the ownership of their
property next door. When I saw our lot, it was completely opened
to the entire canal. Little boats were there. My concern was is
there noise there, like what happens there, do people come and
go. And the realtor said, oh, no, no, no, it' s just a little
neighborhood thing, bla, bla, bla.
Well, within the first week of them owning the property,
they were allowed somehow a six-foot fence because they wanted
to have a marina, and they needed insurance. They've never lent
out a boat, a kayak. No one has ever been there. They have a big
Board of Trustees 13 July 15, 2026
box truck there that says "Kayak Rentals. " You call the number,
goes nowhere. Never been a rental. Ever.
He wants this property as his own little summer home. He's
brought RVs, a brought a tiny house on wheels. All of which were
in contempt, that he had to remove.
He now has another RV there, sitting there, his box truck,
he's not using it as a marina in any way, shape or form. It' s
too close to have a toilet to the water.
The sewage, he claims he needs an RV or an office because
he has a disability, being diabetes. I'm sure there are other
people in this room with diabetes that could use a cooler if
they needed to bring insulin with them. There is no reason for
a home, a trailer or anything of that sort on this property. And
he's using it as a cheap man' s summer home with $500 in taxes,
when the rest of the neighborhood has high taxes, when he's only
brought our property down because of the eyesore we have to live
next door to.
He' s had campers there, he' s just, and he' s just tents,
campers. He' s just refusing to realize that this is not what
that property was sold for and sold as, and he bought it
thinking he could do whatever he wanted, and he found out he
couldn't, and he' s just trying and trying and trying to get his
way and not lose. And that' s basically what he' s trying to do.
MR. KELLY: (INDISCERNIBLE) .
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI : Mr. Kelly. Mr. Kelly --
MS. MORRISSEY: (Continuing) This is what we are dealing with.
This is his personality. He's been taken away on stretchers. And
he's crazy. And just don't give him an inch, he'll take a mile.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Just for the record, it's one person at a
time at the dais. That' s the only thing we can take on the
record. So, please.
Anyone else wishing to speak regarding this application?
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: All me. All right. Just based on what I'm
hearing this evening, it sounds like there is a long and complex
history regarding this property. And perhaps for many of you,
that's an understatement. But we review what is before us, we
did visit the site.
There is one item on this description that, quite frankly,
I don't think exists in our code to approve. I think it's
probably better to seek some other form of permission from the
Town Board. And that' s the RV, and/or office trailer, as it's
written in there.
So there is no other further comment, I make a motion to
close the hearing.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: I make a motion to approve the portion of
this wetland permit, which includes a 10x18 floating deck
against bulkhead, and for the 8xlOx8 high storage shed; and
Board of Trustees 14 July 15, 2026
striking from this application description the as-built RV
storage and parking and/or 28-foot long office trailer.
By approving these in the M-1 zone, which are minor in
nature, and striking from the record the RV storage, we thereby
bring it into consistency with the LWRP.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Number 2, Islandwide Engineering & Land
Surveying on behalf of PATRICIA PECK requests a Wetland Permit
to remove the existing failing sanitary system and install a new
I/A type sanitary system further landward; to install the new
system excavate a minimum of four feet beyond the proposed
leaching chambers to remove unsuitable soils and replace soils
with suitable SP/SW soil;' and to install silt fencing around the
work area until the site is fully stabilized.
Located: 782 Bailie Beach Road, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-99-3-5.
The Trustees most recently visited the site on the 13th of
July, noting that it was a straightforward application.
The LWRP found this to be consistent.
Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this
application?
MR. PATANJO: Jeff Patanjo, on behalf of the applicant. If you
have any questions.
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: I do not have any questions at this time.
Is there anyone else here wishing to speak regarding this
application?
(No response) .
Any questions or comments from the Board?
(No response) .
Hearing none, I make a motion to close the hearing.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: I make a motion to approve this application as
submitted.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second. All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE FINORA: Project .number 3, CONTINUED FROM 4/15/26 AS PER
REVISED SITE PLANS AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION RECEIVED 7/7/26
Islandwide Engineering & Land Surveying on behalf of BLUE MARLIN
REALTY, LLC requests a Wetland. Permit to demolish existing
one-story dwelling including all footings and associated
appurtenances; construct an irregularly shaped 61.8 ' x 38.0'
two-story, single-family dwelling with attached garage, a 51xl7'
front covered porch, an 8 'xll' west covered porch with 2'x4 '
steps; 21x7 ' steps at rear of dwelling; a 12.7 'x18. 10'
second-story balcony; install A/C units and heat pump; remove
Board of Trustees 15 July 15, 2026
existing sanitary system and landward of dwelling install a
Septi-Tech STAAR 0.75 I/A sanitary system and 168 ' of Quick 4
Plus Standard Infiltrators; install gutters to leaders to
dwelling along with driveway to a 14 .8 linear foot trench drain
to catch runoff; install silt fencing around work area until
site is stabilized; and to maintain the existing 15' wide
non-turf buffer area along the landward edge of the bulkhead.
Located: 450 Blue Marlin Drive, Southold. SCTM# 1000-57-1-26
The Trustees visited the site on July 8th, noting that
they've reviewed the staking, and subsequent discussion at the
work session reveal that the revised drawings, received July
7th, included updated dimensions as previously discussed.
The LWRP findings were found to be consistent.
Is there anybody here that wishes to speak on this
application?
MR. PATANJO: Jeff Patanjo, on behalf of the applicant. And as
mentioned, revised plans were prepared. Based on comments
addressed at a previous hearing, the house was shifted back to
be outside of the 75-foot setback, and adjustments were made to
the IA sanitary system and drainage systems to the site.
I was going to say more, but I'm not.
TRUSTEE FINORA: Thank you. Is there anybody else here that
wishes to speak on behalf of this application?
(No response) .
Any comments from the Board?
(No response)
Hearing none, I make a motion to. close this hearing.
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE FINORA: I make a motion to approve this application in
accordance with the drawings that were received July 7th.
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 4, Patricia Moore, Esq. On behalf of
622 CHURCH LANE, LLC requests a Wetland Permit to construct a
two-story dwelling set on piles with a 2, 018sq.ft. Ground level
and a 4,291sq.ft. Second story level including an attached
garage and a glass bridge that connects to existing 469sq.ft. 11-�
story cottage (cottage #2) ; existing 81x22.3' storage area
attached to cottage #2 to be removed and replaced. with stairs
leading to the bridge; construct a raised pool, patios and decks
totaling 1, 829sq. ft. ; install 800sq. ft. Of additional landings
and walkways; install an oil & stone parking area and driveway.;
install an I/A OWTS sanitary system landward of dwelling;
install nine storm-water drainage drywells to contain runoff,
and a pool bench; install pool enclosure fencing; existing
87 .4sq.ft. Block shed and 51.8sq.ft. Frame shed to remain;
Board of Trustees 16 July 15, 2026
convert 326sq. ft cottage #1 to boat storage; 525sq. ft. Seasonal
cottage #3 to remain; concrete slab walkway from cottage #2 and
concrete patio on north side of cottage #1 to be removed; cut
and fill areas and general regrading to be performed;
revegetation of disturbed areas and supplementing existing
vegetation with 22 trees, 85 shrubs, native grasses, perennials
and lawn areas with existing seaward paths, existing woodlands
on 20% slopes to the north, south and east to remain
undisturbed, and lawn areas to remain.
