Controversy continued to swirl last night over a bulkhead project in Greenport that was allowed to proceed without a village permit; some raised significant environmental concerns.
In July, two resolutions were greenlighted. One directed 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 scheduled a public hearing for last night 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.
Some questioned why the hearing was scheduled when the work had already been allowed to proceed without a permit.
At least night’s public hearing, John Costello, owner of Costello Marine, assured the board that he had documentation from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.
Trustee Doug Roberts read the documentation, which said the application was complete but that did not “signify approval.” The letter also said that the application was for a “minor project,” which was not subject state environmental review because it was a Type 2 action.
“That doesn’t mean that the DEC does not review as we go along,” Steve Clark of Greenport Yacht & Shipbuilding said. “I believe we’ve complied with everything on that list.”
Costello said the Local Waterfront Revitalization plan calls for a working waterfront and pointed out the number of individuals employed at the shipyard at businesses he said are “crucial” to the working waterfront. “I hope this board and everyone else is for a working waterfront in Greenport.”
Costello also brought a sand sample for the board and said it was clean.
Douglas Moore, chair of the zoning board of appeals who was speaking on his own behalf, said it was not necessary to give “personal testimonials about Steve Clarke. Everyone knows his contribution to the village and the importance of the property.” His concern, he said, was the process and the issue of “seeking forgiveness rather than permission.”
Howard Burden, who was born in Greenport and ran a wholesale marine distribution company before selling to Lewis Marine in 1988, said when Lewis Marine closed this year, many were out of work. He said Costello had taken “care” in “not disturbing the environment” during the bulkhead work; he said Clarke would willingly show anyone the property and the work, which he said was necessary because the bulkhead needed repair.
The Conservation Advisory Committee, which released its report asking for soil and environmental testing, were appointed “tree huggers” without degrees, he said. “There are a lot of things they’re not familiar with,” he said. “They simply want to have a voice.”
He said if the village impedes a business owner from their ability to making a living, “You are looking at costly litigation.”
“I’m not a tree hugger,” said John Saladino, a CAC member with a degree in conservation biology. “This public hearing is about a permit process that wasn’t followed,” he said. “It’s about a contractor and a business owner that took it upon themselves not to follow the permit process and the law of Greenport.”
Village code, he said, mandates the process.
Saladino said the DEC, the Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Navy have all said “anything done in a shipyard has a high potential of toxic waste.” Toxins could include pesticides, fuel, and other contaminants, he said. The shipyard, which has been in existence since the 1830s, is likely tainted with heavy metals and other contaminants and must be tested, he said.
Saladino said when the CAC was out on a site visit and asked about “another portion of the property, done prior and without a permit, the owner’s only statement was ‘That piece was a nightmare,'” adding that, during excavation, tanks, motors and equipment had been unearthed. “A reasonable person would say if toxic inclusions were there, why wouldn’t they be 40 feet away?” Saladino asked.
Mike Osinski stood up and said his oyster farm is environmentally sensitive and that he’d be the first to be notiied if there were any reports of pollution from the shipyard.
“There is no pollution from the shipyard,” he said. “Common sense should prevail here. We don’t need to go out and spend taxpayer money to pay outside consultants” for unnecessary environmental testing, he said.
Saladino disagreed. “To think Mike’s oysters should be the benchmark for what happens in Greenport is ludicrous,” he said. “This is not about a bunch of tree huggers. It’s about people who care about Greenport, revitalizing the oyster business by prevention pollution and toxicity of waters.”
None of the suggestions in the CAC’s report for environmental testing were “outrageous,” he added.
And, Saladino added, while the LWRP says the village should promote a working waterfront, “Sometimes, people that work on the waterfront think of it as a toolbox to promote their business and provide a profit. That’s why we have places like the Love Canal…because people that worked on the water cared more about doing their job than preservation.”
State law demands that if a shovel of dirt is taken out of the ground in the wetlands it must be tested before it’s replaced. “To come here with a sample of sand and say, ‘This is clean fill,’ with all due respect to John (Costello), he’s been in the business a million years, he doesn’t know that at all.”
Costello responded that if that’s the case, much testing of soil needs to be done at Mitchell Park, as well.
Saladino said for Costello and Clarke, both of whom were on the village board, to “say they didn’t need a wetlands permit is disingenuous at best. This project was done by stealth. No one was notified.”
He also questioned how a DEC permit was granted in four days. “That’s unheard of,” Saladino said.
He also asked why the village’s initial stop work order made no mention of compliance, something he said is normal procedure.
“I just don’ t understand the pushback,” Saladino said, adding that it’s been stated that the bulkhead is one of the village’s the largest civil engineering projects and calls for oversight.
Resident Bill Swiskey agreed. “This board can’t just ignore the process. Steve, I’m sorry, I like you, but this process is mashed up.”
“We can’t be hypocrites about the environment,” Saladino said. “You can’t say Go Green or Go Solar and then let a project go on without oversight. It’s contrary to what the LWRP says. People talk about the LWRP all the time. Perhaps they should read it.”
CAC member Liz Smith said she has a masters degree in conservation policy and a Ph.d. in environmental and natural resource economics.
She asked the board to review policy and procedures when rules are not followed. “I’ve heard Trustee Jack Martilotta say more than once, rules with no enforcement are merely suggestions, well said and applicable. I want to add that when the penalty is lest costly than following the rules, the incentives are pretty clear — do what you want. The village can change this.”
Smith added that, with “no disrespect to Steve Clark or Mr. Costello…they very blatantly did not follow village law as it pertains to wetlands permits at the shipyard.”
Environmental degradation might not happen overnight, she said, but when it does, “it will not be an easy or cheap fix.”
As a CAC member, conservationist and economist, Smith said she’s been “very upset” about the shipyard project. “How serious is the condition at the shipyard? I can’t tell you: Because the proper protocols were not followed. We must protect our waters for our kids and grandkids, but also for our legacy. Do we want to be the people at the helm of the boat that allows environmental pollution which could impact generations of Greenporters to come? I am urging the village board to think beyond short term gains and profits — but think about what’s at stake long term, and let that guide you.”
Costello stood back at the podium and said the sand brought in was tested. “I don’t like to be called disingenuous,” he said, adding that he has been investing in Greenport and has a history of improvements to the village.
Since the shipyard was built in colonial times and on forward, many of the projects in the village “have a degree of pollution,” he said. The railroad dock, he said, “was probably one of the biggest jobs. Steve Clarke’s little bulkhead is minor compared to that.”
The hearing was closed and Greenport Mayor George Hubbard said the board would discuss the issue the next work session.
