Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLWRP-03/08/2007 LWRP Coordinating Council Minutes Thursday, March 8, 2007 Attendance: Members: Ruth Oliva Peg Dickerson Jim King Heather Cusack Jamie Richter Jim McMahon Mark Terry John Sepenoski Al Krupski Jack McGreevy Guests: Bob Ghosio (Trustees) Michael Simons (ZBA) Frank Wills (NFEC) 1. Update on BMP/Guidelines document: Trustees had not discussed having Heather Cusack handle this project and suggested that the Supervisor/Town Board make a decision instead. 2. Update on LWRP CC membership: Resolution appointing official members distributed. Only changes from list originally submitted were the addition of Police Captain Martin Flatley and Superintendent of Highways Peter Harris and the deletion of Michael Simons. The additions were part of the requirements of the LWRP law, it is anticipated that those two members will only attend due to special circumstances. 3. Review public suggestions on Code updates: a. NFEC: Extensive discussions on document submitted to Council entitled “Southold Wetlands Protection Weaknesses and Corrections”. See summary below for details. b. Rozakis: not discussed due to time constraints. 4. Review in-house code notes: not discussed due to time constraints. 5. Bulkhead/jetty/groin “in kind in place” exemptions from LWRP: not discussed due to time constraints. 6. Bulkhead specs/final revisions: not discussed due to time constraints. 7. Prioritizing LWRP CC recommendations: not discussed due to time constraints. 8. PEP TMDL report & 303D water bodies: not discussed due to time constraints. 9. PEP Stormwater Grant: not discussed due to time contraints. 10. Town Matching funds for Mattituck Creek storm water projects: John Sep reminded members that are also involved with the Storm Water Committee that the Town’s purchase of the C&D Realty property on Mattituck Creek last year can be used as a match for LWRP storm water grants in the Mattituck Creek area. All items not discussed will be on the agenda for the next meeting. Summary of discussion on NFEC “Southold Wetlands Protection Weaknesses and Corrections” document. 1. Ambiguity of the Trustee’s Authority and Responsibilities: Council agreed that Trustees should be stating whether they are acting as owners of Andros Patent lands or regulators of wetlands as there are examples of permits issued that reference the State language from the 1800s that applies to Andros Patent lands even though the permit did not involve Andros Patent lands. Other departments such as Planning and Land Preservation always make it clear how and under what rules they are proceeding on applications so it makes sense for the Trustees to follow suit. As chapter 275 does not define these roles code changes may also be necessary. Council also discussed suggestion that Trustees be required to attend training classes in areas such as protocol, wetlands delineation, case law, etc. Most of council felt this was an excellent idea but two members felt training was unnecessary and that learning “on the job” was better. Council also discussed additional training for staff and agreed that this should be done. 2. Jurisdiction of the Town Board and Trustees insufficient and insufficiently stated: see number 3. 3. Setback Limits too easily yield to variance/mitigation: This was discussed along with number 2 as the same issues were discussed together at the previous meeting. Trustees are already discussing fixing the jurisdiction versus setback issue based on the previous LWRP CC meeting. They are considering establishing true set backs that cannot be changed with their mitigation measures applying from past these set backs to the end of their jurisdiction. John Sep reported his discussion with Kieran Corcoran where Kieran stated that if true set backs were established and an applicant wanted to go below them they would have to file an article 78 instead of going to the ZBA since the wetlands code is not part of the zoning code. Council also discussed fact that set backs and jurisdiction can vary based on type of wetland and action proposed, other Towns including East Hampton handle it this way and this concept was on the table for the previous wetlands code update. This could have the effect of moving more applications to the administrative review category which could reduce workload. 4. Vertical setback limits not in Town code: Council agreed that there should be vertical set backs but felt that SCDHS would override anything the Town put in place. More research is needed on this and Mark Terry will look into it. 5. Criteria for mitigation of setback limits and other requirements are absent: Discussed as part of number 3 above. Based on Kieran Corcoran’s views noted above did not discuss adding variance criteria to chapter 275. 6. Storm water runoff monitoring responsibility not defined: Council agreed that the NFEC’s suggestions are excellent but also noted that there are many existing efforts already underway to address this issue. Jamie Richter and Kieran Corcoran have already drafted a new drainage code, the Storm Water Committee is already working on new projects, the Town Board has budgeted funds for additional projects, the Town is receiving a $75,000 grant from PEP towards a new vacuum truck, mapping projects are underway, additional LWRP grants are available, etc. 7. Southold Town code chapter 275 lacks provision for an appeals board: see numbers 3 and 5 above. 8. Requirements/standards/criteria/format for wetland permit applications to Trustees inadequate or inadequately met: Al Krupski explained that the Trustees verify applications as part of the normal process and make their decisions based on their determinations, not simply what applicants claim. Council felt that the BMP/guidance document and new CAF that are already being worked on would help applicants. In some cases Trustees may need to simply document their determinations better. 9. Whip-sawing of permit requirements gradually erode code: see numbers 2 and 3 above. 10. Code requirements can be “gamed” and thus circumvented: Council agrees that Code Enforcement is a major issue confronting the Town and that it goes well beyond just chapter 275. Council also discussed monitoring as a subset of this issue and agreed that monitoring permits, site plans, easements, covenants, Town infrastructure, etc. is also important as it can catch problems earlier. Trustees present reported that they feel the Bay Constables should handle monitoring of Trustees jurisdiction and mentioned Bay Constables past reluctance to issue violations for actions they did not witness themselves. Council agrees that Bay Constables should monitor, or patrol the Trustees jurisdiction just as police officers patrol the rest of the Town and that violations should be written up whether or not the Bay Constables themselves witnessed the violation. The Council acknowledged that it is not feasible to continually monitor the entire Town for violations but that some monitoring could be handled by existing boards and personnel such as the Planning Board, CAC, Trustees, ZBA, Bay Constables, Code Enforcement Officer, etc. as part of their normal routines by simply being conscious of potential violations in areas near where they are working. 11. Public availability of LWRP consistency determinations is awkward: Council agrees that this information should be part of the official files and available to the public prior to any public hearings. Council has already recommended that an Assistant LWRP Coordinator be appointed to help with this. 12. Southold wetlands protection not as stringent as New York State requirements: Council discussed formally adopting a wetlands map and felt that wetlands delineation was more important than a specific map. A wetlands map can be used as general guidance but ground truthing and on site delineation would be needed on a case by case basis. Council discussed potential of creating a Natural Resources Department. This could be done in two ways: one would essentially replace the Trustees and elements of other departments with professional staff that would take over the non-Andros Patent wetland applications and environmental determinations for other departments and base all decisions and recommendations on standards and science without any voting. The other would handle the State’s technical requirements for review of wetlands permits for the Trustees and environmental determinations for other departments with the Trustees and other departments still voting and/or modifying those recommendations. It was pointed out that there does not appear to be much support for the creation of a new department. However, Council agreed that the environmental functions of such a department were important to the Trustees, Planning, ZBA, Land Preservation, Storm Water Committee, etc. and should be available as part of the existing Town infrastructure if a new department is not feasible.