HomeMy WebLinkAboutLL 2009 #15Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
RESOLUTION 2009-974
ADOPTED
Item # 5.31
DOC ID: 5460
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2009-974 WAS
ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON
DECEMBER 15, 2009:
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk
County, New York, on the 22nd day of September 2009, a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in
relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency
Review Law" and
WHEREAS the Town Board of the Town of Southold held a public hearing on the aforesaid
Local Law at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, now
therefor be it
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby ENACTS the proposed
Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions
List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law" reads as follows:
LOCAL LAW NO. 2009
A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt
Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law".
BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows:
Purpose. The amendments to this local law are adopted under the authority of the
Municipal Home Rule Law and the Waterfront Revitalization of Coastal Areas and
Inland Waterways Act of the State of New York (Article 42 of the Executive Law). It is
intended that, by making additions to the "minor actions" exempt list, certain actions that
by their nature will not have an adverse effect on the coastal area and resources will not
require a review under this law, which will result in a more efficient review process.
II. Chapter 268 of the Code of the Town of Sonthold is hereby amended as follows:
§ 268-3. Definitions.
LANDSCAPED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width which is planted with
indigenous, drought tolerant, vegetation similar to that found within the immediate proximity of
the parcel. Vegetation shall be installed in sufficient densities to achieve ninety-five (95) percent
Generated December 16, 2009 Page 47
Southold Town Board - Letter
Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
ground cover within two years of installation. Survival of planted vegetation shall be ninety (90)
percent for a period of three years. Maintenance activities within the buffer are limited to
removing vegetation which are hazardous to life and property, trimming tree limbs up to a height
of fifteen feet (15') to maintain viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and establi~hlng a four foot
(4') wide access path constructed of pervious material for access to the water-body.
MINOR ACTIONS - Include the following actions, which are not subject to review under this
chapter:
A. Maintenance or repair involving no substantial changes in an existing structure or
facility;
B. Replacement, rehabilitation or reconstruction ora structure or facility, in kind, on
the same site (in-place), including upgrading buildings to meet building or fire codes,
except for structures in areas designated by the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area (CEHA)
law where structures may not be replaced, rehabilitated or reconstructed without a permit
and shoreline erosion control structures (including, but not limited to, groins, ietties,
bulkheads, filled piers) located within Great Peconic Bay, Cutchogue Harbor, Little
Peconic Bay, Hog Neck Bay, Noyack Bay, Southold Bay, Shelter Island Sound, Pipes
Cove, Orient Harbor, Gardiners Bay, Long Island Sound, Fishers Island Sound and Block
Island Sound ]excluding all creeks];
C. Repaying or widening of existing paved highways not involving the addition of new
travel lanes;
D. Street openings and fight-of-way openings for the purpose of repair or maintenance of
existing utility facilities;
E. Maintenance of existing landscaping or natural growth, that is not located within 100 feet
of the boundary of a natural protective feature ......... ~'~-~ '~- ....... ,~ .... .~ ...... -~
ov ....... v ......................... d, or within significant coastal fish and wildlife
habitat areas;
Granting of individual setback, lot line and lot area variances, except in relation to a
regulated natural feature or a bulkhead or other shoreline defense structure or any activity
within the CEHA;
Minor temporary uses of land having negligible or no permanent impact on coastal
resources or the environment;
Installation of traffic control devices on existing streets, roads and highways;
Mapping of existing roads, streets, highways, natural resources, land uses and ownership
patterns;
Information collection including basic data collection and research, water quality and
pollution studies, traffic counts, engineering studies, surveys, subsurface investigations
and soils studies that do not commit the agency to undertake, fund or approve any action;
Official acts of a ministerial nature involving no exercise of discretion, including building
where issuance is predicated solely on the applicant's compliance or noncompliance with
the relevant local building code;
Routine or continuing agency administration and management, not including new
programs or major reordering of priorities that may affect the environment;
Conducting concurrent environmental, engineering, economic, feasibility and other
studies and preliminary planning and budgetary processes necessary to the formulation of
H.
I.
J.
Generated December 16, 2009 Page 48
*' Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
V.
W.
X.
AA.
BB.
CC.
DD.
EE.
FF.
GG.
a proposal for action, provided those activities do not commit the agency to commence,
engage in or approve such action;
Collective bargaining activities;
Investments by or on behalf of agencies or pension or retirement systems, or refinancing
existing debt;
Inspections and licensing activities relating to the qualifications of individuals or
businesses to engage in their business or profession;
Purchase or sale of furnishings, equipment or supplies, including surplus government
property, other than the following: land, radioactive material, pesticides, herbicides,
storage of road de-icing substances, or other hazardous materials;
Adoption of regulations, policies, procedures and local legislative decisions in
connection with any action on this list;
Engaging in review of any part of an application to determine compliance with technical
requirements, provided that no such determination entitles or permits the project sponsor
to commence the action unless and until all requirements of this chapter have been
fulfilled;
Civil or criminal enforcement proceedings, whether administrative or judicial, including a
particular course of action specifically required to be undertaken pursuant to a judgment
or order, or the exercise of prosecutorial discretion;
Adoption of a moratorium on land development or construction;
Interpreting an existing code, rule or regulation;
Designation of local landmarks or their inclusion within historic districts;
Emergency actions that are immediately necessary on a limited and temporary basis for
the protection or preservation of life, health, property or natural resources, provided that
such actions are directly related to the emergency and are performed to cause the least
change or disturbance, practicable under the circumstances, to coastal resources or the
environment. Any decision to fund, approve or directly undertake other activities after the
emergency has expired is fully subject to the review procedures of this chapter;
Local legislative decisions such as rezoning where the Town Board determines
the action will not be approved;
Split rail fences or fences used to control nuisance wildlife that do not interfering with the
public's rights of passage along the foreshore;
Removal of a structure greater than 75 feet from a wetland;
Additions to l~4a~b~atr~g/d~f an existing dwelling constituting less than 25 percent of
the existing structure where the addition is greater than 75 feet from a natural protective
feature, except where the parcel is located in a Coastal Erosion Hazard Area;
Structures less than 190 250 square feet in size that are accessory to existing permitted
primary structures, and which accessory structures are greater than 50 feet from a
boundary of a natural protective feature, and freshwater or tidal wetlands tidat-wettamt;
Construction or improvements of pervious residential driveways, parking areas or
walkways greater than 50 feet from a tidal or freshwater wetland;
Upgrades to existing fuel tanks provided that erosion control measures are implemented;
Cutting phragmites to greater than 12 inches and vegetative restoration provided that
native wetland vegetative species are not affected or disturbed in any manner;
~ Within all Town Creeks, replacement of existing bulkhead on the
Generated December 16, 2009 Page 49
Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
applicant's property in the same location with a silt curtmn ....v.,-~ ~ deployed prior to
and during construction; and
HH. Lot line changes, provided that the lot line change will not permit new development that
may have undue adverse impacts on wetlands, tidal waters or natural protective features;
II. Additions to an existing building or rebuilt residential structure which results in no-net
increase in ground area coverage, except where the parcel is located in a Coastal Erosion
Hazard Area;
JJ. Construction or installation of drainage improvements for the retention of storm water
runoffin accordance w~th Chapter 236, ~ .................... ~. ..................... 1
an...,,.v~c`ac` 69,000 75 50
~, ..... ,v~v 75 50
100 75
~.,v90 30 20
100 75
-,,,~,~0 25 15 15
Generated December 16, 2009 Page 50
Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEATURE - A nearshore area, beach, bluff, primary dune,
secondary dune or wetland and their vegetation.
NATURAL VEGETATED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width where existing
vegetation occurs prior to the commencement of any grading or clearing activity. Vegetation
shall be maintained to achieve a minimum percent ground cover of ninety-five (95%) percent.
To achieve the percent ground cover indigenous, drought tolerant vegetation shall be planted.
Survival of planted vegetation shall be ninety (90%) percent for a period of three (3) years.
Maintenance activities within the buffer are limited to removing vegetation which are hazardous
to life and property, trimming tree limbs up to a height of fifteen feet (15') to maintain
viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and establishing a four foot (4') wide access path constructed
of pervious material for access to the water-body.
NEW YORK SCENIC BYWAY (North Fork Trail) - all that portion of the State highway
system known as State Route 25 in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, beginning at the
boundary between the Town of Riverhead and the Town of Southold, continuing northeasterly to
Orient Point and to the end of State Route 25, and all that portion of the local highway system
known as Sound Avenue beginning at the boundary between the Town of Riverhead and the
Town of Southold continuing easterly to the overlap of Sound Avenue and County Route 48 and
continuing along County Route 48 generally northeasterly to the intersection of County Route 48
and State Route 25 north of the Village of Greenport, Suffolk County.
NUISANCE WILDLIFE - Wildlife that is destructive and capable of damaging property such as
buildings, crops, pets, livestock, gardens, or public areas. Wildlife may threaten human health or
safety by spreading diseases, through direct attacks, or accidentally.
PERVIOUS NONTURF BUFFER - a land area of a certain height and width comprised of sand,
stone or permeable pavers arranged in such a manner to allow for maximum percolation of storm
water runoff into the soil.
PRIORITY WATER-BODY - a water-body within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Town of
Southold listed by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation on the
Water-Body Inventory/Priority Water-Bodies List, as amended.
SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT - those habitats which are essential to the
survival of a large portion of a particular fish or wildlife population; support rare or endangered
species; are found at a very low frequency within a geographic area; support fish or wildlife
populations having significant commemial or recreational value; or that would be difficult or
impossible to replace.
III. SEVERABILITY
Generated December 16, 2009 Page 51
Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any
court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law
as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided
by law.
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk
RESULT: ADOPTED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Thomas H. Wickham, Councilman
SECONDER: Louisa P. Evans, .iustice
AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Krupski .Ir., Wickham, Evans, Russell
Generated December 16, 2009 Page 52
RESOLUTION 2009-943
ADOPTED
DOC ID: 5454
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2009-943 WAS
ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON
DECEMBER 1, 2009:
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby finds that the proposed "A
Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront
Consistency Review Law" is classified as an Unlisted Action pursuant to SEQRA Rules and
Regulations, 6 NYCRR Section 617, and that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby
establishes itself as lead agency for the uncoordinated review of this action and issues a Negative
Declaration for the action in accordance with the recommendation of Mark Terry dated
November 30, 2009, and authorizes Supervisor Scott A. Russell to sign the short form EAF in
accordance therewith, and is consistent with the LWRP pursuant to Chapter 268 of the Town
Code of the Town of Southold, Waterfront Consistency Review.
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Louisa P. Evans, Justice
SECONDER: Thomas H. Wickham, Councilman
AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Krupski Jr., Wickham, Evans, Russell
617.20
Appendix C
State Environmental Quality Review
SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only
PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by A~)plicant or Project Sponsor)
1. APPLICANT/SPONSOR /2. PROJECT NAME
Town of Southold / Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
3. PROJECT LOCATION:
Municipality Town of Southold County Suffolk
4. PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road intersections, prominent landmarks, etc., or provide map)
Jurisdictional limits of the Town of Southold
5. PROPOSED ACTION iS:
[] New [] Expansion [] Modification/alteration NA
6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY:
A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
7. AMOUNTOF LAND AFFECTED:
Initially iNA acres Ultimately NA acres
8. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS?
[] Yes [] NO If No, describe
bdefly
9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT?
[] Residential [] Industrial [] Commercial [] Agriculture [] Park/Forest/Open Space [] Other
Describe:
All apply within thc jurisdictional limits of the Town of Southold
10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY
(FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL)?
[] Yes I~l No If Yes, list agency(s) name and
permit/approvals:
11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL? [] Yes [] No If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit/approvals:
12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION VVlLL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION?
[] Yes [] No
I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
Applicanl/sponsor name: Town of Sou. tholE]. Date: ] 1/30/09
Signature:
~cor_r_ A. Russell. Suo~rv~n*'
If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the
Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment
OVER
DART I] - IMPACT ASSESSMENT ITs be completed by Lead Agency)
A. DOES ACTION EXCEED ANY TYPE I THRESHOLD IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.4? If yes, coordinate the review process and use the FULL FAF.
[~] Yes ~]No
B. WILL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.6? If No, a negative
dectamtion may be superseded by another involved agency.
r-lYes E]No
c. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING: (Answers may be handwritten, if legible)
C1. Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality or quanfity, noise levels, existing traffic pattern, solid waste production or disposal,
potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly:
None
C2. Aesthetic. agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or coitural resources; or community or neighborf~ood character? Explain briefly:
None
C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife spores, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly:
None
C4. A community's ex~sting plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change In use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briery:
None
C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activittes likely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly:
None
C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1-C57 Explain briefly:
None
C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly:
None
D. WILL THE PROJECT HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT CAUSED THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CRITICAL
ENVIRONMENTAL AREA (CEA)?
[] Yes [] No If Yes, explain briefly:
E. IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE, CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS?
[] Yes [] NO If Yes. explain briefly:
PART III - DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by Agency)
INSTRUCTIONS: For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether it is substantial, large, important or otherwise significant. Each
effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting (i.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) irreversibility; (e)
geographic scope; and (t) magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference support'lng materials. Ensure that explanations contain
sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately addressed. If question O of Part II was checked
yes, the determination of significance must evaluate the potential impact of the proposed action on the environmental characteristics of the CEA.
] Check this box if you have identified one or mom potendally large or significant adverse impacts which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the FULl
FAF and/or prepare a positive dectaration.
[] Check this box if you have determined, based on the informafion and analysis above and any suppoding documentetion, that the proposed acfion WI LI
NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide, on attachments as necessary, the reasons supporting this determinatior
Town of Southold Town Board
Name of Lead Agency
Scott Russell
Print or Typo Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency
Signature of Responsibte Officer in Lead Agency
11/30/09
Date
Supervisor
Title of Responsible Officer
· MARTIN D, FINNEGAN
TOWN ATTORNEY
martin.finnegan@town, southold.ny.us
JENNIFER ANDALORO
ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY
j ennifer.andaloro@town.southold.ny.us
LORI M. HULSE
ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY
lori.hulse@town.southold.ny.us
SCOTT A. RUSSELL
Supervisor
Town H~lAnnex, 54375Route25
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971-0959
Telephone (631) 765-1939
Facsimile (631) 765-6639
OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
MEMORANDUM
Ms. Sandi Berliner
Lynne Krauza
Secretary to the Town Attorney
December 4, 2009
LUAmendments to Minor Exempt Actions List - SEQRA
I am enclosing an original Short Environmental Assessment Form in
connection with the referenced matter. A resolution authorizing Scott to sign this
document is also attached hereto.
In this regard, kindly have Scott sign this form where indicated and return
to me for processing.
Thank you for your attention. If you have any questions, please do not
hesitate to call me.
Ilk
Enclosures
cc: Ms. Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk (w/encls.) ~'~
DAVID A. PATERSON
STATE OF NEW YORK
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
ONE COMMERCE PLAZA
99 WASHINGTON AVENUE
ALBANY, NY 12231-0001
LORRAINE A. CORTES-VAZQUEZ
SECRETARy OF STATE
Febmary22,2010
Elizabeth A Neville
Town "Clerk
Town Hall 53095 Main Road
PO Box 1179
Southold NY 11971
RE: Town of Southold, Local Law 15, 2010, filed on February 18, 2010
Dear Sir/Madam:
The above referenced material was received and filed by this office as indicated.
Additional local law filing formas can be obtained from our website, www.dos.state.n¥.us.
Sincerely,
State Records and Law Bureau
(518) 474-2755
WWW.DOS.STATE.NY,US ° E-MAIL:INFO~DOS.STATE.NY.US
OFF CIAL USE I
Postage $
Ce~lfied Fee
Postmark
Return ReCelpl Fee Here
(Endorsement P~quired)
Restr~ted Deliver' Fee
(Endorsement Required)
ISentT° Ms~ J~ncla _LasCh, I-'ripClpB. J, clerk
JNYSDO5 5tare Kecorg..s. SLaW ts~.r...e..a..u.. ......
IorPOBoxNo 9~'~-asnlng[on Avenue
· Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
· print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
· Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
Ms. Linda Lasch
Principal Clerk
NYSDOS State Records &
· taw Bureau
One Commerce Plaza
99 Washington Avenue
Albany, NY 12231-001
~ Signature
[] Agent
X r3 Addressee
B. Received by (P~fn~d Name) C. Date of Delivery
D. is delive~ addmss different fn3m item l? [] yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: [] No
3. Service Type
I~Certified Mail I-I Express Ma~l
[] Registered [] Return Receipt for Merchandise
[] Insured Mall [] C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delive~ ~-xtra Fee) OYes
7009 0820 0001 7820 5661
'~ PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt
ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
MARRIAGE OFFICER
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (631) 765-6145
Telephone (631) 765-1800
southoldtown.northfork.net
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
February 12, 2010
CERTIFIED MAIL
RE: Local Law No. 15 of 2009
Town of Southold, Suffolk County
Ms. Linda Lasch
Principal Clerk
New York State Department of State
State Records & Law Bureau
One Commerce Plaza
99 Washington Avenue
Albany, NY 12231-001
Dear Ms. Lasch,
In accordance with the provisions of Section 27 of the Municipal Home Rule Law, I am
enclosing herewith certified copies of Local Law No. 15 of 2009 of the Town of
Southold, suitable for filing in your office.
Please send me a receipt indicating the filing of the enclosures in your office. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk
Enclosures
Cc: Town Attorney
Page 1 of 1
Neville, Elizabeth
From: Kerry Johnson [kjohnson@generalcode.com]
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 11:54 AM
To: Neville, Elizabeth
Subject: RE: Local Law #15
Thanks Betty!
I'm glad you signed up for a webinar. 1 think you will find it very informative.
Kerry
From: Neville, Elizabeth [mailto:E.Neville@town.southold.ny.us]
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 11:39 AH
To: Kerry Johnson
Subject: Local Law #15
Kerry,
Attached is Local Law #15 adopted by the Southold Town Board on December 15, 2009. Please include this in
your quarterly update.
Thank you for the telephone call.
I received the e-Code Webinar and forwarded it to "Everyone". I signed up for March 4th.
Thank you,
Elizabeth A. Neville, RMC, CMC
Southold Town Clerk
PO Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
Tel 631 765-1800
Fax 631 765-6145
2/12/2010
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF STATE
41 STATE STREET
Local Law Filing
ALBANY~ NY 12231
(Use this form to file a local law with the Secretary of State.)
Text of law should be given as amended. Do not include matter being eliminated
and do not use italics or underlining to indicate new matter.
Cl County
rn City
[] Town of SOUTHOLD
r~ Village
Local Law No. 15 of the year 2009.
A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions List of the
Waterfront Consistency Review Law"
Be it enacted the Town Board of the:
rn County
CJ City
[] Town of SOUTHOLD
[] Village
1. Purpose. The amendments to this local law are adopted under the authority of the Municipal Home Rule
Law and the Waterfront Revitalization of Coastal Areas and Inland Waterways Act of the State of New
York (Article 42 of the Executive Law). It is intended that, by making additions to the "minor actions"
exempt list, certain actions that by their nature will not have an adverse effect on the coastal area and
resources will not require a review under this law, which will result in a more efficient review process.
Chapter 268 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
§ 268-3. Definitions.
LANDSCAPED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width which is planted with indigenous, drought
tolerant, vegetation similar to that found within the immediate proximity of the parcel. Vegetation shall be
installed in sufficient densities to achieve ninety-five (95) percent ground cover within two years of installation.
Survival of planted vegetation shall be ninety (90) percent for a period of three years. Maintenance activities
within the buffer are limited to removing vegetation which are hazardous to life and property, trimming tree
limbs up to a height of fifteen feet (15') to maintain viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and establishing a four
fbot (4') wide access path constructed of pervious material for access to the water-body.
MINOR ACTIONS - Include the following actions, which are not subject to review under this chapter:
A. Maintenance or repair involving no substantial changes in an existing structure or facility;
(If additional space is needed, attach pages the same size as this sheet, and number each.)
DOS-239(Rev.05/05)
D.
E.
F.
G.
V.
W.
X.
Replacement, rehabilitation or reconstruction of a structure or facility, in kind, on the same site (in-
place), including upgrading buildings to meet building or fire codes, except for structures in areas
designated by the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area (CEHA) law where structures may not be replaced,
rehabilitated or reconstructed without a permit and shoreline erosion control structures (including, but
not limited to, groins, jetties, bulkheads, filled piers) located within Great Peconic Bay, Cutchogue
Harbor, Little Peconic Bay, Hog Neck Bay, Noyack Bay, Southold Bay, Shelter Island Sound, Pipes
Cove, Orient Harbor, Gardiners Bay, Long Island Sound, Fishers Island Sound and Block Island Sound
[excluding all creeks];
Repaying or widening of existing paved highways not involving the addition of new travel lanes;
Street openings and right-of-way openings for the purpose of repair or maintenance of existing utility
facilities;
Maintenance of existing landscaping or natural growth, that is not located within 100 feet of the
boundary of a natural protective feature, or within significant coastal fish and wildlife habitat areas;
Granting of individual setback, lot line and lot area variances, except in relation to a regulated natural
feature or a bulkhead or other shoreline defense structure or any activity within the CEHA;
Minor temporary uses of land having negligible or no permanent impact on coastal resources or the
environment;
Installation of traffic control devices on existing streets, roads and highways;
Mapping of existing roads, streets, highways, natural resources, land uses and ownership patterns;
Information collection including basic data collection and research, water quality and pollution studies,
traffic counts, engineering studies, surveys, subsurface investigations and soils studies that do not
commit the agency to undertake, fund or approve any action;
Official acts of a ministerial nature involving no exercise of discretion, including building where
issuance is predicated solely on the applicant's compliance or noncompliance with the relevant local
building code;
Routine or continuing agency administration and management, not including new programs or major
reordering of priorities that may affect the environment;
Conducting concurrent environmental, engineering, economic, feasibility and other studies and
preliminary planning and budgetary processes necessary to the formulation of a proposal for action,
provided those activities do not commit the agency to commence, engage in or approve such action;
Collective bargaining activities;
Investments by or on behalf of agencies or pension or retirement systems, or refinancing existing debt;
Inspections and licensing activities relating to the qualifications of individuals or businesses to engage in
their business or profession;
Purchase or sale of furnishings, equipment or supplies, including surplus government property, other
than the following: land, radioactive material, pesticides, herbicides, storage of road de-icing substances,
or other hazardous materials;
Adoption of regulations, policies, procedures and local legislative decisions in connection with any
action on this list;
Engaging in review of any part of an application to determine compliance with technical requirements,
provided that no such determination entitles or permits the project sponsor to commence the action
unless and until all requirements of this chapter have been fulfilled;
Civil or criminal enforcement proceedings, whether administrative or judicial, including a particular
course of action specifically required to be undertaken pursuant to a judgment or order, or the exercise
of prosecutorial discretion;
Adoption of a moratorium on land development or construction;
Interpreting an existing code, rule or regulation;
Designation of local landmarks or their inclusion within historic districts;
Emergency actions that are immediately necessary on a limited and temporary basis for the protection or
preservation of life, health, property or natural resources, provided that such actions are directly related
2
AA.
BB.
CC.
DD.
GG.
HH.
I1.
JJ.
to the emergency and are performed to cause the least change or disturbance, practicable under the
cimumstances, to coastal resources or the environment. Any decision to fund, approve or directly
undertake other activities after the emergency has expired is fully subject to the review procedures of
this chapter;
Local legislative decisions such as rezoning where the Town Board determines the action will not be
approved;
Split rail fences or fences used to control nuisance wildlife that do not interfering with the public's rights
of passage along the foreshore;
Removal of a structure greater than 75 feet from a wetland;
Additions to an existing dwelling constituting less than 25 percent of the existing structure where the
addition is greater than 75 feet from a natural protective feature, except where the parcel is located in a
Coastal Erosion Hazard Area;
Structures less than 250 square feet in size that are accessory to existing permitted primary structures,
and which accessory structures are greater than 50 feet from a boundary of a natural protective feature,
and freshwater or tidal wetlands;
Construction or improvements of pervious residential driveways, parking areas or walkways greater than
50 feet from a tidal or freshwater wetland;
Upgrades to existing fuel tanks provided that erosion control measures are implemented;
Cutting phragmites to greater than 12 inches and vegetative restoration provided that native wetland
vegetative species are not affected or disturbed in any manner;
Within all Town Creeks, replacement of existing bulkhead on the applicant's property in the same
location with a silt curtain deployed prior to and during construction;
Lot line changes, provided that the lot line change will not permit new development that may have
undue adverse impacts on wetlands, tidal waters or natural protective features;
Additions to an existing building or rebuilt residential structure which results in no-net increase in
ground area coverage, except where the parcel is located in a Coastal Erosion Hazard Area;
Construction or installation of drainage improvements for the retention of storm water runoff in
accordance with Chapter 236.
NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEATURE - A nearshore area, beach, bluff, primary dune, secondary dune or
wetland and their vegetation.
oNATURAL VEGETATED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width where existing vegetation
ccurs prior to the commencement of any grading or clearing activity. Vegetation shall be maintained to
achieve a minimum percent ground cover of ninety-five (95%) percent. To achieve the percent ground cover
indigenous, drought tolerant vegetation shall be planted. Survival of planted vegetation shall be ninety (90%)
percent for a period of three (3) years. Maintenance activities within the buffer are limited to removing
vegetation which are hazardous to life and property, trimming tree limbs up to a height of fifteen feet (15') to
maintain viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and establishing a four foot (4') wide access path constructed of
pervious material for access to the water-body.
NEW YORK SCENIC BYWAY (North Fork Trail) - all that portion of the State highway system known as
State Route 25 in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, beginning at the boundary between the Town of
Riverhead and the Town of Southold, continuing northeasterly to Orient Point and to the end of State Route 25,
and all that portion of the local highway system known as Sound Avenue beginning at the boundary between
the Town of Riverhead and the Town of Southold continuing easterly to the overlap of Sound Avenue and
County Route 48 and continuing along County Route 48 generally northeasterly to the intersection of County
Route 48 and State Route 25 north of the Village of Greenport, Suffolk County.
