Concerns continue to cause tension in Greenport over a new bulkhead that some believe is being built without the required process or permits.
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 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.
Last week, CAC members went to the shipyard to review the work being done, without a Greenport village board permit, on the bulkhead. They’ve put together their concerns in a report, which is slated to be delivered to Greenport Village Administrator Paul Pallas and the village board soon.
Although the report was not yet available for review, CAC member John Saladino has long expressed his concerns over process and said he had issues with the fact that the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation issued a permit within a short window.
CAC member Liz Smith said there are several issues related to the work at the shipyard of concern.
Process and timing, she said, was a primary issue. “While the project has been going on since at least June, despite a stop work order, as of Aug. 18 there is still no permit from Village of Greenport,” she said. “If this project can continue with no village permits in place, why should any other homeowner or company follow the rules? The signal being sent by the village is that the rules only pertain to some people.”
She added that while work on the project began in June, no permit was issued by the DEC until the second week in July. The DEC, she said, does not issue “after the fact” permits. “Does that mean that not only is there no village permit but the NYS permit from DEC is not valid? I don’t know the answer, but it’s a question I’d like followed up.”
In addition, she said, on-site activities have sparked significant environmental concerns. “Since the CAC’s site visit was more than a month after work began, it’s hard to know what or ow things have been proceeding,” she said. Smith said “large piles of dirt on site” that had come out of, and would be put back into, the water, had not been tested for heavy metals or contaminants, “nor was the dirt contained to ensure it did not blow into nearby waters, air, or boats,” she said. “Since there has not been any environmental testing done, I do not know how concerning this should be. This is the problem — we simply don’t know.”
Language from the DEC on the issues, she said, is “clear — bulkhead fill needs to be retained, waters need to be protected, and new fill must be clean. The CAC was advised last week that additional fill was needed. I am unsure if this included in the DEC permit or not,” she said.
Smith said questions continue to swirl. She’s unclear if the DEC-issued permit “adequately reflects the work that is happening. For example, in place/in kind replacement is designated as a ‘minor’ project but the original application called for new bulkheads, which would fall under the major project category,” she said.
A number of inconsistencies in the application and overall permit process for the work exist, she said, and “unsurprisingly, many folks, particularly on the CAC, are uncomfortable with the potential risks that are being needlessly taken,” Smith said.
Greenport, Smith said, is a village with a maritime history, appreciated by past, present and future residents and visitors. “If we, even inadvertently, pollute our waterways with heavy metals or toxins, we also jeopardize our economy, public safety and way of life.”
The CAC, however, is set up as an advisory committee, to ensure the Village of Greenport’s best interests are represented in relation to conservation issues, she said. “As with many environmental impacts and issues, effects are often not seen for years and the expense of clean-up or remediation is exponential compared to what they would have been if appropriate steps were taken. In this case, laws followed, permits properly and timely applied for, and environmental testing completed,” she said. “Are we willing to accept short-sighted, profit-seeking behavior at the risk of our public health, safety and the environment that supports this rich maritime community? The village board needs to answer that question.”
At the previous village board meeting, resident, zoning board of appeals member, and CAC member 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.”
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.”
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.
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. He 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.
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.
This week, Clarke conceded “a number of people have become very upset” over the work proceeding without a village board, and only a DEC, permit. Clarke said the work had been scheduled to be done in the winter and Costello came to him and said work would begin within 10 days back in June. Clarke said he had to rush to get his boats onto the water and away from a ramp where the digging would commence.
“This is a problem I really wish I didn’t have but we’ve all got it, we’re all in this. If you ask my side, I’m entirely prejudiced because I want to get this job done, but we’re getting close.”
The project should be completed within two or three weeks, he said.
Clarke said he was unaware that there had initially been no DEC permit and that Costello “forgot” to get the permit “renewed. I didn’t know anything about it. I don’t pay attention to permits,” he said. “All I wanted was for them to not have to do this in the middle of the summer.”
When the village issued a stop work order, Clarke said, “I made it really clear that we could not stop the work then. It would mean I’d not be out of business for a few weeks, but I’d be out of business, period. To go backward and to d all of the environmental work they were, and still are, talking about would have been impossible.”
The DEC, Clarke added, had made a determination that the project would have no environmental impact.
Mark Carrera, representative for the DEC, today said that the DEC permit was issued on July 10, with for conditions in place for “routine bulkhead replacement. The applicant is supposed to comply with those conditions and we don’t have any enforcement actions or violations currently at the facility.”
Aphrodite Montalvo, citizen participation specialist, office of communications for the DEC, said, “The permit issued on July 10, 2015 was a renewal of a routine bulkhead replacement permit which had expired in April. Due to the complete documentation and the existence of the previous permit, the renewal was able to be issued in a speedy fashion.”
Of those protesting the work, Clarke said, “I think their primary concern is they feel I have just tried to walk all over the village and not have respect for village law. This is absolutely not true.” He added that he was a former mayor and trustee. “The last thing I would ever want to do is to have the Village of Greenport decide that I was going to take them on for any reason. You’d have to be insane to do that.”
As for details concerning soil or water samples, Clarke said he had not seen the CAC report yet and would like a copy for review.
After hearing of the CAC’s concerns, Roberts said, “Mr. Costello and Mr. Clarke are openly thumbing their noses at our laws, and the mayor and two trustees think it’s just great. They will get their permit in a 3-2 vote and everyone will move on. However, Trustee Martilotta and I will sleep well at night and we will be able to look the next wetlands permit applicants in the eye when we ask them to comply with conditions to protect our waters. I just hope that the pollution in the fill is not heavy. It is interesting to note that the DEC turned around a permit for this work in four days: faster than Village Hall is able to turn around the report from our own CAC. I have been waiting three months to hear from the state if we can get flashers to protect pedestrians on Front Street and these guys are able to get a permit in four days. Just amazing.”
He said he believed CAC recommendations should be followed, otherwise, what was the point of having the group at all.
Clarke said he had to “strongly disagree that John and I are thumbing our noses at the village.”
Instead, he said the shipyard employs a sizable number and he’s trying to keep up the facility; he works with fishermen, barge operators, marine construction firms, and others.
Had the permit been secured through the regular process, “This would have been a piece of cake, procedurally.”
Clarke added that the bulkhead is being installed at exactly the same spot as it was.
“Putting in that bulkhead was the end of pollution, not the beginning. I’m stopping it not only now but forever.” The DEC will soon be requiring new wash areas to clean bottom paint off boats, in sort of a “miniature swimming pool”, something that can’t proceed without a new bulkhead.
When storms such as Sandy socked Greenport, water was flowing “through a bulkhead with 1,000 holes in it,” Clarke said. The new bulkhead will feature “supertight plastic sheathing,” he said. “I don’t know why they don’t understand,” he said.
Costello did not return a request for comment.
