Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-72.-2-2.2OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 Main Rd. & Youngs Ave. Southold, NY 11971 LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALLZATION PROGRAM TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 Jim King, President Town of Southold Board of Trustees From: Mark Terry, LWRP Coordinator Scott A. Hilary, LWRP Coordinator Date: February 10, 2009 Chapter 268, WATERFRONT CONSISTENCY REVIEW Wetland Permit & Coastal Erosion Permit for KEVIN & ALEXANDRA O'MARA SCTM#72-2-2.2 En-Consultants, Inc. on behalf of KEVIN & ALEXANDRA O'MARA requests a Wetland Permit & Coastal Erosion Permit to construct +/-226 lf. ora double row of quarrystone on a hardcore stone foundation; backfill and re-vegetate eroded bluff face with native vegetation and reconstruct (in-place with open-grate decking) and extend the existing bluff stairs over the proposed stone. Located: 14345 Oregon Rd., Cutchogue. SCTM#72-2-2.2 The proposed action has been reviewed to Chapter 268, Waterfront Consistency Review of the Town of Southold Town Code and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) Policy Standards. Based upon the information provided on the LWRP Consistency Assessment Form submitted to this department, as well as the records available to us, it is our recommendation that the proposed action is CONSISTENT with LWRP policy standards and therefore is CONSISTENT with LWRP policy standards; provided the applicant demonstrate that the following LWRP Policy Standards and TOS Chapters 275 and 111 requirements have been met as outlined below. 4.1 Minimize losses of human life and structures from flooding and erosion hazards. D. Use hard structural erosion protection measures for control of erosion only where: 1. Avoidance of the hazard is not appropriate because a structure is functionally dependent on a location on or in coastal waters; located in an area of extensive public investment; or reinforces the role of Maritime Centers or Areas for Concentrated Development. 2. Vegetative approaches to controlling erosion are not effective. 3. Enhancement of natural protective features would not prove practical in providing erosion protection. 4. Construction of a hard structure is the only practical design consideration and is essential to protecting the principal USe. 5. The proposed hard structural erosion protection measures are: a. limited to the minimum scale necessary b. based on sound engineering practices 6. Practical vegetative methods have been included in the project design and implementation. 7. Adequate mitigation is provided and maintained to ensure that them is no adverse impact to adjacent property or to natural coastal processes and natural resources and, if undertaken by a private property owner, does not incur significant direct or indirect public costs. The applicant must demonstrate that the proposed action will not increase the erosion onto neighboring properties or other locations pursuant to § 275-11 and § 111-15. § 275-11 Construction and operation standards. B. Shoreline structures. The following standards are required for all operations relating to shoreline structures on residential properties. Operations conducted on properties zoned MI or M2 may be given greater flexibility in these requirements given the water-dependent nature 6ftheir use. (1) Bulkheads, retaining walls, revetments and gabions. (b) Bulkheads on the Sound shall only be permitted when the likelihood of extreme erosion is demonstrated and it shall not increase erosion on neighboring properties. 111-15 Erosion protection structures. The following requirements apply to the construction, modification or restoration of erosion protection structures: A. The construction, modification or restoration of erosion protection structures must: (1) Not be likely to cause a measurable increase in erosion at the development site or at other locations. The natural shoreline has an inherent natural, social~ and economic value that should be respected to ensure continuing benefits to the town, region and state. Hardening of the shoreline is to be avoided except when alternative means, such as soft engineering alternatives are not effective. Often hard shoreline structures such as the proposed action can contribute to erosion both on and off the site due to poor design and sitting inhibiting the down drift remediation of sand. Soft structural protection methods are to be used to conform to the natural coastal processes. Beach nourishment and re-vegetation are preferred approaches in controlling erosion because of the lower cost and fewer environmental impacts than hard structures. Hard shoreline protection structures