NUISANCE WILDLIFE - Wildlife that is destructive and capable of damaging property such as buildings,
crops, pets, livestock, gardens, or public areas. Wildlife may threaten human health or safety by spreading
3
diseases, through direct attacks, or accidentally.
PERVIOUS NONTURF BUFFER - a land area of a certain height and width comprised of sand, stone or
permeable pavers arranged in such a manner to allow for maximum percolation of storm water runoff into the
soil.
PRIORiTY WATER-BODY - a water-body within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Town of Southold listed
by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation on the Water-Body Inventory/Priority
Water-Bodies List, as amended.
SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT - those habitats which are essential to the survival of a large
portion of a particular fish or wildlife population; support rare or endangered species; are found at a very low
frequency within a geographic area; support fish or wildlife populations having significant commercial or
recreational value; or that would be difficult or impossible to replace.
1II. SEVERABILITY
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law as a whole or any part
ehereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided by law.
(Complete the certification in the paragraph that applies to the filing of this local law and
strike out that which is not applicable.)
4
1. (Final adoption by local legislative body only.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. 15 of 20 09 of thc
(Ccun.~j)(C!?j)(Town) ('.':.'.'.:.?,:) of SOUTHOLD was duly passed by the
TOWN BOARD on December 15 ,20 09 , in accordance with the applicable provisions of law.
2. (Passage by local legislative body with approval, no disapproval or re-passage after disapproval by the Elective
Chief Executive Officer*.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20
of the (County)(City)(Town)(Village) of was duly passed by the
on 20 ___, and was (approved)(not approved)(re-passed after
disapproval) by the and was deemed duly adopted on 20
in accordance with the applicable provisions of law.
(Final adoption by referendum.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20
of the (County)(City)(Town)(Village) of was duly passed by the
on 20 , and was (approvedXnot approved)(repassed after
disapproval) by the on 20 . Such local law was submitted
to the people by reason ora (mandatory)(permissive) referendum, and received the affirmative vote ora majority of
the qualified electors voting thereon at the (general)(special)(annual) election held on 20__, in
accordance with the applicable provisions of law.
4. (Subject to permissive referendum and final adoption because no valid petition was filed requesting
referendum.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20 of the
ll(h(County)(City)(Town)(Village) of was duly passed by the
on 20 , and was (approved)(not approved) (repassed after
'~disapproval) by the on 20__ Such local law was subject to
permissive referendum and no valid petition requesting such referendum was filed as of 20 , in
accordance with the applicable provisions of law.
* Elective Chief Executive Officer means or Includes the chief executive officer of a county elected on a county- wide
basis or, If there be none, the chairperson of the county legislative body, the mayor of a city or village, or the supervisor of
a town where such officer is vested with the power to approve or veto local laws or ordinances.
5
5. (City local law concerning Charter revision proposed by petition.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20 __
of the City of having been submitted to referendum pursuant to the provisions of
section (36)(37) of the Municipal Home Rule Law, and having received the affirmative vote ora majority of the qualified
electors of such city voting thereon at the (special)(general) election held on 20 __
became operative.
6. (County local law concerning adoption of Charter.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No of 20 __
of the County of State of New York, having been submitted to the electors
at the General Election of November 20 , pursuant to subdivisions 5 and 7 of section 33 of the
Municipal Home Rule Law, and having received the affirmative vote ora majority of the qualified electors of the cities of
said county as a unit and a majority of the qualified electors of the towns of said county considered as a unit voting at said
general election, became operative.
If any other authorized form of final adoption has been followed, please provide an appropriate certification.)
I further certify that I have compared the preceding local law with the original on file in this office and that the same is a
correct transcript there from and of the whole of such original local law, and was finally adopted in the manner indicated
in paragraph I , above.
Clerk of~e County legislative body. City. Town or
(Seal) Village Clerk or officer designated by local legislative body
Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk
Date: February 12~ 2010
(Certification to be executed by County Attorney, Corporation Counsel, Town Attorney, Village Attorney or
other authorized attorney of locality.)
DF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
1, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing local law contains t~oii ¢~.~and that all proper proceedings
have been had or taken for the enactment of the local law annexed
Signature ~ ~
Martin D. Finnegan, Town Attorney
Jennifer Andaloro~ Esq. Assistant Town Attorney
Title
Town of SOUTHOLD
Date:
February 12~ 2010
RESOLUTION 2009-974
ADOPTED
DOC ID: 5460
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2009-974 WAS
ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON
DECEMBER 15, 2009:
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk
County, New York, on the 22nd day of September 2009, a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in
relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency
Review Law" and
WHEREAS the Town Board of the Town of Southold held a public hearing on the aforesaid
Local Law at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, now
therefor be it
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby ENACTS the proposed
Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions
List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law" reads as follows:
LOCAL LAW NO. 2009
A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt
Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law".
BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows:
Purpose. The amendments to this local law are adopted under the authority of the
Municipal Home Rule Law and the Waterfront Revitalization of Coastal Areas and
Inland Waterways Act of the State of New York (Article 42 of the Executive Law). It
is intended that, by making additions to the "minor actions" exempt list, certain actions
that by their nature will not have an adverse effect on the coastal area and resources
will not require a review under this law, which will result in a more efficient review
process.
II. Chapter 268 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
§ 268-3. Definitions.
LANDSCAPED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width which is planted with
indigenous, drought tolerant, vegetation similar to that found within the immediate proximity of
the parcel. Vegetation shall be installed in sufficient densities to achieve ninety-five (95) percent
ground cover within two years of installation. Survival of planted vegetation shall be ninety (90)
percent for a period of three years. Maintenance activities within the buffer are limited to
removing vegetation which are hazardous to life and property, trimming tree limbs up to a height
Resolution 2009-974 Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
of fifteen feet (15') to maintain viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and establishing a four foot
(4') wide access path constructed of pervious material for access to the water-body.
MINOR ACTIONS - Include the following actions, which are not subject to review under this
chapter:
A. Maintenance or repair involving no substantial changes in an existing stxucture or
facility;
B. Replacement, rehabilitation or reconstruction of a structure or facility, in kind, on
the same site (in-place), including upgrading buildings to meet building or fire codes,
except for structures in areas designated by the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area (CEHA)
law where structures may not be replaced, rehabilitated or reconstructed without a permit
and shoreline erosion control structures (including, but not limited to, groins, jetties,
bulkheads, filled piers) located within Great Peconic Bay, Cutchogue Harbor, Little
Peconic Bay, Hog Neck Bay, Noyack Bay, Southold Bay, Shelter Island Sound, Pipes
Cove, Orient Harbor, Gardiners Bay, Long Island Sound, Fishers Island Sound and Block
Island Sound [excluding all creeks];
C. Repaving or widening of existing paved highways not involving the addition of new
travel lanes;
D. Street openings and right-of-way openings for the purpose of repair or maintenance of
existing utility facilities;
E. Maintenance of existing landscaping or natural growth, that is not located within 100 feet
of the boundary of a natural protective feature .... v ...................... ~a ..... .~
.... ~ ~c~, ..... :~ ..... cc~.~.4 within significant coastal fish and wildlife
habitat areas;
F. Granting of individual setback, lot line and lot area variances, except in relation to a
regulated natural feature or a bulkhead or other shoreline defense structure or any activity
within the CEHA;
G. Minor temporary uses of land having negligible or no permanent impact on coastal
resources or the environment;
H. Installation of traffic control devices on existing streets, roads and highways;
I. Mapping of existing roads, streets, highways, natural resources, land uses and ownership
patterns;
J. Information collection including basic data collection and research, water quality and
pollution studies, traffic counts, engineering studies, surveys, subsurface investigations
and soils studies that do not commit the agency to undertake, fund or approve any action;
K. Official acts of a ministerial nature involving no exercise of discretion, including building
where issuance is predicated solely on the applicant's compliance or noncompliance with
the relevant local building code;
L. Routine or continuing agency administration and management, not including new
programs or major reordering of priorities that may affect the environment;
M. Conducting concurrent environmental, engineering, economic, feasibility and other
studies and preliminary planning and budgetary processes necessary to the formulation of
a proposal for action, provided those activities do not commit the agency to commence,
engage in or approve such action;
N. Collective bargaining activities;
O. Investments by or on behalf of agencies or pension or retirement systems, or refinancing
existing debt;
P. Inspections and licensing activities relating to the qualifications of individuals or
Updated: 12/15/2009 2:45 PM by Lynda Rudder Page 2
Resolution 2009-974 Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
businesses to engage in their business or profession;
Q. Purchase or sale of furnishings, equipment'or supplies, including surplus government
property, other than the following: land, radioactive material, pesticides, herbicides,
storage of road de-icing substances, or other hazardous materials;
R. Adoption of regulations, policies, procedures and local legislative decisions in
connection with any action on this list;
S. Engaging in review of any part of an application to determine compliance with technical
requirements, provided that no such determination entitles or permits the project sponsor
to commence the action unless and until all requirements of this chapter have been
fulfilled;
T. Civil or criminal enforcement proceedings, whether administrative or judicial, including a
particular course of action specifically required to be undertaken pursuant to a judgment
or order, or the exercise ofprosecutorial discretion;
U. Adoption of a moratorium on land development or construction;
V. Interpreting an existing code, rule or regulation;
W. Designation of local landmarks or their inclusion within historic districts;
X. Emergency actions that are immediately necessary on a limited and temporary basis for
the protection or preservation of life, health, property or natural resources, provided that
such actions are directly related to the emergency and are performed to cause the least
change or disturbance, practicable under the circumstances, to coastal resources or the
environment. Any decision to fund, approve or directly undertake other activities after the
emergency has expired is fully subject to the review procedures of this chapter;
Y. Local legislative decisions such as rezoning where the Town Board determines
the action will not be approved;
Z. Split rail fences or fences used to control nuisance wildlife that do not interferh~g with the
public's fights of passage along the foreshore;
AA. Removal of a structure greater than 75 feet from a wetland;
BB. Additions to ~4ma4~~ an existing dwelling constituting less than 25 percent of
the existing structure where the addition is greater than 75 feet from a natural protective
feature, except where the parcel is located in a Coastal Erosion Hazard Area;
CC. Structures less than ! 90 250 square feet in size that are accessory to existing permitted
primary structures, and which accessory structures are greater than 50 feet from a
boundary of a natural protective feature, and freshwater or tidal wetlands .......... and,
DD. Construction or improvements of pervious residential driveways, parking areas or
walkways greater than 50 feet from a tidal or freshwater wetland;
EE. Upgrades to existing fuel tanks provided that erosion control measures are implemente&
FF. Cutting phragmites to greater than 12 inches and vegetative restoration provided that
native wetland vegetative species are not affected or disturbed in any manner;
GG. ~ Within all Town Creeks, replacement of existing bulkhead on the
applicant's property in the same location with a silt curtain employed deployed prior to
and during construction;
HH. Lot line changes, provided that the lot line change will not permit new development that
may have undue adverse impacts on wetlands, tidal waters or natural protective features;
Il. Additions to an existing building or rebuilt residential structure which results in no-net
increase in ground area coverage, except where the parcel is located in a Coastal Erosion
Hazard Areal
JJ. Construction or installation of drainage improvements for the retention of storm water
runoffin accordance with Chapter 236 Fr~;'ided
Updated: 12/15/2009 2:45 PM by Lynda Rudder Page 3
Resolution 2009-974 Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
~,,,v00 30 25
,v, ..... ,vv,~ 40 35
, ,,, ..... ,,~vO 75 50
· ~,~, ..... ,v,,,, 75 50
· , -v,,~,~ 30 20
on nnn ~n nnn 40 35 25
~v,,.~v 25 15 15
~.~+~.+u~- on nn~ 75 60 55
NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEATURE - A nearshore area, beach, bluff, primary dune,
secondary dune or wetland and their vegetation.
NATURAL VEGETATED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width where existing
vegetation occurs prior to the commencement of any grading or clearing activity. Vegetation
shall be maintained to achieve a minimum percent ground cover of ninety-five (95%) percent
To achieve the percent ground cover indigenous, drought tolerant vegetation shall be planted.
Survival of planted vegetation shall be ninety (90%) percent for a period of three (3) years.
Maintenance activities within the buffer are limited to removing vegetation which are hazardous
Updated: 12/15/2009 2:45 PM by Lynda Rudder Page 4
Resolution 2009-974 Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
to life and property, trimming tree limbs up to a height of fifteen feet (15') to maintain
viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and establishing a four foot (4') wide access path constructed
of pervious material for access to the water-body.
NEW YORK SCENIC BYWAY (North Fork Trail) - all that portion of the State highway
system known as State Route 25 in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, beginning at the
boundary between the Town of Riverhead and the Town of Southold, continuing northeasterly to
Orient Point and to the end of State Route 25, and all that portion of the local highway system
known as Sound Avenue be.m.'nning at the boundary between the Town of Riverhead and the
Town of Southold continuing easterly to the overlap of Sound Avenue and County Route 48 and
continuing along County Route 48 generally northeasterly to the intersection of County Route 48
and State Route 25 north of the Village of Greenport, Suffolk County.
NUISANCE WILDLIFE - Wildlife that is destructive and capable of damaging property such as
buildings, crops, pets, livestock, gardens, or public areas. Wildlife may threaten human health or
safety by spreading diseases, through direct attacks, or accidentally.
PERVIOUS NONTURF BUFFER - a land area of a certain height and width comprised of sand,
stone or permeable pavers arranged in such a manner to allow for maximum percolation of storm
water runoff into the soil.
PRIORITY WATER-BODY - a water-body within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Town of
Southold listed by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation on the
Water-Body Inventory/Priority Water-Bodies List, as amended.
SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT - those habitats which are essential to the
survival of a large portion of a particular fish or wildlife population; support rare or endangered
species; are found at a very low frequency within a geographic area; support fish or wildlife
populations having significant commercial or recreational value; or that would be difficult or
impossible to replace.
IlL SEVERABILITY
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any
court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law
as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided
by law.
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk
RESULT:
MOVER:
ADOPTED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
Thomas H. Wickham, Councilman
Updated: 12/15/2009 2:45 PM by Lynda Rudder Page 5
Resolution 2009-974 Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
SECONDER: Louisa P. Evans, Justice
AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Krupski Jr., Wickham, Evans, Russell
Updated: 12/15/2009 2:45 PM by Lynda Rudder Page 6
~. Ise"tTo MS. Linda J_asch I~rlnclp~l, L~lerk I
c~ /NYSDOS State Recor~'~ &Law t~ureau I
~= orPOBoxNo. 9'J washington
t Albany NY 12231-001 I
........................ ff ................. /
· Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Reet~cted Delivew is desired.
· Print your name and addmes on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
· Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Ms. Linda Lasch
Principal Clerk
Ni~aSDQS State Records &
w ~ureaa
One Commerce Plaza
99 Washington Avenue
Albany, NY 12231-001
FEB 1 8 2010
[] Address~
B, Received by (Pdnted Name) C. Date of Delivery
D. Isdeliv~yaddressdiffemflt fn3mitem 17 [] Yes
If YES. enter delivery address below: [] NO
3. Service Type
f~V~Certified Mail [] Express Mall
[] Registered [] Return Receipt for Merchandise
[] Insured Melt [] C.O.D.
4. Resbtcted Delivery? (Exlm Fee) [] Yes
7009 0820 0001 7820 5661
PS Form 3811, February 2004
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD
PUBLIC HEARING
December 1, 2009
7:35 PM
Present: Supervisor Scott Russell
Justice Louisa Evans
Councilman Thomas Wickham
Councilman Albert Krupski, Jr.
Councilman William Ruland
Councilman Vincent Orlando
Town Clerk Elizabeth Neville
Town Attorney Martin Finnegan
This hearing was opened at 7:50 PM
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, there has been
presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on
the 22nd day of September 2009, a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in relation to
Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency
Review Law" and
NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of
Southold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town
Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, on the 1st day of December, 2009 at
7:35 p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard.
The proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the
Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law" reads as
follows:
LOCAL LAW NO. 2009
A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt
Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law".
BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows:
Purpose. The amendments to this local law are adopted under the authority of
the Municipal Home Rule Law and the Waterfront Revitalization of Coastal
Areas and Inland Waterways Act of the State of New York (Article 42 of the
Executive Law). It is intended that, by making additions to the "minor actions"
exempt list, certain actions that by their nature will not have an adverse effect on
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 2
December 1, 2009
the coastal area and resources will not require a review under this law, which will
result in a more efficient review process.
II. Chapter 268 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
§ 268-3. Definitions.
LANDSCAPED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width which is planted
with indigenous, drought tolerant, vegetation similar to that found within the immediate
proximity of the parcel. Vegetation ~hall be installed in sufficient densities to achieve
ninety-five (95) percent ground cover within two years of installation. Survival of
planted vegetation shall be ninety (90) percent for a period of three years. Maintenance
activities within the buffer are limited to removing vegetation which are hazardous to life
and property, trirnminE tree limbs up to a height of fifteen feet (15') to maintain
wewsheds, replanting of vegetation and estabhsh~ng a four foot (4) w~de access pat
constructed of pervious material for access to the water-body.
MINOR ACTIONS - Include the following actions, which are not subject to review under
this chapter:
A. Maintenance or repair involving no substantial changes in an existing structure or
facility;
B. Replacement, rehabilitation or reconstruction of a structure or facility, in kind, on
the same site (in-place), including upgrading buildings to meet building or fire
codes, except for structures in areas designated by the Coastal Erosion Hazard
Area (CEHA) law where structures may not be replaced, rehabilitated or
reconstructed without a permit and shoreline erosion control structures (including,
but not limited to, groins, ietties, bulkheads, filled piers) located within Great
Peconic Bay, Cutchogue Harbor, Little Peconic Bay, Hog Neck Bay, Noyack
Bay, Southold Bay, Shelter Island Sound, Pipes Cove, Orient Harbor, Gardiners
Bay, Long Island Sound, Fishers Island Sound and Block Island Sound [excluding
all creeks];
C. Repaving or widening of existing paved highways not involving the addition of
new travel lanes;
D. Street openings and right-of-way openings for the purpose of repair or
maintenance of existing utility facilities;
E. Maintenance of existing landscaping or natural growth, that is not located within
100 feet of the boun of a protective natural feature ..... ~ ....................
· · ~,~ ~cr~,~ ' ' ignifi
~,~ ......,~ ........ r ~, ........ lo ~ ........ , or within s cant coastal
fish and wildlife habitat areas;
F. Granting of individual setback, lot line and lot area variances, except in relation to
a regulated natural feature or a bulkhead or other shoreline defense structure or
any activity within the CEHA;
G. Minor temporary uses of land having negligible or no permanent impact on
coastal resources or the environment;
H. Installation of traffic control devices on existing streets, roads and highways;
I. Mapping of existing roads, streets, highways, natural resources, land uses and
ownership pattems;
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
December 1, 2009
Ko
V.
W.
X.
Information collection including basic data collection and research, water quality
and pollution studies, traffic counts, engineering studies, surveys, subsurface
investigations and soils studies that do not commit the agency to undertake, fund
or approve any action;
Official acts of a ministerial nature involving no exercise of discretion, including
building where issuance is predicated solely on the applicant's compliance or
noncompliance with the relevant local building code;
Routine or continuing agency administration and management, not including new
programs or major reordering of priorities that may affect the environment;
Conducting concurrent environmental, engineering, economic, feasibility and
other studies and preliminary planning and budgetary processes necessary to the
formulation of a proposal for action, provided those activities do not commit the
agency to commence, engage in or approve such action;
Collective bargaining activities;
Investments by or on behalf of agencies or pension or retirement systems, or
refinancing existing debt;
Inspections and licensing activities relating to the qualifications of individuals or
businesses to engage in their business or profession;
Purchase or sale of furnishings, equipment or supplies, including surplus
government property, other than the following: land, radioactive material,
pesticides, herbicides, storage of road de-icing substances, or other hazardous
materials;
Adoption of regulations, policies, procedures and local legislative decisions in
connection with any action on this list;
Engaging in review of any part of an application to determine compliance with
technical requirements, provided that no such determination entitles or permits the
project sponsor to commence the action unless and until all requirements of this
chapter have been fulfilled;
Civil or criminal enforcement proceedings, whether administrative or judicial,
including a particular course of action specifically required to be undertaken
pursuant to a judgment or order, or the exercise of prosecutorial discretion;
Adoption of a moratorium on land development or construction;
Interpreting an existing code, rule or regulation;
Designation of local landmarks or their inclusion within historic districts;
Emergency actions that are immediately necessary on a limited and temporary
basis for the protection or preservation of life, health, property or natural
resources, provided that such actions are directly related to the emergency and are
performed to cause the least change or disturbance, practicable under the
circumstances, to coastal resources or the environment. Any decision to fund,
approve or directly undertake other activities after the emergency has expired is
fully subject to the review procedures of this chapter;
Local legislative decisions such as rezoning where the Town Board determines
the action will not be approved;
Split rail fences or fences used to control nuisance wildlife that do not interfering
with the public's rights of passage along the foreshore;
Removal ora structure greater than 75 feet from a wetland;
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
December 1, 2009
4
BB. Additions to ~e landward aide ef an existing dwelling constituting less than 25
pement of the existing structure where the addition is g/eater than 75 feet from a
natural protective feature, except where the parcel is located in a Coastal Erosion
Hazard Area;
CC. Structures less than !99 250 square feet in size that are accessory to existing
permitted primary structures, and which accessory structures are greater than 50
feet from a boundar~ of a natural protective feature, and freshwater or tidal
wetlands tht~l-weOamt;
DD. Construction or improvements of pervious residential driveways, parking areas or
walkways greater than 50 feet from a tidal or freshwater wetland;
EE. Upgrades to existing fuel tanks provided that erosion control measures are
implemented;
FF. Cutting phragmites to greater than 12 inches and vegetative restoration provided
that native wetland vegetative species are not affected or disturbed in any manner;
GG. ~ Within all Town Creeks, replacement of existing bulkhead on
the applicant's property in the same location with a silt curtain emptoy~d
deployed prior to and during construction; an~
HH. Lot line changes, provided that the lot line change will not permit new
development that may have undue adverse impacts on wetlands, tidal waters or
natural protective features;
II. Additions to an existing building or rebuilt residential structure which results in
no-net increase in ground area coverage, except where the parcel is located in a
Coastal Erosion Hazard Area;
JJ. Construction or installation of drainage improvements for the retention of storm
water runoff in accordance with Chapter 236, provided that such improvements
are located more than 50 feet from the boundary of the natural protective feature;
and
KK. Residential structures not located within the CEHA/or adiacent to a New York
State Designated Scenic Byway, a scenic view shed important to the community
or within a VE/AE Flood Zone Designation and which complies with the
following minimum buffer width tables:
Table 1. Wetland Buffer Table for New Residential Structures located
adjacent to New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation Priority Water Body (select one).
Minimum Buffer Width
Lot Area (sq. ft.) Landscaped Natural Vegetated
0-20,000 30 25
20,000-40,000 40 35
40,000-60,000 75 50
60,000-80,000 75 50
GreaterthanS0,000 100 75
Table 2. Wetland Buffer Table for New Residential Structures (select one)
Minimum Buffer Width
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
December 1, 2009
Lot Area (sq. fi.) Non-turf Landscaped Natural Vegetated
0-20,000 30 20 20
20,000-40,000 40 35 25
40,000-60,000
60,000-80,000
Greater than 80,000
50 45 35
75 65 55
100 100 75
Table 3.
Wetland Buffer Table for Existing or Rebuilt Residential
Structures (select one).
Minimum Buffer Width
Lot Area(sq. fi.) Non-turf Landscaped Natural Vegetated
0-20,000 25 15 15
20,000-40,000 30 25 25
40,000-60,000 40 35 30
60,000-80,000 60 55 45
Gre~erthan80,000 75 60 55
NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEATURE - A nearshore area, beach, bluff, primary dune,
secondary dune or wetland and their vegetation.
NATURAL VEGETATED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width where
existing vegetation occurs prior to the commencement of any grading or clearing activity.
Vegetation shall be maintained to achieve a minimum pement ground cover of ninety-
five (95%) percent. To achieve the percent ground cover indigenous, drought tolerant
vegetation shall be planted. Survival of planted vegetation shall be ninety (90%) percent
for a period of three (3) years. Maintenance activities within the buffer are limited to
removing vegetation which are hazardous to life and property, trimming tree limbs up to
a height of fifteen feet (15') to maintain viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and
establishing a four foot (4') wide access path constructed of pervious material for access
to the water-body.
NEW YORK SCENIC BYWAY (North Fork Trail) - all that portion of the State highway
system known as State Route 25 in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, beginning at
the boundary between the Town of Riverhead and the Town of Southold, continuing
northeasterly to Orient Point and to the end of State Route 25, and all that portion of the
local highway system known as Sound Avenue beginning at the boundary between the
Town of Riverhead and the Town of Southold continuing easterly to the overlap of Sound
Avenue and County Route 48 and continuing along County Route 48 generally
northeasterly to the intersection of County Route 48 and State Route 25 north of the
Village of Greenport, Suffolk County.
NUISANCE WILDLIFE - Wildlife that is destructive and capable of damaging property
such as buildings, crops, pets, livestock, gardens, or public areas. Wildlife may threaten
human health or safety by spreading diseases, through direct attacks, or accidentally.
PERVIOUS NONTURF BUFFER - a land area of a certain height and width comprised
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 6
December 1, 2009
of sand, stone or permeable pavers arranged in such a manner to allow for maximum
percolation of storm water runoff into the soil.
PRIORITY WATER-BODY - a water-body within the jurisdictional boundaries of the
Town of Southold listed by the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation on the Water-Body Inventory/Priorit~ Water-Bodies List, as amended.
SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT - those habitats which are essential to
the survival of a large portion of a particular fish or wildlife population; support rare or
endangered species; are found at a very low frequency within a geographic area; support
fish or wildlife populations having significant commercial or recreational value; or that
would be difficult or impossible to replace.
