Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-12/18/1996 2`ZU ��gUFFrU(,{�C Albert J. Krupski, President ;�y� �G� Town Hall John Holzapfel, Vice President c 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Jim King Martin H. Garrell ® � Southold, New York 11971 Peter Wenczel ��j ��� Telephone (516) 765-1892 Fax (516) 765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MINUTES December 18 . 1996 PRESENT WERE: Albert J. Krupski,Jr. , President John Holzapfel, Vice-President Peter Wenczel, Member Martin H. Garrell, Member James King., Member Jill Doherty, Clerk CALL MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: Wed: January 22 , 1997 after organizational meeting. NEXT TRUSTEE BOARD MEETING: Wed. January 29, 1997 7P.M. WORKSESSION: 6 : 00 p.m. ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING: January 22, 1997 12pm I . MONTHLY REPORT: The Trustees monthly report for November 1996 : A check for $6, 935. 55 was forwarded to the Supervisor' s Office for the General Fund. II . PUBLIC NOTICES: Public Notices are posted on the Town Clerk' s Bulletin Board for review. III . AMENDMENTS/WAIVERS/CHANGES: 1. MICHAEL AND JOAN DILEONE requests. to Transfer. Permit #1104 from Henry C. We.ismann to the DeLeone' s as they have purchased same. Located 940 Tarpon Dr. , Southold. SCTM #57-1-10. A motion was made by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL and seconded by TRUSTEE WENCZEL to approve above. ALL AYES. 2. LARRY KULICK requests to Transfer Permit #1979 from Elizabeth Yaro to Larry Kulick as he has purchased same.. Located 1895 Minnehaha Blvd. , Southold. SCTM 087-3-61. A motion was made by TRUSTEE WENCZEL and seconded by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL. to approve the above. ALL AYES. 3 . RICHARD A.M. JONES requests to Transfer Permit #1000 from Evert S. Bergen to Richard A.M. Jones and Darcy Gazza as they have purchased same. Located 1630 Beebe Dr. , Cutchogue. SCTM #103-3-18 . 22.E Board of Trustees 2 A motion was made by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL and seconded by TRUSTEE KING to approve the above. ALL AYES. 4. James H. Rambo, Inc. request to Transfer. Permit 4375 fr.om. Cheng Yu to Rambo, Inc. as they have purchased same. Located off ROW off Oregon Road, Cutchogue. SCTM #83-2-4. 1. A motion was made. by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL and seconded.. by TRUSTEE_ GARRELL to approve the above. ALL AYES. 5. Gary Flanner Olsen on behalf of ROBERT TURNER requests a Waiver for a deck that was built in 1987 with Building Permit as per map dated August 31, 1988. Located. 1200 West Lane, Southold. SCTM #88-6-17 . A motion was made by TRUSTEE WENCZEL and seconded by TRUSTEE: HOLZAPFEL to approve the above. ALL AYES. 6 . En-Consultants on behalf of. NEIL MCGOLDRICK requests an Extension to Permit #4397 for one year from 12/22/96 to 12./22/97 with ALL the conditions to remain the same including notifying the highway dept. to get sand and to do water quality samples. ( see file for details) . Located ROW off Peconic. Bay Blvd. , Laurel. SCTM #145-4-15 . A motion was made by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL and seconded by TRUSTEE KING to approve the above. AYES : Holzapfel, King, Krupski,Garrell. NEY: Wenczel 7 . Samuels & Steelman on behalf of TONY PANZARINO requests. a. Waiver to construct a 61 . 5" X 331 deck attached to existing residence. All other renovations are out of the Trustees jurisdiction. Located 800 Strohson Road, Cutchogue. SCTM #103-10-23 . A motion was. made by TRUSTEE KRUPSKI and seconded. by TRUSTEE KING to approve the above. ALL AYES. 8. J.M.O. Environmental Consulting Services on behalf of JOHN FRANCO requests an Amendment. to Permit #4674 to move. the bulkhead landward 51 . Located 30 West Lake Road, Southold. SCTM #90-1-25. A motion was made by TRUSTEE WENCZEL and seconded. by TRUSTEE GARRELL to approve the above with the note to maintain the 18 ` buffer behind the bulkhead. ALL AYES. 9. MARDIK & LOUISE DONIKYAN requests an Amendment to Permit #4599 to construct retaining wall shorter and construct a secondary wall as per revised plans dated. 12/10/96. Located 54255 Route 48, Southold. SCTM #52-1-4. A motion was made by TRUSTEE WENCZEL and seconded by TRUSTEE CARRELL. to approve the above. ALL AYES. 10. Costello Marine Cont. on behalf of ROBINS ISLAND requests an Amendment to Permit #4365 to install two 14" Galvanized pipes, approx. 30' in length into the bay bottom under the existing seaplane float. Also to install two inner steel pilings, replace four greenheart piles with two steel piles in same location as per plans. dated. November 1, 1996 . Located Robins. Island, New Suffolk. SCTM #134-3-5. A motion was made by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL and seconded by TRUSTEE KING to approve the above. ALL AYES. Board of Trustees 3 11 . Costello Marine Cont. on behalf of ROBINS ISLAND requests an Amendment to Permit #4346 to add a 6 ' X 24' float to existing float system and install one 2-pile dolphin. Located New Suffolk. SCTM #117-8-20 . A motion was made by TRUSTEE GARRELL and seconded by TRUSTEE. HOLZAPFEL to approve the above. ALL AYES. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS: THIS I.S A PUBLIC HEARING IN THE. MATTER OF THE. FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS UNDER THE WETLANDS ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. I HAVE AN AFFIDAVIT. OF PUBLICATION FROM THE TRAVELER WATCHMEN. PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE MAY BE READ PRIOR TO ASKING FOR COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMMENTS ORGANIZED AND BRIEF: FIVE ( 5) MI.NUTES OR LESS, IF POSSIBLE 1 . Project Management Associates, Inc. on behalf of RUSSELL PLANITZER requests. a Wetland Permit to restore two on-site fresh water ponds, Construct a 13.0' long stone retaining wall, and a 6 ' X 10 ' utility shed. Located Wilderness Point, Fishers Island.. SCTM 412-2-6. 