should only be allowed when a propert~ is in danger~ and no other alternative will save the structure. The portions of the Town's shoreline that are not fortified should generally remain in a natural condition to respond to coastal processes. Therefore~ before a permit is granted for any hardened erosion control structure~ the purpose, function, impact~ and alternatives to the project must be carefully evaluated to determine whether the proposed structure is necessar~ and whether adverse impacts can be avoided or minimized. In the event that the proposed action is approved the following Best Management Practice (BMP) is recommended: 1) Require that the applicant provide w/timelines for administering stabilization plan for stabilizing the entire bluff including; toe, face and top of bluff. The BMP recommended above will maximize the capabilities of the natural protective feature (bluff), further advancing LWRP policy standards 4.1 Minimize losses of human life and structures from flooding and erosion hazards and 4.2 Protect and restore natural protective features. Figure #1 Easterly view of bluff eroSion on SUbject parcel. Figure #2 Beach stairs failing due to extreme erosion of bluff face. FigUre #3 Westerly Figure #4 View of active erosion at top of bluff. # 5 Active erosion of bluff face. Pursuant to Chapter 268, the Board of Trustees shall consider this recommendation in preparing its written determination regarding the consistency of the proposed action. Town, of Southoid LWRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM INSTRUCTIONS 1. A II applicants f0r perm its* including T0w n 0f S0uth01d agencies, shall 00m plete this C C A F f0r proposed actions that are subject to the Tow n of South01d W aterfr0nt C 0nsistency Review Law. This assessment is intended to supplement other inform ati0n used by a T0wn of S0uth01d agency in making a determ inati0n of consistency. *Except minor exempt actions including Building Permits and other ministerial permits not located within the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area. 2. Before answering the questions in Section C, the preparer of this form should review the exempt minor action list, policies and explanations of each policy contained in the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. A proposed action will be evaluated as to its significant beneficial and adverse effects upon the coastal area (which includes all of Southold Town). If any question in Section C on this form is answered "yes" or "no", then the proposed action will affect the achievement of the LWRP policy standards and conditions contained in the consistency review law. Thus, each answer must be explained in detail, listing both suo0ortin~, and non- suooortina facts. If an action cannot be certified as consistent with the LWRP policy standards and conditions, it shall not be undertaken. A copy of the LWRP is available in the following places: online at the Town of Southold's website (southoldtown.northfork.net), the Board of Trustees Office, the Planning Department, all local libraries and the Town Clerk's office. B, DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSED ACTION ~ SCTM# 72 2 2.2 PROJECT NAME ALEXANDRA & KEVINO'MARA · ' ne" The Application has been submitted to (check appropriate respo s )' TownBoard [~ elanningBoard[~ BmldlngDept. F-] Bo~'d~of~'ru~stees~(~,,L'~ Category of Town of Southold agency action (check appropriate responge):l!!~ri: ~ ~ ~ '~'.l~:~il '.~ (a) Action undertaken directly by Town agency (e.g. capital construction, planning activity, agency regulation, land transaction) (b) Financial assistance (e.g. grant, loan, subsidy) (c) Permit, approval, license, certification: Nature and extent of action: AS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY PERMIT NOS. 6248 & 6248C (AS AMENDED 7/23/08), CONSTRUCT +/-226 LINEAR FEET OF A DOUBLE ROW OF QUARRYSTONE ON A HARDCORE STONE FOUNDATION; BACKFILL AND REVEGETATE ERODED BLUFF FACE WITH NATIVE VEGETATION AND RECONSTRUCT (IN-PLACE WITH OPEN-GRATE DECKING) AND EXTEND THE EXISTING BLUFF STAIRS OVER THE PROPOSED STONE, ALL AS DEPICTED ON THE PROJECT PLAN PREPARED BY EN-CONSULTANTS, INC., LAST DATED JUNE 16, 2008. Location of action: 14345 OREGON ROAD, CUTCHOGUE Site acreage:. 3.24 ACRES Present land use: RESIDENTIAL, ONE-FAMILY DWELLING Present zoning classification: If an application for the proposed action has been filed with the Town of Southold agency, the following information shall be provided: (a) Name of applicant: EN-CONSULTANTS, INC. (b) Mailing address: 1319 NORTH SEA ROAD SOUTHAMPTON, NY 11968 (c) Telephone number: Area Code 631-283-6360 (d) Application number, if any: Will the action be directly undertaken, require funding, or approval by a state or federal agency? Yes [~] No [~ If yes, which state or federal agency?