Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wetlands topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Applicants withdraw planned pool encroachment at 85 Shore Road, board hears buffer and utility concerns
Summary
Developers for 85 Shore Road told the Shelter Island Town Board they revised plans to pull the infinity-edge pool entirely outside the 100-foot wetland setback and increased the vegetated buffer; conservation and planning committees recommended clarifications on pool footing, utility routing, and native plantings.
At a public hearing on 85 Shore Road, applicant representatives described a reduced project footprint and said the previously proposed infinity-edge pool feature that approached the 100-foot wetlands setback was pulled back so all new construction sits at or beyond the 100-foot line.
Rob Herman, speaking on behalf of Bootsie SI LLC, reviewed prior approvals and the 2013/2016 site history and said the current proposal locates the dwelling, pool and accessory structures outside the wetlands regulated area. He told the board the revised site plan adds a roughly 12,000 square-foot non-disturbance planting buffer adjacent to a freshwater pond on the property and reduces impervious coverage in the wetland setback.
Teresa Mason, the town’s consultant, and the Conservation Advisory Council (CAC) recommended that the applicants clarify the pool footing and show utilities to an outdoor kitchen on the revised plans. Mason also recommended replacing non-native Chinese junipers with native eastern red cedars in limited, specified areas; applicant landscape designer Vicky Cordero agreed that supplemental drawings could be provided and that the depicted pool edge and associated details can be clarified.
The applicant cited DEC and health department actions — including a DEC jurisdictional determination and a health-department septic variance and permit — and said engineering letters confirm compliance with well and stormwater design standards. The planning board and CAC recommended several minor clarifications; applicants said they provided a revised planting plan and ramp details to address those questions.
The hearing record closed after questions and the board took the advisory comments into account, with staff adding that any remaining technical clarifications could be delivered before the next board action.
Why this matters: The application affects shoreline wetlands, runoff and habitat at a site with a documented history of prior large-scale approvals. The shift of the pool and reductions to impervious area aim to reduce ecological impact but require clarified details on footing, utilities and planting species to be enforceable.
Next steps: Applicants will provide supplemental drawings and details on footing and utilities; the board will confirm the record is complete before taking final action.