9 . MR. KRUPSKI : Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of this application? Is there anyone here who would like to speak against the application? We went over there and we. took Chris Picker.ell who is with the Marine Program at Cornell. Coop. Extension.. He gave us a report. Dear Mr. Krupski: As per your request I have visited the subject parcel to asses the ecological conditions at the pond where restoration activities are proposed. The following observations are based on my site visit on November 20, 1996. Water level, soils and vegetation indicate that. this pond is undisturbed with .little or no impacts: from surrounding land. use. The Most obvious alteration of the landscape was the historic and other high water events. Other than this alteration which has actually prevented common reed from overtaking the pond, the system is .in an almost pristine natural state. Native wetland vegetation can be found in the pond in the form of the bog mat and around the pond as a shrub/scrub fringe. A partial list of species identified in' and around the pond include water willow (Decondon Verticillatus) , sweet pepper bush (Clethra alnifolia.) , red maple. (Aceer rubrum) , sensitive. fern (Onoclea sensisbilis) , Jewel weed. (Impations. capansis) and sedge (Carex spp) . If you have any additional. questions about this site please feel. free to contact me at my office at 852-8660. Here is the retaining wall, which. is constructed. already, here is the . pond. and the access driveway. The driveway was there when Plantizer built the house, a guess ten years ago. There is also a small pond here. What he wants to do is excavate this, excavate this and pump the water back and forth. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Do you recall being there Marty? We were there the time before we went to Fishers Island. It is a house way up on a hill. We where looking at a possible violation. Board of Trustees 4 TRUSTEE GARRELL: Yes. A violation. That is what I was thinking. You come over the hill and there is the pond and there has been playing around up on top. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: That is right. Now he wants to dig up the pond. Dig out all the vegetation and so on. TRUSTEE GARRELL: He wants to dig it out in the name of restorati.on? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: In the name of restoration. However, in our estimation and that. of, it is already a pristine wetland with native vegetation. TRUSTEE GARRELL: He wants an excuse to play with some bulldozers. Why? TRUSTEE WENCZEL.: He wants a fish pond. TRUSTEE GARRELL: Yea. CLERK: I spoke to Chuck Hamilton, DEC. After the violation are. cleared up on this property, they will look at the application. They are not looking at it favorably. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: As far as retaining wall goes, as shown on the site plan the applicant also requests approval to install a rock retaining wall on the steep slope which separates the house from the larger pond. Which part is built? It is unclear here. The applicant commenced construction of the wall without knowledge of a need for a permit for this activity and seize construction of the wall as directed by NYSDEC personnel. Based in part of the discussion of the DEC, the applicant now proposes to complete the road which also will include a drainage pipe up hill of the wall to collect storm water.. The drainage pipe will discharge via swale to the large pond. So this wall is. adjacent to driveway. Isn' t that wall constructed? At. least this section constructed. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I don't know. Part of it is there, but I don't remember which part. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don' t know if you want this sort of arrange meant.. I don' t know if you want the pipes to main line down the runoff. I think it would be a mistake to change what is essentially a functioning system. Then you are going to alter.. TRUSTEE GARRELL.: Essentially what he wants to do is to take an undisturbed pond and make it into a pond that he can stick some fingerling bass or sunfish or something into and- play. TRUSTEE KING: The guy we talked to when we where there said forty or fifty years ago there wasn' t even a pond there. Chris said this. is a natural process. It changes into more of a wetland down the road. . . TRUSTEE GARRELL: That' s right. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don' t think that there will be less because they are still draining a lot of water. TRUSTEE GARRELL: Yea. It is a natural process with fresh water wetlands fill in and become marsh and then. . . . it happens... TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And. it is not a Phragmites pit.. TRUSTEE GARRELL: That is the question. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: That is the real key, is that it is a natural wetland.. TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: Can. we split the application? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We can do what we want, sure.. The last component is the utility shed within the wetland buffer as requested.. It will be used to store misc. lawn equipment. There exist no alternative potential locations of the shed in the area.. TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: How many feet is. this? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Ten feet off the path. Board of Trustees 5 TRUSTEE GARRELL: I have a suggestion. There is nobody here that is working on this. There are people here that have other 11. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I will make a motion. to recess this public hearing until the end of the meeting. TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: Second. ALL AYES. 2 . Proper-T Permit Services on behalf of SCOTT PATCHELL. requests a Wetland Permit to construct a single. family residence approx. 32' X 72 ' overall, with deck approx. 14 ' X 471 ; construct. retaining wall approx. 4 ' high, 86 ' long with two 30 ' returns. Located 1075 West Hill Road, Southold. SCTM #70-4-24. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here. who would like to speak in favor of the application? JAMES FI.TZGERALD: Yes, Jim Fitzgerald for Mr. Patche,ll, if you have any questions. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Is there. anyone else who would like to speak in favor of the. applicati.on? Is there anyone who would like to speak against the application? LAURA COLLINS: My name is Laura Collins and David. Devlin. and I the owners of the property immediately to the west of the lot in question. I am speaking on behalf of Mr. Devlin and myself and Mr. & Mrs. Guyton, who are the owners of the property immediately to the east. A number of our 'neighbors. are also here. This project as out lined raises very substantial issues. of neighborhood character, life style, major land use, how the land looks, how people use the land. We and the Guytons plan to bring these issues to the Zoning Board of. Appeals, which is tentatively schedule. for mid January. We think these. are major issues. with major zoning considerations and we are urgently concerned. that the Zoning Board Appeals has a chance to hold a hearing and consider our views. It was suggested to us today, that the practice was that if the Trustees approved a plan including construction within 75' of the water, that the ZBA would accept the approval and not go further. We there for urge you to postpone your consideration of this project. In fact, I find it very difficult