_ C. Evaluate the project to the following policies by analyzing how the project will further support or not support the policies. Provide all proposed Best Management Practices that will further each policy. Incomplete answers will require that the form be returned for completion. DEVELOPED COAST POLICY Policy 1. Foster a pattern of development in the Town of Southold that enhances community character, preserves open space, makes efficient use of infrastructure, makes beneficial use of a coastal location, and minimizes adverse effects of development. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Page 2 for evaluation criteria. NYes V--] No ~ Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 2. Protect and preserve historic and archaeological resources of the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 3 through 6 for evaluation criteria [~ Yes ~ No ~ Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 3. Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 6 through 7 for evaluation criteria Attach additional sheets if necessary NATURAL COAST POLICIES Policy 4. Minimize loss of life, structures, and natural resources from flooding and erosion. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 8 through 16 for evaluation criteria The proposed toe stone is consistent with Policy 4, as the proposed hard structural erosion protection measure is being proposed only where a non-structural, vegetative erosion control program was implemented but ineffective; where the natural protective feature -in this case the bluff- cannot be effectively enhanced without stabilization of the bluff toe; where a hard structure is the only design consideration that can pmcticably and effectively provide such toe stabilization; where the proposed protection measure is engineered to provide 30 or mom years of effective erosion control but also designed as naturally as possible (i.e., using sloped, natural stone instead of vertically faced retaining wall); where vegetative bluff face enhancement is incorporated into the project design; and where, due to the natural angle of the stone, there will be no adverse impacts to the adjacent properties. There wilI be no significant direct or indirect costs incurred by the public as a result of the implementation of the project. Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 5. Protect and improve water quality and supply in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 16 through 21 for evaluation criteria ~ Yes ~ No ~ Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 6. Protect and restore the quality and function of the Town of Southold ecosystems including Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats and wetlands. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 22 through 32 for evaluation criteria. Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 7. Protect and improve air quality in the Town of Southoid. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 32 through 34 for evaluation criteria. [~] Yes [~ No[~ Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 8. Minimize environmental degradation in Town of Southold from solid waste and hazardous substances and wastes. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 34 through 38 for evaluation criteria. 71 Yes [--1 No Not Applicable PUBLIC COAST POLICIES Policy 9. Provide for public access to, and recreational use of, coastal waters, public lands, and public resources of the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 38 through 46 for evaluation criteria. Yes 71 No ~ Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary WORKING COAST POLICIES Poli,cy 10. Protect Southold's water-dependent uses and promote siting of new water-dependent suitable locations. See LWRP Section IH - Policies; Pages 47 through 56 for evaluation criteria. [--] Yes [~ No [~ Not Applicable uses in Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 11. Promote sustainable use of living marine resources in Long Island Sound, the Peeonie Estuary and Town waters. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 57 throngh 62 for evalnafion criteria. [--] Yes [--] No E~ Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 12. Protect agricnltnral lands in the Town of Sonthold. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 62 through 65 for evalnatioa criteria. [~] Yes [--] No [5~] Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 13. Promote appropriate use and development of energy and mineral resources. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 65 through 68 for evaluation criteria. [-~ Yes ~] No [~ Not Applicable PREPARED BY RT~ ROBE ANN TITLEcoASTALMGMTSPECIALIST DATE 1/28/09 Amended on 8/1/05 +226 +319' _+193' 1" = 60' OF sEPH A RICCI :GON ROAD PROPOCP ~LIPP TO~ 5TON~ POR ~I~XANPRA AklP I(P. VIN O'MAEA ON LONd I%ANi¢ 50UNP, CLII'CHOdLIP-, 5UPPOL. K COLINfY, NY 5HPZTI OF 2 10/24/02, 6/15/ 0& 9/15/O& 6/lb/08 CFE,KPILL fO [~ PLANTEP W11H ~AEH dRAS¢ (12' O,C,) / / Off QuAq~sTON~ I~MOV/~¢L~ ¢CTION OP 5fAIR5 6' ×6" FO5f5 (1Y¢,) HAI~COt~ 5fON[ POLNiP^flON / 5P. CTION 1'Hindu PRQPOCP QLIARRYSfQN~ Al' fOB OP PLL~P S 5fAIR RIf. CONSTRUCTION ~CM.-B :1' ~ I0' OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 Main Rd. & Youngs Ave. Southold, NY 11971 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM TOWN OF SOUTHOLD To: Jim King, President Town of Southold Board of Trustees From: Mark Terry, LWRP Coordinator Scott A. Hilary, LWRP Coordinator ' Re: Chapter 268, WATERFRONT CONSISTENCY REVIEW Wetland Permit and Coastal Erosion Permit for DORIS GALLAGHER C/O BARBARA PENNACHIA SCTM#72-2-1 Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of DORIS GALLAGHER C/O BARBARA PENNACHIA requests a Wetland Permit to stabilize the base of the bluff by constructing 90' of double row 3' to 5' dia. (2 to 5 ton) rock revetment. Re-grade any disturbed areas reusing excavated materials and re-vegetate materials. Located: 14347 Oregon Rd., Cutchogue. SCTM#72-2-1 The proposed action has been reviewed to Chapter 268, Waterfront Consistency Review of the Town of Southold Town 'Code and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) Policy Standards. Based upon the information provided on the LWRP Consistency Assessment Form submitted to this department, as well as the records available to us, it is our recomrnendation that the proposed action is INCONSISTENT with LWRP policy standards and therefore is INCONSISTENT with the denoted following LVOIP policy standards. The natural shoreline has an inherent natural, social, and economic value that should be respected to ensure continuing, benefits to the town, region and state. Hardenino of the shoreline is to be avoided except when alternative means, such as soft engineering alternatives are not effective. Often hard shoreline structures such as the proposed action can contribute to erosion both on and off the site due to poor design and sittinu inhibiting the down drift remediation of sand. Soft structural protection methods are to be used to conform to the natural coastal processes. Beach nourishment and re-vegetation are preferred approaches in controlling erosion because of the lower cost and fewer environmental impacts than hard structures. Hard shoreline protection structures should only be allowed when a property is in danger, and no other alternative will save the structure. The portions of the Town's shoreline that are not fortified should generally remain in a natural condition to respond to coastal processes. Therefore, before a permit is granted for any hardened erosion control structure~ the purpose, function, impact, and alternatives to the proiect must be carefully evaluated to determine whether the proposed structure is necessary and whether adverse impacts can be avoided or minimized. 4.1 Minimize losses of human life and structures from flooding and erosion hazards. B. Use vegetative non-structural measures to manage flooding and erosion hazards. 1. Use vegetative non-structural measures which have a reasonable probability of managing flooding and erosion, based on shoreline characteristics including exposure, geometry, and sediment composition. D. Use hard structural erosion protection measures for control of erosion only where: 1. Avoidance of the hazard is not appropriate because a structure is functionally dependent on a location on or in coastal waters; located in an area of extensive public investment; or reinforces the role of Maritime Centers or Areas for Concentrated Development. 2. Vegetative approaches to controlling erosion are not effective. 3. Enhancement of natural protective features would not prove practical in providing erosion protection. 4. Construction of a hard structure is the only practical design consideration and is essential to protecting the principal USe. 5. The proposed hard structural erosion protection measures are: a. limited to the minimum scale necessary b. based on sound engineering practices 6. Practical vegetative methods have been included in the project design and implementation. 