III. SEVERABILITY
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by
any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the
validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be
unconstitutional or invalid.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as
provided by law.
We are proposing to put these in the law to avoid having to go through the lengthy
LWRP process for these particular items. I have in the file a notice that this has appeared
in the Suffolk Times as a legal, sworn on the 23rd of November. It has appeared on the
Town Clerk's bulletin board despite the fact that we don't see the bulletin board out
there. I have a note here from Mark Terry, the LWRP coordinator and also principal
planner here. 'The Board of Trustees reviewed the amendments to the minor exempt
actions list of the LWRP and would like to comment on these proposed amendments.'
Excuse me, I beg your pardon. This is from the Southold Town Board of Trustees. It is
addressed to Mark Terry. 'The Board suggests that in relation to properties that are in our
jurisdiction (that means the Trustee's jurisdiction) the current proposed buffer tables
would eliminate any yard areas and in most cases would be impossible to meet the
criteria. Therefore this would be putting all applications before LWRP and making the
process even more complicated and more time consuming for both applicants and staff.
The majority of the Board recommends that these tables he used as a best management
practice tool, not as tables in regard to LWRP minor exemptions. Currently the Board of
Trustees reviews each application as it comes in and the decision of the size of the buffer
is determined by many factors, for example, neighboring buffers, topographical aspects,
distance between existing buildings and the end of the wetlands. We find this method to
be successful. With regard to fences used to control nuisance wildlife, we suggest that
this is not put in place until the Town Board comes up with specifications on such
fences.' What I think the Trustees are saying here, with regard to fences, we suggest this
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 7
December 1, 2009
not be part of this law that we are enacting until we come up with sp_ecifications on such
fences. Is that what the memo says?
JILL DOHERTY: We are just, we don't know if that is the fight time to put that in here
now where everybody still is kind of confused on the nuisance fences that are popping
up. Right now you have to go to the Building Department, Zoning Board and Trustees
and LWRP but nobody really has an answer of you know, it is not allowed, these 8 foot
high fences and until we come up with the, you know, unified specifications for these we
should not be starting to stick them in our code. We should figure it out first and then
have a unified in every department, have the same things. Specifications. That is all we
are saying.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Okay but this law, as I understand it, proposes to put
certain factors into the LWRP and define them as a minor action so that it doesn't go
through the whole review process.
MS. DOHERTY: Right.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Fences are one of those things that are now being
proposed. Do the Trustees support removing it from that lengthy LWRP process?
Fences? Or would you rather leave it where it is?
MS. DOHERTY: We support removing it from the LWRP process depending on what
the Town Board specifies in the future. You know, if its, if you complicate it, we are
saying let's figure it out first before we start sticking it here in the code or here in the
code.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Okay. Thank you. I have a letter received by the Town
on November 30 from the county department of Planning, 'pursuant to the requirements
of sections of the Suffolk County administrative code, this application which has been
submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is considered to be a matter for
local determination as there is no apparent significant countywide or inter-community
aspect to it.' And a memo from Mark Terry to the Supervisor and the Town Board on
this proposed law. This is dated November 30. 'The proposed amendments exempt so
called minor actions from local waterfront revitalization program coastal consistency
review that integrate the best management practices into the design and or are
insignificant in scale, practice or are located at a certain distance. Through compliance of
the identified setbacks for best managed practices, the proposed actions meet or further
the policies and the sub policies of the LWRP and are therefore exempt from review by
the coordinator. The discretion of the Board's to review applications to the Southold
Town code remains in full effect. It is important to note that the wetland buffer tables,
tables 1 and 3, proposed within the amended local law were developed to exempt
residential applications not located adjacent to New York State scenic byways, scenic
view sheds important to the community or within coastal erosion hazard areas or VEAE
fold zones. Residential applications within these areas are subject to numerous other
policies and sub policies. The wetland buffer tables, together with other amendments
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
December 1, 2009
proposed meet and further the policy 6.3 which protect and restore tidal and freshwater
wetlands and mom specifically a sub policy outlined below, and there are several
different policies, in fact there are five of them listed down below. Based on all of the
above, the local law that is under consideration tonight was reviewed against chapter 268,
the waterfront consistency review of the town and the LWRP policy standards. Based
upon the information provided on the consistency assessment form, submitted to this
department, as well as the records available to me, it is my recommendation that the
proposed action consistent with the denoted following policy standards and therefore is
consistent with the LWRP.' And there are several policies that are referred to. Finally a
memo from the Planning Board, Martin Sidor chair, dated November 30th. 'The Planning
Board has reviewed the above proposed legislation and fully supports the amendments,
recognizing that the changes streamline the application process and exempt certain
applications such as lot lines and activities that pose insignificant impacts to LWRP goals
and policies.' I have in front of me a short environmental assessment form in the file and
that completes the stuff in the file.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Would anybody like to come up and address the Town
Board on this particular public hearing? Jill?
JUSTICE EVANS: Are you going to talk about the buffer stuff?. Because that is what I
don't understand.
JILL DOHERTY, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEE: Yes, that is what I want to. In
reviewing these changes, the Board of Trustees agrees with most of these changes
(inaudible) and we have been working with Mark and we talked to Mark about the
buffers and it is a difficult thing to explain and so Mark has come up with a scale but we
feel it is not, the way it is written up, the way it is written up is not a practical use. In
other words, for us to go through the process, it is going to make it more difficult and it's
not, I mean, I can't even explain it, so imagine trying to explain it to our applicants on the
buffers. If they meet this criteria, they don't have to go to LWRP. Most of the properties
in this town will not meet this criteria, so they will have to go to LWRP. Most of the
properties with existing buildings on it don't have the space between the building and the
wetland to have this buffer and they wouldn't meet these, so they would have to go to
LWRP. Then, what happens is Mark does his review and he would either find it
inconsistent or he would find it consistent and recommend the width of the buffer and
then if we don't agree with that width, meaning the Trustees, then we would have to
come up with a way why we find it consistent. And the reasoning of the width of the
buffer we are coming up with. And it just kind of puts us back and forth with each other
and it is not helping the applicant. It is not helping the process. We are trying to smooth
out the process here and make less govemment and it seems to be making more.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Where did the numbers come from? Because I am reading
from the memo here from Mark Terry to Supervisor Scott Russell and it directly quotes a
section of the LWRP and there is a subsection, policy 6.3, protect and restore tidal and
freshwater wetlands subsection d, okay, and it talks about buffers, adequate buffers,
alright? The adequacy of the buffer depends on the following factors, direction and flow
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
December 1, 2009
9
of surface water between use and adjacent or nearby wetlands. Buffer widths may be
reduced in areas where drainage patterns normally do not lead directly to the wetlands
where adverse effects to the wetland, other than those due to runoff, are not likely. So
that says there you can't put a number on it. You have to go and determine it in the field.
MS. DOHERTY: Right.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: So how can you put a number on this? Where did these
numbers come from?
MS. DOHERTY: I don't know. I would defer that question to Mark Terry but that is our
point exactly is that it just makes it too confusing. It is just too much in there and we
need to make it simpler, the wording.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: It is actually contrary to the LWRP.
MS. DOHERTY: Right. Right.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Jill, when you are finished, I would like to ask Mark if he
could explain how these buffer tables actually work.
MS. DOHERTY: Sum. If you have any other questions, you can let Mark explain.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: We can call on you again.
MARK TERRY, SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD: Good evening. The
question was where did the buffer tables come from? Over the past few months, the
LWRP coordinating council and the LWRP coordinator, myself, have researched buffer
science across the country. It is an inexact science. Basically what it says is the wider
the buffer and the more dense in species composition within the buffer makes it a more
effective buffer. So in an attempt to reduce the number of applications that come through
the LWRP process, we said okay, why don't we set the rules at the door and tell the
applicants what we are looking for. So if you can meet the 25 foot buffer and it is a
natural vegetative buffer which you leave up your existing vegetation or it is a landscaped
buffer, you get to bypass the LWRP process. I no don't have to spend the hours doing it,
writing the review and it goes up to the Trustees. Now these buffer tables were proposed
with a sense of reasonable distance from a water body or a top of bluff and I must say,
they are on paper but in practice as we go through them, they are certainly amendable.
So if the Board would like to put them in as bmp's over the next couple of months or half
year, six months, we can move forward in that direction and see if they will work in some
properties. Like Jill said, they are not going to apply everywhere. They will apply where
the (inaudible) flood zone occurs, if the applicant says, okay, I will put a 25 foot natural
vegetative buffer in and I don't have to go through the review process, fine. (inaudible)
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: You suggested we could, if we wanted to, put this in as a
best management practice rather than putting it in the code the way it is drafted?
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 10
December 1, 2009
MR. TERRY: Right.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: If we did that, all applications would have to be LWRP
reviewed, isn't that right?
MR. TERRY: That is correct. What I would do though is I would have a much shorter
review. I would say, provide a buffer (inaudible) leave it up to the Trustees to start
implementing (inaudible) memorandum of agreement and then we will move on from
there. I know the policy is being furthered ....
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: I see. I see.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: That is acceptable.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: It is acceptable but I would still support putting it right
into the law and exempting them entirely from review, provided they meet the table...
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: See, the better way, what Mark suggested is to put it in as
best management practices and then let the Trustees and Mark who is the coordinator,
review this over a period of time and then refine it into something that is even better.
MR. TERRY: The point is to get the widest, most effective buffer up against the water
bodies. Once that is accomplished, they will still need further LWRP ....
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But as section 6.3 and the subsection D 5 states, other
management measures for design alternatives to protect wetlands from adverse affects
where site constraints do not allow sufficient buffer width, so I am sure the Trustees as
they did before, back in the day, take into account different strategies to control upland
runoff, besides the buffer width. So if you have got, you know, drywells and gutters in
the house that run directly on to the lawn that run directly overboard and you put in a
buffer and you contain your drywell runoff, that significantly contributes to the amount
volume of runoff, then that is furthering the policies. But it might not give you the buffer
width that is required in the table and yet you don't need that because you have reduced
your runoff through other measures, so you...
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Just so we understand though, the buffer width in the table is
not required, it is simply required to get a pass. From the LWRP coordinator review.
The Trustees are still very much a part of this process. So all those factors and those
mitigating factors and steps that we can take, are still very much part of the application
process with the Trustees. It is just that it is an application that doesn't have to go to
Mark. And one less bureaucratic review. No offense on the bureaucratic, you look
smashing in your power yellow tie. But that is the reality. It is an imperfect, you know,
it is a science.
MR. TERRY: The key, Al, is that the chapter 275 still applies, discretion still applies.
This is taking a policy and saying, okay, if you come in, you meet the policy with this
buffer, if you can fit it within your site plan...
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 11
December 1, 2009
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: If you can't, we are no different.
JUSTICE EVANS: You don't have to have the LWRP part of it but you still have to
have the Trustee part of it.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Mmmhmm.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: The idea, I thought, was to reduce the volume of work that
goes through LWRP?
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Yes.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: But I understand, you know, if there is an interest in tabling
this to revisit the tables, that is fine with me. But I don't want to lose the other parts or
the other goals that are here which is to get some of this stuff that is really unnecessary
out of LWRP review. You know, that is really what the goal is, to just take some of the
stuff out of the aegis of the LWRP. But I don't have an aversion to tabling if we want to
take another shot at those tables to better understand them.
COUNCILMAN ORLANDO: Refine them and work on them a little bit.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Yeah, that is fine.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: I have a few other questions if we are done with the table
discussion. Dave has a comment.
DAVE BERGEN, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEE: With regard to the table discussion,
first off, I want to commend Mark on the job he has done on this. I think he has done a
great job and commend the Town Board also for trying to achieve the goal of reducing
the number of applications or projects that have to go through LWRP review because it is
making government simpler by doing that. I think, Al, you hit the nail on the head.
Much of what I was prepared to say, you have already covered with the research you
have done. I also felt that if these tables were just listed as best management practices so
that the applicant can see what our goals are and see if their properties can meet those
goals, taking into consideration all the different factors that that property has then this is
something that could be utilized, I think would be very good for the town. But did not
have these written as, as Tom said, as in a code rather best management practices.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: I, I am surprised because I had always thought the
Trustees were among, in the vanguard of those that would like to make the whole LWRP
process simpler and less involved with people.
MR. BERGEN: Absolutely.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: I understand the content of your comment to not go in
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 12
December 1, 2009
that direction ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Well, it is just in a different way and a more complete and
meaningful way. What I would recommend is deleting section KK, which I believe is the
entire reference to the tables and setbacks, but the other aspects of the LWRP adopting
tonight, ton continue the amendment of the other aspects of the LWRP. But striking KK
and then we will take up the issues of the bmp's ....
COUNCILMAN ORLANDO: A lot of acronyms flying around. Bmp and KK...
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Have you given much thought how to incorporate them
as best management practices in the language of the law that we have?
MR. TERRY: Within the language ....
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: I mean, we have got a law in front of us with a public
hearing tonight, we are going to ....
MR. TERRY: They were proposed as your residential structure is located adjacent to a
water body then your buffer has to be, your minimum buffer should be x amount of feet
wide. That is the way (inaudible) but incorporated as far as (inaudible) that would be
difficult. There has got to be an agreement between I guess the program and council with
the Trustees. Inaudible.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: You know what makes sense and Albert, inaudible and
yourself suggested that this can be incorporated in another way which will still make the
process simpler and easier, the bmp's. I don't have a problem with that. I suggest that
we just strike that section KK and move on with the rest.
JUSTICE EVANS: If you keep it in there, you are just exempting them from the LWRP
review.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: That is right.
JUSTICE EVANS: So I don't understand why you take it out. Anything else that falls
under the LWRP review and the Trustees still have review of the whole thing. It is just
one less step for the applicant.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Peggy, do you want to comment?
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: I don't think necessarily because if you had, let me just
take a shot at this, if you have an existing home and you rebuild it but you can't meet
because of your lot size, you don't have to meet a specific number, you have to go out in
the field, the Trustees have to go out in the field and review it. Say you redo your
bulkhead during the course of it and you put in a 15 foot non turf buffer, you have
complied ....
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 13
December 1, 2009
JUSTICE EVANS: But you are still going to have to go through LWRP.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But you have complied with it by doing that. But if you
put these numbers in here, then you haven't complied with it because then you need a 30
foot buffer ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: If you take the whole table out, you still have to go through
LWRP one way or the other.
JUSTICE EVANS: Exactly. But if you leave it in, at least some people ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: It might be too tiny a step but it takes a step in the right
direction if it is schooling us from LWRP review.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Let's hear from the people who have to deal with it.
JUSTICE EVANS: Do you understand what I am trying to say?
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: I agree with you.
PEGGY DICKERSON, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEE: I just have to come up and say
that for one of the last times. I do agree some of the wording needs to be worked on,
however, Al, I think you are being very optimistic as you usually are, that after 8 years of
being out in the field and discussing buffers its sometimes difficult when someone is
saying to you, I don't want this much of my lawn to give up, I would rather have this
much. And you go back this way and you go back this way and then there are LWRP
requirements and that is this wide and the applicant wanted, so it becomes a discussion
and this brings it to something more specific. I think the other thing that has happened
over the last eight years is that the more times we have had standards to look at, that have
been recommended by Mark Terry and have been based on science, the more applicants
are coming in and they have already met those standards because they are aware of them
and so I think that what this does, as Mark says, is giving the applicants an idea, as
Louisa was saying, what is a buffer and what is the best buffer? The science says the
widest and it is hard to take lawns away from applicants but that is what the
recommendation is and I think this chart gives us those details that are needed. As
Louisa said again and Tom, this is just an exemption. If people come in, they have new
construction, they can go to this chart and say, okay, we are going to follow it and we are
exempt.
JUSTICE EVANS: It only exempts you from the LWRP, right?
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: That is right. It is not exactly a pass to a building permit.
MS. DICKERSON: But I think it also emphasizes the importance of buffers which I
think sometimes is misunderstood and again, over the eight years of having many a many
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 14
December 1, 2009
buffer discussion, more times than not I would like to see them wider and it doesn't
always end up that way, so I think these details are important.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: I do have one question about them, I don't know if you can
answer it Peg or if Mark has to answer it, it says adjacent residential structures located
adjacent to the New York state designated scenic byway, now does that mean that, do
these, I don't know what that means. What are the requirements here?
MR. TERRY: It says residential structures that are not located within the CEHA because
of other policies that deal with that...
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Right.
MR. TERRY: The New York state scenic byway because of other policies that deal with
that and the VEAE flood zone because of other policies that deal with that, if you come in
and you are not located in those three areas and you put in a 25 foot natural vegetated
buffer on a 0 to 25,000 square foot lot, you are exempt from the LWRP and gutters and
leaders and pervious driveway, you are exempt from the LWRP and you go through the
Board of Trustees and they can, per the policies which is their charge, this is coming
through as a recommendation, they can per their policies by even manipulating the site
plan further with bmp's.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But I don't, see I don't understand where this comes in
with scenic view shed important to the community. Who is determining that?
MR. TERRY: Scenic view shed important to the community, that is public parks, that,
we determine that. Like if you have a park district on the water, there may be a very
large structure going up against it, things like that. And we didn't think that it was
prudent to exempt those type of applications from the LWRP process because other
policies would comment on that type of application.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But, so I don't understand, if you live across the street from
a town or municipally owned piece of property, then someone could object to your
putting on anything? Doing anything.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I am just disappointed...
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: I don't understand that.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: The LWRP did not create that scenario. Adoption of scenic
byways and other programs over the years has.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: This is separate from scenic byway even. This is a scenic
view shed important to the community. I am just trying to wonder who is going to make
that ....
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 15
December 1, 2009
COUNCILMAN ORLANDO: That is open for interpretation.
MR. TERRY: That is open for interpretation. However, I have...
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But someone has got to pull the trigger on that and say this
is important and they shouldn't go that far. Who is going to make that determination?
That is what I want to know.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: That is something that we need to ferret out. You know,
legislation that has been passed historically at this Board level by previous boards. I
think people are confusing the LWRP as being the new law. It is not, it is the collection
of all the existing laws.
JUSTICE EVANS: Well, it is a concern of some of the Trustees that by putting this
buffer as an exemption that people that come in for permits will feel like that is giving
them a bye all the way through, then the Trustees have no say in changing what they are
doing?
COUNCILMAN ORLANDO: It will still go through the Trustees, they just don't get the
LWRP review.
JUSTICE EVANS: I don't understand, I am confused.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Again, we are taking steps to exempt things. This doesn't,
you know, the New York state, we have the scenic by-ways, there are policies in place
that already govern that, that we didn't dare (inaudible) but yeah, we need to get to the
bottom of that. But again, these are the things that we are trying to get, it may be baby
steps but steps to get them out from under the LWRP review. Dave?
MR. BERGEN: If I could just attempt to address Louisa's questions from my
perspective. When projects come in for review, obviously I think it is best for both the
owner of the property and the town if it is either determined to be consistent or exempt.
It is when it is determined to be inconsistent, that's when the work begins on trying to,
the Board, whether it is the ZBA or whether it is the Trustees or whoever, trying to bring
it in to consistency. And when we have the table that states here are minimum buffers,
the concern that I had was, again, if these are not looked as best management practices
but as tables that we are going to go by, when applications come in that are reviewable, in
other words they wouldn't fall under here, they are reviewable, and then this table is used
saying well, these are the buffers you need, if not they are going to be determined to be
inconsistent.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: No, that is not what it says.
MR. BERGEN: I am looking towards the future.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: But that is not what this law says.
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 16
December 1, 2009
MR. BERGEN: I understand that.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: In fact, strike that, then it is all inconsistent anyway.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Right.
MR. BERGEN: Inaudible.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: But if we strike the section KK, then it is all inconsistent
anyway and ends up on Mark's pile.
JUSTICE EVANS: It is not saying that you have to meet these standards to be
consistent, it is just saying if you meet these standards, you are exempt.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: You get a bypass.
MR. BERGEN: Yes and I understand that. I understand that. I just, when we get
through the tables, I wanted to return to one other section in here.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: If we get through the tables.
MS. DOHERTY: I just want to try to clarify what Dave is trying to say is once these
tables are set in here, they need to be more clarified before we have them set because as
we work through them and find out what works and what doesn't, it is just hard to
explain. We feel it is going to be hard to work with and to find it inconsistent and then
how are we supposed to mitigate that and try to find it because there are so many areas
and properties in town that don't meet this...
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Under the current code...
MS. DOHERTY: Right.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: They are inconsistent now, without the exemptions.
MS. DOHERTY: Right.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: They are all inconsistent, so you do the mitigation and then
you do all of that now ....
MS. DOHERTY: But we don't have, excuse me for interrupting but we don't have exact
guidelines, we go by our policies and what our review is.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: And you should continue to do that. We are not changing
anything about that. The Trustees should still use exactly the same criteria that they used
before and we are not trying to interfere with that. What we are saying is if an applicant
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 17
December 1, 2009
comes in and just fits within this table, you can deal with it but it doesn't have to go
through the LWRP process.
MS. DOHERTY: Right, I understand that but, okay, I mean, maybe we can just take out
KK for now and try to reword it to make it clear because we work with the public directly
and we know this is going to be confusing to them. It is confusing to us and it is going to
be confusing to them. So we need to work on the wording of this, to make it more clear
and simpler and I think that is what our point on this thing is. It is not so much that we
are not saying we are against buffers, we just put a 50 foot buffer on a property a couple
of months ago, so it is not the buffer and the science behind the buffer, it is the wording
of this and the way we are going to use it.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: It is really terms such as consistent, inconsistent, I know that
has been a source of confusion for people since this had been adopted by the previous
Board. Would anyone like to address the Board on any of the other aspects? Yes, Gail.
GAlL WICKHAM: Good evening. Thank you. My name is Gall Wickham from
Cutchogue and I have to tell you that if I were addressing you after my first reading of
this, I would probably be screaming at you. I am not going to do that but I have to say ....
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: That wouldn't help at all.
MS. WICKHAM: No, I know. I know. I read this much more differently, from a
different perspective from what I am hearing and I certainly understand that you want to
comply with the title of this to simplify and expand on the definition of minor exempt
actions and take them out but the LWRP is a monster of govemment regulation and I
think that what has happened here is in trying to define what is exempt you have set a
very complicated and exhaustive list of definitions that vastly increase the regulation that
the LWRP can impose upon a private property owner and it is not just waterfront
property, it is scenic byways properties on the Main Road, Route 48, Sound Avenue. So
in trying to exempt things, that is a good thing because it gives you something that Mark
can put off his desk and not even have to have come on his desk. But then when you say,
except or unless, you are adding this whole other umbrella of regulations that really
restrict things like being able to mow your lawn and when you put a number on the table
and say if you have a two acre piece of property, 100 foot buffer is the standard for
LWRP consistency. This is going to mean something to somebody in a regulation and
now I am going to have to fight you to say it should be less than 100 feet. So you are
imposing a standard that I think is not necessarily matched in science or what the
environmental protection might be depending on the slope to the bay, there are a number
of other examples here, for instance, as I see it, this whole protective natural feature
definition. You are setting up setbacks from a whole other category of demarcation that I
don't quite understand. You're apparently, we are losing the right to replace a bulkhead
on the bay because you said it is only within town creeks that you can replace the
bulkheads without going to LWRP, so and what is interesting about this KK, another
thing, that scenic view shed is really scary to me, I don't know what that is. But that
should be ....
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 18
December 1, 2009
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: It doesn't say what it means.
MS. WICKHAM: It doesn't and just because I happen to have a piece of property I want
to put an addition on on the Main Road that people like to look at, is somebody going to
tell me I can't do it because it is going to interrupts the view of somebody passing by. I
don't think so, it is not legal to do that. The public doesn't have an easement view.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I think people badly misunderstand this law and the existing
law that is out there. Incidentally, the current setback for all waterfront properties is 100
feet. Everything is 100 feet. The Trustees have the right to vary that.
MS. WICKHAM: They regulate what that means. They have a right to look at it and
decide.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: And they still would when we pass this. The idea is this is
only one, and I agree with you on the LWRP, it is a bureaucratic quagmire, it is awful.
But the idea was to remove some of the LWRP review from some of the applications.
We don't create anything new here. The scenic byways was passed in, I believe the mid
80's.
MS. WICKHAM: I get that. I think that is a laudable goal, I just think that it went
overboard in trying to define it but, because you do have all kinds of other regulations in
this area. You have the town Trustees and some extent the Planning and ZBA, you have
the...
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: It doesn't create new regulation, the scenic byways was
created long before the LWRP was.
MS. WICKHAM: I understand that but it is another gamut of regulation that is just out
of control.
JUSTICE EVANS: That exist.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Yeah, that exist.
MS. WICKHAM: I know it exists. I know it exists. That is the problem. Maybe we ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: It is a problem, it certainly is. But this didn't create it, it
doesn't advance it.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: In fact, this is...
MS. WICKHAM: I know it is an attempt to reduce it ....
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But you see, what you said about the scenic byway, if you
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 19
December 1, 2009
read KK, 'residential structures not located within a scenic view shed important to the
community' is you know, that would be exempt. Well, you are never going to have
anything built anywhere in this town, if someone, the neighbor is not going to say that is
an important view shed to me and so now it is not exempt. So in other words, nothing is
exempt.
MS. WICKHAM: Well, anyways, those are my preliminary comments.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: And so we can not pass the law and nothing is exempt and
we are back to square one.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: I think we should table it for two weeks and try to work
KK out better so that it doesn't, because, and the way it is, and you can disagree with me
Mark but doesn't that mean nothing would be exempt then? Because the neighbor is
going to say that is a scenic view shed that is important to me.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: You have to remember ....
MR. TERRY: The intent and the direction from the Town Board was ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: The reference to the scenic view shed which I understand all
the concems about, but those concerns needed to be raised when this thing was passed 20
years ago. That would be, generally two jurisdictions review scenic view sheds. The
Planning Board as part of the subdivision process or the Zoning Board of Appeals as the
result of an application. The Building Department does not review the scenic view shed.