to believe that the ZBA .would not hear the zoning issues if brought to them. At any rate, we don' t want to take any chances on procedure. You the Trustees are: going ahead and having your hearing on this, I just want to make clear that. our understanding after some conversation today, I believe Mr. Krupski one of our neighbors called you,. is that in fact, ' by your considering this project now, you are not compromising our ability to raise these zoning issues. Not wetland issues. Our opposition can be summarized by two main points. The first one is that the proposed. house is awfully big. At least it looks that way on the drawings. It has a really enormouLs deck. 14' by 471 . The abnormality of the deck has certainly contributed to the house being so big. The bigger issue that concerns us in this and the one that raises all. the. points that I sugges.ted. before about life style and land use. That is the proposed construct of the retaining wall 12 ' back from the existing bulkhead on the creek. and than to fill the land behind. the retaining wall. Our lots- have all slope down from the street to the creek. I suspect the total. drop is around 15 ' and a depth of maybe 1751 . Most of our houses. are built with a lower floor that looks out onto the creek. There is enough land drop to accomplish that. The prospective purchaser of this lot wants a level lot, rather than a sloping lot. There for this retaining wall that he proposes to do 12 ' from the water, the purpose is to put up the wall Board of Trustees 6 and then fill behind where there is no fill. We are basically appalled. We think it is a ghastly proposition. Ugly. It will make serious drainage problems. Mr. Devlin and I just brought our house. We just move in the day we got the notice of these hearings. So we. don' t have experience in. the neighborhood. Our neighbors surely do. I am sure that a couple of them would like to make some comments to you about drainage. Our position with this board is, please pass a very skeptical eye on this project because of the enormity of its impact. on the environment as it now exist in the neighborhood. Basically what they want to do, is build up the. land. well. above the level of our adjoining lots and erect their house and deck up there. We think that is a major environmental. intrus.ion that is why we are speaking to you tonight. TRUSTEE. KRUPSKI : Thank you. I. will just answer your first concern about the ZBA. Normally we act completely separate from the boards. We had a problem 8 or 10 years ago. Applicants were being put in a catch 22 by the code in that they couldn't. come before us they had all their other approvals from the other boards:. All the other boards also required that they had all their other approvals. Now we act completely separate from other boards. Our approval does not mean that other boards don't have responsibilities to uphold their sections of the code. However, we did get something from the board of appeals today. Which is sort of unusual. Which I will read into the. record. We have received concerns from an adjoining property owners pertaining to the proposed landscaping plan which includes two retaining walls and second bulkhead., all within. 75' of the existing bulkhead. Would it be possible to temporarily hold any final action. by the town Trustees until both departments have inspected the property and. communicated_ The applicant will be providing information at our variance hearing, scheduled for January 16, 1997. In the next few days, I will visit the property (and ask other ZBA members to inspect the property in advance of the 1/16 hearing date) . Also, if the Trustees' files have a proposed landscape or similar plan showing the retaining wall construction. detai.ls, land contours or other changes proposed landward of the existing bulkhead, please: let our office know in order that we may duplicate a set for our records. Thank your for your assistance. Jerry Goehringer. We just received this today..' TRUSTEE. WENCZEL: What is the variance for? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don' t know. We people requests a variance, it is usually not included in. our file because it is not relative to our review. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I. think it might be for side line set backs. LAURA COLLINS: The simplest part of the variance request is the side yard set backs. They are on each side. about a foot less than what is required. There is. also the set back of the deck and house.. The deck is only 61' back. The zoning code says you can't build a structure within 75 ' of a bulkhead and that is what this is. There is the set back of the deck. Thirdly, there is the construction of this wall 12' back from the. bulkhead in order to fill behind it. As we review the zoning those are three quite distinct elements in it. The retaining and the fill is clearly the mega aspect of this project because it is changing the character of the land. The reason that you received this note from the zoning board was that we where doing a little home .work this morning. I spoke with someone in the ZBA office who said in fact that if the Trustees. approve we won' t be considering it. We were Z 2� Board of Trustees 7 galvanized into action. I think the note you have from the zoning board of appeals. was meant to make sure that our concerns weren't going to fall into a procedural trap. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think. they are wrong about that, but.. . . EVA GUYTON: My name is Eva Guyton. We live on the other side of the lot, the east side. I have owned this lot for twenty five years. I have experienced all the pro and cons of. living by the. water. One of them is that this lot as you all know is filled in with: the bottom of. the creek and was bulkheaded some 25, 30 years ago. The soil is not farm soil. It has very, very poor drainage.. At the time we built. we. had to have soil brought in order to make a proper garden. As it is now we have a situation where water from the lot actually comes. in on our land. On Long Hill Road there is a town sump. There is one across the street and there. is one on that property. I was living there when that road was under water every time there was a major rain storm. It would go right up on our lawn' and up to the door. At first we complained and we said that our cellar and everything gets soaken wet, we have to do something. That is when the excavated Hill Road on both sides. The clay is in layers. I can attest to that because I dug the holes for the trees that we got so many years ago. Also, when it rains you can actually see in floating from the lot on. to our driveway. If the new owners are permitted to raise the land in. the back, we will have additional water. from that. It will certainly seep onto our land. That is my main concern aside from the aesthetic one. I wish and hope that you would consider that in that location. The bulkhead was repaired I think three years ago. It is not a. stable bulkhead. It had to be repaired and a permit was granted for that. If so much weight is put on top of that- land, I am very much afraid that that bulkhead would not be able stand it. As it is there is a big cavity on that is. being undermined.. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak either in be half of or against the application. CARL BRATTEL: My name is Carl Brattel. I live on 775 Hill Road. My property is approximately 200 ' east of the proposal. My main. objection is to the retaining wall.. That is going to be four feet above the existing bulkhead. I am afraid that is going to create an. effect like Fort Ticondaroga with nothing but wood. It is not going to be to esthetic.. That is my main concern with it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Would anyone else like to comment? MR. FITZGERALD: I would like. to comment. on some. of the items.. As far as the drainage is concerned, I think that providing a more level lot will keep a lot. of runoff out of the dredge canal. I am sure that it can be graded in such away and will be graded in such away so that is doesn't go to neighbors lots because of the erection of the retaining wall. I think that is the only environmental. issue here. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI.: What about the condition. of the existing bulkhead2 Can you comment on that? MR. FITZGERALD: It looks functional to me. If the bulkhead needs to be repaired, the bulkhead needs. to be repaired. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It is something to think about. As far as replacing or repairing inkind/inplace before you got some thing built in front of it. As opposed to creating a hardship and it has to come out further. seaward. A repair in the future_ I am talking about the. existing bulkhead. MR. FITZGERALD: Where the other bulkheads repaired inkind/inplace? 22� Board of Trustees 8 LAIRS. GUYTON: YES. TRUSTEE GARRELL.: What about the possibility of putting a non-turf cover in back of the retaining wall itself. So you have plantings mostly instead of a lawn from the house to the retaining wall. I don' t know what they have planned for. that area. MR. FITZGERALD: I would presume that it would be landscaped appropriately. Another point is that. one of the factors that is frequently considered in. setback situations, is the set backs of the neighboring properties.. And the set backs of the deck with the neighboring properties are significantly less then what is being proposed.. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We did notice that. Basically our considerations are environmental considerations and anything would. decrease. the amount of surface runoff from entering the creek, that is our priority. It is an area that is already built up and developed, almost to the maximum. Does the Board have any comments? TRUSTEE GARRELL: You took the pool out of that? MR. FITZGERALD: yes. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: As far as aesthetics go, we looked at it on the site. The applicant could also put up a 4' high stockade fence. there. and that would accomplish the same.' look. as a retaining wall. Mr. DEVLIN: If he puts in a bulkhead and then a 4' high fence on top of that, that is 81 . TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: From the water level. I am saying that if somebody came in and wanted to put a fence up there, it would be the same. . .. I believe that. is your property to the. west? If they put a 4 ' fence up similar to yours, it would have the aesthetically the same effect. MR. DEVLIN: We do not object to a 4 ' fence.. That is fine.. MS. COLLINS.: Could we pursue this. a little further? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Sure. MS. COLLINS: It has seem to us that the leveling of the land was absolutely central to what the: purchaser has in mind. Mr. Garrell. has suggested a different approach of the. slope with vegetation. That is what a lot of the neighbors have right now and it looks very nice.. This is the norm. What we see here. is a desire to change the topography of the land. I agree of course anybody could come in and. as of right build of 4' fence and build an ugly fence and you have to live with it if you are the neighbor. it is. having 4' of earth behind it. Changing where we stand down in the valley from where they stand up on the height, that has us. *concerned.. I will add that we feel the swimming pool in larking in the back round. The swimming pool was. deleted from the project as the appeal was. submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals. I find. it hard to believe that. it. has. gone. away. I think these. folks want a swimming pool and all that. We are a neighborhood largely of retiree`s. We are very, very scared of a swimming pool. That has a good deal. to do were we are coming from. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI.: Excuse me. Why are you frighten of a swimming pool. I just. MS. COLLINS.: I was thinking of a life style issue. With all due respect Mr. Krupski, you are a parent of young children. Young children and. swimming pools are a very noisy proposition. MR. GUYTON: You. are more interested in drainage. and. wetlands and stuff like. that.? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is right. MR. GUYTON: If you take compacted property for 20, 30 or 100 years, you would have a solid property. When they are going to fill in on 2Z� Board of Trustees 9 top of that and drain that into the creek, we fish that creek. We use that creek. We have water, we have a well. Our water supply depends on that staying as close to what it is right now as we can get it that way. As soon as that gets interrupted with other things happening, we might as well go out of business. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thanks. Any comment? TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: I think we should recognize the Zoning Board. of Appeals. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI : Yes. I just wanted to see if there are any other comments on. what has. been. said. What: does the. Board think about. the addition fill to the property? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: There is a project on Mattituck Creek that has a little bulkhead and they are. backfilling it. Quite frankly it is ugly. TRUSTEE. KRUPSKI: But what effect is it. going to have on the. creek? TRUSTEE KING: Nothing. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: That sums it up. Aesthetically it is not pleasing, but environmentally I don't think it is. going to have a big effect. I can understand their concerns. MR. DEVLIN: Our major desire is to permit the Zoning Board. of Appeals to look at this fresh. Without any danger that your reviewing it is going to cause them trouble. All I know is what they told us. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Even though I think you where given bad information by the ZBA, because they sent us this memo, which is very unusual, I would make a motion, unless there is any other comment on the environmental factors, to recess the hearing until next month. If they do want to coordinate with us further then they can.. If there is some sort of legal technicality that I am unaware of that what prohibit them from acting on on any of the merits of this, then they can do that unrestricted. TRUSTEE GARRELL: I would go a long with that. TRUSTEE. WENCZEL: I have a question for Jim. Have you. done any core samples .on this property. MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, a test hole. has been done. It is I think 15 or 17 ' to ground water. The test hole is perhaps 40' south of the mercatum and 25' from the eastern property line.. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Was it basically sand or sand/clay? MR. FITZGERALD: I don' t remember. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Could we have that data? MR. FITZGERALD: Sure. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You don' t have Health Department on' this yet? MR. FITZGERALD: No. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Is there city water there. MR. FITZGERALD: Yes. TRUSTEE. WENCZEL: Do most of you folks have. your own well water? MR. DEVLIN: Some have well water and some have. Greenport water. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But then. again the septic system is outside our jurisdiction. The. Health Department will handle that. NEIGHBOR: The clay situation should be looked into. What we heard in the past on the holes., there is a whole. bed of clay on the bottom.. That is one of the reasons. why Guyton' s are. having problems... The water can' t get through the clay and comes over on to their property. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That material will be provided to us. Normally it. is on a survey. MS. COLLINS: The drilling as Mr. Fitzgerald described. it is 40 ' in from the. mercatum road. Which is before the property begins to slope. down. The slope doesn' t begin until well past that, so the area where. Board of Trustees 10 they are proposing all this fill is not the area where the borings for the septi.c system where tabled. MR. FITZGERALD: I don't think that the placement. of fill behind the retaining wall is going to adversely effect the drainage. If indeed -the drainage is. controlled on the existing layers of clay. The layers of clay are still going to be there. except where the foundation is. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Right now the property drains directly into the. creek.. MR. FITZGERALD: That is right. All of them do. The on]_y, difference is, on this property there isn't any fertilizer going .ri. with the water. TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: Jim, I now it is outside our jurisdi.ction, but are there plans to contain the roof runoff into drywells. MR. FITZGERALD: I haven't even thought of it. I would think we would do exactly what everybody else in the area has done. TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: Just for my own information, are your clients aware of the negative reactions of the neighborhood. MR. FITZGERALD: No. TRUSTEE. HOLZAPFEL: I was just wondering if they were aware of it that. they were being adamant. and that is what we want no matter what or is that. . . TRUSTEE KRUPSKI : Is that something they should go and knock on the door and introduce themselves to the neighbors? . MR. FITZGERALD: This is the first we became. aware of this. TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: Understood. A lot of times we are asked to argue. between neighbors, as you know, I just wanted to know if they where aware. I makes sense to put it off another month. MR. FITZGERALD: My I comment on your tabling the decision? It. is my understanding that. this board is supposed to judge environmental issues.. I would like to requests that you pass on the environmental issues of this project. It is unclear to me why some years ago the Zoning restrictions. . . MR. DEVLIN: Spoke, but not audible. MR. FITZGERALD: The fact that the Zoning hearing is one day after the. existing time line, I don.'t think there is any reason to not be concerned from this stand point. What it means is that the next time. the board will meet to discuss would be at the end of. January which is some two weeks after the Zoning Board. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The next time we meet is the 22nd. We could make a decision on that day based on the information we would get from the Zoning Board.. We can certainly could do that.. Normally, if we just. got a request at a public hearing we normally wouldn't honor it. In this case we got a request from a different board. I feel we should honor it. I feel my motion will stand on that... (to recess hearing until January 22, 1997) TRUSTEE GARRELL.: I will. second it. ALL AYES. MRS. GUYTON: I would like to inquire what you plan to fill this space with? From the excavation that it would make? MR. FITZGERALD: I would think so. . MRS. GUYTON: Then it would be pure. clay. MR. FITZGERALD: I think you trapped me. MRS. GUYTON: I just wanted to say that.. MR. FITZGERALD They wouldn' t do it if it was pure clay. The following public hearings were not audible. Board of Trustees 11 3 . En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of MARSHALL JOHNSON requests a. Wetland Permit to construct a 34+/- l.f . retaining wall landward. of existing deteriorated concrete wall on west side of house. Construct a 6 l. f . return. along westerly property line. B.ackf ill_ with 10 c.y of clean sand to be trucked in from. upland source. Located 320 Northview Drive, Orient. SCTM #13-1-6 . TRUSTEE KRUPSKI.: Is there anyone who would like to speak. on behalf of this application? DIANE LE VERRIER: Diane, En-Consultants on behalf of Mr. Johnson if there are any questions. After the a discussion about drywells to contain all roof runoff the. following motions where. made; A motion was made by TRUSTEE WENCZEL and seconded by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL to close the hearing. ALL AYES. A motion was made by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL and seconded by TRUSTEE KING to approve a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion subject