Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984_10_02 Coastal Zone Management Commission Minutes (2) VILLAGE OF LARCHMONT TOWN OF MAMARONECK :: oy COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE tEMCi 1 :II" • •o RECEI\/Fly - 0 " yz'• OCT 10 1984 F{ "' w AT:Y.11V DOROTHYS.M{_LER f-- TOWN CLERK Founaea Issr - MAMARONECK Larchmont, NY 10538 N'Y' "/ Mamaroneck, NY 10543 MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of the Committee , Larchmont Village Center, Tuesday, October 2 , 1984- Present: Bruce Allen James Killilea June Allen Lawrence Lowy Elinor Fredston C . Alan Mason Wallace Irwin Jr. Shirley W. Tolley Mary Anne Johnson Joseph F. Vandernoot Arthur Katz Paul H. Kean, Liaison Trustee , Village of Larchmont Daniel Shuster, Consultant 1. The meeting was called to order at 8: 20 p.m. , Mr. Irwin in the chair. The minutes of the meeting of September 11 were approved without change. 2. Two forthcoming meetings of interest to the Committee were noted by the chair, as follows: On Thursday, October 11, at 8 p.m. in the Larchmont Village Hall, County Legislator Diane Keane will hold a hearing to obtain local views on "what you see as the County' s role in stormwater management. " Dr. Mason will make a statement for the Conservation Advisory Commission and Mr. Irwin will make a statement for the Committee. Committee members are encouraged to attend. On Thursday evening, October 18 , at 7:30 p.m. , at the Ivamaro- neck Women' s Club, 504 Cortland Avenue , Mamaroneck, a "Panel Discussion on Coastal Zone Management in the Tri-Municipal Area" will be held. There will be four panelists from the Larchmont-Town CZMC (Mr. Irwin, Mrs. Tolley, Mr. Lowy and Dr. Mason) and four from the Village of Mamaroneck. Committee members are encouraged to attend. 3. Status of Draft LWRP, Sections I throuh V. Supplementing his memoranda to CZMC members of September 20 and 24 ( see texts attached to Minutes) , Mr. Irwin reported on developments leading up to the two municipal governments' agreeing to forward draft Sections I through V to Albany for review and comment, as recommended in the Irwin/Tolley memorandum of September 14. As noted in the memoranda referred to, the Village Board To: Ccastal Zone TNianag3mert Committee Since Tuesday, November 6, which would normally be our regular meeting date, is Election Day, it has been decided to hold our "November" meeting on Tuesday evening, October 30 , at 8 p.m. in the Village Center. yJallace Irwin Jr. Co-Chairman (Copies to all Larchmont Village Trustees and CZI," mailing list) - 2 - at its September 17 meeting had deferred action on this matter until October 1 in the hope of resolving the objection of Trustee Anderson. Meanwhile , the Town Council on September 19 unanimously agreed to the forwarding of the drafts to Albany. On September 24 Mayor Curnin, on being informed that no objection had been made by any CZMC member to the amendment suggested by Mr. Irwin in his Sept. 20 memorandum, asked the Village Clerk to poll the Trustees by telephone on whether the drafts should be forwarded to Albany with the proposed amendment. (If this were agreed to, steps would also be taken to gain consent to the amendment from the Town Council. ) In the telephone poll, completed Tuesday after- noon, September 25, Trustees Anderson and Astle voted no. This outcome rendered the amendment redundant, since it had been offered as a way to meet the objection raised by Mr. Anderson and had failed to do so. Accordingly, when the Village Board resumed consideration of the matter at its October 1 meeting, the question was on for- warding the drafts as originally submitted September 14. After some discussion, in which Messrs. Anderson and Astle stated their views and Mr. Irwin noted that there had been no dissent in the Committee on this question, the proposal to forward was put to a vote and was adopted 3 to 2 , Messrs. Anderson and Astle voting no. The necessary approvals having been obtained, a letter of transmittal (copy attached to Minutes) had been prepared and the documents would be reproduced and forwarded to Albany by Mr. Shuster in a day or two. 4. Reservoir dedication. The Committee noted with satisfaction that the Larchmont Village Board, at its October 1 meeting, had adopted a resolution dedicating the Larchmont Reservoir property in perpe- tuity as open space, to be used for public purposes including flood control and passive recreation. Revisions to the draft LaRP would be made to reflect this important action. 5. Need for further dialogue. In discussion of the divided vote in the Larchmont Village Board (item 3 above) , Mr. Lowy said he thought a new attempt should be made to resume the Committee' s dialogue with Trustees Anderson and Astle in the hope of maintaining a com- munity-wide consensus on the L•,uRP. He suggested that, if the two Trustees were willing to enter such a dialogue , the Committee might be represented by a small group including, for example, Mr. Allen, Dr. Mason, and the two co-chairmen. There was general agreement that an effort along these lines should be made . Mr. Irwin under- took to confer with those named, and with any other interested members , on how to proceed. 