They are not encumbered by that law. Therefore, a private property owner that wants to
build a house can still come in to the Building Department and get the building permit.
All this does would be saying, look, if there is an issue here for the Planning Board or the
Zoning Board of Appeals, the scenic view shed, we are not excluding that, we still want
Mark to look at it. Well, maybe we don't, we can exclude it entirely but you are still
stuck with that law. This doesn't create the law, it doesn't advance the law. I think there
is so much misunderstanding and that is the problem when they passed this LWRP, they
passed this at the 11th hour of a previous administration without any explanation to the
public at all. And tonight is just another example of how this whole thing was badly
misplayed.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Alright, but doesn't that, you know what I am saying if it is
our intent to exempt something, this doesn't exempt any residential structures. The way
it is written.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: But the Building Department doesn't review them on the
scenic view shed ....
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: No, it is not the Building Department, it would be the
LWRP.
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 20
December 1, 2009
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: No but who sends it? There has to be an agent who sends it
to Mark.
MR. TERRY: The Trustees, Planning.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: The Trustees...
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Or the Zoning Board of Appeals.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: So I think, I have a few other items in here that are little
items that I think should be changed but I would rather table this and try to meet and try
to make this, the KK section, work a little smoother so it works for the applicant and it
works for the Town. Because I don't think it works for anyone right now. But I do have
a few other small...
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I think there is probably a consensus here to table this but I
really want to hear what the public has to say. Would anybody else like to comment on
section KK of the LWRP, ASAP? (No response)
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: I have a couple of other comments.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I just want to make sure the public gets heard before we...
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Section 268-3 under minor actions E. The maintenance of
existing landscaping or natural growth. The new change is if it is not located within 100
feet of the boundary of a protective natural feature, it should say natural protective
feature I think anyway but I think that means you couldn't maintain your existing
landscaping or natural growth. I think everyone is inconsistent there. I think you really
have to strike out within 100 feet and just put that it is not located within a natural
protective feature. Or am I reading that wrong?
JUSTICE EVANS: You are saying you are exempt if it is not within that 100 foot
boundary?
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: What Albert is saying is, delete the 100 feet. Just say if it
is not within the protective feature itself.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Right.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Why do you need that 100 foot?
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Right. If it is existing landscaping, you should be able to
maintain it without LWRP review.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Yeah, I agree. I just don't know where that would be an
issue.
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 21
December 1, 2009
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Well, it is new. That is a new change. That's, it shouldn't,
yeah.
MR. BERGEN: Just to complicate that further, under 275 and I am sorry I don't have a
copy of 275 in front of me, routine maintenance in the existing landscape and natural
growth is exempt from even an application for a permit.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Yeah.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: So there is no need to raise objection to the reference.
MR. BERGEN: There is no need for review because there is no need for a permit.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Right. So could we strike part of that?
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Unless it is within the protective feature.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Yeah, right, unless it is within that protective feature then
you want to review it. But this is within 100 feet of it. Which shouldn't be reviewed.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Mark, can you comment on this?
COUNCILMAN ORLANDO: I don't think he wants to.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Unless I am reading it wrong. To me it seems like you are
going to need review. It is not going to be a minor action if it is within 100 feet of a
natural protective feature.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: It is just important to remember that these exemptions do not
add any new layers of review to the ....
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: No, this is a new, it is a change though.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: But it is still, there are no means for review because you
don't have to come in...
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But it shouldn't be changed then.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: I think we are going to have to table it.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Okay and there is one more, well, there are a few more
things here. Just, this is a nitpicking one, FF, cut phragmites to greater than 12 inches
and vegetative restoration. The changes provided that native wetland vegetation species
are not affected or disturbed in any manner, well, they will benefit from it. So they will
be affected. So maybe you say just not, that native wetland vegetative species are not
adversely affected or disturbed in any manner, alright? And then HH, no forget that, no,
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
December 1, 2009
22
JJ. This one doesn't make sense. Construction or installation of drainage improvements,
for the retention of stormwater runoff in accordance with chapter 236 provided that such
improvements are located more than 50 feet from the boundary of a natural protective
feature. See, most stormwater improvements are going to be closer than that because by
their nature, they can be located right adjacent to the natural protective feature. And
since they are stormwater improvements, they shouldn't really have to be reviewed.
JUSTICE EVANS: Well, but they are now anyway.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: They are reviewed now. What this does is it makes them
unreview ....
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: No, no, no, strike out the 50 feet.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: They are all reviewed by Mark...
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: No, no, no, no. No. if you leave the rest in, if you just put
construction or installation of drainage improvements for the retention of stormwater
runoff in accordance with chapter 236, that is it. So these would be exempt because you
are putting in a stormwater improvement. Take out the 50 feet because the, you are
making it more difficult already. You shouldn't have to review it because it is close to a
natural protective feature, that is maybe where you have to put the stormwater ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Under current code, am I required, if I want to install
stormwater mitigation 30, 40 feet away from a wetland boundary, do I need to come to
the Trustees?
UNIDENTIFIED: Inaudible
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Alright.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: We did it.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Do I need to come to Mark?
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Now you do.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Within the first 100 feet, right?
UNIDENTIFIED: Inaudible.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: So what we are saying is, we are cutting it in half. If you
want to do it, if you want to do it 51 feet out, you don't need to go to Mark.
JUSTICE EVANS: I know but...
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
December 1, 2009
23
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Yeah but where is the guide? You (inaudible) like water
wash, you have to go at the top of the ramp. So that is where it has to go. You couldn't
move it back to 51 feet.
JUSTICE EVANS: Al is saying don't go to Mark at all if it has to do with water runoff.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Just go to the Trustees.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Right.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Okay, Mark does that seem reasonable? It does to me if the
Trustees are already reviewing it but I think you are going to be giving people this
misunderstanding that somehow you can do it without review now, if we strike the ....
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: No, no.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Fifiy feet doesn't ....
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: I think this is just going to require another meeting.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: We are going to require a heck of a lot of clarification.
MR. TERRY: Scott, it is reasonable but chapter 236, I cross referenced all the chapters
for consistency with the town code with these applications, so in my detailed review, I do
pick up things and point them out to the Trustees for their benefit, as well as the Town's
benefit and the applicants benefit. So they don't get violations down the road. So that is
saying within chapter 236, provided such improvements are located 50 feet from the
boundary of a natural protective feature, I think it is qualified in chapter 236 as
somewhere, as 50 feet distance but I could double check that. And back to the outside
the 100 foot or within the 100 foot, we have coastal systems, we have a very large coastal
plain, some people clear within that coastal plain and then submit maintenance and
mitigation plans that they want to do different things with their property. That is where
we would catch that, in relation to those areas outside of Trustees jurisdictions, when we
review certain applications.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Alright, one more...
MR. TERRY: Inaudible, the Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: One more thing. Pervious non-turf buffer, a land area of a
certain height and width comprised of sand, stone or permeable pavers, range in such a
manner to allow for maximum percolation of stormwater runoff into the soil. Can we add
decking to that? Because some people put in you know, like landward of a bulkhead,
people put in decking and that acts as a you know, a non-turf buffer.
MR. TERRY: Inaudible. I guess we are going to code committee with this?
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 24
December 1, 2009
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Evidently. But I think people need to understand that a lot of
these laws have been around for a long time and when the LWRP reveals them for the
first time, people said oh, the LWRP created that law. It is not really how it worked and
then again, the failing of how it was set up.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Scott, instead of code committee, what about the LWRP
council as the venue to review this?
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Because I think at this point they have done their work, they
are certainly welcome to come to the code committee but it has to be a document that we
are ready to pass as a Board. Jill?
MS. DOHERTY: Just a comment on the decking. We have been allowing that, as you
know but we have the spacing of the decking (inaudible)
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Sure.
MS. DOHERTY: We can put that in so it is consistent with Trustee policy.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Sure. Yeah.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I just want to make sure that everybody has been heard on
the LWRP. Okay. Oh, Dave.
MR. BERGEN: Just one last item under Z, split rail fences or fences to control nuisance
wildlife, just to clarify when this, if this goes to the code committee if the code committee
will please consider current code because under chapter 275 currently you are not
allowed to put nuisance fencing down to the foreshore and I would like to see that
amended because of what is happening with deer over-running our population here, I
would like to see the code committee address that part of the code. So that nuisance
fencing is, in other words ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Then we should leave it in there because any change in the
legislation would automatically exempt...
MR. BERGEN: What we have kind of done is cart before the horse here. You know, we
have the code that says you are not allowed to have nuisance fencing down to the
foreshore yet you are saying that is exempt under the LWRP for review but right now it is
not allowed under code. So what I am saying is adjust the code.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Yeah but there are also other aspects where nuisance fencing
should be exempt. You are allowed to exceed 6 feet if you go to the Zoning Board of
Appeals, things like, in other words, there is already venues for those. That would
remove, the ZBA needs to send it to Mark etc.
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 25
December 1, 2009
MR. BERGEN: I am just talking about 275. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Okay. Any motions?
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: We might want to table it because the changes that come
out, we are going to get a lecture from Martin as to whether or not we can, we need to re-
advertise or not.
TOWN ATTORNEY FINNEGAN: I think we should adjourn it. Inaudible. We noticed
it 60 days ago because, depending on the changes, we may have to resubmit this whole
thing for review by the state.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But you might not.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL:
permission.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI:
make might not be substantial.
Don't forget we still have to run to Bill Sharp and get
But you might not have to re-advertise. The changes you
This public hearing was adjourned at 8:43 PM
This hearing was reopened at 4:53 PM
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I was going to ask if anybody wants to comment on the
exempt actions. We had a robust discussion a few weeks back on this. This is the LWRP
exemptions, the result of the robust discussion is we are literally striking all of section
KK from the original draft document. We have also removed any drainage system that is
being installed subject to the new code requirement, regardless of its location near a
wetland or fragile water body.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: If I could just add, the law that we are reviewing at this
time incorporates the measures that we, that went up to public hearing and some that we
have taken out that would be taken up at a future time by this Board or by the next Board
for inclusion as additional things that could be exempted from LWRP review.
BENJA SCHWARTZ: Benja Scwhartz, Cutchogue. If I could, if somebody could just
briefly explain the mechanism by which these exemptions will be applied? If the matter
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 26
December 1, 2009
subject to the exemptions will still be referred to the LWRP coordinator and he will make
the determination ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: No, the determination is, the determination is made by the
jurisdictional bodies, the reviewing bodies. The Planning Board, the Zoning Board of
Appeals and the Trustees; are typically the three that would review an action, an
application and then determine from the list of exemptions that it doesn't need to be
forwarded to the LWRP for review. It is the same jurisdictional bodies that make the
current determinations on review. You look confused or puzzled, can I help with that?
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: What this says is that the minor actions that we have
designated in this resolution would not have to be submitted for LWRP review. That is
to say, the action of the body or Board that takes the action is sufficient and it doesn't
need that additional level of review. The specific ones that we would exempt in this
resolution.
MR. SCHWARTZ: It makes some sense doing it that way, it just it requires all of the
referring Board's or committees or officers or whatever to understand all of the
exemptions. The mason I ask, I recently had some work done on my house and I just
replaced the window which is an action that is specifically exempted from the Trustees
jurisdiction and yet I was required to pay $50 to submit an application to the Trustees and
I received a letter from them confirming that the action was exempt. It didn't make any
sense for me. If they don't have jurisdiction, why do I have to apply for an exemption?
So I think the way you are doing it in this case makes more sense. That the referring
bodies who make the determination and the LWRP coordinator won't have anything to
do with it.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Thank you.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Would anybody else like to comment on this? (No response)
This heating was closed at 4:57 PM
~beth A Neville
Southold Town Clerk
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD
PUBLIC HEARING
December 1, 2009
7:35 PM
Present:
Supervisor Scott Russell
Justice Louisa Evans
Councilman Thomas Wickham
Councilman Albert Krupski, Jr.
Councilman William Ruland
Councilman Vincent Orlando
Town Clerk Elizabeth Neville
Town Attorney Martin Finnegan
This hearing was opened at 7:50 PM
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, there has been
presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on
the 22nd day of September 2009, a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in relation to
Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency
Review Law" and
NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of
Southold will bold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town
Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, on the 1st day of December, 2009 at
7:35 p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard.
The proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the
Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law" reads as
follows:
LOCAL LAW NO. 2009
A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt
Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law".
BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows:
Purpose. The amendments to this local law are adopted under the authority of
the Municipal Home Rule Law and the Waterfront Revitalization of Coastal
Areas and Inland Waterways Act of the State of New York (Article 42 of the
Executive Law). It is intended that, by making additions to the "minor actions"
exempt list, certain actions that by their nature will not have an adverse effect on
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 2
December 1, 2009
the coastal area and resources will not require a review under this law, which will
result in a more efficient review process.
II. Chapter 268 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
§ 268-3. Definitions.
LANDSCAPED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width which is planted
with indigenous, drought tolerant, vegetation similar to that found within the immediate
proximity of the parcel. Vegetation shall be installed in sufficient densities to achieve
ninety-five (95) percent ground cover within two years of installation. Survival of
planted vegetation shall be ninety (90) percent for a period of three years. Maintenance
activities within the buffer are limited to removing vegetation which are hazardous to life
and property, trimming tree limbs up to a height of fifteen feet (15') to maintain
viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and establishing a four foot (4') wide access path
constructed of pervious material for access to the water-body.
MINOR ACTIONS - Include the following actions, which are not subject to review under
this chapter:
A. Maintenance or repair involving no substantial changes in an existing structure or
facility;
B. Replacement, rehabilitation or reconstruction of a structure or facility, in kind, on
the same site (in-place), including upgrading buildings to meet building or fire
codes, except for structures in areas designated by the Coastal Erosion Hazard
Area (CEHA) law where structures may not be replaced, rehabilitated or
reconstructed without a permit and shoreline erosion control structures (including,
but not limited to, groins, jetties, bulkheads, filled piers) located within Great
Peconic Bay, Cutchogue Harbor, Little Peconic Bay, Hog Neck Bay, Noyack
Bay, Southold Bay, Shelter Island Sound, Pipes Cove, Orient Harbor, Gardiners
Bay, Long Island Sound, Fishers Island Sound and Block Island Sound ]excluding
all creeks];
C. Repaving or widening of existing paved highways not involving the addition of
new travel lanes;
D. Street openings and right-of-way openings for the purpose of repair or
maintenance of existing utility facilities;
E. Maintenance of existing landscaping or natural growth, that is not located within
100 feet of the boundary of a protective natural feature .... v .....................
...... ~, ..... v .......v ........................... , or in s n cant coa
fish and wildlife habitat areas;
F. Granting of individual setback, lot line and lot area variances, except in relation to
a regulated natural feature or a bulkhead or other shoreline defense structure or
any activity within the CEHA;
G. Minor temporary uses of land having negligible or no permanent impact on
coastal resources or the environment;
H. Installation of traffic control devices on existing streets, roads and highways;
I. Mapping of existing roads, streets, highways, natural resources, land uses and
ownership patterns;
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 3
December 1, 2009
J. Information collection including basic data collection and research, water quality
and pollution studies, traffic counts, engineering studies, surveys, subsurface
investigations and soils studies that do not commit the agency to undertake, fund
or approve any action;
K. Official acts of a ministerial nature involving no exercise of discretion, including
building where issuance is predicated solely on the applicant's compliance or
noncompliance with the relevant local building code;
L. Routine or continuing agency administration and management, not including new
programs or major reordering of priorities that may affect the environment;
M. Conducting concurrent environmental, engineering, economic, feasibility and
other studies and preliminary planning and budgetary processes necessary to the
formulation of a proposal for action, provided those activities do not commit the
agency to commence, engage in or approve such action;
N. Collective bargaining activities;
O. Investments by or on behalf of agencies or pension or retirement systems, or
refinancing existing debt;
P. Inspections and licensing activities relating to the qualifications of individuals or
businesses to engage in their business or profession;
Q. Purchase or sale of fumishings, equipment or supplies, including surplus
govemment property, other than the following: land, radioactive material,
pesticides, herbicides, storage of road de-icing substances, or other hazardous
materials;
R. Adoption of regulations, policies, procedures and local legislative decisions in
connection with any action on this list;
S. Engaging in review of any part of an application to determine compliance with
technical requirements, provided that no such determination entitles or permits the
project sponsor to commence the action unless and until all requirements of this
chapter have been fulfilled;
T. Civil or criminal enforcement proceedings, whether administrative or judicial,
including a particular course of action specifically required to be undertaken
pursuant to a judgment or order, or the exercise of prosecutorial discretion;
U. Adoption of a moratorium on land development or construction;
V. Interpreting an existing code, rule or regulation;
W. Designation of local landmarks or their inclusion within historic districts;
X. Emergency actions that are immediately necessary on a limited and temporary
basis for the protection or preservation of life, health, property or natural
resources, provided that such actions are directly related to the emergency and are
performed to cause the least change or disturbance, practicable under the
circumstances, to coastal resources or the environment. Any decision to fund,
approve or directly undertake other activities after the emergency has expired is
fully subject to the review procedures of this chapter;
Y. Local legislative decisions such as rezoning where the Town Board determines
the action will not be approved;
Z. Split rail fences or fences used to control nuisance wildlife that do not interfering
with the public's rights of passage along the foreshore;
AA. Removal of a structure greater than 75 feet from a wetland;
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
December 1, 2009
BB. Additions to ~an existing dwelling constituting less than 25
4
percent of the existing structure where the addition is greater than 75 feet from a
natural protective feature, except where the parcel is located in a Coastal Erosion
Hazard Area;
CC. Structures less than ! 99 250 square feet in size that are accessory to existing
permitted primary structures, and which accessory structures are greater than 50
feet from a boundary of a natural protective feature, and freshwater or tidal
wetlands tidal wetland;
DD. Construction or improvements of pervious residential driveways, parking areas or
walkways greater than 50 feet from a tidal or freshwater wetland;
EE. Upgrades to existing fuel tanks provided that erosion control measures are
implemented;
FF. Cutting phragmites to greater than 12 inches and vegetative restoration provided
that native wetland vegetative species are not affected or disturbed in any manner;
GG. t~ Within all Town Creeks, replacement of existing bulkhead on
the applicant's property in the same location with a silt curtain e~
deployed prior to and during construction; and
HH. Lot line changes, provided that the lot line change will not permit new
development that may have undue adverse impacts on wetlands, tidal waters or
natural protective features;
II. Additions to an existing building or rebuilt residential structure which results in
no-net increase in ground area coverage, except where the parcel is located in a
Coastal Erosion Hazard Area;
JJ. Construction or installation of drainage improvements for the retention of storm
water runoff in accordance with Chapter 236, provided that such improvements
are located more than 50 feet from the boundary of the natural protective feature;
and
KK. Residential structures not located within the CEHA/or adiacent to a New York
State Designated Scenic Byway, a scenic view shed important to the community
or within a VE/AE Flood Zone Designation and which complies with the
following minimum buffer width tables:
Table 1. Wetland Buffer Table for New Residential Structures located
adjacent to New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation Priority Water Body (select one).
Minimum Buffer Width
Lot Area (sq. ft.) Landscaped Natural Vegetated
0-20,000 30 25
20,000-40,000 40 35
40,000-60,000 75 50
60,000-80,000 75 50
GreaterthanS0,000 100 75
Table 2. Wetland Buffer Table for New Residential Structures (select one)
Minimum Buffer Width
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
December 1, 2009
Lot Area (sq. ft.) Non-turf Landscaped
0-20,000 30 20
Natural Vegetated
20
20,000-40,000 40 35 25
40,000-60,000 50 45 35
60,000-80,000 75 65 55
Greater ~an 80,000 100 100 75
5
Table 3.
Wetland Buffer Table for Existing or Rebuilt Residential
Structures (select one).
Minimum Buffer Width
Lot Area(sq. ft.) Non-turf Landscaped Natural Vegetated
0-20,000 25 15 15
20,000-40,000 30 25 25
40,000-60,000 40 35 30
60,000-80,000 60 55 45
Greaterthan80,000 75 60 55
NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEATURE - A nearshore area, beach, bluff, primary dune,
secondary dune or wetland and their vegetation.
NATURAL VEGETATED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width where
existing vegetation occurs prior to the commencement of any grading or cleating activity.
Vegetation shall be maintained to achieve a minimum percent ground cover of ninety-
five (95%) pement. To achieve the pement ground cover indigenous, drought tolerant
vegetation shall be planted. Survival of planted vegetation shall be ninety (90%) percent
for a period of three (3) years. Maintenance activities within the buffer are limited to
removing vegetation which are hazardous to life and property, trimming tree limbs up to
a height of fifteen feet (15') to maintain viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and
establishing a four foot (4') wide access path constructed of pervious material for access
to the water-body.
NEW YORK SCENIC BYWAY (North Fork Trail) - all that portion of the State highway
system known as State Route 25 in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, beginning at
the boundary between the Town of Riverhead and the Town of Southold, continuing
northeasterly to Orient Point and to the end of State Route 25, and all that portion of the
local highway system known as Sound Avenue beginning at the boundary between the
Town of Riverhead and the Town of Southold continuing easterly to the overlap of Sound
Avenue and County Route 48 and contilming along County Route 48 generally
northeasterly to the intersection of County Route 48 and State Route 25 north of the
Village of Greenport, Suffolk County.
NUISANCE WILDLIFE - Wildlife that is destructive and capable of damaging property
such as buildings, crops, pets, livestock, gardens, or public areas. Wildlife may threaten
human health or safety by spreading diseases, through direct attacks, or accidentally.
PERVIOUS NONTURF BUFFER - a land area of a certain height and width comprised
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
December 1, 2009
of sand, stone or permeable pavers arranged in such a manner to allow for maximum
percolation of storm water runoff into the soil.
PRIORITY WATER-BODY - a water-body within the jurisdictional boundaries of the
Town of Southold listed by the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation on the Water-Body Inventory/Priority Water-Bodies List, as amended.
SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT - those habitats which are essential to
the survival of a large portion of a particular fish or wildlife population; support rare or
endangered species; are found at a very low frequency within a geographic area; support
fish or wildlife populations having significant commemial or recreational value; or that
would be difficult or impossible to replace.
III. SEVERABILITY
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by
any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the
validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be
unconstitutional or invalid.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as
provided by law.
We are proposing to put these in the law to avoid having to go through the lengthy
LWRP process for these particular items. I have in the file a notice that this has appeared
in the Suffolk Times as a legal, sworn on the 23ra of November. It has appeared on the
Town Clerk's bulletin board despite the fact that we don't see the bulletin board out
there. I have a note here from Mark Terry, the LWRP coordinator and also principal
planner here. 'The Board of Trustees reviewed the amendments to the minor exempt
actions list of the LWRP and would like to comment on these proposed amendments.'
Excuse me, I beg your pardon. This is from the Southold Town Board of Trustees. It is
addressed to Mark Terry. 'The Board suggests that in relation to properties that are in our
jurisdiction (that means the Trustee's jurisdiction) the current proposed buffer tables
would eliminate any yard areas and in most cases would be impossible to meet the
criteria. Therefore this would be putting all applications before LWRP and making the
process even more complicated and more time consuming for both applicants and staff.
The majority of the Board recommends that these tables be used as a best management
practice tool, not as tables in regard to LWRP minor exemptions. Currently the Board of
Trustees reviews each application as it comes in and the decision of the size of the buffer
is determined by many factors, for example, neighboring buffers, topographical aspects,
distance between existing buildings and the end of the wetlands. We find this method to
be successful. With regard to fences used to control nuisance wildlife, we suggest that
this is not put in place until the Town Board comes up with specifications on such
fences.' What I think the Trustees are saying here, with regard to fences, we suggest this
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 7
December 1, 2009
not be part of this law that we are enacting until we come up with specifications on such
fences. Is that what the memo says?
JILL DOHERTY: We are just, we don't know if that is the right time to put that in here
now where everybody still is kind of confused on the nuisance fences that are popping
up. Right now you have to go to the Building Department, Zoning Board and Trustees
and LWRP but nobody really has an answer of you know, it is not allowed, these 8 foot
high fences and until we come up with the, you know, unified specifications for these we
should not be starting to stick them in our code. We should figure it out first and then
have a unified in every department, have the same things. Specifications. That is all we
are saying.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Okay but this law, as I understand it, proposes to put
certain factors into the LWRP and define them as a minor action so that it doesn't go
through the whole review process.
MS. DOHERTY: Right.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Fences are one of those things that are now being
proposed. Do the Trustees support removing it from that lengthy LWRP process?
Fences? Or would you rather leave it where it is?
MS. DOHERTY: We support removing it from the LWRP process depending on what
the Town Board specifies in the future. You know, if its, if you complicate it, we are
saying let's figure it out first before we start sticking it here in the code or here in the
code.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Okay. Thank you. I have a letter received by the Town
on November 30 from the county department of Planning, 'pursuant to the requirements
of sections of the Suffolk County administrative code, this application which has been
submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is considered to be a matter for
local determination as there is no apparent significant countywide or inter-community
aspect to it.' And a memo from Mark Terry to the Supervisor and the Town Board on
this proposed law. This is dated November 30. 'The proposed amendments exempt so
called minor actions from local waterfront revitalization program coastal consistency
review that integrate the best management practices into the design and or are
insignificant in scale, practice or are located at a certain distance. Through compliance of
the identified setbacks for best managed practices, the proposed actions meet or further
the policies and the sub policies of the LWRP and are therefore exempt from review by
the coordinator. The discretion of the Board's to review applications to the Southold
Town code remains in full effect. It is important to note that the wetland buffer tables,
tables 1 and 3, proposed within the amended local law were developed to exempt
residential applications not located adjacent to New York State scenic byways, scenic
view sheds important to the community or within coastal erosion hazard areas or VEAE
fold zones. Residential applications within these areas are subject to numerous other
policies and sub policies. The wetland buffer tables, together with other amendments
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 8
December 1, 2009
proposed meet and further the policy 6.3 which protect and restore tidal and freshwater
wetlands and more specifically a sub policy outlined below, and there are several
different policies, in fact there are five of them listed down below. Based on ail of the
above~ the local law that is under consideration tonight was reviewed against chapter 268,
the waterfront consistency review of the town and the LWRP policy standards. Based
upon the information provided on the consistency assessment form, submitted to this
department, as well as the records available to me, it is my recommendation that the
proposed action consistent with the denoted following policy standards and therefore is
consistent with the LWRP.' And there are several policies that are referred to. Finally a
memo from the Planning Board, Martin Sidor chair, dated November 30th. 'The Planning
Board has reviewed the above proposed legislation and fully supports the amendments,
recognizing that the changes streamline the application process and exempt certain
applications such as lot lines and activities that pose insignificant impacts to LWRP goals
and policies.' I have in front of me a short environmental assessment form in the file and
that completes the stuff in the file.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Would anybody like to come up and address the Town
Board on this particular public hearing? Jill?