to CEHA line on survey and ALL roof runoff must be contained in drywells. ALL AYES. 4. Richard Saetta General Contractor, I.nc. on behalf of JAMES GRACE,SR. requests a Wetland Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit to remove two existing hous.es., join the two lots and construct one single family dwelling as. per survey. Located Willow Terrace Right of. Way, Orient. SCTM 26-2-6. . Barbara. Defina (neighbor) spoke with concerns of the size of the project compared. to location of bay. After discussion with Richard Saetta, it was decided to meet in the field. of ter project was. staked.. A motion was made by TRUSTEE KRUPSKI and seconded by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL to recess public hearing until next meeting. ALL AYES. 5 . PHILIP AND NANCY WEBER requests. a Wetland Permit to construct wooden stairs with minimal landings to: access beach as per survey dated October 17, 1996. Located 160 The. Strand, East Marion.. SCTM #21-5-7. Nobody was present to speak for or against this. application. A motion was made by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL and seconded by TRUSTEE GARRELL to close the public hearing. ALL AYES. A motion was made by TRUSTEE KRUPSKI and seconded by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL to approve. application. subject to receipt of regrading plan showing top of bluff. regraded towards. land and haybales. placed immediately along bluff. No disturbance to bluff other then what is necessary for. stairs.. ALL AYES. 6. Costello Marine on behalf of DR. FRANK MONTELEONE. r.equests a. Wetland. Permit to cover existing concrete parch and steps with timber decking. Square off porch by adding 8 ' X 25 ' timber deck. Install. two sets of timber access stairs.. Also 8 ' X 12' deck landward of existing bulkhead.. Located Blue Marlin Drive, Southold. SCTM #57-1-30. Sue Long from Costello Marine was present.. The walkway from the deck to the bulkhead is 3 ' X 60 ' A motion was made by TRUSTER GARRELL and. seconded by TRUSTEE KING to close the hearing. ALL AYES. A motion was made by TRUSTEE WENCZEL and. seconded by TRUSTEE.. HOLZAPFEL to approve the above. ALL AYES. 2j1 Board of Trustees 12 7 . Inter-Science Research Associates, Inc. on behalf of SEBASTION' S COVE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC. requests a Wetland. Permit to replace timber bulkhead including 45 '1.f. replaced inkind/inplace to protect tidal wetlands vegetation; 220 .75 l.f.. replaced in-kind within 1.8." of existing timber bulkhead and proposed concrete launching ramp to replace existing ramp in disrepair.. Transplant 35 s.f. of existing tidal. wetlands in. graded area south of boat ramp.. Located_ Sebastion' s Cove Road and Sebastion's Gutter, Mattituck. SCTM #100-3-=11.. 1.1 & 11.1.2. Jim Walker from Inter-Science. Research Assoc. was. present. After discussion a motion was made by TRUSTEE WENCZEL and seconded by TRUSTEE GARRELL to close the hearing.. ALL. AYES. A motion was made by TRUSTEE. KING and seconded by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL, to approve the above project with a French drain above the ramp and the ramp can be concrete or G.eowebb and a non-turf buffer behind bulkhead. . ALL AYES. 8. FRANK SCAVONE requests Wetland Permit to construct a 45' bulkhead along toe of bluff approx. 4 ' high. 8.' to 15 ' above average high water as per drawings. Located 1615 Fleetwood Road, Cutchogue. SCTM #137-4-35. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone. hear to represent Mr. Scavone? None A motion was made by TRUSTEE KRUPSKI and seconded by. TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL to table this application until a report from Natural Resources has been received. ALL AYES. The following is verbatim. 9. PETER ENNERS requests a Wetland Permit to construct a 4 ' X 35' dock and a 4' X 10 ' platform attached to existing. bulkhead. Also to place rock on west side of property. Located 15 East Mill Road, Mattituck SCTM #106-4-2. PETER ENNERS: I moved the dock. I scaled it down. . TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: The one question I had was the rock. You can put 50 ' of rock there and—Where are you ending the rock? It is very fuzzy. PETER ENNERS: It is fuzzy. I will leave it up to Rambo. We are going to keep it above the high -water mark. TRUSTER HOLZAPFEL: O.K. So the- rock will all be above? PETER ENNERS: That is correct. When he puts that rock there, some of it might fall in, I don't know. It is bound to happen, but it is not in the plan to do that. TRUSTEE. HOLZAP.FEL,: We just don' t want to see that go out ten. more. feet. PETER ENNERS: Absolutely. I understand.. TRUSTEE. KRUPSKI: Is there anyone else here who would like to comment in favor of or against the application? ,_CYNTHIA KAMINSKI: I own property adjoining the Dwyer property to the south and to the east. We are opposed to this. project. Number one. the property is zoned residential. The proposed use is commercial according to the correspondence we have: received from the Army Corp. of Engineers. There is not enough water around this proposed dock to accommodate a commercial boat. The sketch submitted is incorrect as to water depth and contours. The only way this. location can be used for a commercial boat which will. draw more water then. . .will be to blow away the bottom with prop wash.. Which will wash away the banks Board of Trustees 13 of the marsh area, kill that land and. alter an already shallow channel in this area. This is very important to the boats that use this channel on a daily basis.. The only safe way would to be require a dredging permit. This is a prime shellfishing area that. would be. adversely affected. by any alteration at the bottom. Clams and- Oysters- are commercially harvested from this-area-during open season.. Although, I was informed before. by the Trustees. office. that a DEC permit had been issued, the DEC in. a telephone conversation this afternoon indicated that a permit had not as yet. been issued. If a permit. is issued for this and the bottom. doe.s. get altered, what is our recourse? Who do we go to then. This property is not' suitable for commercial use. Had it been, we would have bought. it ourselves. many years ago when it was offered to us by the senior Mr. Dwyer. Thank you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I am looking in the file for a DEC Permit. Is there one here? There is a DEC Permit dated 1.988 for the construction of 133 ' of timber bulkhead inkind and in same location as existing. and a 10' return approx. 10 c.y. of fill. That was the only work done in 1988? MR. ENNERS: Yes, it was. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Tha.t. is the only DEC Permit I can find in the file here. MR. ENNERS: Mrs. Kaminski seems to think it is going to be. a commercial. I have become a commercial fishermen. I am coming to Mattituck to retire. It is not strictly for commercial us. A 1/4 of an acre of that size., you can.' t do any kind. of commercial stuff: there. I can tie a boat there. You have been on the property, you can see that is ridiculous. MRS. KAMINSKI: My only reason for saying that is when we received a letter from the Army Corp. of Engineers requesting our comments on the project, they referred to it as a commercial. dock for commercial. use. TRUSTEE. HOLZAPFEL: When was that? MRS. KAMINSKY: Within the last month. TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: It wasn't on the original application six months. or so? MRS. KAMINSKY: The paperwork that we received from the Army Corp. was. only within the last month. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI.: Originally the applicant ask for a. 6 or 8 ' wide dock and we advised him since it was a residential structure, we only approve 4 ' wide docks on residential structures:. TRUSTEE. KING: He had amended since. It was. amended. to 4.1 . MR. ENNERS.: I just want a good. substantial. dock to tie up to. TRUSTEE: KING: Doesn't: the Home Occupancy Law let fishermen: operate on a residential. There is plenty of residential property on. Mattituck. Creek that is. being used by Commercial Fishermen. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI:: I don't know. TRUSTEE'. KING: I think it does.. TRUSTEE. KRUPSKI..: That is why we requested that the dock be cut down in width. MRS. KAMINSKY: I think it is more the length of the dock and that length of it there. There is just no water on either side of it. We are afraid that if any boat of any size gets in there, that it is going to alter the bottom.. You. get in there at low water, there might be 2 ' there. Sometimes. there is no water there at all. TRUSTEE CARRELL: I think we have soundings. Board of Trustees 14 TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: We have soundings on their diagram and Jim went down himself and took some. TRUSTEE KING: The soundings I .took on the proposed dock; 30; north of. the bulkhead, there was 101 . I took soundings: at low tide., 12:30 , I took soundings at 12: 45. This was the 21st of September. 30 ' north of the bulkhead there was. 10 ' of water. 10' north of the bulkhead there was 9 ' of water.. On the west side there. was 12' water s.eaward of the end of the bulkhead.. There was one point I couldn't even touch bottom.. TRUSTEE GARRELL: Mrs. Kaminsky, do you want to come up take a look at this.. TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: We had the same questions. We asked. Jim to go down just to check. the numbers.. TRUSTEE KING: You can. -go up here in this marsh. and there is. no water up here. MRS. KAMINSKY: This is actually hard to believe. I have pictures. I don' t have them in my folder. TRUSTEE KING: I would like to say I did these soundings myself. MRS. KAMINSKY: We show no water here at all. This is all dry in through there.. That is certainly within at least 4' out from there. If get over this way, we run aground in the. area over here trying to get out. TRUSTEE KING.: You. can' t. There is 40 ' of water right there. He runs aground back here where there is a. big rock. MRS. KAMINSKY: No. He drew it for me. TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: We took. soundings right here. We had a 16' pole and we couldn't even touch bottom. That was at this place right: here. We where all there for that.. MRS. KAMINSKY: That is my concern that if there is no water around there and if he starts changing the bottom there blowing the bottom out by putting a boat in there that is bigger than what that area would accommodate. You are going to change. the bottom and you are. going to start pushing that stuff off. into the creek. He told me he . is running aground right at that spot.. TRUSTEE GARRELL.: I guess it is a question of what size. vessel too.. If you where running a really big boat in there: . . . MR. ENNERS: The boat is 44' and draws 4 1/2' of water. The width of the boat is 1418" . It is like a lobster boat_ MRS. KAMINSKY: It is all shoaled through there:. That is the deepest part there and he is running aground in through there. Which would be right off the end of that. dock.. MR. ENNERS I don't think, he could run. aground there. TRUSTEE. KRUPSKI: He is running aground in the federal channel then? MRS. KAMINISKY: Right. But what he is saying is that if you start changing the configuration of the bottom here your are going to: push, stuff off into. the. channel. It is going to be even more: shallow than it is now. TRUSTEE GARRELL.- How big is Jim Kaminsky' s boat? MRS.. KAMINSKY: 55 `wi.th 17' width I believe. TRUSTEE GARRELL: And draws about 6 ' ? MRS. KAMINSKY: I think we draw 61 . TRUSTEE GARRELL: You are talking a 44 ' boat with a 4 1/2 ' draw and and 14 foot width. It- draws almost 2' less and it is almost 3 ' narrower? MR. ENNERS:. Yes. TRUSTEE GARRELL.: That is a big difference. z�)q Board of Trustees. 15 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any other comment? Do I have. a motion to *close the hearing? A motion was made. by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL and seconded by TRUSTEE. GARRELL to close. the hearing.. ALL AYES. A motion was made by TRUSTEE KING and seconded. by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL, . to approve above application... ALL AYES.. 10. En-Consultants, Inc. on. behalf of RICHARD Z_EIDLER re(Toests_ a Wetland Permit to remove & replace fin same location.) 128 l.f.. of bulkhead on southwest. side of property. Remove. ( 2) angled sections. of bulkhead and replace with ( 1) 30' section to connect north and south bulkheads. Dredge up to 10' in front of 100 ' of bulkhead to maximum depth of 4` below ALW. Resultant 25 c.y. of spoil will be used for backfill only. Bulkhead elevation will match. adjacent- bulkheads__ Located ROW off Peconic Bay Blvd. , Laurel. SCTM #145-4-15. TRUSTEE- KRUPSKI. Is there anyone hear who wants to. speak in favor of the application? DIANE LE VERRIER.: En-Consultants. on behalf of Richard Zeidler. I am here if you have any questions. I spoke with Jill. with regards dredging. The dredging is just allowing for incidental dredging to backfill behind the bulkhead. We are not planning on dredging the. entire creek. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That was our. big question. DIANE LE VERRIER: It is very shoaled up in. there. For him to go ahead. and perform that operation would be very costly. TRUSTEE GARRELL.:. Yea, we. thought 1200 c.y. DIANE LE VERRIER: That is not his intention.. We. are just allowing for incidental dredging.. He just wants-. to utilize some of what is there. TRUSTEE. WENCZEL:. I have a problem with that. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Lets just let. . . DIANE LE VERRIER: O.K. Further he just wants to remove that deteriorated se.cti.on and construct a. 30' bulkhead from end to end, thereby opening up the width of the creek.. TRUSTEE. KRUPSKI:. Any other comments? MRS. WALKER.:. We have no objection to this.. We: just want to clarify how it is to be done. MR. WALKER: It is much needed. It really is. MRS. WALKER,: We just- got back in town yesterday. We found the notice in the shrubs. The bulkhead. elevation will match adjacent bulkheads, but at the same time the -sketch. is showing it at an increase in height., if we are reading this. right. It is difficult to read. it. TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: Can we just stop there and ask Diane? DIANE LE. VERRIER:: I have a copy of the profile of the bulkhead. right now. TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL.: Is there. any intention to have it higher? DIANE LE. VERRIER: No, It looks. like. the pilings might be higher. The .actual bulkheading and seething is supposed to remain. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: As far as what the Walkers are questioning, it is impossible to tell from the drawing because there is no comparison.. MRS. WALKER: I have a copy of the one. done in 1989. before they replaced they replaced the 631 . This is higher then that. It appears to be made against the same basic sketch.. MR. WALKER: What we would like. to know is it going to stay the same height as the bulkhead: that they put in in 89? DIANE LE. VERRIER: That is what we proposed.. 25� Board of Trustees 16 MRS. WALKER: It is contradictory here. And another thing it says here remove and replace in the same location. Obviously the angle. piece is being removed, but is the entire bulkheading. be removed-. and replace? DIANE LE VERRIER: Yes, and putting a new bulkhead in place. MRS. WALKER: I still would like to know the dimensions, becaus.e:. it. also says, if you look at the application here, the fill line is going up again. The fill line on the older one is lower.. You are aware, becaus.e we have gone through this before, that we have a deeded I view easement_ Which is horizontal as. well as vertical.. We have had a lot of trouble protecting that. It has gradually increased. He brings fill in. He does. things, uses a little fill and then spreads the. rest out. It keeps going up. I interpret this. as it is going to go up some more. DIANE LE VERRIER: In response to that, I have picturea here which indicate a loss of back fill from behind the bulkhead. I don' t know what was previously improved or what the previous. fill permit or depth was, however, these things do change over time. Depending on storm. events or whatever else occurs down. there, if the backfi.11 is. washed out from behind the bulkhead, than in that particular case it would be deeper.. You would have that area to back fill. That would be bringing it back to the present grade. MR. WALKER: That is know problem. MRS. WALKER: What we are talking about is increasing: the elevation. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Diane, do understand that there was. a problem here? DIANE LE VERRIER: I .have heard about the easement. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: They are concerned that this. portion is going to be brand new here. This will be replaced inkind/inplace. This. porti.on.. will be brand new and should be put in. the same height as. existing.. MRS. WALKER: Not •if it conforms with these sketches. If you look at, it is so confusing, here is this one and here is this one. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That is where there problem is, they are only sketches:. MRS. WALKER.: Now we are going up to this.. Here is the fill line back. when they did it. in 89. This is filling up and above that. If we go to high up. . . DIANE. LE VERRIER: I see what you are talking about, but. TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: There is no intention to. . DIANE LE VERRIER: No, there is no intention to build a wall. MR. WALKER: He has put in 120 yards in the last six months. He has be trying to work on his bulkhead by putting sticks and such. We now have it right into the creek. We only have a two foot opening at low tide in the creek. As. far as him. trying to take what. he lost and put- back, we having the dredge come in in the spring, they allows take care of it. He asks the dredge the. last time if they would. dredge his_ so he can put a boat in. there.. They only went. two feet and. hit clay. They ruined the dredge. MRS. WALKER: Another concern of ours is if this is indeed elevated now we .are going to have a slop downward. We are talking. again about the water coming into our area. TRUSTEE. KRUPSKI: Do we have an elevation on the existing bulkhead? TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL: Some way we just need to guarantee. the: height. I think that is the bottom line. A motion was made by TRUSTEE GARRELL and seconded. by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL. to close the public hearing. ALL- AYES.- A motion was made by TRUSTEE KRUPSKI and seconded by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL to approve reconstruction of bulkhead inkind/inplace. and. Board of Trustees 17 there will be NO dredging for backfill or otherwise. and the eye-view easement. must be respected subject to elevations on the survey to make sure the height of the bulkhead will stay the. same.ALL AYES. 11. DONNA I . WEXLER requests a Wetland Permit and Coastal Erosian. Permit to construct 25' bulkhead to tie into existing. bulkheads. on. adjacent properties. Place 2 to 3 ton stone armor- seaward of propcsed. bulkhead. Place. 2,622. c.y. of fill and re-vegetate according to approved plan. Located ROW private Road. #5, off. Bridge Lane, Cutchogue. SCTM 72-1-3 . A motion was made. by TRUSTEE GARRELL. and seconded by TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL to table the application to speak with the Town Attorney in. light of the. settlement. ALL AYES. 12. BRICK COVE MARINA requests a Wetland- Permit to construct a 104 ' steel jetty bulkhead within 18" of existing eroded one and dredge. 75 c.y. to below 6 ' of MLW and use spoil to replenish behind bulkhead. Located 16.70 Sage Blvd. , Greenport. SCTM 57-1-38.3. A motion was. made: by TRUSTEE KRUPSKI and seconded by TRUSTEK GARREL _ to table this application until. further information is received. ALL AYES.. V. RESOLUTI.ONS: None VI . MOORINGS: None Meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m. Re pectfully Submitted by: dill M. Doherty, Jerk �'oard of Trustees