6. Further steps in the LWRP process. Mr. Shuster described the next steps in developing the LWRP and estimated the likely approximate lapse of time that could be expected, as follows: --Comments from the Coastal Zone staff in Albany may arrive by about mid-November. Meanwhile Mr. Shuster and the Committee will be preparing drafts of the remaining Sections VI through IX , which are mostly technical and will not require as much effort by the Committee as the first five sections. --A complete draft L'I1RP , with any changes in Sections I-V to meet Albany or local comments, can be made ready for both municipal governments by about mid-December and, if they approve , submitted by them to Albany during December. - 3 - --This submission will start a 60-day review process. Albany will seek comments from all interested State and Federal agencies. During this same 60-day period, a public hearing on the draft L: RP must be held locally to accord with SEQRA and other legal requirements. --Following the 60-day review, which might end as early as mid- February 1985, the Committee will make a final revision in light of agency comments plus the public hearing. The resulting text will then be presented to the two municipal governments for their adoption. When adopted by them and signed by the Secretary of State, the LWRP will become law. If all goes well this could happen by mid-1985. 7. Second public meeting. The Committee discussed the requirement in the .^iork Program that at least two public meetings be held locally with a view to " obtaining '_Id-dal commitment" to the LWRP. One meeting having been held in April, it would be necessary--and, it was generally felt, desirable--to hold a second meeting. To leave time for preparation, and for consi- deration by the Committee at a further meeting, it was agreed that the public meeting should not be scheduled earlier than November. Either Thursday, November 8 or Tuesday, November 13 were mentioned as possible dates. The chair undertook to consult with members and reach a decision on the best date. 8. Adjournment . No further business being raised, the Committee adjourned at 10: 05 p.m. Wallace Irwin Jr. . NEXT MEETING By inadvertence , the Committee before adjourning failed to set a date for the next meeting. In subsequent discussion with members it has been decided that , since Tuesday, November 6 is Election Day, the regular meeting that would have been held that evening will be held instead on Tuesday. October 30 at 8 p.m. in the Village Center. u r g e n t September 20, 1984 TO; Co-Chairman Shirley Tolley and all Members of the Coastal Zone Management Committee I FROM: �dallace Irwin Jr. , Co-Chairman W; • This memo requests your URGENT attention to a proposed change in the text of Section V of the draft LWRP. The background is this: One September 17 the Larchmont Village Board took up our recom- mendation that our drafts of Parts I through V of the LWRP be forwarded to Albany. I reported orally to the Board, reviewing the main points in our covering memo of September 14. Trustee James Anderson raised an objection. He said he felt the draft of Section V-C , "Management Structure , " would confer on the proposed Coastal Zone Management Commission too much authority to deal with questions relating to recreation and public access on the waterfront. (A similar objection had been expressed orally to me by Trustee Sydney Astle, who was not present at the Board meeting. ) The matter was then discussed at some length. I endeavored to meet Jim Anderson' s objection by pointing out the extensive criteria and safeguards regarding recreation, public access, and land use which had been written into the earlier sections of the draft Program --all of which would be binding on the Commission. He nevertheless maintained his objection to the "Management Structure" provisions as drafted. As a result, Mayor Curnin proposed, and the Board agreed, not to make a decision at that meeting on our recommendation, but to take the question up again at its meeting on October 1. Following the meeting Jim Anderson and I agreed to meet to try to work out some new formula which our Committee and the Board could accept. After con- ferring with Co-Chairman Shirley Tolley, liaison Trustee Paul Kean, and liaison Councilman Larry Lerman, I talked yesterday (Wednesday) with Jim Anderson. After considerable discussion we arrived at a possible solution which he said would meet his problem and enable him to concur in a Village Board decision to forward the drafts to Albany, subject to the drafting of actual language which he would of course have to see. Our Committee and both municipal governments would, of course, also have to concur. I then reported this development to Mayor Curnin, who found the concept acceptable and suggested a technical improvement. On the attached sheet you will find some proposed changes which I have drafted as a result of these discussions. They relate to the text on page V-6 of the September 14 draft which you have . Please let me know urgently if you have any problem with these changes. There is no need to call if you find them acceptable. But if any member cannot accept them and wants to explain why to the Committee , we will have to hold a special meeting. I have reserved our usual room in the Village Center for 8 p.m. Tuesday the 25th for this purpose , in case of need. Therefore , I would appreciate it if any member who has a problem with the language changes on the attached sheet would please call me at 834-1962 AS SOON AS POSSIBLE and in any event not later than Monday noon, September 24: - 2 - I will report the Committee ' s views to the Village Board in plenty of time for its October 1 meeting. Any changes made as a result will also have to be brought to the attention of the Town Council, whose next meeting is scheduled for October 3. At its meeting last night, the Town Council agreed to the forwarding of these drafts to Albany without change. My own view, for what it may be worth, is that the changes proposed on the attached sheet simply make explicit what was already implicit in our Committee draft, and that they are acceptable. I therefore strongly favor their adoption in order to move forward. But they deserve your careful review, and any Committee member who disagrees is entitled to a full opportunity to be heard. Thanks for your cooperation: S+cAj C. Oahe - 3 - Proposed changes on page V-6 of Draft LWRP (Sept. 14 text) 1 . Following the sentence ending "policy guidance. " on line 1, insert an additional sentence as follows: The JCZC will be kept currently informed of the proceedings and plans of the Coastal Zone Management Commission. 