JUSTICE EVANS: Are you going to talk about the buffer stuff?. Because that is what I
don't understand.
JILL DOHERTY, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEE: Yes, that is what I want to. In
reviewing these changes, the Board of Trustees agrees with most of these changes
(inaudible) and we have been working with Mark and we talked to Mark about the
buffers and it is a difficult thing to explain and so Mark has come up with a scaie but we
feel it is not, the way it is written up, the way it is written up is not a practical use. In
other words, for us to go through the process, it is going to make it more difficult and it's
not, I mean, I can't even explain it, so imagine trying to explain it to our applicants on the
buffers. If they meet this criteria, they don't have to go to LWRP. Most of the properties
in this town will not meet this criteria, so they will have to go to LWRP. Most of the
properties with existing buildings on it don't have the space between the building and the
wetland to have this buffer and they wouldn't meet these, so they would have to go to
LWRP. Then, what happens is Mark does his review and he would either find it
inconsistent or he would find it consistent and recommend the width of the buffer and
then if we don't agree with that width, meaning the Trustees, then we would have to
come up with a way why we find it consistent. And the reasoning of the width of the
buffer we are coming up with. And it just kind of puts us back and forth with each other
and it is not helping the applicant. It is not helping the process. We are trying to smooth
out the process here and make less government and it seems to be making more.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Where did the numbers come from? Because I am reading
from the memo here from Mark Terry to Supervisor Scott Russell and it directly quotes a
section of the LWRP and there is a subsection, policy 6.3, protect and restore tidal and
freshwater wetlands subsection d, okay, and it talks about buffers, adequate buffers,
airight? The adequacy of the buffer depends on the following factors, direction and fl°w
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 9
December 1, 2009
of surface water between use and adjacent or nearby wetlands. Buffer widths may be
reduced in areas where drainage patterns normally do not lead directly to the wetlands
where adverse effects to the wetland, other than those due to runoff, are not likely. So
that says there you can't put a number on it. You have to go and determine it in the field.
MS. DOHERTY: Right.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: So how can you put a number on this? Where did these
numbers come from?
MS. DOHERTY: I don't know. I would defer that question to Mark Terry but that is our
point exactly is that it just makes it too confusing. It is just too much in there and we
need to make it simpler, the wording.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: It is actually contrary to the LWRP.
MS. DOHERTY: Right. Right.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Jill, when you are finished, I would like to ask Mark if he
could explain how these buffer tables actually work.
MS. DOHERTY: Sure. If you have any other questions, you can let Mark explain.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: We can call on you again.
MARK TERRY, SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD: Good evening. The
question was where did the buffer tables come from? Over the past few months, the
LWRP coordinating council and the LWRP coordinator, myself, have researched buffer
science across the country. It is an inexact science. Basically what it says is the wider
the buffer and the more dense in species composition within the buffer makes it a more
effective buffer. So in an attempt to reduce the number of applications that come through
the LWRP process, we said okay, why don't we set the rules at the door and tell the
applicants what we are looking for. So if you can meet the 25 foot buffer and it is a
natural vegetative buffer which you leave up your existing vegetation or it is a landscaped
buffer, you get to bypass the LWRP process. I no don't have to spend the hours doing it,
writing the review and it goes up to the Trustees. Now these buffer tables were proposed
with a sense of reasonable distance from a water body or a top of bluff and I must say,
they are on paper but in practice as we go through them, they are certainly amendable.
So if the Board would like to put them in as bmp's over the next couple of months or half
year, six months, we can move forward in that direction and see if they will work in some
properties. Like Jill said, they are not going to apply everywhere. They will apply where
the (inaudible) flood zone occurs, if the applicant says, okay, I will put a 25 foot natural
vegetative buffer in and I don't have to go through the review process, fine. (inaudible)
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: You suggested we could, if we wanted to, put this in as a
best management practice rather than putting it in the code the way it is drafted?
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 10
December 1, 2009
MR. TERRY: Right.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: If we did that, ail applications would have to be LWRP
reviewed, isn't that right?
MR. TERRY: That is correct. What I would do though is I would have a much shorter
review. I would say, provide a buffer (inaudible) leave it up to the Trustees to start
implementing (inaudible) memorandum of agreement and then we will move on from
there. I know the policy is being furthered ....
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: I see. I see.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: That is acceptable.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: It is acceptable but I would still support putting it right
into the law and exempting them entirely from review, provided they meet the table...
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: See, the better way, what Mark suggested is to put it in as
best management practices and then let the Trustees and Mark who is the coordinator,
review this over a period of time and then refine it into something that is even better.
MR. TERRY: The point is to get the widest, most effective buffer up against the water
bodies. Once that is accomplished, they will still need further LWRP ....
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But as section 6.3 and the subsection D 5 states, other
management measures for design altematives to protect wetlands from adverse affects
where site constraints do not allow sufficient buffer width, so I am sure the Trustees as
they did before, back in the day, take into account different strategies to control upland
runoff, besides the buffer width. So if you have got, you know, drywells and gutters in
the house that run directly on to the lawn that run directly overboard and you put in a
buffer and you contain your drywell runoff, that significantly contributes to the amount
volume of runoff, then that is furthering the policies. But it might not give you the buffer
width that is required in the table and yet you don't need that because you have reduced
your runoff through other measures, so you...
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Just so we understand though, the buffer width in the table is
not required, it is simply required to get a pass. From the LWRP coordinator review.
The Trustees are still very much a part of this process. So all those factors and those
mitigating factors and steps that we can take, are still very much part of the application
process with the Trustees. It is just that it is an application that doesn't have to go to
Mark. And one less bureaucratic review. No offense on the bureaucratic, you look
smashing in your power yellow tie. But that is the reality. It is an imperfect, you know,
it is a science.
MR. TERRY: The key, Al, is that the chapter 275 still applies, discretion still applies.
This is taking a policy and saying, okay, if you come in, you meet the policy with this
buffer, if you can fit it within your site plan...
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 11
December 1, 2009
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: If you can't, we are no different.
JUSTICE EVANS: You don't have to have the LWRP part of it but you still have to
have the Trustee part of it.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Mmmhmm.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: The idea, I thought, was to reduce the volume of work that
goes through LWRP?
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Yes.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: But I understand, you know, if there is an interest in tabling
this to revisit the tables, that is fine with me. But I don't want to lose the other parts or
the other goals that are here which is to get some of this stuff that is really unnecessary
out of LWRP review. You know, that is really what the goal is, to just take some of the
stuff out of the aegis of the LWRP. But I don't have an aversion to tabling if we want to
take another shot at those tables to better understand them.
COUNCILMAN ORLANDO: Refine them and work on them a little bit.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Yeah, that is fine.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: I have a few other questions if we are done with the table
discussion. Dave has a comment.
DAVE BERGEN, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEE: With regard to the table discussion,
first off, I want to commend Mark on the job he has done on this. I think he has done a
great job and commend the Town Board also for trying to achieve the goal of reducing
the number of applications or projects that have to go through LWRP review because it is
making government simpler by doing that. I think, Al, you hit the nail on the head.
Much of what I was prepared to say, you have already covered with the research you
have done. I also felt that if these tables were just listed as best management practices so
that the applicant can see what our goals are and see if their properties can meet those
goals, taking into consideration all the different factors that that property has then this is
something that could be utilized, I think would be very good for the town. But did not
have these written as, as Tom said, as in a code rather best management practices.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: I, I am surprised because I had always thought the
Trustees were among, in the vanguard of those that would like to make the whole LWRP
process simpler and less involved with people.
MR. BERGEN: Absolutely.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: I understand the content of your comment to not go in
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 12
December 1, 2009
that direction ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Well, it is just in a different way and a more complete and
meaningful way. What I would recommend is deleting section KK, which I believe is the
entire reference to the tables and setbacks, but the other aspects of the LWRP adopting
tonight, ton continue the amendment of the other aspects of the LWRP. But striking KK
and then we will take up the issues of the bmp's ....
COUNCILMAN ORLANDO: A lot of acronyms flying around. Bmp and KK...
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Have you given much thought how to incorporate them
as best management practices in the language of the law that we have?
MR. TERRY: Within the language ....
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: I mean, we have got a law in front of us with a public
hearing tonight, we are going to ....
MR. TERRY: They were proposed as your residential structure is located adjacent to a
water body then your buffer has to be, your minimum buffer should be x amount of feet
wide. That is the way (inaudible) but incorporated as far as (inaudible) that would be
difficult. There has got to be an agreement between I guess the program and council with
the Trustees. Inaudible.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: You know what makes sense and Albert, inaudible and
yourself suggested that this can be incorporated in another way which will still make the
process simpler and easier, the bmp's. I don't have a problem with that. I suggest that
we just strike that section KK and move on With the rest.
JUSTICE EVANS: If you keep it in there, you are just exempting them from the LWRP
review.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: That is right.
JUSTICE EVANS: So I don't understand why you take it out. Anything else that falls
under the LWRP review and the Trustees still have review of the whole thing. It is just
one less step for the applicant.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Peggy, do you want to comment?
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: I don't think necessarily because if you had, let me just
take a shot at this, if you have an existing home and you rebuild it but you can't meet
because of your lot size, you don't have to meet a specific number, you have to go out in
the field, the Trustees have to go out in the field and review it. Say you redo your
bulkhead during the course of it and you put in a 15 foot non turf buffer, you have
complied ....
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 13
December 1, 2009
JUSTICE EVANS: But you are still going to have to go through LWRP.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But you have complied with it by doing that. But if you
put these numbers in here, then you haven't complied with it because then you need a 30
foot buffer ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: If you take the whole table out, you still have to go through
LWRP one way or the other.
JUSTICE EVANS: Exactly. But if you leave it in, at least some people ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: It might be too tiny a step but it takes a step in the right
direction if it is schooling us from LWRP review.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Let's hear from the people who have to deal with it.
JUSTICE EVANS: Do you understand what I am trying to say?
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: I agree with you.
PEGGY DICKERSON, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEE: I just have to come up and say
that for one of the last times. I do agree some of the wording needs to be worked on,
however, Al, I think you are being very optimistic as you usually are, that after 8 years of
being out in the field and discussing buffers its sometimes difficult when someone is
saying to you, I don't want this much of my lawn to give up, I would rather have this
much. And you go back this way and you go back this way and then there are LWRP
requirements and that is this wide and the applicant wanted, so it becomes a discussion
and this brings it to something more specific. I think the other thing that has happened
over the last eight years is that the more times we have had standards to look at, that have
been recommended by Mark Terry and have been based on science, the more applicants
are coming in and they have already met those standards because they are aware of them
and so I think that what this does, as Mark says, is giving the applicants an idea, as
Louisa was saying, what is a buffer and what is the best buffer? The science says the
widest and it is hard to take lawns away from applicants but that is what the
recommendation is and I think this chart gives us those details that are needed. As
Louisa said again and Tom, this is just an exemption. If people come in, they have new
construction, they can go to this chart and say, okay, we are going to follow it and we are
exempt.
JUSTICE EVANS: It only exempts you from the LWRP, right?
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: That is right. It is not exactly a pass to a building permit.
MS. DICKERSON: But I think it also emphasizes the importance of buffers which I
think sometimes is misunderstood and again, over the eight years of having many a many
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 14
December 1, 2009
buffer discussion, more times than not I would like to see them wider and it doesn't
always end up that way, so I think these details are important.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: I do have one question about them, I don't know if you can
answer it Peg or if Mark has to answer it, it says adjacent residential structures located
adjacent to the New York state designated scenic byway, now does that mean that, do
these, I don't know what that means. What are the requirements here?
MR. TERRY: It says residential structures that are not located within the CEHA because
of other policies that deal with that...
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Right.
MR. TERRY: The New York state scenic byway because of other policies that deal with
that and the VEAE flood zone because of other policies that deal with that, if you come in
and you are not located in those three areas and you put in a 25 foot natural vegetated
buffer on a 0 to 25,000 square foot lot, you are exempt from the LWRP and gutters and
leaders and pervious driveway, you are exempt from the LWRP and you go through the
Board of Trustees and they can, per the policies which is their charge, this is coming
through as a recommendation, they can per their policies by even manipulating the site
plan further with bmp's.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But I don't, see I don't understand where this comes in
with scenic view shed important to the community. Who is determining that?
MR. TERRY: Scenic view shed important to the community, that is public parks, that,
we determine that. Like if you have a park district on the water, there may be a very
large structure going up against it, things like that. And we didn't think that it was
prudent to exempt those type of applications from the LWRP process because other
policies would comment on that type of application.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But, so I don't understand, if you live across the street from
a tom or municipally owned piece of property, then someone could object to your
putting on anything? Doing anything.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I am just disappointed...
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: I don't understand that.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: The LWRP did not create that scenario. Adoption of scenic
byways and other programs over the years has.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: This is separate from scenic byway even. This is a scenic
view shed important to the community. I am just trying to wonder who is going to make
that ....
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
December 1, 2009
COUNCILMAN ORLANDO: That is open for interpretation.
15
MR. TERRY: That is open for interpretation. However, I have...
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But someone has got to pull the trigger on that and say this
is important and they shouldn't go that far. Who is going to make that determination?
That is what I want to know.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: That is something that we need to ferret out. You know,
legislation that has been passed historically at this Board level by previous boards. I
think people are confusing the LWRP as being the new law. It is not, it is the collection
of all the existing laws.
JUSTICE EVANS: Well, it is a concern of some of the Trustees that by putting this
buffer as an exemption that people that come in for permits will feel like that is giving
them a bye all the way through, then the Trustees have no say in changing what they are
doing?
COUNCILMAN ORLANDO: It will still go through the Trustees, they just don't get the
LWRP review.
JUSTICE EVANS: I don't understand, I am confused.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Again, we are taking steps to exempt things. This doesn't,
you know, the New York state, we have the scenic by-ways, there are policies in place
that already govern that, that we didn't dare (inaudible) but yeah, we need to get to the
bottom of that. But again, these are the things that we are trying to get, it may be baby
steps but steps to get them out from under the LWRP review. Dave?
MR. BERGEN: If I could just attempt to address Louisa's questions from my
perspective. When projects come in for review, obviously I think it is best for both the
owner of the property and the town if it is either determined to be consistent or exempt.
It is when it is determined to be inconsistent, that's when the work begins on trying to,
the Board, whether it is the ZBA or whether it is the Trustees or whoever, trying to bring
it in to consistency. And when we have the table that states here are minimum buffers,
the concern that I had was, again, if these are not looked as best management practices
but as tables that we are going to go by, when applications come in that are reviewable, in
other words they wouldn't fall under here, they are reviewable, and then this table is used
saying well, these are the buffers you need, if not they are going to be determined to be
inconsistent.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: No, that is not what it says.
MR. BERGEN: I am looking towards the future.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: But that is not what this law says.
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 16
December 1, 2009
MR. BERGEN: I understand that.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: In fact, strike that, then it is all inconsistent anyway.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Right.
MR. BERGEN: Inaudible.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: But if we strike the section KK, then it is all inconsistent
anyway and ends up on Mark's pile.
JUSTICE EVANS: It is not saying that you have to meet these standards to be
consistent, it is just saying if you meet these standards, you are exempt.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: You get a bypass.
MR. BERGEN: Yes and I understand that. I understand that. I just, when we get
through the tables, I wanted to return to one other section in here.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: If we get through the tables.
MS. DOHERTY: I just want to try to clarify what Dave is trying to say is once these
tables are set in here, they need to be more clarified before we have them set because as
we work through them and find out what works and what doesn't, it is just hard to
explain. We feel it is going to be hard to work with and to find it inconsistent and then
how are we supposed to mitigate that and try to find it because there are so many areas
and properties in town that don't meet this...
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Under the current code...
MS. DOHERTY: Right.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: They are inconsistent now, without the exemptions.
MS. DOHERTY: Right.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: They are all inconsistent, so you do the mitigation and then
you do all of that now ....
MS. DOHERTY: But we don't have, excuse me for interrupting but we don't have exact
guidelines, we go by our policies and what our review is.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: And you should continue to do that. We are not changing
anything about that. The Trustees should still use exactly the same criteria that they used
before and we are not trying to interfere with that. What we are saying is if an applicant
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 17
December 1, 2009
comes in and just fits within this table, you can deal with it but it doesn't have to go
through the LWRP process.
MS. DOHERTY: Right, I understand that but, okay, I mean, maybe we can just take out
KK for now and try to reword it to make it clear because we work with the public directly
and we know this is going to be confusing to them. It is confusing to us and it is going to
be confusing to them. So we need to work on the wording of this, to make it more clear
and simpler and I think that is what our point on this thing is. It is not so much that we
are not saying we are against buffers, we just put a 50 foot buffer on a property a couple
of months ago, so it is not the buffer and the science behind the buffer, it is the wording
of this and the way we are going to use it.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: It is really terms such as consistent, inconsistent, I know that
has been a source of confusion for people since this had been adopted by the previous
Board. Would anyone like to address the Board on any of the other aspects? Yes, Gail.
GAIL WICKHAM: Good evening. Thank you. My name is Gail Wickham from
Cutchogue and I have to tell you that if I were addressing you after my first reading of
this, I would probably be screaming at you. I am not going to do that but I have to say ....
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: That wouldn't help at all.
MS. WICKHAM: No, I know. I know. I read this much more differently, from a
different perspective from what I am heating and I certainly understand that you want to
comply with the title of this to simplify and expand on the definition of minor exempt
actions and take them out but the LWRP is a monster of government regulation and I
think that what has happened here is in trying to define what is exempt you have set a
very complicated and exhaustive list of definitions that vastly increase the regulation that
the LWRP can impose upon a private property owner and it is not just waterfront
property, it is scenic byways properties on the Main Road, Route 48, Sound Avenue. So
in trying to exempt things, that is a good thing because it gives you something that Mark
can put off his desk and not even have to have come on his desk. But then when you say,
except or unless, you are adding this whole other umbrella of regulations that really
restrict things like being able to mow your lawn and when you put a number on the table
and say if you have a two acre piece of property, 100 foot buffer is the standard for
LWRP consistency. This is going to mean something to somebody in a regulation and
now I am going to have to fight you to say it should be less than 100 feet. So you are
imposing a standard that I think is not necessarily matched in science or what the
environmental protection might be depending on the slope to the bay, there are a number
of other examples here, for instance, as I see it, this whole protective natural feature
definition. You are setting up setbacks from a whole other category of demarcation that !
don't quite understand. You're apparently, we are losing the right to replace a bulkhead
on the bay because you said it is only within town creeks that you can replace the
bulkheads without going to LWRP, so and what is interesting about this KK, another
thing, that scenic view shed is really scary to me, I don't know what that is. But that
should be ....
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 18
December 1, 2009
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: It doesn't say what it means.
MS. WICKHAM: It doesn't and just because I happen to have a piece of property I want
to put an addition on on the Main Road that people like to look at, is somebody going to
tell me I can't do it because it is going to interrupts the view of somebody passing by. I
don't think so, it is not legal to do that. The public doesn't have an easement view.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I think people badly misunderstand this law and the existing
law that is out there. Incidentally, the current setback for all waterfront properties is 100
feet. Everything is 100 feet. The Trustees have the right to vary that.
MS. WICKHAM: They regulate what that means. They have a right to look at it and
decide.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: And they still would when we pass this. The idea is this is
only one, and I agree with you on the LWRP, it is a bureaucratic quagmire, it is awful.
But the idea was to remove some of the LWRP review from some of the applications.
We don't create anything new here. The scenic byways was passed in, I believe the mid
80's.
MS. WICKHAM: I get that. I think that is a laudable goal, I just think that it went
overboard in trying to define it but, because you do have all kinds of other regulations in
this area. You have the town Trustees and some extent the Planning and ZBA, you have
the...
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: It doesn't create new regulation, the scenic byways was
created long before the LWRP was.
MS. WICKHAM: I understand that but it is another gamut of regulation that is just out
of control.
JUSTICE EVANS: That exist.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Yeah, that exist.
MS. WICKHAM: I know it exists. I know it exists. That is the problem. Maybe we ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: It is a problem, it certainly is. BUt this didn't create it, it
doesn't advance it.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: In fact, this is...
MS. WICKHAM: I know it is an attempt to reduce it ....
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: BUt you see, what you said about the scenic byway, if you
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 19
December 1, 2009
read KK, 'residential structures not located within a scenic view shed important to the
community' is you know, that would be exempt. Well, you are never going to have
anything built anywhere in this town, if someone, the neighbor is not going to say that is
an important view shed to me and so now it is not exempt. So in other words, nothing is
exempt.
MS. WICKHAM: Well, anyways, those are my preliminary comments.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: And so we can not pass the law and nothing is exempt and
we are back to square one.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: I think we should table it for two weeks and try to work
KK out better so that it doesn't, because, and the way it is, and you can disagree with me
Mark but doesn't that mean nothing would be exempt then? Because the neighbor is
going to say that is a scenic view shed that is important to me.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: You have to remember ....
MR. TERRY: The intent and the direction from the Town Board was ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: The reference to the scenic view shed which I understand all
the concerns about, but those concerns needed to be raised when this thing was passed 20
years ago. That would be, generally two jurisdictions review scenic view sheds. The
Planning Board as part of the subdivision process or the Zoning Board of Appeals as the
result of an application. The Building Department does not review the scenic view shed.
They are not encumbered by that law. Therefore, a private property owner that wants to
build a house can still come in to the Building Department and get the building permit.
All this does would be saying, look, if there is an issue here for the Planning Board or the
Zoning Board of Appeals, the scenic view shed, we are not excluding that, we still want
Mark to look at it. Well, maybe we don't, we can exclude it entirely but you are still
stuck with that law. This doesn't create the law, it doesn't advance the law. I think there
is so much misunderstanding and that is the problem when they passed this LWRP, they
passed this at the 11th hour of a previous administration without any explanation to the
public at all. And tonight is just another example of how this whole thing was badly
misplayed.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Alright, but doesn't that, you know what I am saying if it is
our intent to exempt something, this doesn't exempt any residential structures. The way
it is written.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: But the Building Department doesn't review them on the
scenic view shed ....
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: No, it is not the Building Department, it would be the
LWRP.
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 20
December 1, 2009
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: No but who sends it? Them has to be an agent who sends it
to Mark.
MR. TERRY: The Trustees, Planning.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: The Trustees...
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Or the Zoning Board of Appeals.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: So I think, I have a few other items in here that are little
items that I think should be changed but I would rather table this and try to meet and try
to make this, the KK section, work a little smoother so it works for the applicant and it
works for the Town. Because I don't think it works for anyone right now. But I do have
a few other small...
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I think there is probably a consensus here to table this but I
really want to hear what the public has to say. Would anybody else like to comment on
section KK of the LWRP, ASAP? (No response)
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: I have a couple of other comments.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I just want to make sure the public gets heard before we...
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Section 268-3 under minor actions E. The maintenance of
existing landscaping or natural growth. The new change is if it is not located within 100
feet of the boundary of a protective natural feature, it should say natural protective
feature I think anyway but I think that means you couldn't maintain your existing
landscaping or natural growth. I think everyone is inconsistent there. I think you really
have to strike out within 100 feet and just put that it is not located within a natural
protective feature. Or am I reading that wrong?
JUSTICE EVANS: You are saying you are exempt if it is not within that 100 foot
boundary?
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: What Albert is saying is, delete the 100 feet. Just say if it
is not within the protective feature itself.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Right.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Why do you need that 100 foot?
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Right. If it is existing landscaping, you should be able to
maintain it without LWRP review.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Yeah, I agree. I just don't know where that would be an
issue.
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 21
December 1, 2009
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Well, it is new. That is a new change. That's, it shouldn't,
yeah.
MR. BERGEN: Just to complicate that further, under 275 and I am sorry I don't have a
copy of 275 in front of me, routine maintenance in the existing landscape and natural
growth is exempt from even an application for a permit.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Yeah.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: So there is no need to raise objection to the reference.
MR. BERGEN: There is no need for review because there is no need for a permit.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Right. So could we strike part of that?
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Unless it is within the protective feature.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Yeah, right, unless it is within that protective feature then
you want to review it. But this is within 100 feet of it. Which shouldn't be reviewed.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Mark, can you comment on this?
COUNCILMAN ORLANDO: I don't think he wants to.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Unless I am reading it wrong. To me it seems like you are
going to need review. It is not going to be a minor action if it is within 100 feet of a
natural protective feature.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: It is just important to remember that these exemptions do not
add any new layers of review to the ....
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: No, this is a new, it is a change though.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: But it is still, there are no means for review because you
don't have to come in...
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But it shouldn't be changed then.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: I think we are going to have to table it.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Okay and there is one more, well, there are a few more
things here. Just, this is a nitpicking one, FF, cut phragmites to greater than 12 inches
and vegetative restoration. The changes provided that native wetland vegetation species
are not affected or disturbed in any manner, well, they will benefit from it. So they will
be affected. So maybe you say just not, that native wetland vegetative species are not
adversely affected or disturbed in any manner, alright? And then HH, no forget that, no,
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 22
December 1, 2009
JJ. This one doesn't make sense. Construction or installation of drainage improvements,
for the retention of stormwater runoff in accordance with chapter 236 provided that such
improvements are located more than 50 feet from the boundary of a natural protective
feature. See, most stormwater improvements are going to be closer than that because by
their nature, they can be located right adjacent to the natural protective feature. And
since they are stormwater improvements, they shouldn't really have to be reviewed.