Located: 1625 Naugles Drive, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-99-4-18
The Trustees conducted a field inspection July 8th. Notes
read concern about location of structures in proximity to bluff
bank; move structures landward away from bluff bank; concerns
about proposed regrading; concerns about construction over bank
in connection to existing cottage; proposed pool is less than 60
feet from top of bank; adverse environmental impact due to
construction and proximity to wetlands, banks and bluffs with
all structures; concerns about bridge on bluff bank.
The LWRP found this to be inconsistent. The inconsistencies
are with. Police 1, Policy 5 and Policy 6. The proposed action is
on a nonconforming waterfront lot with three pre-existing
structures. Considering that the lot has a waterfront boundary
at the north and a partial waterfront boundary to the east, all
pre-existing structures are less than 100 feet from the top of
the bank, leading to the wetland boundary of Mattituck creek.
Although the proposed action is underneath the allowable
20% of lot coverage at 9%, it is inconsistent with Policy 1
because the building footprint of the single-family dwelling is
expanded by 6.32%, which increases the adverse effects of
development.
The proposed action of building a connection from the current
single-family dwelling to the newly constructed addition over
the slope bank is inconsistent with Policy 5.4 (a) .2 and
5. 4 (a) .3, which calls for the maintenance of natural
characteristics of drainage systems and protection of areas that
are particularly susceptible to erosion and sediment loss.
The proposed action would require clearing the land and
altering the blank landscaping. Although native vegetation is
proposed to be planted in replacement in the same areas, the
drainage system of the bank will be affected and erosion can
increase in the future.
Additionally, the proposed plant species, Winter King
Hawthorne, is not native to New York and should be replaced by a
plant species that is. The proposed action of the new addition
to the single-family dwelling is inconsistent with Policy 6.3 (a)
because it does not comply with the regulatory requirements of
the Town Code Chapter 275 . On site plan L2. 1, the limit of
Trustee jurisdiction is not labeled correctly.
The Trustees jurisdiction starts at the top of the bank and
then extends 100-feet landward. When properly labeled, the
Board of Trustees 17 July 15, 2026
proposed additions are within the Trustees jurisdiction, and the
residence, including the pool, because it is attached to the
house, does not meet the top of the bank setback under Town Code
275.3 (d) (1) (a) (1) .
The proposed action is also inconsistent with Policy
6.3 (c) (1) (b) , which calls for reduction of development intensity
to avoid the evacuation or fill of vegetated wetlands.
The site plan proposes that 1,200 cubic yards is to be
excavated, cut, and 365 cubic yards are to be filled on the
property. Reducing the scale of the proposed development will
lower the environmental footprint.
The proposed installation of an IA onsite wastewater
treatment system is consistent with Policy 5.1 (c) (3) .
Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this
application?
MS. MOORE: Yes, thank you. Patricia Moore, on behalf of the
applicants.
I have with me Ed Harbes, who is the principal. He and
Shannon, his wife, are planning to build this house on the
property. I also have with me Charles Hamilton who I'll have his
resume for the record. I'm going to have him speak with regard
to the application since he has the technical expertise. I will
defer to him so that he has plenty of time to go over the
application.
Chuck, if you don't mind.
MR. HAMILTON: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Board,
my name is Chuck Hamilton, .I'm with A.M. Weber Associates, PO
Box 2753, Setauket New York 11733.
As you may know, I'm the former regional supervisor of the
DEC and have a few years of experience in tidal wetlands work.
So I was the one who first got involved with this project
to obtain the New York State DEC permits for this project. And
the first thing we knew that we had to, you know, do a design
that gets us as far away from the wetlands. Because it' s a
difficult piece of property. If I may just walk over to the
screen, it might be an easier way to talk about what I did.
So, when we first came and looked at it, now obviously we
have this hill area, we have this beautiful cove wetland area,
you know, flagged and wetlands. And we came, we went to the DEC,
and we basically said we're going to get a no-jurisdiction from
the, because of Elevation 10. But we are over here, the
jurisdiction came up the side of the hill, and so a permit was
needed for that part of the project.
But now we are dealing with Chapter 275, which deals with
up to 2023, tidal wetland areas, it's been a very effective law,
very similar to one of, the DEC wetlands law, but a very
effective law in protecting the resources here in the town.
Then in 2023, you modified the wetland law to add the new
banks and bluffs, which is kind of like what the coastal erosion
hazard law does, with the state law and things like that.
Board of Trustees 18 July 15, 2026 .
And again, bluffs and banks are really an integral part of
the tidal wetlands. And also, depending on where you, primarily
on the north shore we see that as an important feature to
protect. So you are probably talking to one of the biggest fans
of your Chapter 275. It' s a good law, written good, and things
like that.
So I just want to go a little bit over the design and how
we did this design of the project. And, you know, how we ended
up where we are today.
So when you, the first thing that I look at, and I'll just
want to show you here, but I tried to look at the south, you
know, cove is the most important natural resource feature and
tidal wetlands and bank that needed to be protected. It's got a
mature canopy forest, wooded area, on the south side of the
property, and really needed to be protected. So when we did the
design, we moved the dwelling up to the north. And when you
actually' look at this survey, you can see the most natural
shoreline is the south portion of the property, with the cove,
the banks, and then as you come to the east, you have a
bulkheaded shoreline.-
You guys all know the history of this property. It was an old
commercial lot, Tim and Heidi' s place here had an old bulkhead, it
went non-functional. Permits were given to build a rock revetment.
That's there. Redo the bulkhead, add a floating dock. And then
there' s a stone wall over here.
So pretty much the whole eastern side of the property at
the shore, at least with the tidal wetlands, is pretty much
developed with hard structures. Then as you come further to the
north of the property, that' s where you really see development.
You see the cottage. You see the cottage that people live in.
You see there is a gravel driveway that actually comes down
between both properties. There is a concrete patio and another
cottage.
Then when you start looking north, you start looking how
does this bluff work. This bluff hooks right into another
property to the north. It' s got 80 foot of a very high, big
retaining wall there. There is a shed. And when you actually
look at the other side of the property, it's a bulkhead.
So basically, the shoreline that, and I looked at it, I
felt it really needed to be protected, was this particular area.
This is the most natural remaining aspect of this bluff system,
our hill system and wetland system here on Mattituck Creek.
As you can see, we have a bulkhead, the rock armor, another
stone wall over here, big stone wall right here. This is a
gravel driveway they made, and they have a gravel parking area
here.
This here, anything that happens here is not going to do
anything to the wetlands or the bluff. Because this is an
already significant altered area with manmade structures, things
like that.
Board of Trustees 19 July 15, 2026
So we pushed the structures all, and, you know, with the
direction. I think. this is the third modification of this
project. So what we did -- make sure I get this right -- is
again, push the project to the north and put it up to the
60-foot setback, so it meets front yard setback, which is really
where you want to be in this project.
When you start looking at distances, you know, the driveway,
the sanitary system is 145 feet from wetlands. Um, the house is
115, 115, 118, 120. So a really good distance away from the
tidal wetlands. And the 120 feet away for the toe of the bank.
The toe of the bank to the north is 120 feet away from the tidal
wetland boundary.
When we think about bluffs and banks and hills, you know,
first thing I think of is Long Island Sound. I look at they have
an intertidal area, they have a beach and they have bluff.
That' s an integrated natural feature, natural structure.
When I look at this project, I have an intertidal marsh,
high marsh, rock wall, grass lawn, driveway, bunch of houses.
