Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983_03_01 Coastal Zone Management Commission Minutes MINUTES OF THE MEETING COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE Tuesday March 1st - Fire Committee Room PRESENT: Bruce Allen June Allen Sydney Astle Albert Blumenthal Trustee Liaison Miriam Curnin Elinor Fredston Mary Ann Johnson Paul Miller • Robert E.White Also present: Alan Mason (Chairman CAC) Jim Lotto (Environmental Planning & Design Consultant) Two corrections were necessary to the minutes of the meeting of February 3rd:- 1. Alex Buchman was not present at that meeting; his name had been added to the list of attendees to insure that he receive all relevant information. 2. Trustee Liaison Miriam Curnin said that during the meeting with Mr.Charles McCaffrey the opportunity was given to discuss a work program, but not the documentation prepared. ,• Trustee Curnin reported that she was hopeful that a grant would be forthcoming and was expecting an announcement very soon. It was also anticipated that the original spending deadline of September 1st would be extended. The Chairman then suggested that the structure and aims of the CZMC should be reviewed. Trustee Curnin offered: - - 1. A summary of a New York State Management Program for circulation - wmpipmmOimmimmi. 2 . A newly arrived booklet "Feasibility Study of Co-operative Maintenance Program for Westchester and Long Island Sound • Communities" which will be left with Barbara Wood. C_. Mary Anne Johnson also recommended for study "Guidlines for Coastal Zone Management Planning" which she would circulate. Trustee Curnin drew attention to two seminars on Coastal Management which may be of interest:- 1 . City of New Rochelle - Saturday March 5th at Iona. Mary Anne Johnson will represent Larchmont, but since �(�� she will also be speaking an additional volunteer was �, desirable. The Chairman offered to attend if personal circumstances permitted. 2 . Westbury, Long Island - an all day seiminar costing $90 . The content was mainly legal, the seminar being for continuing legal education, and the Committee felt that attendance was not important. The Chairman commented that as the Committee' s work progressed it could become necessary for members to observe work in other communities. Reports then followed from the subcommittees formed at the last meeting. 1 . POLLUTION Elinor Fredston reported that she had spoken with County representatives and concluded that pollution in the Sound was , o' �9 as much from non point construction and land run off as from AA.1 rPsf • lo sewage. She will asse%ible simple data but pointed out that this cannot be done by a Committee of one. The Chairman agreed saying we needed more help and that the Co-Chairmen should determine which attendees at past meetings were really interested. Bruce Allen commented that he could understand why people might not show enthusiasm for the project. He himself was interested but would like to see the aims and purpose of the Committee more clearly defined. The Chairman replied that the first job was clearly to evolve a master plan but since this is an entirely new field for us , that would take time. Al Blumenthal thought that we should proceed with limited objectives; for example on siltation, first catagorise the factors causing pollution. He further offered to help in that work. Mary Anne Johnson offered some published material which outlines causes of pollution. 2. SILTATION, EROSION, DREDGING. Pimmy White felt that this impinged on the first sub committees work on pullution. Ho foresees no problem in removal of siltation, the major problem being re-deposition. Containment islands seem to be the only practical solution. Sydney Astle suggested that subcommittees 1 and 2 should be combined to overcome the stated problems of lack of help and possible duplication of effort. Elinor Fredston thought not for the time being since the pollution problem was complex enough, and the Committee so agreed. 3. CONSERVATION AREAS Mary Anne Johnson listed the various areas with some common problems:problems:- .t6Y1f1. PREMIUM MARSH which was the most critical area. Described deel as "urbanised residential" , the marsh suffered from seepage, garden refuse, land fill and oil seepage. Additionally, motor bike riders were causing packing down of the marsh. Tony' s Nurseries and Lorenzen Field were also listed as potential sources of difficulty. MANOR PARK was holding up well despite over use. HARBORS will need attention. ! �.(% te'h HOMMOCKS/FLINT PARK will be reported on later. TeP4ir 4. HARBOR MANAGEMENT cfrkY �\r� �1��`� Bruce Allen gave a report on the work of his sub-committee, relating to Harbor Soundings, Police Authority and Recreation. A copy of this report is attached. 5.LAND USE/FLOODING Larry Lowy was away on business and no report was given. ,ary 6. BOUNDARIES war Alan Mason discussed four possible criteria to be used in vLr- �waye determination of the "Coastal Zone" . He suggested that for Syr both technical and political reasons a combination of these criteria could effectively be used. A copy of a memo from Dr. Mason is attached which details his comments and proposal. Jim Lotto thought that the criteria detailed in Alan Mason' s memo were sound and that it was necessary at this stage to concentrate on important areas. He commented that the Committee should formulate a definite plan and policy and decision makers though he did agree that initially it was important to accumulate information. Funds would be more readily available from the State if local government and residents demonstrated support. The Chairmen 4044rustee Curnin to consider the following:- i) Where do we fit into this overall picture? ii) Will we become a Commission? iii) Will we have direct input? iv) Will we be empowered to act? The next meeting was set for Tuesday April 5th. (Subsequently postponed to Tuesday May 3rd. ) ti �i A meeting of the SubCommittee on 1) Harbor Soundings, 2) Police Authority on Larch Waterfront, and 3 ) Recreation was held on Sunday, February 13th, 1983. Those present were Paul Miller, Sydney Astle, Al Blumenthal, Jack Morris, and Bruce Allen. Harbor Soundings — It was agreed by all present that before any stimates could be made about dredging in Larchmont }arbor Harbor, Little Sound, or Horseshoe Harbor, that soundings would 4 have to be made in each area. The first order of business will be to make suitable charts of each area irr_ a large enough