JUSTICE EVANS: Well, but they are now anyway.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: They are reviewed now. What this does is it makes them
unreview ....
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: No, no, no, strike out the 50 feet.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: They are all reviewed by Mark...
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: No, no, no, no. No. if you leave the rest in, if you just put
construction or installation of drainage improvements for the retention of stormwater
runoff in accordance with chapter 236, that is it. So these would be exempt because you
are putting in a stormwater improvement. Take out the 50 feet because the, you are
making it more difficult already. You shouldn't have to review it because it is close to a
natural protective feature, that is maybe where you have to put the stormwater ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Under current code, am I required, if I want to install
stormwater mitigation 30, 40 feet away from a wetland boundary, do I need to come to
the Trustees?
UNIDENTIFIED: Inaudible
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Alright.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: We did it.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Do I need to come to Mark?
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Now you do.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Within the first 100 feet, right?
UNIDENTIFIED: Inaudible.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: So what we are saying is, we are cutting it in half. If you
want to do it, if you want to do it 51 feet out, you don't need to go to Mark.
JUSTICE EVANS: I know but...
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 23
December 1, 2009
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Yeah but where is the guide? You (inaudible) like water
wash, you have to go at the top of the ramp. So that is where it has to go. You couldn't
move it back to 51 feet.
JUSTICE EVANS: Al is saying don't go to Mark at all if it has to do with water runoff.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Just go to the Trustees.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Right.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Okay, Mark does that seem reasonable? It does to me if the
Trustees are already reviewing it but I think you are going to be giving people this
misunderstanding that somehow you can do it without review now, if we strike the ....
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: No, no.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Fifty feet doesn't ....
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: I think this is just going to require another meeting.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: We are going to require a heck of a lot of clarification.
MR. TERRY: Scott, it is reasonable but chapter 236, I cross referenced all the chapters
for consistency with the town code with these applications, so in my detailed review, I do
pick up things and point them out to the Trustees for their benefit, as well as the Town's
benefit and the applicants benefit. So they don't get violations down the road. So that is
saying within chapter 236, provided such improvements are located 50 feet from the
boundary of a natural protective feature, I think it is qualified in chapter 236 as
somewhere, as 50 feet distance but I could double check that. And back to the outside
the 100 foot or within the 100 foot, we have coastal systems, we have a very large coastal
plain, some people clear within that coastal plain and then submit maintenance and
mitigation plans that they want to do different things with their property. That is where
we would catch that, in relation to those areas outside of Trustees jurisdictions, when we
review certain applications.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Alright, one more...
MR. TERRY: Inaudible, the Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: One more thing. Pervious non-turf buffer, a land area of a
certain height and width comprised of sand, stone or permeable pavers, range in such a
manner to allow for maximum percolation of stormwater runoff into the soil. Can we add
decking to that? Because some people put in you know, like landward of a bulkhead,
people put in decking and that acts as a you know, a non-turf buffer.
MR. TERRY: Inaudible. I guess we are going to code committee with this?
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law 24
December 1, 2009
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Evidently. But I think people need to understand that a lot of
these laws have been around for a long time and when the LWRP reveals them for the
first time, people said oh, the LWRP created that law. It is not really how it worked and
then again, the failing of how it was set up.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Scott, instead of code committee, what about the LWRP
council as the venue to review this?
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Because I think at this point they have done their work, they
are certainly welcome to come to the code committee but it has to be a document that we
are ready to pass as a Board. Jill?
MS. DOHERTY: Just a comment on the decking. We have been allowing that, as you
know but we have the spacing of the decking (inaudible)
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Sure.
MS. DOHERTY: We can put that in so it is consistent with Trustee policy.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Sure. Yeah.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I just want to make sure that everybody has been heard on
the LWRP. Okay. Oh, Dave.
MR. BERGEN: Just one last item under Z, split rail fences or fences to control nuisance
wildlife, just to clarify when this, if this goes to the code committee if the code committee
will please consider current code because under chapter 275 currently you are not
allowed to put nuisance fencing down to the foreshore and I would like to see that
amended because of what is happening with deer over-running our population here, I
would like to see the code committee address that part of the code. So that nuisance
fencing is, in other words ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Then we should leave it in there because any change in the
legislation would automatically exempt...
MR. BERGEN: What we have kind of done is cart before the horse here. You know, we
have the code that says you are not allowed to have nuisance fencing down to the
foreshore yet you are saying that is exempt under the LWRP for review but right now it is
not allowed under code. So what I am saying is adjust the code.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Yeah but there are also other aspects where nuisance fencing
should be exempt. You are allowed to exceed 6 feet if you go to the Zoning Board of
Appeals, things like, in other words, there is already venues for those. That would
remove, the ZBA needs to send it to Mark etc.
Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
December 1, 2009
MR. BERGEN: I am just talking about 275. Thank you.
25
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Okay. Any motions?
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: We might want to table it because the changes that come
out, we are going to get a lecture from Martin as to whether or not we can, we need to re-
advertise or not.
TOWN ATTORNEY F1NNEGAN: I think we should adjourn it. Inaudible. We noticed
it 60 days ago because, depending on the changes, we may have to resubmit this whole
thing for review by the state.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But you might not.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Don't forget we still have to run to Bill Sharp and get
permission.
COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But you might not have to re-advertise. The changes you
make might not be substantial.
This public hearing was adjourned at 8:43 PM
Southold Town Clerk
Southold Town Board - Letter
Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
RESOLUTION 2009-974
ADOPTED
Item # 5.31
DOC ID: 5460
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2009-974 WAS
ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON
DECEMBER 15, 2009:
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk
County, New York, on the 22nd day of September 2009, a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in
relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency
Review Law" and
WHEREAS the Town Board of the Town of Southold held a public hearing on the aforesaid
Local Law at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, now
therefor be it
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby ENACTS the proposed
Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions
List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law" reads as follows:
LOCAL LAW NO. 2009
A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt
Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law".
BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows:
Purpose. The amendments to this local law are adopted under the authority of the
Municipal Home Rule Law and the Waterfront Revitalization of Coastal Areas and
Inland Waterways Act of the State of New York (Article 42 of the Executive Law). It is
intended that, by making additions to the "minor actions" exempt list, certain actions that
by their nature will not have an adverse effect on the coastal area and resources will not
require a review under this law, which will result in a more efficient review process.
II. Chapter 268 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
§ 268-3. Definitions.
LANDSCAPED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width which is planted with
indigenous, drought tolerant, vegetation similar to that found within the immediate proximity of
the parcel. Vegetation shall be installed in sufficient densities to achieve ninety-five {'95) percent
Generated December 16, 2009 Page 47
Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
ground cover within two years of installation. Survival of planted vegetation shall be ninety (90)
percent for a period of three years. Maintenance activities within the buffer are limited to
removing vegetation which are hazardous to life and property, trimming tree limbs up to a height
of fifteen feet (15') to maintain viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and establishing a four foot
(4') wide access path constructed of pervious material for access to the water-body.
MINOR ACTIONS - Include the following actions, which are not subject to review under this
chapter:
A. Maintenance or repair involving no substantial changes in an existing structure or
facility;
B. Replacement, rehabilitation or reconstruction of a structure or facility, in kind, on
the same site (in-place), including upgrading buildings to meet building or fire codes,
except for structures in areas designated by the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area (CEHA)
law where structures may not be replaced, rehabilitated or reconstructed without a permit
and shoreline erosion control structures (including, but not limited to, groins, jetties,
bulkheads, filled piers) located within Great Peconic Bay, Cutchogue Harbor, Little
Peconic Bay, Hog Neck Bay, Noyack Bay, Southold Bay, Shelter Island Sound, Pipes
Cove, Orient Harbor, Gardiners Bay, Long Island Sound, Fishers Island Sound and Block
Island Sound [excluding all creeks];
C. Repaving or widening of existing paved highways not involving the addition of new
travel lanes;
D. Street openings and right-of-way openings for the purpose of repair or maintenance of
existing utility facilities;
E. Maintenance of existing landscaping or natural growth, that is not located within 100 feet
of the boundary of a natural protective feature .......... ~'~-~ '~'-~*~ .... ,~ ......
~v ....... v ......................... d, or w~th~n significant coastal fish and wildlife
habitat areas;
Granting of individual setback, lot line and lot area variances, except in relation to a
regulated natural feature or a bulkhead or other shoreline defense structure or any activity
within the CEHA;
Minor temporary uses of land having negligible or no permanent impact on coastal
resources or the environment;
Installation of traffic control devices on existing streets, roads and highways;
Mapping of existing roads, streets, highways, natural resources, land uses and ownership
patterns;
Information collection including basic data collection and research, water quality and
pollution studies, traffic counts, engineering studies, surveys, subsurface investigations
and soils studies that do not commit the agency to undertake, fund or approve any action;
Official acts of a ministerial nature involving no exercise of discretion, including building
where issuance is predicated solely on the applicant's compliance or noncompliance with
the relevant local building code;
Routine or continuing agency administration and management, not including new
programs or major reordering of priorities that may affect the environment;
Conducting concurrent environmental, engineering, economic, feasibility and other
studies and preliminary planning and budgetary processes necessary to the formulation of
H.
I.
J.
Generated December 16, 2009 Page 48
Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
a proposal for action, provided those activities do not commit the agency to commence,
engage in or approve such action;
N. Collective bargaining activities;
O. Investments by or on behalf of agencies or pension or retirement systems, or refinancing
existing debt;
P. Inspections and licensing activities relating to the qualifications of individuals or
businesses to engage in their business or profession;
Q. Purchase or sale of furnishings, equipment or supplies, including surplus government
property, other than the following: land, radioactive material, pesticides, herbicides,
storage of road de-icing substances, or other hazardous materials;
R. Adoption of regulations, policies, procedures and local legislative decisions in
connection with any action on this list;
S. Engaging in review of any part of an application to determine compliance with technical
requirements, provided that no such determination entitles or permits the project sponsor
to commence the action unless and until all requirements of this chapter have been
fulfilled;
T. Civil or criminal enforcement proceedings, whether administrative or judicial, including a
particular course of action specifically required to be undertaken pursuant to a judgment
or order, or the exercise of prosecutorial discretion;
U. Adoption of a moratorium on land development or construction;
V. Interpreting an existing code, rule or regulation;
W. Designation of local landmarks or their inclusion within historic districts;
X. Emergency actions that are immediately necessary on a limited and temporary basis for
the protection or preservation of life, health, property or natural resources, provided that
such actions are directly related to the emergency and are performed to cause the least
change or disturbance, practicable under the circumstances, to coastal resources or the
environment. Any decision to fund, approve or directly undertake other activities after the
emergency has expired is fully subject to the review procedures of this chapter;
Y. Local legislative decisions such as rezoning where the Town Board determines
the action will not be approved;
Z. Split rail fences or fences used to control nuisance wildlife that do not interferi,ag with the
public's rights of passage along the foreshore;
AA. Removal of a structure greater than 75 feet from a wetland;
BB. Additions to ~he4~ad, wa~ht~ an existing dwelling constituting less than 25 percent of
the existing structure where the addition is greater than 75 feet from a natural protective
feature, except where the parcel is located in a Coastal Erosion Hazard Area;
CC. Structures less than 100 250 square feet in size that are accessory to existing permitted
primary structures, and which accessory structures are greater than 50 feet from a
boundary of a natural protective feature, and freshwater or tidal wetlands ~;
DD. Construction or improvements of pervious residential driveways, parking areas or
walkways greater than 50 feet from a tidal or freshwater wetland;
EE. Upgrades to existing fuel tanks provided that erosion control measures are implemented;
FF. Cutting phragmites to greater than 12 inches and vegetative restoration provided that
native wetland vegetative species are not affected or disturbed in any manner;
GG. ~a~ Within all Town Creeks, replacement of existing bulkhead on the
Generated December 16, 2009 Page 49
Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
applicant's property in the same location with a silt curtain employed deployed prior to
and during construction; and
HH. Lot line changes, provided that the lot line change will not permit new development that
may have undue adverse impacts on wetlands, tidal waters or natural protective features;
II. Additions to an existing building or rebuilt residential structure which results in no-net
increase in ground area coverage, except where the parcel is located in a Coastal Erosion
Hazard Area;
JJ. Construction or installation of drainage improvements for the retention of storm water
runoff
in
accordance
with
~hnt
O .~,~,vO0 30 2q
.,,, .....,w0 75 50
w, ..... ,000 75 50
............... ,900
100 75
9 ~a ~ 30 20 20
,v, ..... ,wO 50 45 35
............. · v~ 75
15
25
30
Generated December 16, 2009 Page 50
Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEATURE - A nearshore area, beach, bluff, primary dune,
secondary dune or wetland and their vegetation.
NATURAL VEGETATED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width where existing
vegetation occurs prior to the commencement of any grading or clearing activity. Vegetation
shall be maintained to achieve a minimum percent ground cover of ninety-five (95%) percent.
To achieve the percent ground cover indigenous, drought tolerant vegetation shall be planted.
Survival of planted vegetation shall be ninety (90%) percent for a period of three (3) years.
Maintenance activities within the buffer are limited to removing vegetation which are hazardous
to life and property, trimming tree limbs up to a height of fifteen feet (15') to maintain
viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and establishing a four foot (4') wide access path constructed
of pervious material for access to the water-body.
NEW YORK SCENIC BYWAY (North Fork Trail) - all that portion of the State highway
system known as State Route 25 in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, beginning at the
boundary between the Town of Riverhead and the Town of Southold, continuing northeasterly to
Orient Point and to the end of State Route 25, and all that portion of the local highway system
known as Sound Avenue beginning at the boundary between the Town of Riverhead and the
Town of Southold continuing easterly to the overlap of Sound Avenue and County Route 48 and
continuing along County Route 48 generally northeasterly to the intersection of County Route 48
and State Route 25 north of the Village of Greenport, Suffolk County.
NUISANCE WILDLIFE - Wildlife that is destructive and capable of damaging property such as
buildings, crops, pets, livestock, gardens, or public areas. Wildlife may threaten human health or
safety by spreading diseases, through direct attacks, or accidentally.
PERVIOUS NONTURF BUFFER - a land area of a certain height and width comprised of sand,
stone or permeable pavers arranged in such a manner to allow for maximum percolation of storm
water runoff into the soil.
PRIORITY WATER-BODY - a water-body within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Town of
Southold listed by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation on the
Water-Body Inventory/Priority Water-Bodies List, as amended.
SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT - those habitats which are essential to the
survival of a large portion of a particular fish or wildlife population; support rare or endangered
species; are found at a very low frequency within a geographic area; support fish or wildlife
populations having significant commercial or recreational value; or that would be difficult or
impossible to replace.
III. SEVERABILITY
Generated December 16, 2009 Page 51
Southold Town Board - Letter
Board Meeting of December 15, 2009
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any
court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law
as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided
by law.
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk
RESULT: ADOPTED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Thomas H. Wickham, Councilman
SECONDER: Louisa P. Evans, Justice
AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Krupski .Ir., Wickham, Evans, Russell
Generated December 16, 2009 Page 52
MARTIN D. FINNEGAN
TOWN ATTORNEY
mar tin.finnegan@town.southold.ny.us
JENNIFER ANDALORO
ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY
j ennifer.andaloro @town.southald.ny.us
LORI M. HULSE
ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY
lori.hulse@town.southold.ny.us
SCOTT A. RUSSELL
Supervisor
Town Hall Annex, 54375 Route 25
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971-0959
Telephone (631) 765-1939
Facsimile (631) 765-6639
OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Ms. Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk
Lynne Krauza
Secretary to the Town Attorney
December 15, 2009
LUAmendments to Minor Exempt Actions List
SEQRA
For your records, I am enclosing the original, fully executed Short
Environmental Assessment Form in connection with the referenced matter.
have retained a copy of this document in our file.
We
Also attached is a copy of the resolution authorizing Scott to sign this
document.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. Thank you
for your attention.
/Ik
Enclosures
cc: Members of the Town Board (w/encls.)
Martin D. Finnegan, Town Attorney (w/encls.)
617.20
Appendix C
State Environmental Quality Review
SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only
'ART I - PROJECT INFORMATION ITo be completed by Applicant or Project Sponsor)
1. 2. PROJECT NAME
APPLICANT/SPONSOR Amendments to thc Watcr£ront Consistency Review Law
Town of Southold
3. PROJECT LOCATION:
Municipality Town of Southold
County
Suffolk
4. PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road intersections, prominent landmarks, etc., or provide map)
Jurisdictional limits of the Town of Southold
5. PROPOSED ACTION IS:
[] New [] Expansion
[~ Modification/alteration
NA
6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY:
A Local Law in relation to Amendments to thc Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED:
Initially I~A acres Ultimately NA
acres
8. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS?
[] Yes [] NO If No, describe bdefly
9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT?
[] Residential [] Industrial [] Commercial [] Agriculture [] park/Forest/Open Space
Describe:
All apply within thc jurisdictional limits of thc Town of Southold
[~ Other
10.
DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY
(FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL)?
[] Yes [] No If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit/approvals:
11.
DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL?
[] Yes [] No If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit/approvals:
NA
12, AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WiLL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? [] Yes [] No NA
I CERTIFY~'~AT THE INFORMATION PROV DED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
Applicant/spons°r nam'~ ~'~/~;l't'~'W'-;nsignature' ~--'" ----.-. ~°f ;S~utho ld Date'. 1 ]/30/09
' DCOE~' A. Russell. Suo~rv~nr
I If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the
Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment
OVER
1
PART II - IMPACT ASSESSMENT (To be comp!ete,~ by Lead Agency)
A. DOES ACTION EXCEED ANY TYPE ~ THRESHOLD IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.47 if yes, coordinate the review process and use the FULL EAF.
[~] Yes [~No
B. WILL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.6? If No, a negative
declaration may be superseded by another involved agency.
[~] Yes r~No
C. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING: (Answers may be handwritten, if legible)
C1. Existing air quality, sudace or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic pattern, solid waste production or disposal,
potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly:
None
C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly:
None
C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain bdefly:
None
C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officiaily adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly:
None
C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly:
None
C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1 -C57 Explain briefly:
None
C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly:
None
D. WiLL THE PROJECT HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT CAUSED THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CRITICAL
ENVIRONMENTAL AREA (CEA)?
[] Yes [] No If Yes, explain bdefiy:
E. IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE, CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS?
[] Yes [] No If Yes, explain briefly:
PART III - DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by Agency)
INSTRUCTIONS: For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether it is substantial, ~arge, important or otherwise significant. Each
effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting (i.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) irreversibility; (e)
geographic scope; and (f) magnitude. ~f necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materiats. Ensure that explanations contain
sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately addressed. If question D of Part II was checked
yes, the determination of significance must evaluate the potential impact of the proposed action on the environmental characteristics of the CEA.
] Check this box if you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adveme impacts which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the FULl
EAF and/or prepare a positive dedarafion.
] Check this boxifyou have determined, based on the information and analysis abo~ and any supporting documentation, that the pr°p°sed acti°n ~L[
NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide, on attachments as nenessary~ the reasons supporting this determination
Town of Southold Town Board
Name of Lead Agency
Scott Russell t~
Print or ~~ncy
~/;~ture of ResponsiSle Officer in Lead Agem~y
11/30/09
Date
Supervisor
Title of Responsible Officer
RESOLUTION 2009-943
ADOPTED
DOC ID: 5454
THIS 1S TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2009-943 WAS
ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON
DECEMBER 1, 2009:
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby finds that the proposed "A
Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront
Consistency Review Law" is classified as an Unlisted Action pursuant to SEQRA Rules and
Regulations, 6 NYCRR Section 617, and that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby
establishes itself as lead agency for the uncoordinated review of this action and issues a Negative
Declaration for the action in accordance with the recommendation of Mark Terry dated
November 30, 2009, and authorizes Supervisor Scott A. Russell to sign the short form EAF in
accordance therewith, and is consistent with the LWRP pursuant to Chapter 268 of the Town
Code of the Town of Southold, Waterfront Consistency Review.
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Louisa P. Evans, Justice
SECONDER: Thomas H. Wickham, Councilman
AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Kmpski Jr., Wickham, Evans, Russell
RESOLUTION 2009-943
ADOPTED
Item # 5.31
DOC ID: 5454
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2009-943 WAS
ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON
DECEMBER 1, 2009:
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby finds that the proposed "..~A
Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront
Consistency Review Law" is classified as an Unlisted Action pursuant to SEQRA Rules and
Regulations, 6 NYCRR Section 617, and that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby
establishes itself as lead agency for the uncoordinated review of this action and issues a Negative
Declaration for the action in accordance with the recommendation of Mark Terry dated
November 30, 2009, and authorizes Supervisor Scott A. Russell to sign the short form EAF in
accordance therewith, and is consistent with the LWRP pursuant to Chapter 268 of the Town
Code of the Town of Southold, Waterfront Consistency Review.
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
t4OVER: Louisa P. Evans, ~lustice
SECONDER: Thomas H. Wickham, Councilman
AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Krupski .lt., Wickham, Evans, Russell
RESOLUTION 2009-944
TABLED
Item # 5.32
DOC ID: 5460
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2009-944 WAS
TABLED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON
DECEMBER 1, 2009:
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk
County, New York, on the 22na day of September 2009, a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in
relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency
Review Law" and
WHEREAS the Town Board of the Town of Southold held a public hearing on the aforesaid
Local Law at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, now
therefor be it
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby ENACTS the proposed
Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions
List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law" reads as follows:
LOCAL LAW NO. 2009
A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt
Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law".
BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows:
Purpose. The amendments to this local law are adopted under the authority of the
Municipal Home Rule Law and the Waterfront Revitalization of Coastal Areas and
Inland Waterways Act of the State of New York (Article 42 of the Executive Law). It is
intended that, by making additions to the "minor actions" exempt list, certain actions that
by their nature will not have an adverse effect on the coastal area and resources will not
require a review under this law, which will result in a more efficient review process.
II. Chapter 268 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
§ 268-3. Definitions.
LANDSCAPED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width which is planted with
indigenous, drought tolerant, vegetation similar to that found within the immediate proximity of
the parcel. Vegetation shall be installed in sufficient densities to achieve ninety-five (95) percent
ground cover within two years of installation. Survival of planted vegetation shall be ninety (90)
percent for a period of three years. Maintenance activities within the buffer are limited to
removing vegetation which are hazardous to life and property, trimming tree limbs up to a height
of fifteen feet (15') to maintain viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and establishing a four foot
(4') wide access path constructed of pervious material for access to the water-body.
MINOR ACTIONS - Include the following actions, which are not subject to review under this
chapter:
A. Maintenance or repair involving no substantial changes in an existing structure or
facility;
H.
I.
J.
Replacement, rehabilitation or reconstruction of a structure or facility, in kind, on
the same site (in-place), including upgrading buildings to meet building or fire
codes, except for structures in areas designated by the Coastal Erosion Hazard
Area (CEHA) law where structures may not be replaced, rehabilitated or
reconstructed without a permit and shoreline erosion control structures (including,
but not limited to, groins, ietties, bulkheads, filled piers) located within Great
Peconic Bay, Cutchogue Harbor, Little Peconic Bay, Hog Neck Bay, Noyack
Bay, Southold Bay, Shelter Island Sound, Pipes Cove, Orient Harbor, Gardiners
Bay, Long Island Sound, Fishers Island Sound and Block Island Sound [excluding
all creeks];
Repaying or widening of existing paved highways not involving the addition of
new travel lanes;
Street openings and right-of-way openings for the purpose of repair or
maintenance of existing utility facilities;
Maintenance of existing landscaping or natural growth, that is not located within
100 feet of the boundary of a ' ^ ......... ~'~-~ '~' ....... '~ ~
protective natural feature .... r ....................
...... ~, ..... v ....... v ........................... or within s nificant coastal
fish and wildlife habitat areas;
Granting of individual setback, lot line and lot area variances, except in relation to
a regulated natural feature or a bulkhead or other shoreline defense structure or
any activity within the CEHA;
Minor temporary uses of land having negligible or no permanent impact on
coastal resources or the environment;
Installation of traffic control devices on existing streets, roads and highways;
Mapping of existing roads, streets, highways, natural resources, land uses and
ownership patterns;
Information collection including basic data collection and research, water quality
and pollution studies, traffic counts, engineering studies, surveys, subsurface
investigations and soils studies that do not commit the agency to undertake, fund
Lo
Uo
V.
W.
Xo
AA.
BB.
or approve any action;
Official acts of a ministerial nature involving no exercise of discretion, including
building where issuance is predicated solely on the applicant's compliance or
noncompliance with the relevant local building code;
Routine or continuing agency administration and management, not including new
programs or major reordering of priorities that may affect the environment;
Conducting concurrent environmental, engineering, economic, feasibility and
other studies and preliminary planning and budgetary processes necessary to the
formulation of a proposal for action, provided those activities do not commit the
agency to commence, engage in or approve such action;
Collective bargaining activities;
Investments by or on behalf of agencies or pension or retirement systems, or
refinancing existing debt;
Inspections and licensing activities relating to the qualifications of individuals or
businesses to engage in their business or profession;
Purchase or sale of furnishings, equipment or supplies, including surplus
government property, other than the following: land, radioactive material,
pesticides, herbicides, storage of road de-icing substances, or o~her hazardous
materials;
Adoption of regulations, policies, procedures and local legislative decisions in
connection with any action on this list;
Engaging in review of any part of an application to determine compliance with
technical requirements, provided that no such determination entitles or permits the
project sponsor to commence the action unless and until all requirements of this
chapter have been fulfilled;
Civil or criminal enforcement proceedings, whether administrative or judicial,
including a particular course of action specifically required to be undertaken
pursuant to a judgment or order, or the exercise of prosecutorial discretion;
Adoption of a moratorium on land' development or construction;
Interpreting an existing code, rule or regulation;
Designation of local landmarks or their inclusion within historic districts;
Emergency actions that are immediately necessary on a limited and temporary
basis for the protection or preservation of life, health, property or natural
resources, provided that such actions are directly related to the emergency and are
performed to cause the least change or disturbance, practicable under the
circumstances, to coastal resources or the environment. Any decision to fund,
approve or directly undertake other activities after the emergency has expired is
fully subject to the review procedures of this chapter;
Local legislative decisions such as rezoning where the Town Board determines
the action will not be approved;
Split rail fences or fences used to control nuisance wildlife that do not interfering
with the public's rights of passage along the foreshore;
Removal ora structure greater than 75 feet from a wetland;
Additions to ,u~ ~.~ ..... ,~ g d
............ z:.~z c, fan existin welling constituting less than 25
percent of the existing structure where the addition is greater than 75 feet from a
natural protective feature, except where the parcel is located in a Coastal Erosion
Hazard Area;
CC. Structures less than 100 250 square feet in size that are accessory to existing
permitted primary structures, and which accessory structures are greater than 50
feet from a boundary ora natural protective feature, and freshwater or tidal
wetlands '
t~d ...........