And then I have a hill. This little dip on the north side.
So I look at this hill here and say, it meets the code
definition of a bank, not a bluff, but a bank. And I call it
more like a hill. But its value in the natural resources is of
limited value.
Then when I looked at the eastern portion of the property,
where I have a stone wall, substantial rock revetment, a
bulkhead, that has limited value. Then I have a stretch of 60,
80-foot of lawn. And that has less value but I find that the
hill is not really connected to that intertidal wetland section.
But when I come to the south side of the property, it's all
connected. And it obviously shows on the survey. That is the
most important part of this property, is' that south section.
And that's actually where we have the highest square footage of
20-foot tall slopes, pretty steep slopes, that we are staying
Away from.
So now let's talk about the design of the project. I don't
design houses, first thing I'll tell you. It's a house. And so
what we did is, and if you look at the roadway, the roadway is
about 40, and when you come down, it goes down to like three.
So 'it's a big drop. So it comes down, we are doing a gravel
driveway, so the runoff will not be directed anywhere. We have
at least nine drywells on the project site to grab all the roof
runoff, all the runoff from the driveways. The sanitary systems
are in the front yard, as far away as possible. And pretty much
in the center of this hill area, if you look at right here on
the front yard of the property. It's a linear home. It' s, again,
anywhere from 45 to 75 feet away from the top of the bank to the
south. But when I get to the north, I'm right on the edge. I'm
zero feet away.
So when I talked to the architect, I said, you know what,
how are you going to build this? Well, I'm just going to build
Board of Trustees 20 July 15, 2026
it. No, you're not. You start doing an excavation and put a
foundation there, you'll tear the whole bluff apart. I said,
I'll tell you how you're going to do it. You'll pile-drive it.
You'll pile-drive the foundation for this structure, with
the bank here. We are not going to disturb that bank to the
north, where I think it's of lesser value than other ones, it' s
a protected structure that it' s in the code.
So we're going to build that house on that bank as far away
from that south area, pile drive it then put your foundation and
then your dwelling on top of that. Same thing with the pool. So
we can be on a terra firma area.
And the key factor is no alteration to the surface
topography, we don't want to modify any of the drainage
patterns, any of the salt types.
So the architect has a design to have this, I guess I call
it a bridge, for lack of a better word, to the lower dwelling
down there. And it' s going to be over that.
So the first thing I said, well, how are you going to build
that. Helicopter, right? So we are going to have to consider
anything in that area is going to be disturbed, the vegetation,
just by manual labor and people going in there. So I said, so
when I talked to John Hamilton -- by the way, I'm not a
landscape architect. That would be my son, okay, that's not me.
I didn't go to school again.
So he, and we came up, we said we're going to restore that.
We're going to restore that with native vegetation. And that
was another creative way, I directed and advised these guys, you
gotta do native plantings. Anything else is totally
unacceptable.
So John put together a plan that shows areas that we will
do the restoration that is needed. There' s no way you can do
it. There' s no sense, and I told these guys, we are not lying to
regulators, we're not going to tell them we can just plop it in
there. It' s going to happen. It' s going to be disturbances, but
what we are going to do is we are going to put erosion control
structures.
So when you look at the plan, you'll see that, I think it's
the orange line, we have a line of silt fence and construction
limiting fence entirely around the construction site so that
anything on the seaward side or toward the bank will not be
disturbed. And that first thing that we do, construction that
would be installed, it would be maintained, and it's, you know,
when you start looking at the south side again, you can see
that' s a really super-protected area as far as setbacks. When I
get up to the north side, which is this area, where it's been
manmade, altered, we are still going to protect the large wooded
area up to the northwest.
And when actually look at the area below the top of the
bank that we are disturbing here, it's about 70 feet. It' s about
I think 490 feet of top of bank in this particular area. So
Board of Trustees 21 July 15, 2026
probably about, you know, 17% of that area is proposed to be
altered. But when we alter it, there is going to be some slight
grading and filling just to get a smooth grade, not to have a
sharp grade, and it's all intended to be planted with native
plants. We have a bunch of drywells there so that slope, so this
house, if you kind of look at it, you'll see the blue areas of
the drywells, we surround the entire house with drywells, we
grab roof runoff, any change of topography, to grab that, so we
don't have any alteration, any surface runoff increase that
would denude the vegetation.
As you know, it' s a pretty heavy home there, but again,
we'll do the plantings. So all the plantings are native.
I saw the thing about King Hawthorn tree. Its zone is in
New York state. It' s kind of a neat plant, a lot of flowers in
May. Which means it' s a pollinator. All winter it has a lot of
red berries, which means bird food, and bird habitat. So if you
want that removed, we can do that. But I looked at it and said,
you know, from a wildlife perspective it's not a bad plant to
have, and it' s not a bad thing to have a pollinator tree in this
area.
We are planting over a thousand plants, you know, grasses,
shrubs, and things like that. All native.
I did have an opportunity to review the LWRP report. I
reviewed it. I had comments on them. If it' s okay, I'll just
present this, I 'll just present it as evidence and you can read
it, or do you want me to read it to you, my review?
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: No, you can submit it into the file.
MR. HAMILTON: Okay, that will save your time here.
And I do have a report that I wrote about this. It's pretty
much, I pretty much go over the project, what it is. It's a
two-story dwelling on piles, pool, fabulous decks, all-stone
pervious driveway, IA system, nine stormwater drywells, a pool
drywell, retention of the existing structures and the seasonal
cottage, conversion of a cottage one to boat storage, removal of
the concrete slab out in front, we'll do some cut and fill;
plant, you know, over a thousand plants, we'll preserve all the
existing woodlands in a 20% area. In fact the whole, the
perimeter is going to be protected.
We're. going to install salt-control devices, we'll maintain
-- there'll be no alteration to topography other than that
70-foot area that I talked about behind the two cottages.
We maximize the distance from tidal wetlands .
So when I look at the compliance with wetland setbacks, the
residence is 115 to 118. The driveway is 115. This is from tidal
wetlands now. Okay, the sanitary system is 145 feet to 240 feet.
The septic tank is over 150 feet. And the swimming pool is 120
feet.
So from a wetland perspective, it' s a really protected,
good design.
When we look at drainage and stormwater compliance, with
Board of Trustees 22 July 15, 2026
Chapter 275, we're putting nine storm wells, we have a dedicated
pool drywell, a permeable oil and stone driveway and we are
going to retain all runoff from the roofs and the property into
below-grade drywells.
Woodlands on the 20o slopes are going to remain
undisturbed. All the woodlands on the south and the east side
are going to remain as is. The seaward paths that are there will
be maintained but not increased in the area.
The regrading is paired with revegetation. The entire
construction area, before construction starts, will be
surrounded by erosion control devices and a
construction-limiting fence. I'm talking about a four-foot high
fence, avoid any alteration to the protected slope area.
I'll skip some of this stuff. I don't want to say it again.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think we are starting to circle back on some
of the points you already made.
MR. HAMILTON: Okay, that' s okay. Yes. I'll, there's that.
As far as flood and storm tide resiliency, Chapter 275-12 (e) , we
-are compliant. We are not going to have any impact on flood and
storm tide resilience. There will be no adverse impact in
navigation, tidal flow or lateral support. The lateral support
means when we do the piling driving and things like that, there
will be no alteration to those topographies, those sloped areas,
that would diminish the lateral support of the existing slopes.
