The Greenport village board was divided last night over a long-time village business they said went ahead to build a new bulkhead without following the required process.
On the agenda for the July meeting of the board were two resolutions, one directing the village’s Conservation Advisory Council to review the wetlands permit application submitted by Costello Marine Contracting Corporation for a property located at 210 Carpenter Street, and to provide a report to the board by August 15.
The second resolution was to schedule a public hearing for August 27 at 7 p.m. at the Third Street Firehouse on the wetlands permit application, as submitted by Costello Marine, to remove and replace 346′ of existing bulkhead, in-kind, in-place, and to construct 204′ of new bulkhead immediately in front of existing bulkhead at 210 Carpenter Street.
Resident, zoning board of appeals member, and CAC member John Saladino asked how the board could ask the CAC to review a project, or hold a public hearing for a project, that will soon be completed.
“How can we make a value judgment on a proposed project that’s already done?” he asked.
Saladino said a village board that allows individuals to move ahead with projects that have not received proper approvals is allowing “a process that’s already broken, out the window. You say we have to go through the process. There is no process.”
Greenport Village Mayor George Hubbard said in past years, the mantra in the village was that individuals could “go and do something, and and ask for forgiveness later. We’re trying to get people to break that trend.”
That’s why, he said, the board was voting on the two resolutions, to follow process, even after the fact, so that a precedent would not be set “for the next guy, to do the same thing.”
A stop work order was issued for the project, Saladino said, asking why work was allowed to continue without the permit in place.
Hubbard said the owner had not realized a maintenance permit had expired in April and once the new permit from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation was received, work was allowed to commence.
“How can you give carte blanche to a construction without oversight?” Saladino said.
Hubbard said normally, work does not proceed without Army Corps of Engineers and DEC permits but since the DEC had given the green light, work continued.
“We are autonomous. This is home rule — the village has the last word here,” Saladino said. “To ignore village code is to ignore the law. I’m having a hard time standing here listening to you trying to justify this. This project was done by stealth. No one has any idea of what’s going on.”
Steve Clarke, owner of Greenport Yacht and Ship Building and former Greenport Village mayor, said Saladino was “absolutely dead right” on a number of points. “I happen to be one of the most flagrant” violators of village law, he said. “For the 45 years I have been here, I never knew I had to have a village wetlands permit. I know that now, in spades, and I will never even dream of building something without a wetlands permit.”
However, he said, a future public hearing on the bulkhead would be “unnecessary and unproductive.”
Clarke said both Costello Marine and Greenport Yacht and Ship Building did not realize their ongoing DEC permits had expired until the new bulkhead project was “well underway.”
The DEC did issue a new permit on July 10, he said.
However, he said, the DEC sent a notice stating that the project was not subject to state environmental quality review because it was a Type 2 action.
A hearing in August will just mean some points might be raised and more might need to be done, when the project is nearly complete
“Let’s save time and money,” he said, adding engineering and other costs could result after the hearing.
The vitality of the working waterfront in the Village is critical, something that makes Greenport unique, he said.
“The waterfront in Greenport is shrinking and John Costello and I, and probably quite a few others, are determined that it not shrink too much more.”
Clarke asked the board to vote down the resolutions and promised that Greenport Yacht and Ship Building “will cooperate with all village, public and environmental regulations in the future. Obviously, from the whole thing we are going through, it’s not worth trying to get around anything,” he said.
Former Greenport Village Trustee Gail Horton spoke out in support of Clarke. “He is a very important part of our working waterfront. I don’t think he was a scofflaw in the first place.” Holding the hearing and review, she said, could cost his business valuable time and said the business was important to the working waterfront.
Village Trustee Doug Roberts pointed out that others were being made to “go through the process” and the board should remember that, when they voted on the two resolutions.
Trustee Mary Bess Phillips said that the board had agreed with the DEC “to follow the process.”
Greenport Village Attorney Joseph Prokop said whether or not a portion of the work on the project has been completed “is not relevant” and “does not waive or preclude the requirement to have a permit and a hearing.”
Phillips asked if the August hearing date was set in stone, and said she understood the need for “a shipyard wanting to be a shipyard” and move forward as soon as possible.
Prokop said he believed a 10-day notice could be given to set a special meeting at which the board could hold a meeting and act.
“I’m just trying to keep the project moving forward,” Phillips said, adding that the work on the bulkhead benefited the village.
Hubbard said the first step involved having the CAC review the project and provide feedback to the board.
The mayor said work is continuing on the project currently. “Work is not stopping and they will finish the bulkhead. We’re not holding you up.” The mayor said the vote on the issues was coming “after the fact,” with the work nearing completion.
Roberts asked if it was illegal for work to continue without a permit; Hubbard said the stop work order was in effect until the owner had brought in the DEC permit.
Prokop said “emergency or protective action” likely had been taken due to the possibility of “potential damage to the upland if the project wasn’t finished,” adding that there could have potentially more damage if the project was help up than if it was allowed to proceed.
Roberts asked if there was documentation showing “that it is better for the environment to proceed.”
Phillips said it was her understanding that if the work didn’t continue the bulkheading could “be lost altogether.”
Any time there’s work in progress, “a good storm can take the whole bulkhead out,” Hubbard agreed.
Roberts said he believes everyone wants Clarke “to continue to keep doing what he’s doing. This village needs the shipyard to be vital.” But, he added, “This is a bad situation. Bad for Mr. Clarke and bad for Greenport.”
He said much was based on “hearsay”, rather than backed up with written documentation.
“This whole thing doesn’t feel very transparent,” with some residents “put through the ringer” and required to follow the process, and others allowed to move ahead, Roberts said.
“We need to protect our process,” he said. While he said he believed Clarke “didn’t know” he needed a wetlands permit, in the future, “maybe others will pretend they didn’t know. It could become a free for all.” He added that perhaps not voting for the two resolutions might make a statement, rather than “go on record with a broken, back room deal, with a ‘wink, wink, nudge nudge, go ahead’,” situation. “I don’t want to be a part of that,” Roberts said.
He asked if Clarke and Costello might consider an in-kind donation of services to support water quality.
Phillips reminded that the DEC permit had been secured.
“There’s nothing that can or will happen that can moot the requirement for the wetlands permit,” Prokop said.
He said the village has ran into the situation before, with individuals, for example, building decks without approvals and then, going back through the paperwork to get it taken care of. “That’s what’s at issue here. The process is not mooted by the fact that this work may well be underway,” Prokop said.
“This wasn’t a back door deal,” with someone “trying to ram anything” forward, Hubbard said. “This was about trying to help a long-time village business owner in a jam, who made a mistake and didn’t realize his maintenance permit had expired. We were trying to make the best of a bad situation,” with the realization that the village didn’t want to lose of the bulkhead or rails in case of a storm or emergency. “We were trying to do what was best to keep him in business and protect the environment,” while still following process, the mayor said.
The board voted 3-1 to allow the CAC to review the project. Trustee Jack Martilotta was not present, due to training with his military unit. Roberts voted “no,” stating that he didn’t want to waste the time of the CAC, comprised of volunteers.
The board voted unanimously to move forward with the public hearing.
“If I’m coming for a wetlands permit, and I have problems, I’m bringing up this case,” Roberts said.
“One way or another, it’s coming back to get us,” Hubbard agreed.”We’ll deal with it as we go.”