DD. Construction or improvements of pervious residential driveways, parking areas or
walkways greater than 50 feet from a tidal or freshwater wetland;
EE. Upgrades to existing fuel tanks provided that erosion control measures are
implemented;
FF. Cutting phragmites to greater than 12 inches and vegetative restoration provided
that native wetland vegetative species are not affected or disturbed in any manner;
GG. t~ Within all Town Creeks, replacement of existing bulkhead on
the applicant's property in the same location with a silt curtain
deployed prior to and during construction; an~
HH. Lot line changes, provided that the lot line change will not permit new
development that may have undue adverse impacts on wetlands, tidal waters or
natural protective features;
II. Additions to an existing building or rebuilt residential structure which results in
no-net increase in ground area coverage, except where the parcel is located in a
Coastal Erosion Hazard Area~
JJ. Construction or installation of drainage improvements for the retention of storm
water runoff in accordance with Chapter 236, provided that such improvements
are located more than 50 feet from the boundary of the natural protective feature;
and
KK. Residential structures not located within the CEHA/or adjacent to a New York
State Designated Scenic Byway, a scenic view shed important to the community
or within a VE/AE Flood Zone Designation and which complies with the
following minimum buffer width tables:
Table 1. Wetland Buffer Table for New Residential Structures located
adiacent to New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation Priority Water Body (select one).
Minimum Buffer Width
Lot Area (sq. fi.) Landscaped Natural Vegetated
0-20,000 30 25
20,000-40,000 40 35
40,000-60,000 75 50
60,000-80,000 75 50
Greater than 80,000 100 75
Table 2.
Wetland Buffer Table for New Residential Structures (select one)
Minimum Buffer Width
Lot Area (sq. ft.) Non-turf Landscaped Natural Vegetated
0-20,000
30 20 20
40 35 25
50 45 35
20,000-40,000
40,000-60,000
60,000-80,000
Greaterthan 80,000
75 65 55
100 100 75
Table 3.
Wetland Buffer Table for Existing or Rebuilt Residential
Structures (select one).
Minimum Buffer Width
Lot Area(sq. ft.) Non-turf Landscaped Natural Vegetated
0-20,000 25 15 15
20,000-40,000 30 25 25
40,000-60,000 40 35 30
60,000-80,000 60 55 45
Grcaterthan80,000 75 60 55
NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEATURE - A nearshore area, beach, bluff, primary dune,
secondary dune or wetland and their vegetation.
NATURAL VEGETATED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width where existing
vegetation occurs prior to the commencement of any grading or clearing activity. Vegetation
shall be maintained to achieve a minimum percent ground cover of ninety-five (95%) percent.
To achieve the percent ground cover indigenous, drought tolerant vegetation shall be planted.
Survival of planted vegetation shall be ninety (90%) percent for a period of thrce (3) years.
Maintenance activities within the buffer arc limited to removing vegetation which are hazardous
to life and property, trimming tree limbs up to a height of fifteen feet (15') to maintain
viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and establishing a four foot (4') wide access path constructed
of pervious material for access to the water-body.
NEW YORK SCENIC BYWAY (North Fork Trail) - all that portion of the State highway
system known as State Route 25 in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, beginning at the
boundary between the Town of Riverhead and the Town of Southold, continuing northeasterly to
Orient Point and to the end of State Route 25, and all that portion of the local highway system
known as Sound Avenue beginning at the boundary between the Town of Riverhead and the
Town of Southold continuing easterly to the overlap of Sound Avenue and County Route 48 and
continuing along County Route 48 generally northeasterly to the intersection of County Route 48
and State Route 25 north of the Village of Greenport, Suffolk County.
NUISANCE WILDLIFE - Wildlife that is destructive and capable of damaging property such as
buildings, crops, pets, livestock, gardens, or public areas. Wildlife may threaten human health or
safety by spreading diseases, through direct attacks, or accidentally.
PERVIOUS NONTURF BUFFER - a land area of a certain height and width comprised of sand,
stone or permeable pavers arranged in such a manner to allow for maximum percolation of storm
water runoff into the soil.
PRIORITY WATER-BODY - a water-body within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Town of
Southold listed by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation on the
Water-Body Inventory/Priority Water-Bodies List, as amended.
SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT - those habitats which are essential to the
survival of a large portion of a particular fish or wildlife population; support rare or endangered
species; are found at a very low frequency within a geographic area; support fish or wildlife
populations having significant commercial or recreational value; or that would be difficult or
impossible to replace.
III. SEVERABILITY
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any
court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law
as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided
by law.
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk
RESULT: TABLED [UNANIMOUS] Next: 12/15/2009 4:30 PM
MOVER: William Ruland, Councilman
SECONDER: Vincent Orlando, Councilman
AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Krupski ~lr., Wickham, Evans, Russell
James F. King, President
Jill M. Doherty, Vice-President
Peggy A. Dickerson
Dave Bergen
Bob Ghosio, Jr.
Town Hall Annex
54375 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971-0959
Telephone (631) 765-1892
Fax (631) 765-6641
TO:
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Mark Terry
Principal Planner
LWRP Coordinator
REC£1¥~D
FROM: Southold Town Board of Trustees
DATE:
December 1, 2009
RE:
A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt
Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
The Board of Trustees reviewed the Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions
List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law and would like to comment on
these proposed Amendments.
The Board suggests that in relation to the properties that are in our jurisdiction
the current proposed buffer tables would eliminate any yard areas and in most
cases be impossible to meet the criteria. Therefore, this would be putting all
applications before LWRP and making the process even more complicated and
more time consuming for both the applicant and Town staff. The majority of the
Board recommends that these tables be used as a Best Management Practice
tool, not as tables with regard to LWRP minor exemptions.
Currently the Board reviews each application as it comes in and the decision of
the size of the buffer is determined by many factors for example: neighboring
buffers, topographical aspects of the property, distance between existing
buildings and edge of wetlands. We find this method to be successful.
With regard to fences used to control nuisance wildlife we suggest that this is not
put in place until the Town Board comes up with specifications on such fences.
Cc: Supervisor Russell
Town Board
Lori Hulse
11/30/2009 16:2a 631-B53-40a4 S C PLANIN~ DE:PT pAGE 02
DEPARTMENT OF pLANNiNG
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
STEVE LEvY
SUFFOLK COUNTY' EXECUTIVE
November 30, 2009
THOMAS A. ISLES, A,I.C,P
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
RECEIVED
Town of Southold
PO Box 1179
Southold, Naw York 11971
Att; Ms, Elizabeth A. Nc, ville, Clerk
NOV 3 0 2C09
Southold Town ¢leri
Applic~m: Town of Southold
Zoning Action: Amendmants: "Minor Exempt Actions List of the
WaTerfront Consistency Review Law"
Municipal 1:ile No.: Local 1~olution No, 794
$.C.P.D. File No,: $D-09-LD
Dear Ms. Nex411e:
Pursuant to the requkemtmts of Sections A 14-14 to 25 of the Suffolk County Adminis~ativc
Code, Ge above referenced application which has been submitted to the Suffolk CounW Plara~ng
Commission is considered to be a rna~er for local determination as there is no apparent significant
county-wide or imer-cornrnunity impa~t(s). A deci~on of looal determination should not be
construed as e:thcr an approval or ctisappro al.
Very truly yours,
Thomas A, Isles, AICP
DirectOr of Planning
H. Con:al
?lanu~
JHC:jc
LOCATION
H, LEE DENNISON 0[.DG. - 4TH FLOOR .
1 oo vETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAy
MAILtN~ ADDRESS
P. O. BOX $1~
HAUPPAUGI~, NY 1 tTa~-0ogg
(~I)
TELECOPIER (63'1)
t 'd 8~g'ON ~dSg:g .600~'O$'AON
OFF1CE LOCATION:
Town Hall Annex
54375 State Route 25
(cor. 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
MEMORANDUM
To~
From:
Scott Russell, Supervisor /
Members of the Town Board
Mark Terry, Principal Planner
LWRP Coordinator
Date: November 30, 2009
£ECEIV2D
-, , ~
$ou~hckl T~'am Clerk
Re:
Local Waterfront Revitalization Coastal Consistency Review of"A Local Law
in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront
Consistency Review Law"
The proposed amendments exempt certain "minor" actions from Local Waterfront
Revitalization Program (LWRP) Coastal Consistency Review that integrate best
management practices into design and/or are insignificant in scale, practice or are located
a certain distance to a protected, regulated feature. Through compliance of the identified
setbacks or best management practices, the proposed actions meet or further the policies
and sub-policies of the LWRP and are therefore exempt from review by the LWRP
Coordinator. The discretion of the boards to review applications to the Southold Town
Code remains in full effect.
It is important to note that the wetland buffer tables (Tables 1 and 3) proposed within the
amended local law were developed to exempt residential applications not located
adjacent to New York State Scenic Byways, Scenic View-Sheds Important to the
Community or within Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas or VE/AE Flood Zones. Residential
applications within these areas are subject to numerous other policies and sub-policies.
The wetland buffer tables together with the other amendments proposed, meet and further
Policy 6.3 Protect and restore tidal and freshwater wetlands, more specifically, sub-
policy (D) outlined below.
Provide adequate buffers between wetlands and adjacent or nearby uses and
activities in order to ensure protection of the wetland's character, quality, values,
and functions. The adequacy of the buffer depends on the following factors:
Potential for adverse effects associated with the use. Uses such as
those involving hazardous materials, on-site sewage disposal, or
mineral extraction have high potential for adverse effects and may
require substantial buffer.
The nature and importance of the wetland and its benefits.
Substantial buffers may be necessar~ to avoid adverse effects from
adjacent or nearby uses based on the nature of the land use and
the characteristics of the affected wetland.
Direction and flow of surface water between a use and adjacent or
nearby wetland. Buffer widths may be reduced in areas where
drainage patterns normally do not lead directly to the wetland and
where adverse affects on the wetland, other than those due to
runoff, are not likely.
Buffer width necessary to achieve a high particulate filtration
efficiency of surface runoff as determined by vegetative cover type,
soil characteristics, and slope of land.
Other management measures or design alternatives to protect
wetlands from adverse effects where site constraints do not allow
sufficient buffer width.
E. Maintain buffers to ensure that adverse effects of adjacent or nearby
development are avoided:
1. Maintain buffers to achieve a high filtration efficiency of surface
runoff
2. Avoid permanent or unnecessary disturbance within buffer areas.
3. Maintain existing indigenous vegetation within buffer areas.
Based upon the above, the local law was 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 me, it is my recommendation that the proposed action is
CONSISTENT with the denoted following Policy Standards and therefore is
CONSISTENT with the LWRP.
DEVELOPED COAST POLICIES
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.
Policy 3 Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town
of Southold.
NATURAL COAST POLICIES
Policy 4 Minimize loss of life, structures, and natural resources ~rom flooding and
erosion.
Policy 5 Protect and improve water quality and supply in the Town of Southold.
Policy 6 Protect and restore the quality and function of the Town of Southold's
ecosystem.
WORKING COAST POLICIES
'Policy 11 Promote sustainable use of living marine resources in the Town of
Southold.
Pursuant to Chapter 268, the Town Board shall consider this recommendation in
preparing its written determination regarding the consistency of the proposed action.
Cc~
Martin Finnegan, Town Attorney
Jennifer Andaloro, Assistant Town Attorney
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
MARTIN H. SIDOR
Chair
WILLIAM J. CREMERS
KENNETH L. EDWARDS
GEORGE D. SOLOMON
JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MAILING ADDRESS:
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
OFFICE LOCATION:
Town Hall Annex
54375 State Route 25
(cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.)
Southold, NY
Telephone: 631 765-1938
Fax: 631 765-3136
RECEJVF-D
MEMORANDUM
~r-~, 1 20J9
To:
Scott Russell, Town Supervisor
Members of the Town Board
From:
Martin Sidor, Planning Board Chairperson
Date:
November 30, 2009
Re:
Planning Board Comments on "A Local Law in relation to Amendments
to the Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review
Law"
The Planning Board has reviewed the above proposed legislation and fully supports the
amendments recognizing that the changes streamline the application process and exempt
certain applications (lot lines) and activities that pose insignificant impacts to LWRP
goals and policies.
Cc: Martin Finnegan, Town Attorney
617.20
Appendix C
State Environmental Quality Review
SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only
PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by A~)pllcant or Project Sponsor)
1. APPLICANT/SPONSOR /2. PROJECT NAME
Town of Southold ! Amendments to the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
3. PROJECT LOCATION:
Municipality Town of Southold County Suffolk
4. PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road intersections, prominenl landmarks, etc., or provide map)
Jurisdictional limits of the Town of Southold
5. PROPOSED ACTION iS:
[] New [] Expansion [] Modification/alteration
6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY:
A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law
7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED:
initially HA acres Ultimately NA acres
8. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXIST NG ZON NG OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS? L~ Yes LJ No If No, describe briefly
9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT?
Descr[~]be:Residerltlal [] Industrial [] Commercial [] Agriculture [] Park/Forest/Open Space [] Othor
All apply within the jurisdictional limits of the Town of Southold
10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY
(FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL)?
[J Yes ~ No If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit/approvals:
11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL?
[] Yes [] No If Yes. list agency(s) name and permit/approvals:
NA
12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODiFiCATiON? []Yes E~]No
I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
Applicant/sponsor name: Date: I 1/30/09
Signature:
If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the
Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment
OVER
PART II - IMPACT ASSESSMENT (To be completed by Lead Agency)
A. DOES ACTION EXCEED ANY TYPE I THRESHOLD IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.47 If yes, coordinate the review process and use the FULL EAF.
r-]Yes [~]No
B. WILL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.67 If No, a negative
declaration may be superseded by another involved agency.
[~Yes
C. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING: (Answers may be handwritten, if legible)
C1. Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality er quantity, noise levels, existing traffic pattern, solid waste production or disposel,
potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly:
None
C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood charaoter? Explain briefly:
None
C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly:
None
C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted· or a change in use or intensity of use ct ~and or other natural resources? Explain briefly:
None
C5. Growlh, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly:
None
C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1-C57 Explain briefly:
C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly:
None
D. WILL THE PROJECT HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT CAUSED THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CRITICAL
ENVIRONMENTAL AREA (CEA)?
[] Yesg.a~ No If Yes, explain briefly:
E. IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE, CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS?
[] Yes [] NO if Yes, explain briefly:
PART Itt - DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by Agency)
INSTRUCTIONS: For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether it is substantial, large, important or otherwise significant. Each
effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting (i.e. urban or rural); (bi probability of occurring; (c} duration; (d) irraversibility; (e)
geographic scope; and (fi magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that explanations contain
sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately addressed. If question D of Part II was checked
yes, the determination of significance must evaluate the potential impact of the proposed action on the environmental characteristics of the CEA.
] ~he~k~hisb~fy~uhaveidenfl~ed~ne~rm~rep~tent~a~iy~arge~rsigni~cantadverseimpactswhichMAY~ccur~ ThenproceeddirectiytotheFULL
EAF and/or prepare a positive declaraflon.
] Check lffisboxifyou have delermined, based onlheinformation and analysis aboveandanysuppodingdocumentation,thattheproposedaotionWlLL
NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide, on attachments as necessap/, the reasons supporting this determination
Town of Southold Town Board
Name of Lead Agency
Scott Russell
Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency
Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency
I 1/30/09
Date
Supervisor
Title of Responsible Officer ~
~m nsible officer)
#9558
STATE OF NEW YORK)
) SS:
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK)
Karen Kine of Mattituck, in said county, being duly sworn, says that she is
Principal Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a weekly newspaper, published at
Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, and that
the Notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been regularly published in
said Newspaper once each week for 1 week(s), successively, commencing on the
19th day of November, 2009.
/
Principal Clerk
Sworn to before me this
day of
.~- 2009.
C~iRtSTINA VOLINSKI
~,;.¥ pUi)~jC~SI/,JE OF NEW YORK
t~c 01-V06105050
~.-;.,~: f;ed in Suffolk County
~ 18 ~ G~O[~, Illere Im~ [~J ~Re, d to t[~ To~n Board
of [!~ Tc~e~ $outhol~, Suffolk Com~, ~ ~ ma ~e ~ad d~y of September
EE. Up~rades to exis~g fuel ta~ks pt~nded that
~ Landscaoed Natural Vegetated
0-20.000 3O 25
~.o~-~o.ooo 75 5o
Table 2. Wetland Buffer Table for New Residential Structures (select onel
l.o~a~a3~%kL~ Non-turf ~ Natural Veeetated
0-20~00 3O 20 2O
20.000-40.0c0 40 35 25
,aloeo-~.c~o 50 4_5 5
Greater than 80.000 100 100 7~
_T~tl)J¢ 3. Wetland Buffer Table for l~iqfino or Rebuilt Residential Structures ( se-
lect one }.
~{inirmt m Buffer Width
Non-turf Landsca~d Natural Vegetated
25 15 15
c°astal res°urces °r the en'h '~' n-~- ? .... 40 '
I4. Ins~_' n, of txaffie ~nt~i4~de~nces on ex~stmg streets, ro~s a~ lfighways;
I. Map~ of ~i~ting~ ~t~eets, hishway& natural resource, land uses and 60.000-80.0~0
J. Iaformafioa-~o~ i~i~ ba~c dam collection and research, water qusl-
ity amd polll~ ~es~ ~ ¢ol~lls, engineering stud~ s~u'veys, subsurface in-
vestigations a~'.?~ii~s studte~t;~n6t commit the agency to undertake, fund or
new programs or majeazfeorderi~ of priofiti~ that ~ ~ ll~e
M Omductinll coa~airi~nt ~lvironmental, eng~e~ring ~conormc, feasibility and
mher studies a~d pre,lmi.ar~ planning. ~cl ~m:!g~. E .~c~ ~, the for-
mulati~ of a propor~ ~a~a,p. ~u~?~ ~ose acUwUes ~ no:.Coa~t ate ~n~
O. In~ or~ Or pemio~ or u~t, ir~ae,~ syaie~, or
E inspections and ~i~n~i~lat~g to the quatificalions of in~fividuals or
Q. Purclu~e or sale of ~uaa.~u~p, equ!pment or su .~ll% incluain~ surp~u~ Oov-
R. Adoption of regulations, pq~cies, ~urea. a~ ~ l~v~dea:i~ ia,
s. ~ in rev~ of ant part of an application to aet~rmine c~mp~n~ with
chapter have been ~ : ~, ~ PERVIOUS NONTURF BUFFER - a land area of a eartaih hei~h~ t and width
T. Civil Or criminal ~t~gs, whether admiaiatrafive or judicial, ~nm~ri~ Of sand~ S~one or ~e~m~ah!enav~rs ~l~t~ed il~ ~ a ~lal~let' to 8llow for
includlng a particular ~ o~ aetio~l~tf~.~ y .r~qu~r~d t..o be .undertaken purau- ma x~m~m rserco[afi~ffo~ siorm ~ratet runoff into the aoll.
U. Ado~0fiofl of ~ ~10~atori~m 6~ la6d ~tev~?.p~.~..n~ or cgnst~ ,- . . of th~ Town of Sm~tholc~listed hv the New Yo~ Stute Denartment of EnVironmental
X. Eme~'gency actions tha~ are immediatdy~ on 8 ~ ~=lyi essential to the survival of a large ~Ortion of a oartlcular fiah or wikllife tnmulafioa:
Sworn to before me this
day of
/J~- 2009.
Ca~!$~NA ¥oLIN$1q
. M,~¥ CUi)LIC-$1ATE OF NEW yORK
~ c, 01_V06105050
;4~c t~e ~ in Su~otk county
.~ willholdapublichearmgontheafol~e _.I~_,L~.~,alLaw ~ . _ ~ ~ . . . ·
~{ll/la Road, Southo|d. New yor .k., on I~l~lk~ ,l)~,~.~llid~. '.~ af'/'3$ 'fle~d on ,the?p!~tlcan. t's. P~operty ? _t~.~ sa. _m_e~l°catl°n w~th a slit curtain emPth~d
r'BE- IT ENACTED b~he Town Board of theTown of Southold as follows: .
L Pmpo~ Tho amemdlnents to this l~al law ~u~,luto~d under the authority of
nance of existi~ utility thdliti~s:
any aetivi~ withi~ I1~ CEHA:
G. Minor t~npot'~ ~ oJ ~ having negligthl~ ~l~'~m~t impact on
ity and polhBion stlldie, s, tral~ counts, engineenng studies, surveys, subsurface in-
ing blffiding whero i~u~ce i~ ll~li~...., ~ 1~ the applicant's compliance or
noncompliance with tile relevant local building cod~:
mulation o£ a proposal for agtion, prOvided t~ose activities do not com~it the agency
to commence, e. ngag~in or a~n~ ~ch acUon; -
N. Coll~-tlve bargainthgacti~ifies; .
. O. Invea~l~!~t or ~ ~gencies or pension or retirement systems, or
R Inspections and licensi~a~fivtt/e~relating to the qualifications of indi¥iduah or
O. Pureha~ or sale o£ fim~lfings, equ?ment or suJ~pli¢~, incladm~ su~plu~
R. Adoption oi re~tio~, pollc/cs, preccdores and, local le/~intive dechinm
cotmectio~ wlth ~Dy :ffition on
incluthn~ a particular ca,se o~ actio~ ape ' .cif~ll, y rqulr, edt.? be ,undertaken pursu-
U A~optiofl of a g~atorium on ts6a development or consh'ucQon;
W. Designation of local landmarks or th 'e~azla~a within hisUnk disUic~
X. Emergency actions that are immediately ,~o~saty on a lhlaited and ~ergpota~
Y. Local legislative decisions such as rezoning wh~re the Town Board determines
h~-with the public's rights oi passage along the foreshore:
Lot Area (so. ft3 Landscaoed Natural Vegetated
g-2o.ooo ~o 25
60.000-80.000 75 5o
Qreater than 80.000 100 75
Table 2. Wetland Buffar Table for New Residential Stracmres (select onel
Lt~t Area isa. ft3 Non-turf ~ Natural Vetetated
20. ,(~-40.000 4o ~ 25
Table 3. Wotlnfld Buffer Table for Existine or Rebuilt Residential Structures
Minimum Buffer Width
Lot Area I sq_. ft3 Non-turf ~ Natural Vegetated
0-20,000 25 15 15
LEGAL NOTICE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, there has been presented to the Town Board of the
Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 22nd day of September 2009, a
Local Law entitled "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt
Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law" and
NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of
Southold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town
Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, on the 1st day of December, 2009 at
7:35 p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard.
The proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the
Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law" reads as
follows:
LOCAL LAW NO. 2009
A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt
Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law".
BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows:
Purpose. The amendments to this local law are adopted under the authority of
the Municipal Home Rule Law and the Waterfront Revitalization of Coastal
Areas and Inland Waterways Act of the State of New York (Article 42 of the
Executive Law). It is intended that, by making additions to the "minor actions"
exempt list, certain actions that by their nature will not have an adverse effect on
the coastal area and resources will not require a review under this law, which will
result in a more efficient review process.
II. Chapter 268 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
§ 268-3. Definitions.
LANDSCAPED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width which is planted
with indigenous, drought tolerant, vegetation similar to that found within the immediate
proximity of the parcel. Vegetation shall be installed in sufficient densities to achieve
ninety-five (95) percent ground cover within two years of installation. Survival of
planted vegetation shall be ninety (90) percent for a period of three years. Maintenance
activities within the buffer are limited to removing vegetation which are hazardous to life
and property, trimming tree limbs up to a height of fifteen feet (15') to maintain
viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and establishing a four foot (4') wide access path
constructed of pervious material for access to the water-body.
MINOR ACTIONS - Include the following actions, which are not subject to review under
this chapter:
A. Maintenance or repair involving no substantial changes in an existing structure or
facility;
H.
I.
J.
