Dock application raises challenges
“What else would you have them do?” The speaker was Coastal Management Specialist Rob Hermann from Southampton-based EN Consultants at Monday night’s Town Board public hearing on a dock permit application.
Karen Feuer, trustee of the Feuer Irrevocable Inheritance Trust, had called on EN Consultants for help with an application to finish a dock at 142G North Ferry Road that had been repaired and rebuilt without a permit.
She was fined $4,000 by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) for the violation. She expressed difficulty gaining a local permit to complete the work, which she said poses a danger if steps can’t be taken to correct what currently exists at the site.
Mr. Hermann had to research several years of records to determine who did what when, and then develop a strategy for completion of the dock with the proper permits. He agreed with critics of actions taken without permits, but said in addition to the DEC fine, there would be added expenses requiring payment of five times what a client working within the system would be assessed for the permit.
This has been going on now for over a year,” Mr. Hermann told the Town Board and multiple attendees at the meeting, or participating via Zoom. “This has to get resolved.”
Councilman Albert Dickson said he “can’t turn the other way,” ignoring the violation. Town officials are constantly criticized for not strictly enforcing Code requirements, he said. He further noted in conversations with Senior Building Inspector Reed Karen that work in the house was also found to be underway with no permit.
“I don’t disagree,” Mr. Hermann said, adding it doesn’t resolve the issue of how to remedy the immediate situation.
Several residents expressed their dissatisfaction with the application but Mr. Hermann maintained some of the criticisms were wrong.
An argument that the dock would exceed the 100 feet allowed by code met with the consultant explaining the code stipulates 100 feet from the mean high water mark.
Resident Kim Bonstrom posed a two-pronged question: Is the Feuer dock a “hybrid,” and what is a hybrid dock? He accused the Town Board of “dodging the question” about a hybrid dock. When he was told it wasn’t relevant to the Feuer public hearing, but would be discussed at a future work session, Mr. Bonstrom ceased his questions.
Later, Mr. Bonstrom objected to closing the hearing with another challenge pertaining to a hybrid dock. He persisted in trying to get an answer until Supervisor Amber Brach-Williams repeated that the definition of a hybrid dock didn’t pertain to the hearing, and warned if he continued to push the matter, she would have him removed from the meeting.
The Feuer dock is a personal residential dock, Ms. Brach-Williams replied. As to the question of what is a hybrid dock, she said that doesn’t pertain to this application, but would be separately discussed at a future work session.
Supervisor Amber Brach-Williams said the Town Board needs to receive updated drawings on the Feuer dock within two weeks to discuss them at the Sept. 10 work session. The drawings must reference all suggested changes, including replacing several pilings of treated wood with untreated wood pilings; placement of a light at the end of the dock to alert other boaters; and changes to protect wetlands.
With a closed hearing only comments may be submitted by that Sept. 10 work session when the Town Board will discuss the application.
A Town Board decision on the application could be rendered at the Sept. 16 regular meeting.