2. In subparagraph d of paragraph 3, following the heading "Functions and Powers. " , insert two additional sentences as follows: The Commission will function under the supervision and policy guidance of the Joint Coastal Zone Committee (JCZC) . In the event of disagreement in the JCZC on a matter before the Commission, the Commission, on being informed of the disagreement, will take no action on the disagreed matter until the disagreement has been resolved. • Excerpt from Irvin memorandum of Sept. 24 ( referred to in item 3 of Gct 2 minutes) : In my September 20 memorandum I proposed that any Committee member who objects to the proposed change should so inform me by noon Monday, September 24; the Committee could then meet, if necessary, on September 25 to discuss the objection. The deadline has passed, no objection has been raised, and it will not be necessary for the Committee to meet on this question. I am informed by Mayor C urnin and Dr. Lerman ,that procedures are being worked out in the Village and Town governments to expedite agreement to the new language and clear the way for forwarding Sections I to V to Albany. I would like to thank not only the officials mentioned above but also several Committee colleagues, especially Co-Chairman Shirley Tolley, for their rood advice and encouragement in pursuing this solution, which will enable us to move forward with our planning. dallace Irwin J . Co-Chairman TOWN OF MAMARONECK VILLAGE OF LARCHMONT 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD MUNICIPAL BUILDING MAMARONECK, NEW YORK 10543 LARCHMONT, NEW YORK 10538 October 2, 1984 Mr. George R. Stafford Coastal Programs Administrator New York State Department of State 162 Washington Avenue Albany, New York 12231 Dear Mr. Stafford: Enclosed, for review and comment by the Department of State, are drafts of Sections I through V of a Local Waterfront Revitalization Program being jointly developed by the Village of Larchmont and the Town of Mamaroneck. These are submitted to you in accordance with the Work Program annexed to the Waterfront Revitalization Program Development Agreement with the Village of Larchmont dated August 1, 1983 (Contract #D-000422) and the parallel Agreement with the Town of Mamaroneck dated August 1, 1983 (Contract #D-000423) . As you know, our two municipalities decided to frame a single LWRP for both areas. Our contracts contain the same Work Program. The • enclosed drafts were developed by a single Coastal Zone Management Committee whose membership represents both municipalities, with the professional support of Daniel Shuster, Planning Consultant. Both municipal governments have approved the Co1m tittee's reccma:e.ndation that these five draft sections be forwarded to the Department of State for review and comment. Meanwhile work will continue locally on the remainder of the Work Program. Clearly, the present drafts will be subject to refinement and improvement, both as a result of your comments and as a result of further study and • discussion at the local level. However, they already contain the general contours, and many of the details, of the Program we hope to adopt. They are the product of many months' research and discussion. by our Committee and its Consultant, working in close contact with both municipal governments and with the public. They express a substantial degree of consensus on the priority problems and tasks that must be faced in order to maintain and enhance our waterfront area. Mr. George R. Stafford - 2 - October 2, 1984 All the "required" policies in the State's list of 44 coastal policies are dealt with in our drafts to the extent that they are applicable to local conditions. Not all, of course, concern us to the same degree. Our most important problems center on a physical fact of life that applies to the entire Long Island Sound shore of Westchester, namely, that we are at the downstream • end of highly developed, flood-prone watersheds which cross municipal boundaries and traverse our entire area. With continuing development , upstream over the decades, the sum total of flooding, erosion, siltation and pollution (including sewage) problems in this area adds up to a serious threat to our coastal zone. Our ecology, wildlife, water quality, recreation, and other amenities that affect residential values have all been impaired and will be impaired still further unless effective new steps are taken. • The drafts here presented, while embracing the whole range of applicable State policies, seek especially to come to grips with the manifold effects of this "upstream" problem. They do so in three ways. First, we have written into Sections II, III, IV and V specific language calling for, and explaining the need for, policies, projects and other action to relieve this complex of drainage basin problems. Second, we have proposed in Section I to revise the State-defined Coastal Zone Boundary in our area in order that our Program may have the maximum geographical • extent. Third, we have given major emphasis to the need for • cooperation with neighboring municipalities, and with concerned State and County agencies, to improve drainage basin management along the Westchester Sound shore. We appreciate the guidance and encouragement received from your staff, and especially from Charles McCaffrey. Your comments and guidance in perfecting our Program will be much appreciated. Sincerely, J�? Lc( - ( Dolores BattaLLa Supervisor Town of Mamaroneck • 14/C0--(1-/V'PAL'i Miriam Curnin Mayor Village of Larchmont /bw