Replacement, rehabilitation or reconstruction of a structure or facility, in kind, on
the same site (in-place). including upgrading buildings to meet building or fire
codes, except for structures in areas designated by the Coastal Erosion Hazard
Area (CEHA) law where structures may not be replaced, rehabilitated or
reconstructed without a permit and shoreline erosion control structures (including,
but not limited to, groins, jetties, bulkheads, filled piers) located within Great
Peconic Bay, Cutchogue Harbor, Little Peconic Bay, Hog Neck Bay, Noyack
Bay, Southold Bay, Shelter Island Sound, Pipes Cove, Orient Harbor. Gardiners
Bay, Long Island Sound, Fishers island Sound and Block Island Sound [excluding
all creeks];
Repaving or widening of existing paved highways not involving the addition of
new travel lanes;
Street openings and right-of-way openings for the purpose of repair or
maintenance of existing utility facilities;
Maintenance of existing landscaping or natural growth, that is not located within
100 fe fthe bou d f p cti al fe ...... , ...u~ ,~.~,~.~.~ ~.
et o narv o a rote ve natur ature .... v .....................
end ...... ,4 .... ;~o ~c~1~., ..... 1~1 ..... CroaTiA or with' significant coastal
fish and wildlife habitat areas;
Granting of individual setback, lot line and lot area variances, except in relation to
a regulated natural feature or a bulkhead or other shoreline defense structure or
any activity within the CEHA;
Minor temporary uses of land having negligible or no permanent impact on
coastal resources or the environment;
Installation of traffic control devices on existing streets, roads and highways;
Mapping of existing roads, streets, highways, natural resources, land uses and
ownership patterns;
Information collection including basic data collection and research, water quality
and pollution studies, traffic counts, engineering studies, surveys, subsurface
investigations and soils studies that do not commit the agency to undertake, fund
or approve any action;
Official acts of a ministerial nature involving no exercise of discretion, including
building where issuance is predicated solely on the applicant's compliance or
noncompliance with the relevant local building code;
Routine or continuing agency administration and management, not including new
programs or major reordering of priorities that may affect the environment;
Conducting concurrent environmental, engineering, economic, feasibility and
V.
W.
X.
AA.
BB.
CC.
DD.
other studies and preliminary plaiming and budgetary processes necessary to the
formulation of a proposal for action, provided those activities do not commit the
agency to commence, engage in or approve such action;
Collective bargaining activities;
Investments by or on behalf of agencies or pension or retirement systems, or
refinancing existing debt;
Inspections and licensing activities relating to the qualifications of individuals or
businesses to engage in their business or profession;
Purchase or sale of furnishings, equipment or supplies, including surplus
government property, other than the following: land, radioactive material,
pesticides, herbicides, storage of road de-icing substances, or other hazardous
materials;
Adoption of regulations, policies, procedures and local legislative decisions in
connection with any action on this list;
Engaging in review of any part of an application to determine compliance with
technical requirements, provided that no such determination entitles or permits the
project sponsor to commence the action unless and until all requirements of this
chapter have been fulfilled;
Civil or criminal enforcement proceedings, whether administrative or judicial,
including a particular course of action specifically required to be undertaken
pursuant to a judgment or order, or the exercise of prosecutorial discretion;
Adoption of a moratorium on land development or construction;
Interpreting an existing code, rule or regulation;
Designation of local landmarks or their inclusion within historic districts;
Emergency actions that are immediately necessary on a limited and temporary
basis for the protection or preservation of life, health, property or natural
resources, provided that such actions are directly related to the emergency and are
performed to cause the least change or disturbance, practicable under the
circumstances, to coastal resources or the environment. Any decision to fund,
approve or directly undertake other activities after the emergency has expired is
fully subject to the review procedures of this chapter;
Local legislative decisions such as rezoning where the Town Board determines
the action will not be approved;
Split rail fences or fences used to control nuisance wildlife that do not interferi~vg
with the public's rights of passage along the foreshore;
Removal of a structure greater than 75 feet from a wetland;
Additions to O~Mm~ar44~f an existing dwelling constituting less than 25
percent of the existing structure where the addition is greater than 75 feet from a
natural protective feature, except where the parcel is located in a Coastal Erosion
Hazard Area;
Structures less than 100 250 square feet in size that are accessory to existing
permitted primary structures, and which accessory structures are greater than 50
feet from a boundary of a natural protective feature, and freshwater or tidal
wetlands fidat-wedamt;
Construction or improvements of pervious residential driveways, parking areas or
walkways greater than 50 feet from a tidal or freshwater wetland;
EE. Upgrades to existing fuel tanks provided that erosion control measures are
implemented;
FF. Cutting phragmites to greater than 12 inches and vegetative restoration provided
that native wetland vegetative species are not affected or disturbed in any manner;
GG. Eu!!~hcad tv, rcp!aco Within all Town Creeks, replacement of existing bulkhead on
the applicant's property in the same location with a silt curtain employed
deployed prior to and during construction; and
HH. Lot line changes, provided that the lot line change will not permit new
development that may have undue adverse impacts on wetlands, tidal waters or
natural protective features;
II. Additions to an existing building or rebuilt residential structure which results in
no-net increase in ground area coverage, except where the parcel is located in a
Coastal Erosion Hazard Area;
JJ. Construction or installation of drainage improvements for the retention of storm
water runoff in accordance with Chapter 236, provided that such improvements
are located more than 50 feet from the boundary of the natural protective feature;
and
KK. Residential structures not located within the CEHA/or adjacent to a New York
State Designated Scenic Byway, a scenic view shed important to the community
or within a VE/AE Flood Zone Designation and which complies with the
following minimum buffer width tables:
Table 1. Wetland BuffEr Table for New Residential Structures located
adjacent to New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation Priority Water Body (select one).
Minimum Buffer Width
Lot Area (sq. ft.) Landscaped Natural Vegetated
0-20,000 30 25
20,000-40,000 40 35
40,000-60,000 75 50
60,000-80,000 75 50
GreaterthanS0,000 100 75
Table 2. Wetland Buffer Table for New Residential Structures (select one)
Minimum Buffer Width
Lot Area (sq. ft.) Non-turf Landscaped Natural Vegetated
0-20,000 30 20 20
20,000-40,000 40 35 25
40,000-60,000 50 45 35
60,000-80,000 75 65 55
Greater than 80,000
100 100 75
Table 3.
Wetland Buffer Table for Existing or Rebuilt Residential
Structures (select one).
Minimum Buffer Width
Lot Area(sq. fl.) Non-turf Landscaped Natural Vegetated
0-20,000 25 15 15
20,000-40,000 30 25 25
40,000-60,000 40 35 30
60,000-80,000 60 55 45
Greaterthan 80,000 75 60 55
NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEATURE - A nearshore area, beach, bluff; primary dune,
secondary dune or wetland and their vegetation.
NATURAL VEGETATED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width where
existing vegetation occurs prior to the commencement of any grading or clearing activity.
Vegetation shall be maintained to achieve a minimum pement ground cover of ninety-
five (95%) percent. To achieve the percent ground cover indigenous, drought tolerant
vegetation shall be planted. Survival of planted vegetation shall be ninety (90%) percent
for a period of three (3) years. Maintenance activities within the buffer are limited to
removing vegetation which are hazardous to life and property, trimming tree limbs up to
a height of fifteen feet (15') to maintain viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and
establishing a four foot (4') wide access path constructed of pervious material for access
to the water-body.
NEW YORK SCENIC BYWAY (North Fork Trail) - all that portion of the State highway
system known as State Route 25 in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, beginning at
the boundary between the Town of Riverhead and the Town of Southold, continuing
northeasterly to Orient Point and to the end of State Route 25, and all that portion of the
local highway system known as Sound Avenue beginning at the boundary between the
Town of Riverhead and the Town of Southold continuing easterly to the overlap of Sound
Avenue and County Route 48 and continuing along County Route 48 generally
northeasterly to the intersection of County Route 48 and State Route 25 north of the
Village of Greenport, Suffolk County.
NUISANCE WILDLIFE - Wildlife that is destructive and capable of damaging property
such as buildings, crops, pets, livestock, gardens, or public areas. Wildlife may threaten
human health or safety by spreading diseases, through direct attacks, or accidentally.
PERVIOUS NONTURF BUFFER - a land area of a certain height and width comprised
of sand, stone or permeable pavers arranged in such a maimer to allow for maximum
percolation of storm water runoff into the soil.
PRIORITY WATER-BODY - a water-body within the jurisdictional boundaries of the
Town of Southold listed by the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation on the Water-Body Inventory/Priority Water-Bodies List, as amended.
SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT - those habitats which are essential to
the survival of a large portion of a particular fish or wildlife population; support rare or
endangered species; are found at a very low frequency within a geographic area; support
fish or wildlife populations having significant commercial or recreational value; or that
would be difficult or impossible to replace.
IlL SEVERABILITY
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by
any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the
validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be
unconstitutional or invalid.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as
provided by law.
Dated: September 22, 2009
BY ORDER OF THE TOWN BOARD
OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Elizabeth Neville
Town Clerk
PLEASE PUBLISH ON November 19, 2009, AND FORWARD ONE (1) AFFIDAVIT
OF PUBLICATION TO ELIZABETH NEVILLE, TOWN CLERK, TOWN HALL, P.O.
BOX 1179, SOUTHOLD, NY 11971.
Copies to the following:
The Suftblk Times
TC's Bulletin Board
Bldg. Dept.
Town Board Members
Accounting Dept.
ZBA
Town Attorney
Planning Dept
Trustees
STATE OF NEW YORK)
SS:
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK)
ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, Town Clerk of the Town of Southold, New York being
duly sworn, says that on the /~ '~ day of ,t/~,~; _, 2009, she affixed a notice of
which the annexed printed notice is a true copy, in a proper and substantial manner, in
a most public place in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, to wit:
Town Clerk's Bulletin Board, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York.
Re: WCRL Amendments
Sworn before me this
/-~ day of ;7~
,2009.
LINDA J COOPER
NOTARY PUBLIC, State of New York
NO. 01CO4822563, Suffolk Cou:~
Term Expires December 31, 20 ~'¢¢'
(~lizabeth ~. Ndville~-
Southold Town Clerk
Page I of I
Cooper, Linda
From: Cooper, Linda
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 11:04 AM
To: Reisenberg, Lloyd
Subject: WCRL Amendments 12-1-09
Attachments: WCRL Amendments 12-1-09.doc
Hi Lloyd,
When you get an opportunity, would you mind posting this on our web site? Thank you,
Linda
11/10/2009
RESOLUTION 2009-794
ADOPTED
DOC ID: 5314
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2009-794 WAS
ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON
SEPTEMBER 22, 2009:
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk
County, New York, on the 22nd day of September, 2009, a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in
relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency
Review Law"
and
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a public hearing on the
aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, on the
1st day of December, 2009 at 7:35 p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an
opportunity to be heard.
The proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor
Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront Consistenc.y Review Law" reads as follows:
LOCAL LAW NO. OF 2009
A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Minor Exempt
Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review Law".
BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows:
Purpose. The amendments to this local law are adopted under the authority of the
Municipal Home Rule Law and the Waterfront Revitalization of Coastal Areas and
Inland Waterways Act of the State of New York (Article 42 of the Executive Law). It is
intended that, by making additions to the "minor actions" exempt list, certain actions that
by their nature will not have an adverse effect on the coastal area and resources will not
require a review under this law, which will result in a more efficient review process.
II. Chapter 268 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
§ 268-3. Definitions.
Resolution 2009-794 Board Meeting of September 22, 2009
LANDSCAPED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width which is planted with
indigenous, drought tolerant, vegetation similar to that found within the immediate proximity of
the parcel. Vegetation shall be installed in sufficient densities to achieve ninety-five (95) percent
ground cover within two years of installation. Survival of planted vegetation shall be ninety (90)
pement for a period of three years. Maintenance activities within the buffer are limited to
removing vegetation which are hazardous to life and property, trimming tree limbs up to a height
of fifteen feet (15') to maintain viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and establishing a four foot
(4') wide access path constructed of pervious material for access to the water-body.
MINOR ACTIONS - Include the following actions, which are not subject to review under this
chapter:
A. Maintenance or repair involving no substantial changes in an existing structure or
facility;
H.
I.
J.
Replacement, rehabilitation or reconstruction of a structure or facility, in kind, on
the same site (in-place), including upgrading buildings to meet building or fire
codes, except for structures in areas designated by the Coastal Erosion Hazard
Area (CEHA) law where structures may not be replaced, rehabilitated or
reconstructed without a permit and shoreline erosion control structures (including,
but not limited to, groins, ietties, bulkheads, filled piers) located within Great
Peconic Bay, Cutchogue Harbor, Little Peconic Bay, Hog Neck Bay, Noyack
Bay, Southold Bay, Shelter Island Sound, Pipes Cove, Orient Harbor, Gardiners
Bay, Long Island Sound, Fishers Island Sound and Block Island Sound [excluding
all creeks[;
Repaving or widening of existing paved highways not involving the addition of
new travel lanes;
Street openings and right-of-way openings for the purpose of repair or
maintenance of existing utility facilities;
Maintenance of existing landscaping or natural growth, that is not located within
1 O0 feet of the boundary of a protective natural feature~,-~w' '-'~'~,,ll~l~ *~-~*~..~ ~.~l~ ~.~
~ ...... .~ .... :~ ^c~+ ..... :~ ..... cc~+~ within significant coastal
fish and wildlife habitat areas;
Granting of individual setback, lot line and lot area variances, except in relation to
a regulated natural feature or a bulkhead or other shoreline defense structure or
any activity within the CEHA;
Minor temporary uses of land having negligible or no permanent impact on
coastal resources or the environment;
Installation of traffic control devices on existing streets, roads and highways;
Mapping of existing roads, streets, highways, natural resources, land uses and
ownership patterns;
Information collection including basic data collection and research, water quality
and pollution studies, traffic counts, engineering studies, surveys, subsurface
investigations and soils studies that do not commit the agency to undertake, fund
or approve any action;
Official acts of a ministerial nature involving no exercise of discretion, including
building where issuance is predicated solely on the applicant's compliance or
noncompliance with the relevant local building code;
Routine or continuing agency administration and management, not including new
Updated: 10/13/2009 12:47 PM by Lynda Rudder Page 2
Resolution 2009-794 Board Meeting of September 22, 2009
programs or major reordering of priorities that may affect the environment;
M. Conducting concurrent environmental, engineering, economic, feasibility and
other studies and preliminary, planning and budgetary processes necessary to the
formulation of a proposal for action, provided those activities do not commit the
agency to commence, engage in or approve such action;
N. Collective bargaining activities;
O. Investments by or on behalf of agencies or pension or retirement systems, or
refinancing existing debt;
P. Inspections and licensing activities relating to the qualifications of individuals or
businesses to engage in their business or profession;
Q. Purchase or sale of furnishings, equipment or supplies, including surplus
govemment property, other than the following: land, radioactive material,
pesticides, herbicides, storage of road de-icing substances, or other hazardous
materials;
R. Adoption of regulations, policies, procedures and local legislative decisions in
connection with any action on this list;
S. Engaging in review of any part of an application to determine compliance with
technical requirements, provided that no such determination entitles or permits the
project sponsor to commence the action unless and until all requirements of this
chapter have been fulfilled;
T. Civil or criminal enforcement proceedings, whether administrative or judicial,
including a particular course of action specifically required to be undertaken
pursuant to a judgment or order, or the exercise of prosecutorial discretion;
U. Adoption of a moratorium on land development or construction;
V. Interpreting an existing code, rule or regulation;
W. Designation of local landmarks or their inclusion within historic districts;
X. Emergency actions that are immediately necessary on a limited and temporary
basis for the protection or preservation of life, health, property or natural
resources, provided that such actions are directly related to the emergency and are
performed to cause the least change or disturbance, practicable under the
circumstances, to coastal resources or the environment. Any decision to fund,
approve or directly undertake other activities after the emergency has expired is
fully subject to the review procedures of this chapter;
Y. Local legislative decisions such as rezoning where the Town Board determines
the action will not be approved;
Z. Split rail fences or fences used to control nuisance wildlife that do not interfer/q:vg
with the public's rights of passage along the foreshore;
AA. Removal of a structure greater than 75 feet from a wetland;
BB. Additions to ~ an existing dwelling constituting less than 25
percent of the existing structure where the addition is greater than 75 feet from a
natural protective feature, except where the parcel is located in a Coastal Erosion
Hazard Area;
CC. Structures less than ! 00 250 square feet in size that are accessory to existing
permitted primary structures, and which accessory structures are greater than 50
feet from a boundary of a natural protective feature, and freshwater or tidal
wetlands t4dat4vettand;
DD. Construction or improvements of pervious residential driveways, parking areas or
walkways greater than 50 feet from a tidal or freshwater wetland;
Updated: 10/13/2009 12:47 PM by Lynda Rudder Page 3
Resolution 2009-794 Board Meeting of September 22, 2009
EE. Upgrades to existing fuel tanks provided that erosion control measures are
implemented;
FF. Cutting phragmites to greater than 12 inches and vegetative restoration provided
that native wetland vegetative species are not affected or disturbed in any manner;
GG. ~ Within all Town Creeks, replacement of existing bulkhead on
the applicant's property in the same location with a silt curtain ~uah, ployed
deployed prior to and during construction; and
HH. Lot line changes, provided that the lot line change will not permit new
development that may have undue adverse impacts on wetlands, tidal waters or
natural protective features;
II. Additions to an existing building or rebuilt residential structure which results in
no-net increase in ground area coverage, except where the parcel is located in a
Coastal Erosion Hazard Area~
JJ. Construction or installation of drainage improvements for the retention of storm
water runoff in accordance with Chapter 236, provided that such improvements
are located more than 50 feet from the boundary of the natural protective feature;
and
KK. Residential structures not located within the CEHA/or adjacent to a New York
State Designated Scenic Byway, a scenic view shed important to the community
or within a VE/AE Flood Zone Designation and which complies with the
following minimum buffer width tables:
Table 1. Wetland Buffer Table for New Residential Structures located
adjacent to New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation Priority Water Body (select one).
Minimum Buffer Width
Lot Area (sq. fi.) Landscaped Natural Vegetated
0-20,000 30 25
20,000-40,000 40 35
40,000-60,000 75 50
60,000-80,000 75 50
Greater than 80,000 100 75
Table 2. Wetland Buffer Table for New Residential Structures (select one)
Minimum Buffer Width
Lot Area(sq. fi.) Non-turf Landscaped Natural Vegetated
0-20,000 30 20 20
20,000-40,000 40 35 25
40,000-60,000 50 45 35
60,000-80,000 75 65 55
Greaterthan 80,000 100 100 75
Table 3.
Wetland Buffer Table for Existing or Rebuilt Residential
Structures (select one).
Minimum Buffer Width
Updated: 10/13/2009 12:47 PM by Lynda Rudder Page 4
Resolution 2009-794 Board Meeting of September 22, 2009
Lot Area (sq. fi.) Non-turf Landscaped Natural Vegetated
0-20,000 25 15 15
20,000-40,000 30 25 25
40,000-60,000 40 35 30
60,000-80,000 60 55 45
Greater than 80,000 75 60 55
NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEATURE - A nearshore area, beach, bluff, primary dune,
secondary dune or wetland and their vegetation.
NATURAL VEGETATED BUFFER - a land area of a certain length and width where existing
vegetation occurs prior to the commencement of any grading or clearing activity. Vegetation
shall be maintained to achieve a minimum percent ground cover of ninety-five (95%) percent.
To achieve the percent ground cover indigenous, drought tolerant vegetation shall be planted.
Survival of planted vegetation shall be ninety (90%) percent for a period of three (3) years.
Maintenance activities within the buffer are limited to removing vegetation which are hazardous
to life and property, trimming tree limbs up to a height of fifteen feet (15') to maintain
viewsheds, replanting of vegetation and establishing a four foot (4') wide access path constructed
of pervious material for access to the water-body.
NEW YORK SCENIC BYWAY (North Fork Trail) - all that portion of the State highway
system known as State Route 25 in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, beginning at the
boundary between the Town of Riverhead and the Town of Southold, continuing northeasterly to
Orient Point and to the end of State Route 25, and all that portion of the local highway system
known as Sound Avenue beginning at the boundary between the Town of Riverhead and the
Town of Southold contim~ing easterly to the overlap of Sound Avenue and County Route 48 and
continuing along County Route 48 generally northeasterly to the intersection of County Route 48
and State Route 25 north of the Village of Greenport, Suffolk County.
NUISANCE WILDLIFE - Wildlife that is destructive and capable of damaging property such as
buildings, crops, pets, livestock, gardens, or public areas. Wildlife may threaten human health or
safety by spreading diseases, through direct attacks, or accidentally.
PERVIOUS NONTURF BUFFER - a land area of a certain height and width comprised of sand,
stone or permeable pavers arranged in such a manner to allow for maximum percolation of storm
water runoff into the soil.
PRIORITY WATER-BODY - a water-body within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Town of
Southold listed by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation on the
Water-Body Inventory/Priority Water-Bodies List, as amended.
SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT - those habitats which are essential to the
survival of a large portion of a particular fish or wildlife population; support rare or endangered
species; are found at a very low frequency within a geographic area; support fish or wildlife
populations having significant commercial or recreational value; or that would be difficult or
impossible to replace.
III. SEVERABILITY
Updated: 10/13/2009 12:47 PM by Lynda Rudder Page 5
Resolution 2009-794 Board Meeting of September 22, 2009
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any
court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law
as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided
by law.
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: William Ruland, Councilman
SECONDER: Louisa P. Evans, Justice
AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Kmpski Jr., Wickham, Evans, Russell
Updated: 10/13/2009 12:47 PM by Lynda Rudder Page 6
Page 1 of I
Cooper, Linda
From: Cooper, Linda
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 11:03 AM
To: Bunch, Connie; Cantrell, Elizabeth; Cappabianca, Lucille; Cooper, Linda; Kowalski, Linda; Lanza,
Heather; Randolph, Linda; Standish, Lauren; Verity, Mike; Neville, Elizabeth; Andaloro, Jennifer;
Finnegan, Martin; Hulse, Lori; Krauza, Lynne; 'Al Krupski'; Louisa Evans
(Ipevans@fishersisland.net); Russell, Scott; Thomas Wickham (wickhamthomas@yahoo.com); V
Orlando (vincent.orlando@town.southoldny.us); W. Ruland (rulandfarm@yahoo.com)
Subject: WCRL Amendments 12-1-09 PH Notice
Attachments: WCRL Amendments 12-1-09.doc
Legal notice of Public Hearing for 12/1/09 TB Meeting
11/10/2009
Page I of 1
Cooper, Linda
From: Reisenberg, Lloyd
Sent: Tuesday. November 10, 2009 2:23 PM
To: Cooper, Linda
Subject: RE: WCRL Amendments 12-1-09
Posted.
Lloyd H. Reisenberg
Network and Systems Administrator
Town of Southold, New York
IIoyd. reisenber.q~.town.southold, ny. us
631-765-1891
From: Cooper, Linda
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 11:04 AM
To: Reisenberg, Lloyd
Subject: WCRL Amendments 12-1-09
Hi Lloyd,
When you get an opportunity, would you mind posting this on our web site? Thank you.
Linda
11/10/2009
Southold Town Board - Letter
Board Me~ Octobe~ 6, 2009
RESOLUTION 2009-821
ADOPTED
Item It 5.29
DOC ID: 5344
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2009-821 WAS
ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON
OCTOBER 6, 2009:
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby authorizes and directs the
Town Clerk to forward the proposed Local Law entitled "A Local Law in Relation to
Amendments to the Minor Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront Consistency Review
Law" to the Suffolk County Planning Commission and the Southold Town Planning Board
for their review and recommendation.
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIHOUS]
MOVER: Albert Krupski Jr., Councilman
SECONDER: William Ruland, Councilman
AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Krupski Jr., Wickham, Evans, Russell
Generated October 13, 2009 Page 35
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
STEVE LEVY
SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
THOMAS A. ISLES, A.I.C.P
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
October 16, 2009
RECEIVED
Town of Southold
PO Box 1179
Southold, New York 11935
Att: Ms. Elizabeth A. Neville, Clerk
Ot~; 2 2 2009
~outhold Town Cled~
Applicant: Town of Southold
Zoning Action: Amendments: "Minor Exempt Actions List of the
Waterfront Consistency Review Law"
Municipal File No.: Local Resolution No. 794
S.C.P.D. File No.: SD-09-LD
Dear Ms. Neville:
Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative
Code, the above referenced application which has been submitted to the Suffolk Cotmty Planning
Commission is considered to be a matter for local determination as there is no apparent significant
county-wide or inter-community impact(s). A decision of local determination should not be
construed as either an approval or disapproval.
Very truly yours,
Thomas A. Isles, AICP
Chief Planner
APF:ds
LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS
H. LEE DENNISON BLDG. - 4TH FLOOR P.O. BOX 6100 (631) 853-5191
100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY 11788-0099 TELECOPIER (631) 853-4044
ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
MARRIAGE OFFICER
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (631) 765-6145
Telephone (631) 765-1800
southoldtown.nor thfork.net
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CI,F. RK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
September 24, 2009
Re: Resolution Number 794 "A Local Law
in relation to Amendments to the Minor
Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront
Consistency Review Law".
Andrew P. Freleng, Chief Planner
Suffolk County Department of Planning
Post Office Box 6100
Hauppauge, New York 11788-0099
Dear Mr. Freleng:
The Southold Town Board at their regular meeting held on September 22, 2009 adopted
the resolution referenced above. A certified copy is enclosed.
Please prepare an official report defining the Planning Department's recommendations
with regard to this proposed local law and forward it to me at your earliest convenience.
This proposed local law will also be sent to the Southold Town Planning Department for
their review. The date and time for this public hearing is 7:35 P.M., Tuesday, December
1, 2009. Please do not hesitate to contact me, if you have any questions. Thank you.
Every truly yours,
Southold Town Clerk
Enclosure
cc: Town Board
Town Attorney
ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
MARRIAGE OFFICER
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (631) 765-6145
Telephone (631) 76571800
southoldtown.northfork.net
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
September 24, 2009
Re: Resolution Number 794 "A Local Law
in relation to Amendments to the Minor
Exempt Actions List of the Waterfront
Consistency Review Law".
Martin Sidor, Chairman
Southold Town Planning Board
54375 State Route 25
Post Office Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Dear Mr. Sidor,
The Southold Town Board at their regular meeting held on September 22, 2009 adopted
the resolution referenced above. A certified copy is enclosed.
Please prepare an official report defining the Planning Department's recommendations
with regard to this proposed local law and forward it to me at your earliest convenience.
This proposed local law will also be sent to the Suffolk County Planning Department for
their review. The date and time for this public hearing is 7:35 P.M., Tuesday, December
1, 2009. Please do not hesitate to contact me, if you have any questions. Thank you.
Every truly yours,
Eliza~bcth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk
Enclosure
cc: Town Board
Town Attorney