As far as esthetic and environmental improvements, we' ll
maintain the Oak and Hickory mature woodland area. There will be
no alteration to tidal wetlands, we're going to preserve the
natural shoreline, and all the installation of new structures
are going to be landward of existing structure. They are
landward of an existing cottage, a building, concrete patio, and
all kinds of marine hardware that's on the shoreline.
So now we are going to get back to the bank setback of 100
feet. Local Law 5200223 was amended on March 29th, 2023, Chapter
25, Chapter 275, Wetlands and Shorelines.
So again, I talked about the project hill, it' s a hill with
open slopes northeast and south. I did all that. The proposed
dwelling and driveway are proposed 41 on the south, proposed
project is 41, is 75 feet landward from the top of bank. From
the south, 41 to 75 feet to the top of the bank. We can't be
100 feet away from the south top of bank. But we're 41 to 75
feet away but these areas will remain fully vegetated with no
man alterations to that area seaward of that dwelling.
The setbacks on the north side, as I indicated, is a
diminished value, having a gravel driveway, gravel parking area,
a reticence in building, a concrete patio.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Excuse me, Mr. Hamilton. I'm just going to
interrupt you for one point here. You did mention the code was
updated in 2023, banks and bluffs.
MR. HAMILTON: That. was my information.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: That' s not true. So, just for the record,
Board of Trustees 23 July 15, 2026
that is not a true statement.
MR. HAMILTON: Okay, so when was it amended?
MS. HULSE: In Chapter 275? In 275?
MR. HAMILTON: Yes.
MS. HULSE: Looks like in 2017.
MR. HAMILTON: Okay, I stand corrected. Thank you, sir.
MS. HULSE: What are you referencing, Pat?
MS. MOORE: Local Law, it was Local Law 2000 -- what was the
number I gave you where you changed, you added banks.
(Perusing) . It's Local Law 5 of 2023. That law is the first time
that you added "bank" to the definition of the jurisdiction.
MS. HULSE: Are you talking about under 280?
MS. MOORE: No, 275. Yeah. That' s what the Town Clerk had.
MR. HULSE: I don't think we changed that. I don't think it was
changed. You're saying it was changed, Pat?
MS. MOORE: Yes, that word was added. I'll pull the law.
MS. HULSE: We had the definition of "bank" in the code in 2017.
That' s the last time I had it. It was changed -- but you are
saying it changed the definition?
MS. MOORE: It was changed, you changed the jurisdiction. Hold
on. Let me finish. I'll pull up the local law.
Maybe I can give it to you after the meeting so we don't
delay.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Yes, Mr. Hamilton --
MR. HAMILTON: I don't want to talk about any legal matters.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: And, sir, please, five minutes or less, if
possible.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It started ten minutes ago. We are trying to
take care of this.
MR. HAMILTON: Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
Okay, the residence is proposed right at the top of the
hill, however no excavation is needed as a power foundation will
be installed, with no alteration or disturbance to the slope or
topography of that area.
The north slope is not connected directly to tidal
wetlands, it's connected to a gravel driveway with a substantial
retaining wall on the north side, and also to the area to the
south.
The high natural resource value of this project site is the
south slope with a direct connection to the south cove tidal
wetlands, which is why we designed the project.
As far as residence, regarding the bank setbacks, the bank
setbacks to the residence is 41 feet to 74 feet on the south; on
the north slope it' s two feet to 22 feet; on the driveway it's
20 feet from the south top of bank; 42 feet from the south top
of bank. The sanitary leaching pool is proposed 57 feet from the
south, and 30 feet from the north.
The septic tank is 50 feet from the south and 48 feet from
the north. The swimming pool is proposed two to four feet from
the north slope.
Board of Trustees 24 July 15, 2026
So when you look at the way it is, we try to maximize the
maximum distance and equidistance some of the other structures
that are proposed here.
So my request to the Board is that we meet and protect all
the resources of the tidal wetlands, we protect all of the bank
areas, however we cannot meet the hundred-foot setback, so
respectfully we would ask -- they are not attainable, and we
would ask that a variance to the 100-foot setback is requested.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Thank you. Is there anyone else here wishing
to speak regarding this application?
TRUSTEE FINORA: I have a question for Mr. Hamilton.
MR. HAMILTON: Sure.
TRUSTEE FINORA: I appreciate your review of the concept that, I
commend you for the approach in recognizing those important
features, the aspects of that topography orientation where the
wetlands are located.
One particular issue that I would be curious what your take
is on, just the general intensification of the project on the
specific site. We have a number of structures there already.
The need for connectivity of the lower main dwelling now, at the
lower elevation, to the proposed large dwelling at the higher
elevation. I understand in talking to the applicant and their
representation, this is largely a zoning need to have these
connected because there's already an existing single-family
dwelling on the property, and associated accessory structures.
One thing I would be curious about, from your opinion,
environmentally, you know, what is justification for this
extraordinary increase in size of structure and its given
location, and how is that really mitigated here?
MR. HAMILTON: I think the critical aspect is, is where we should
be working, when you do development of any of kind of property,
it should be concentrated in one common location. And when you
look at this property, it's been developed over time, where
we've had these pre-existing cottages, and then we built a
bulkhead, and the dock, it' s that nickel-dime approach that we
get caught on as a regulator, and here we are at the end of the
game saying how do we straighten this mess up.
And so when I look at it, the best approach to me is that
we should concentrate the development, for these residential
developments, because this is the last development of this
parcel, and we should concentrate that on the top of that hill,
and anything below that should have limited value as far as
views and things like that. I would concentrate everything on
top of that hill. You know, walkway, staircase, clear, you know,
access to the rest of the property. Because it' s kind of
connected where you have the residence on the top part of the
property, and the recreational aspects would be down by the
water, where we've already altered so much, it's just the lawn
and bulkheads, you know. But you try to keep it up on top.
The mitigation is to move as far away as possible. And I
Board of Trustees 25 July 15, 2026
think I did the best I could on the south side. Any closer to
the road, it's obviously a zoning issue with front yard setback,
and I think the key thing in making decisions is we as
regulators have to protect our resources, the Zoning Board has
to protect their resources with the zoning code and things like
that. So, we try to do the best we can to put it together. So,
you know, we're at the very -- and we got good direction, to the
right at 60 foot. So that's where we're at. So I think that's
the best mitigation we can do at this point.
TRUSTEE FINORA: Thank you.
MR. HAMILTON: You're welcome.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Anyone else wishing to speak regarding this
application?
(No response) .
Any other questions or comments by the Board?
(No response) .
Hearing none, I make a motion to table this hearing for ZBA
review.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Number 5, Cole Environmental Services on behalf
of PAMELA VALENTINE requests a Wetland Permit to construct a
proposed 42 . 6' x 17' (793 S.F. ) two-story dwelling on piles, a
42 . 6' x 12 ' (510 S. F. ) rear first-story wood deck with stairs, a
373 S.F. irregular rear second-story deck, a 20.5 ' x 7' (145
S. F. ) front wood deck with a +/- 20 S.F. outdoor shower; an I/A
sanitary system to be installed to the west of the dwelling;
existing firepit to remain; install a well to establish water
supply line; install two drywells; install a 500 gallon buried
propane tank; construct an 80' x 12 ' timber bridge over
approximately 473 S.F. of wetlands consisting of five (5) 16'
bents supported by a wooden pile substructure with a structural
wooden deck; all bridge elements to be constructed of
exterior-grade structural timber with no disturbance to occur
below the bridge; install an approximately 35' x 12 ' driveway
extending from the dwelling to the bridge approach with a 15' x
20' turnaround area, to be constructed of pervious material
consisting of medium-compaction RCA or a pervious masonry/stone
product; two (2) approximately 20' x 12' bridge approach areas,
grade dependent, to be constructed of medium-compaction pervious
RCA; install an approximately 140' x 12' private road accessway
within the existing 30' right-of-way extending from the terminus
of the bridge to Birdseye Road with existing vegetation within
the accessway to be cleared and the roadbed leveled to match
existing grade; accessway to be constructed of medium-compaction
pervious RCA and silt fencing to be established and maintained
during construction.