scale to work with. Secondly, a boat or boats will have to be available with either a leadline or depthsounder on board in or der to make accurate estimates of depth. These soundings will have to be made at mean low tide sometime in April or early May (Before the fleet is moored in: the harbor (s ) ) . Arrangements have been made to start- working on the enlarged charts of each area. Boats and sounding equipment have been promised for April or May. Police Authority in Larchmont Area — A check with Lt. Keresy on Feb 13th, verified the Mayor's contention that the NY State Police were responsible for policing the Larchmont waterfront up to 1000 ft from shore. He agreed this was ridiculous and cited the fact that the State Police v,wwere not visible last summer when the plane crashed etc. Also agreed that there was no plan in the event of a waterfront disaster that he '_anew of. Said we were fortunate that the Village did not have to pay the bill for divers, etc last summer. Called Mr F rioli, Village Manager, Village of Mamaroneck, 'L re their Police Patrol on the water. He told me that the patrol - � operlted from May 15th to Nov 1st and cost the Village about 326,000 in salaries for the patrolmen (2 ) for those months. (They have an 8 hr shift on the water. Mr. Fra.oli said that state aid had been cut to less than 40%. (They received about 38500 from state last year). The Village of Mamaroneck finances their whole waterfront operation including harbormaster, docks, moorings etc. — and police, by issuing permits to each boat. (Sending Village Ordinance) . Each (2) boat is issued a permit and charged according to its length. Their income from this last year was $89,133 plus $8500 from state. Mr. Frioli claims they just about break even. 4 Recreation - Because this is a very broad subject and Larchmont does not have any commercial operat%ons on the waterfront, the committee had a hard time knowing where to start. Vie therefore looked at different facets of the recreational scene i.e. Swimming - Although all the waterfront available to swimmers is restricted to private property, there are apparently few, if any residents of the Village of Larchmont who do not have a swimming facility available to them if they so choose. Since Manor Beach has been open4d to all residents of the Village,there have been empty lockers and the beach has been underutilized. Small Boats - It was the concensus of opinion by the members of this committee that there is no suitable place for a small boat • facility in the Village of Larchmont, Fishing - Fishing is forbidden in Manor Park for- safety reasons and to prevent in influx of fishermen along a small waterfront area which is enjoyed by many for the view etc. NNW C MEMO To : Coastal Zone Management Committee From: C.A. Mason, Chairman C .A . C . Re : Boundaries of Coastal Zone In determining the boundaries of the Coastal Zone of the Village of Larchmont , the Village of Mamaroneck, and the unincorporated area of the Town of Mamaroneck several possible lines of demarcation present themselves . The most obvious one is the Boston Post Road, followed by Palmer Ave . and the Metro-north right-of-way . Each of these has the advantage of being familar Cand unmoving . However, none of them seems suitable . For purposes of early discussion, the Boston Post Road has been used as the northerly boundary of the Coastal Zone in our area. ,At the February 1983, meeting of the Coastal Zone' Committee the general sense was that this was too restrictive a boundary and •that the coastal zone" did, in fact , extend further inland. The purpose cif this memo is to suggest possible. criteria on the basis of which the coastal zone 'should be extended inland. • 1 (:) Some Possible Approaches . 1 . Geopolitical boundaries could be adopted . This would extend the coastal zone as far as Scarsdale and Harrison and include areas of the Town of Mamaroneck whose inclusion would be, at best , questionable while excluding some of the near-by portions of New Rochelle (Pinebrook area) which should be included. • 2 . • A fixed from distance from Long Island Sound such as one mile could be adopted, but this would have the same disadvantage as using existing geopolitical boundaries . 3. Elevation above sea level could also serve as a criterion . This would produce an irregularly shaped coastal zone . However , ilf C because the low lands are located along the banks of the streams • which flow into the sound, the resulting zone would have a demonstrable relationship to the coastline and would be more easily defended when seeking funding . An additional advantage would be that those citizens who live along the rivers and streams are generally more aware of water problems and could be expected to be more supportive of efforts to revitalize, preserve and protect the coastline and wetlands . 4. Impact on the immediate coastline such as sources of sediment and pollution could also serve as reason to include a particular area in the coastal zone . 4:) 1 J+ A Suggestion . C It is my suggestion the the criteria for determining the limits of the coast zone be an amalgamation of all of the above with particular emphasis on three and four . I would suggest that the coastal zone be designated as all lands lying on the southerly side of the Boston Post Road within the entire Town of Mamaroneck ( including both the Village of Larchmont and the Village of Mamaroneck) and, in addition, all areas fifteen feet or less in elevation above mean high water on the northerly side of said road. This zone to be further extended by following all streams upstream to their first free . waterfall of three or more feet . (Beyond tidal influence. ) The zone to be extended laterally from each stream to an elevation of (:) fifteen feet above -th at streams bed . I thatn the event no free waterfall of three or more feet is found, the upstream extent of coastal zone shall terminate at an elevation fifteen feet above the last point at which a vit3ible flow can be demonstrated five days after the most recent rain. 3 This would have the effect of extending the coastal zone up Pinebrook nearly to Quaker Ridge Road in New Rochelle ; up the Sheldrake' Rive'r to the waterfall above Gardens Lake ; and up the Mamaroneck River to and including the reservoir on Mamaroneck Avenue . It would not , however , extend to the Larchmont Reservoir . This is intended as a discussion draft , comments and suggestions are. solicited ! •