7. Adequate mitigation is provided and maintained to ensure that there is no adverse impact to adjacent property or to natural coastal processes and natural resources and, if undertaken by a private property owner, does not incur significant direct or indirect public costs. The applicant has not met the above criteria to warrant the use of hardened erosion control measures at this time. 4.2 Protect and restore natural protective features. Natural protective geologic features provide valuable protection and should be protected, restored and enhanced. Destruction or degradation of these features should be discouraged or prohibited. B. Maximize the protective capabilities of natural protective features by: 1. avoiding alteration or interference with shorelines in a natural condition 2. enhancing existing natural protective features 3. restoring the condition of impaired natural protective features wherever practical 4. using practical vegetative approaches to stabilize natural shoreline features 5~ managing activities to limit damage to, or reverse damage which has diminished, the protective capacities of the natural shoreline C. Minimize interference with natural coastal processes by: 1. providing for natural supply and movement of unconsolidated materials and for water and wind transport 2. limiting intrusion of structures into coastal waters D. A limited interference with coastal processes may be allowed where the principal purpose of the structure is necessary to: 1. simulate natural processes where existing structures have altered the coast 2. provide necessary public benefits for flooding and erosion protection 3. provide for the efficient operation of water-dependent uses The applicant has not demonstrated that the proposed action will not increase the erosion onto neiehborin~ properties or other locations pursuant to § 275-11 and ~ 111-15. Policy 6 Protect and restore the quality and function of the Town of Southold ecosystem 6.3 Protect and restore tidal and freshwater wetlands. A. Comply with statutory and regulatory requirements of the Southold Town Board of Trustees laws' and regulations for all Andros Patent and other lands under their jurisdiction 1. Comply with Trustee regulations and recommendations as set forth in Trustee permit conditions. § 275-11 Construction and operation standards.. B. Shoreline structures. The following standards are required for all operations relating to shoreline structures on residential properties. Operations conducted on properties zoned M 1 or M2 may be given greater flexibility in these requirements given the water-dependent nature of their usc. (1) Bulkheads, retaining walls, revetments and gabions. (b) Bulkheads on the Sound shall only be permitted when the likelihood of extreme erosion is demonstrated and it shall not increase erosion on neighboring properties. § 111-15 Erosion protection structures. The following requirements apply to the constmction, modification or restoration of erosion protection stmctures: A. The constmction, modification or restoration of erosion protection stmctures must: (1) Not be likely to cause a measurable increase in erosion at the development site or at other locations. The toe of the bluff on the subiect parcel is exemplary of long-term erosion conditions which is a slow process. It is evident that the toe of bluff is accreting (an accumulation of sand deposited at the base from the eroding bluff above)~ which contributes to the natural coast process of supplying sand to the down drift beaches allowing for the shoreline to come into equilibrium. It is further evident that the bluff face and top of the bluff suffer from (extreme) active erosion and therefore requires immediate action in stabilizing the bluff through non-structural vegetative measures. In the event that the proposed action is approved the following Best Management Practice (BMP) is recommended: 1) Require that the applicant administer an approved planting plan to stabilize the bluff face and top of bluff, prior to any operations. The BMP recommended above will maximize the capabilities of the natural protective feature (blur0, further advancing LWRP policy standards 4.1 and 4.2. If the Agency~ (Board of Trustees) makes a contrary determination of consistency, the Agency shall elaborate in writing the basis for its disagreement with their recommendations Pursuant to Chapter 268 Waterfront Consistency Review. § 268-5. Review of actions. In the event the LI'FRP Coordinator's recommendation is that the action is inconsistent with the LlgZRP, and the agency makes a contrary determination of consistency, the agency shall elaborate in writing the basis' for its disagreement with the recommendation and state the manner and extent to which the action is consistent with the L kVRPpolicy standards. Pursuant to Chapter 268, the Board of Trustees shall consider this recommendation in preparing its written determination regarding the consistency of the proposed action.