Located: 1675 Birds Eye Road, Orient. SCTM# 1000-17-2-1.4
Board of Trustees 26 July 15, 2026
The Trustees most recently visited the property on July
8th, 2026, questions raised about the paper road over the
wetlands, fresh and salt nearby; concerns about bridge;
diminishing freshwater wetlands; house can be located closer to
IA septic system; an alternative possibility open for access
closer to driveway; hydrology a factor as it feeds through paper
road area.
This is the most recent of multiple site inspections which
echoed the same concerns about the sensitivity of the area.
The LWRP found this to be inconsistent. The proposed action
is inconsistent with Policy One as it does not preserve open
space, make efficient use of infrastructure or provide a
beneficial use of coastal location while increasing the adverse
affects of development. The only pre-existing structures on the
parcel are gravel paths.
The proposed action is inconsistent with Policy 4. 1A
because there are flooding and erosion hazards on the parcel.
Directly off the shoreline of the Long Island Sound is the
Coastal Erosion Hazard Area. Extending past the CEHA is the
FEMA VE flood zone, which holds the high coastal risk of
flooding and high wave action. Beyond the VE flood zone where
the proposed second/third dwelling is proposed is the FEMA AE
flood zone, which has a high flood risk.
The proposed actions of the proposed residence and the
proposed sanitary leaching pool are inconsistent with Policy
6.3A, which states the Town of Southold Trustees jurisdiction,
and does not comply with the wetland setbacks in Town Code
Chapter 275 (D) (1) (A) , under "waterfront parcel. "
The residence should be 100 feet from the wetland boundary
and sanitary leaching pools, and should be 75 feet from the
wetland boundary.
The proposed installation of an IA Onsite Wastewater
Treatment System is consistent with Policy 5.1 (C) (3) .
Is there anyone here that wishes to speak regarding this
application?
MR. COLE: Yes. Chris Cole, Cole Environmental, agent for the
applicant.
To go through a few points on here, we met with the
Trustees in the Fall originally, from our side of the things,
and discussed the project. We worked in Trustee comments into
the design. We put a lot of time and effort into creating a plan
that creates minimal disturbance.
I do want to note that there is a permit granted by this
Board from 1990, that granted approval for a house, a pool and a
driveway that filled in the westerly side of wetlands.
This current proposal proposes to extend the road on the
southern side, Birdseye Road, and create a bridge in,. you can
almost see it on the aerial here, where there is a pathway in
between two sections of wetlands, so we are going to traverse
the wetlands to minimally impact them, compared to the previous
Board of Trustees 27 July 15, 2026
1990 permit.
The house will be, the house has been designed using
helical piles and using strategies to minimize as much
disturbance as possible.
We discussed the helical piles on the site, and the builder
and architect have assured me that they can be installed with
augurs, so it won't be a team of oxen. Access to the site will
be from the adjacent property to the west, and all storage and
materials, dumpster, et cetera, will be on that property.
We discussed the septic and the house location, potentially
flipping those. If we flipped them, that would bring the
effluent closer to the well. But we did investigate shrinking
the footprint of the septic system and bringing it closer to the
house, which the architect believes he can do. He can shrink
that and put the septic system more inline with the previously
disturbed and already disturbed areas on site. So if that is
something the Board is open to, we can resubmit plans depicting
that.
And we also have the attorney, John here, who can speak
further to the road and the access and the legality of that side
of things.
MR. BOURQUIN: Good afternoon, Board members. John Bourquin of
Greenberg Traurig, 2317 Main Street in Bridgehampton, on behalf
of the applicant.
Myself and Mr. Portillo, the builder of the project, met
with Mike Verity of the Building Department in July 2025 and
again in September of 2025 to discuss this concept.
Mr. Verity's wish list for us at that time was proof that
the properties, the two properties, were single and separate,
distinct from each other and thus buildable. And also whether
the applicant had legal access over the Birdseye Road, kind
of the T-shaped road there for this parcel.
So as I have provided Mr. Verity in writing, the road and
its "T" configuration as well as these two lots were created by
the map of JD Stern, which was approved by the Town's Planning
Board in 1970. Dime Abstract has proved that the two lots have
been held single and separate.
These two lots are plotted on the tax map prior to 1981 and
are thus conforming as to the Health Department. And the deed by
which the applicant took the easterly property, 1675 Tax Lot
1. 4, also grants use of the right-of-way, particularly the
easterly or the right-hand side of the T-shaped element, which
runs to the south of the lot and where the proposed access and
bridge would take from.
So to give you a quick summary of all that, the applicant
has a buildable lot and has legal access over the T-shaped
private road.
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Thank you.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone else here wishing to speak
regarding this application?
Board of Trustees 28 July 15, 2026
(No response)
So I think if you look back in the notes, the Board of
Trustees has been pretty uniform since the first pre-submission
of this application. It's -- in 2026, to say it' s a buildable
lot is, with such firmness, is troubling to me. I 'm not sure if
we are speaking of the dune that extends all the way up .to this
application, and is not mapped or pictured correctly, or if we
are talking about the pond that says "area of phragmites and
drainage. " But I'm not sure which part of that is clearly
buildable.
One thing the Trustees had talked about from the start is
the concept -- and which you see on the, part of which you see
in the original permit from 30 years ago, when we don't know as
much as we do now about the environment, but which takes the
access from the other side of the property, thereby preserving a
lot of the sensitive habitat, certainly arguably not enough, but
a lot of sensitive habitat that is absolutely going to be
destroyed with this application.
But for myself, a large part of my trouble with this is that
it shows 40. 9 feet to the crest of dune, and as per our code
it's on unconsolidated earth, which is very apparent in the
field, mere feet from this proposal and the flagged area.
So I think at minimum, the plans would have to be changed
and would have to be some justification as to why we would allow
a structure so close to that.
Furthermore, just environmentally speaking, it doesn't seem
like since the pre-submission in this application there has been
any attempt to mitigate the environmental concerns of the
Trustees and try to minimize those as required in our code,
whether it be with the expansion of a bridge immediately
adjacent to the wetlands, expansion of a paper road that goes
over the wetlands, or sliding the structure over, condensing the
structures and trying to mitigate the enormous environmental
impact of a very sensitive area in a very special place within
this Town, that has a history of trying to preserve the
environment and work within those confines.
MR. COLE: John will speak to the road.
One also piece that I would also just like to hand the
Board is just a no-jurisdiction letter from the DEC. They don't
have jurisdiction over freshwater wetlands.
MR. BOURQUIN: So, just a few comments. I know that I 've touched
on the paper road and the legal access to that, but as to the
concept of access with the bridge.
While it might not look like this is the most
straightforward approach or straightforward way to get access to
the lot, any other alternative, such as using a portion of the
westerly lot to access, would create a whole host of other
complications. It would at least require recording some sort of
document against title to the westerly property, which could
create single and separate implications for both the zoning and
Board of Trustees 29 July 15, 2026
the Health Department. Further having access from the westerly
lot may create the deed for a Town Lot 280 (a) variance, which
generally is building on a lot without road access.
So that is the, part of the legal argument that is behind that
concept.
MR. COLE: So we will revisit the proposal, if the Board is open
to the idea of shrinking the overall development by condensing
the sanitary system and the house, and we will revegetate any
areas that have been disturbed with native species. And we
could even expand the area of wetlands to the northwest corner
and create additional habitat in that area, and add additional
native species.
In addition to that we'll take a look at the plan and see
if there is anything else that we can do to minimize overall
impact on the site here.
And we have Anthony, the architect, here as well.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think, I 'd suggest as part of that as well, I
mean, you can, it' s a Tittle hard to tell, but frankly speaking,
those sand paths, the sand wasn't brought in to create those. So
to say, again, the dune and the beach line is 40 feet away, I
think that should be revisited as well as part of that.
MR. COLE: Okay.
MR. PORTILLO: Hi, Board, Anthony Portillo, AMP Architecture.
I just wanted to put .on the record that if you look at the
site plan from the 1990 application, there was actually a road
pretty much in the area that we are proposing this road, that at
some point was removed. And I just thought that interesting
that, you know, that that was sort of already existing at some
point and then removed. I just wanted to say that on the record.
And just one other thing. The right-of-way is at 30 feet,
you know, we are proposing just 15 feet, for emergency vehicle
access. And trying to stay as far from the wetlands line as
possible. That' s the reason we are proposing it that way.
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Mr. Portillo, to that point, have you explored
the concept of maybe 15-feet wide for the road leading up but
the bridge going across the wetlands potentially being smaller
than 15-feet wide, knowing that there is no way that a fire
truck could turn all the way down and traverse a bridge to
access this property. It would be pulling hose over the bridge
anyway.
MR. PORTILLO: Sure. And Bob actually, the builder of the
project, spoke with the Fire Marshall in Orient about that
situation, and just sort of wanted to understand how they were
to sort of access the house if there ever was a fire. And I 'm
not speaking for Bob, but basically the conversation led to fire
apparatus would park at the road and basically go up the
driveway with the hoses.
So to your point, I think we could look at it less wide of
a bridge and reduce that, you know, based on that conversation.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And just to respond about the road on the
Board of Trustees 30 July 15, 2026
original permit that was removed, it says "create marsh by
removing old road. " So, that' s a positive. But the old road that
was removed, if it' s to scale, based off the measurements of the
driveway, is about three-feet wide.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: And also, just for the record, obviously we
all know the environmental conditions have changed since 1990,
in coastal erosion and everything.
MR. PORTILLO: Of course.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: And the setbacks from 1990 to now have
changed as well.
MR. PORTILLO: Sure. I mean I think we need what we got, what we
just heard from Nick, I think we need to unpack a little bit and
look at some of those things. And I appreciate it. You know, one
of my other statements to the Board would be that, you know, our
lot coverage is very minimal.
I think this a very condensed -- you know, I don't think, I
think it's about a 750 or so square-foot footprint. There are
some decks that we're requesting off the rear that are not
covered structures, they are open decks. Which that's what that
measurement was to. It's not actually to the residence.
But again, those are the things I think we can look at and
take, you know, into consideration.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I appreciate that. One of my issues with lot
coverage is it doesn't take into account everything that is
going on there. So a piece of property like this, you are
talking about like 100% lot coverage of the sensitive area when
you are dealing with, you know, primary and secondary dunes,
unconsolidated sediments, and a wetland area that, you know
appears to be pretty healthy. So I do think it's certainly worth
taking a look at.
And certainly the impacts of shading of a two-story
structure, that is also on piles_ , to the surrounding habitat and
vegetation.
MR. PORTILLO: The piles are not actually for an elevation
purpose. It' s going to be somewhat in line with grade. I mean,
we are following the natural grade and not disturbing it. The
piles were more in line with trying to create a way to have a
foundation without having to excavate, essentially.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, I appreciate that. I just, a lot of things
that are not taken into account is the height of these
structures that just wipes out the native vegetation that's
around it.
MR. PORTILLO: And to that statement, we are within our zoning
height. I mean, we're not going over that. But I understand
that' s something we can discuss and maybe mitigate.
MR. BOURQUIN: To the earlier point about fire apparatuses, we do
have, for the record, a letter dated today, July 15th, 2026, .
from Richard Gillooly, the Chief of the Orient Fire Department,
in which he expresses support for the concept.
So, I can hand this up to counsel, if you would like.
Board of Trustees 31 July 15, 2026
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Sure. Thank you.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you.
MR. COLE: So we'll take all of the Board' s comments and work it
in to address all of them to the maximum extent possible, and
we'll request to table the application. Thank you.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone else here wishing to speak
regarding this application?
(No response) .
Or any members of the Board?
(Negative response) .
Hearing none, I make a motion to table this application at
the applicant's request. .
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second. All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Number 6, Cole Environmental Services on
behalf of BRYAN & TRACY KAPPENBERG requests a Wetland Permit to
demolish existing one-story dwelling, foundation, concrete stoop
and stairs, paver walk, concrete porch, paver' patio, and asphalt
driveway; construct .an irregularly shaped two-story
2, 655.3sq.ft. Dwelling with an attached 24 'x27.5 ' garage, 111x6'
and 9. 61x4 ' front porches; a 19. 6'xl5.5' seaward screened porch
with 4'x5' landing and steps; a basement stair egress on west
side and a basement window egress on east side of dwelling; an
18 'xl1' inground pool within an a 1, 006.7sq.ft. Pool patio with
stairs to ground; install pool enclosure fencing with gates and
pool equipment area with sound deadening enclosure; install
three 8' diameter by 6' deep drywells to contain roof runoff and
one 8' diameter by 4' deep drywell for pool; abandon existing
septic system and install an I/A sanitary system landward of
dwelling; and install a pervious driveway.
Located: 6050 Great Peconic Bay Blvd. , Laurel. SCTM#1000-128-2-7
The Trustees visited the site on 7/8/26. Notes from our
visit read: . Two-for-one tree replacement, increase non-turf
buffer.
The LWRP found the project inconsistent with its policies,
Policy 6, specifically 6.3, noting the move of the structure
further landward and the addition of a pool and patio, making it
slightly closer to the water.
Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding the
application?
MS. RUMMEL: Kate Rummel, Cole Environmental, on behalf of the
homeowner.
So we are demoing the existing residence, and then the
proposed new residence is almost entirely landward of the
existing. There is a slight encroachment of the patio beyond the
seaward of the existing house. But all covered structures
remain. I guess the screened porch, the corner, does not
encroach further towards the bulkhead. And the majority of the
proposal is beyond the 100-foot setback.
Board of Trustees 32 July 15, 2026
I do have updated plans that do show the 100-foot setback
also includes, there is the 13-foot existing buffer, sand
buffer, and then the stair, like, the rock retaining wall, is
approximately two-feet wide and then we do have a proposed
three-foot wide vegetated buffer, that I can submit, if it
pleases the Board.
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Ms. Rummel, you were at our work session.
Were you able to conference about the driveway?
MS. RUMMEL: Yes. It was part of the design with the architect,
it was just, you know, taking into consideration the site and
trying to maximize the enjoyment of it.
But the client did walk the site and there are minimal
trees to be taken down, but he is open to replanting them. They
would be outside of Trustee jurisdiction, but he would still be
open to replanting them outside.
And we do have a note that any tree within Trustee
jurisdiction would be replaced two-to-one. And I believe at the
work session you noted that you wanted cedar for cedar, instead
of another species.
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: All right.
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: At times like this I really wish we had more
strength to a tree code in town, because while I understand the
client's desire to move .the driveway, there will be a
significant loss of trees on the property due to that decision.
And while it may not be our purview, it is still worth noting
that that is a loss for the community.
MS. RUMMEL: They did count, it would be in total for the
project, they approximate about five trees would come down.
Which I understand is not what the Board would like to hear, but
he is open to replanting.
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Thank you.
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Okay. Do you have plans ready?
MS. RUMMEL: I have two copies, yes, of additional plans, with an
additional vegetated buffer.
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Would you mind letting us take a quick look?
MS. RUMMEL: (Handing) .
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Liz, can you stamp them.
MS. CANTRELL: (Complying) .
MS. RUMMEL: I also have a copy of the plans, which I've
highlighted the existing structure, if that helps, for
comparison.
(Stenographer asks Ms. Rummel to repeat her sentence) .
I've highlighted the existing structure on this site, I
don't know if that's helpful, for comparison of where things are
located, but.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: While it may not be related to the entirety of
this application, I would just, too, echo my concerns about the
trees that, there's a lot of really talented architects and
engineers in town designing this projects, and environmental and
consulting firms, and it' s becoming a new trend to not design
Board of Trustees 33 July 15, 2026
around the existing native landscape, and it's getting worse and
worse across town. So while we might not have a metric tonight
for some of those, to protect these actually beautiful cedars,
which is not the case of all the cedars we are trying to
protect, it's certainly something that I 'm going to look for in
the future if it does come by again.
MS. RUMMEL: Understood. Aside from the driveway, the proposed
house is within, primarily within like the cleared area, and
noted on your sentiments.
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: But we are losing one beautiful tree for the
extension, right?
MS. RUMMEL: I understand. I apologize, on behalf of the tree.
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Is there anyone else here to speak regarding
this application?
(No response) .
Hearing no further comment, I make a motion to close the
hearing.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) . .
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI : I make a motion to approve this application
with the new plans submitted this evening, July 15th, 2026,
depicting the addition of a three-foot wide vegetated non-turf
buffer and a 13-foot wide sand area seaward of that buffer. The
addition of the buffer and the retreat of the structure further
landward, taking it almost out of Trustee jurisdiction,
satisfies the concerns of the LWRP, bringing it into
consistency.
I make a motion to approve the application with the
addition of six native trees, two to three-inch caliper, four of
which will be the Eastern Red Cedars.
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
MS. RUMMEL: Thank you.
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Number 7, En-Consultants on behalf of
ELIZABETH GARDNER requests a Wetland Permit to construct onto
existing 1, 424sq. ft. Single-family dwelling a cantilevered
second-floor addition with a 1'x19' overhang over approximately
496sq. ft. Portion of existing first floor to remain, and a 41x8 '
balcony; in place of existing entry steps construct a 40sq. ft.
Covered entry porch addition with steps; reconnect renovated
roof to existing stormwater drywell; and to maintain the
existing 10' wide non-turf buffer along the landward edge of the
bulkhead.
Located: 1665 Shore Drive, Greenport. SCTM# 1000-47-2-30.
The Trustees most recently visited the site and noted to
add a five-foot vegetated buffer on the 8th of July.
The LWRP reviewed this application and found it to be
Board of Trustees 34 July 15, 2026
consistent.
Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this
application?
MR. HERRMANN: Yes. Rob Herrmann of En-Consultants, on behalf of
the applicant.
It' s a straightforward project with a second-floor
addition. There is an existing IA sanitary system to accommodate
that. There is an existing non-turf buffer, but in the field, as
you just mentioned, there was discussion of adding a proposed
five-foot vegetated non-turf buffer, which more or less is
established already, but this would make that permanent and
memorialize it, landward of that approximately 1.3-foot high
masonry landscape wall. And so to that end we have revised
plans from Mark Schwartz, architect, dated July 14th, 2026, and
I'll hand up three copies of that now.
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Thank you.
Is there anyone else here wishing to speak regarding this
application?
(No response) .
MR. HERRMANN: I should also note that we did add that landscape wall
for reference and the stairs that were missing from the original
plans. So those features as they relate to that buffer are now
shown on the site plan. And I can give Elizabeth a revised
project description to reflect that.
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: All right, we just reviewed the plan that we
just received. It reflects the vegetated non-buffer as
requested.
Is there anyone else who would like to make any comments
from the Board?
(No response) .
Hearing none, I make a motion to close the hearing.
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: I make a motion to approve this application
with the new plans received July 15th, 2026.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE FINORA: Number 8, En-Consultants on behalf of PATRICIA
BOGEN REVOCABLE TRUST requests a Wetland Permit to demolish and
remove existing two-story dwelling with waterside deck and
covered porch, accessory garage, shed and brick oven; existing
18 'x36' swimming pool and .722sq. ft. Brick pool patio to remain;
construct a new 1, 353sq.ft. Two-story, single-family dwelling
with attached garage and a covered porch; a 379sq.ft.
Free-standing (structurally independent) waterside deck with
steps; a 322sq. ft. Grade-level permeable patio; install a
permeable gravel walkway in place of existing brick walk;
Board of Trustees 35 July 15, 2026
replace existing septic system with an I/A OWTS sanitary system
landward of dwelling; install a stormwater drainage system
including a pool drywell; and to establish and perpetually
maintain a 15' wide vegetated non-turf buffer area along the
landward edge of the wetland boundary.
Located: 375 Old Wood Path, Southold. SCTM# 1000-87-1-3.3
The Trustees conducted a site inspection on July 8th
requesting the establishment of a non-disturbance area seaward
of the berm; ten-foot non-turf buffer landward of the
non-disturbance, laterally across the property, through area of
existing shed.
The LWRP found this to be consistent.
I am looking at plans that depict those changes that were
requested in the field showing a non-disturbance area located
seaward of the existing berm and following the wetland line.
Is there anyone here wishing to speak on behalf of this
application?
MR. HERRMANN: Yes. Rob Herrmann of En-Consultants on behalf of
the applicant, on behest of the applicant. Pat Bogen is
also here, with her husband, and the design team, Lisa Murray is
here.
This is, as I presented in the field, a good application,
it' s a coastal retreat application. The house and majority of
the structures are being pushed away from the nearest point of
the wetlands, which angle up on the neighboring property.
The sanitary waste will be treated with an upgraded IA
sanitary system. Runoff will be treated with a new stormwater
drainage system. And as Joe just referenced, we have submitted a
revised site plan that shows two buffer areas, and the first
closest to the house is a ten-foot wide vegetated non-turf
buffer that is measured off the seaward toe of the berm, that is
also been added to the survey and site plan. And then the
entire area seaward of that vegetated non-turf buffer between
the buffer and the wetland is additionally labeled to remain as
a non-disturbance buffer.
So I believe those buffers ,designations should align with
the Board' s request, and you'll notice that the way that
vegetated non-turf runs linearly across the property, that will
actually occupy half of the footprint of where that existing
shed is now, and is slated to be removed.
So the one part of the project that is closest to the
wetland is actually a removal, and so the Board will be finding
a vegetated non-turf buffer going in place of half the footprint
of where that shed was.
I think that' s all I have. If the Board has any questions,
I'm happy to answer them.
TRUSTEE FINORA: Thank you. Any questions from the Board?
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't remember if it had come up in the field
or not, but it might make sense to add a few trees in there with
the vegetation. It's a pretty treed area and there' s not, I
Board of Trustees 36 July 15, 2026
don't think, a native on the site.
MR. HERRMANN: Particularly where that shed is now, because there
are actually some trees in that corner of the property already,
so we could, if that' s -- Patricia is nodding yes.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Great.
MR. HERRMANN: So if you want to note as a condition a minimum of
three trees within that. We wouldn't put it in the
non-disturbance, correct? It would be within the vegetated
buffer.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Yes. Or outside of the vegetated buffer,
whatever works. I'm pretty open in my opinion on that.
MR. HERRMANN: Sure, .okay. . That sounds agreeable. Sounds good.
TRUSTEE FINORA: Hearing no other comments, questions, I make a
motion to close this hearing.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE FINORA: I make a motion to approve this application,
noting conformity with the July 15th drawings set, indicating
the change in modification to the buffers as we described, and
also adding the condition of the additional three native
hardwood trees to be included, which are not depicted on these
plans at present.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Number 9, En-Consultants on behalf of JOHN M.
MILLER LIFETIME QTIP TRUST requests a Wetland Permit to
construct a dock attached to bulkhead consisting of a 3'xl4 '
hinged ramp to a 6'x20' floating dock secured by two 10"
diameter piles situated in an "L" configuration; construct a
161x33' swimming pool (southwest corner to be elevated up to 18"
above existing grade) ; remove portion of existing stone patio as
needed and install 6' wide paver stones; construct a 596sq. ft.
Masonry pool patio; and install a pool drywell and pool
enclosure fencing.
Located: 1132 Bridge Lane, Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-118-1-18. 4
The Trustees conducted a field inspection July 8th, notes
need to see pool equipment location; ten-foot wide non-turf
buffer to be shown on plans; dock and pool acceptable.
The LWRP found it to be inconsistent. The inconsistency is
the proposed pool is inconsistent with Policy 6.3 (a) , because it
does not comply with Town Code Chapter 275.3 (d) (1) (a) (5) , that
states the setback at the top of the bank slope for a swimming
pool and related structures is 16 feet.
Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this
application?
MR. HERRMANN: Yes, Rob Herrmann, of En-Consultants.
This is a straightforward application. There is a proposed
Board of Trustees 37 July 15, 2026
dock that consists of a hinged ramp off the existing bulkhead
with a floating dock. And then a swimming pool and patio with a
minimum setback from the wetlands associated with Wunneweta Pond
of 78 eight feet.
Regarding the LWRP review, I think there is, I doubt they
get a chance to go out to these properties, but there is no bank
here, it is a basically rolling lawn between the bulkhead and
the house, as the Board .saw. There is perhaps a slight
embankment on the south side of Bridge Lane, but the pool is,
the 60-foot setback from the pool in that direction ends up in
the middle of Bridge Lane. So if that small, steeper incline on
the south side of Bridge Lane were considered to be a top of
bank, a pool and patio do conform, they exceed that setback.
The Board had discussed in the field the addition of buffer
areas on the Wunneweta pond side.
I did just hand up to Elizabeth a revised site plan, survey
site plan last dated July 12th. We showed two different non-turf
buffer areas, a traditional ten-foot wide non-turf buffer
landward of the bulkhead, and a ten-foot wide vegetated non-turf
buffer adjacent to the wetland boundary in the area of the
existing lawn just to the east of the bulkhead as we had
discussed in the field.
So hopefully that does satisfy the conditions we talked
about. Oh, and the pool equipment, we added to the north, off
the north corner of the house, just outside wetlands
jurisdiction and showing that pool equipment to be screened with
evergreens on both sides facing the water and facing the
neighbor.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: So, yes, we do have that, and new plans were
submitted.
Mr. Herrmann, just one quick question. On the plans you
submitted you have one area that says "sand, " which as we know
is supposed to be just a non-turf buffer, because it' s acting as
a non-turf buffer.
MR. HERRMANN: Right.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: So we'd probably look for new plans to depict
that as a non-turf buffer, not just "sand.
MR. HERRMANN: Okay.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: And while you are updating the plans, the
proposed ten-foot wide vegetated non-turf buffer, and then the
other proposed ten-foot wide non-turf buffer, it seems as if
between those two areas, there is nothing.
So is there a way that you could—
MR. HERRMANN: Sort of tie them in together?
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Yes, sir.
MR. HERRMANN: Yes. And so the sand was just, that was shown on
the survey originally, and we got very focused on the area we
were establishing and I just, I apologize, I didn't even think
to ask Ken to extend that over.
And I assume you'll want to see sort of like a similar
Board of Trustees 38 July 15, 2026
tie-in on that side, it's a continuous --
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Yes.
MR. HERRMANN: Yes. That's fine. That's my bad.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Is there anyone else here wishing to speak
regarding this application?
(No response) .
Any other questions or comments from the Board?
(No response) .
Hearing none, I make a motion to close this hearing.
TRUSTEE GILLOOLY: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion to approve this application
with the condition of new plans depicting the non-turf buffer
continuous along that bulkhead, and noting that in the field we
found this was not a bank, therefore it brings it into
consistency with the LWRP.
TRUSTEE SEPENOSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
MR. HERRMANN: Thank you.
TRUSTEE KRU.PSKI: Number 10, En-Consultants on behalf of DANIELLE
& JOSEPH MONACO III requests a Wetland Permit to construct
approximately 60 linear feet of vinyl bulkhead in place of
existing timber bulkhead; construct a 12. linear foot long vinyl
return along easterly property line in place of existing return;
backfill with approximately 15 cubic yards of clean sandy fill
to be trucked in from an approved upland source; remove and
replace in-place existing ±51x5.5' cantilevered wood landing and
31x6' steps to beach; remove and replace in-place a 3'x±10'
section of existing .3'x±22' masonry walkway; and to maintain the
existing 7 ' wide non-turf buffer along the landward edge of the
bulkhead.
Located: 3775 Camp Mineola Road, Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-123-5-33
The Trustees most recently visited the property on the 8th
of July, noted it was a straightforward replacement of an
existing bulkhead.
And the LWRP coordinator found this to be consistent.
Is there anyone here wishing to speak regarding this
application?
MR. HERRMANN: Yes, Rob Herrmann, on behalf of the applicant.
It is a straightforward, in-place bulkhead replacement, and
we noted the existing seven-foot non-turf buffer to be
memorialized, that is consistent, as we noted in the field, that
same buffer that extends along the shoreline. So we would
anticipate that that would be the subject of a covenant
requirement. So other than that, it' s about as straightforward
as it gets.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to
Board of Trustees 39 July 15, 2026
speak regarding this application, or any comments from the
Board?
(No response) .
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Hearing none, I make a motion to close the
hearing.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second. All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I make a motion to approve this application as
submitted.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: Second. All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
MR. HERRMANN: Thank you.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: I make a motion for adjournment.
TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second.
TRUSTEE GOLDSMITH: All in favor?
(ALL AYES) .
Resp ctfully submitted by,
Glenn Goldsmith, President
Board of Trustees