Town could take ownership of lighthouse revetment

Recommend

Comment

Email this article

Print this article

Get news alerts

RSS Feeds

Share Digg Mixx Linked In Facebook Twitter Delicious

By Michael Wright

I

n order for plans to go forward for shoring up the stone revetment protecting the bluff beneath the Montauk Lighthouse, East Hampton Town may have to take ownership of the revetment itself, a twist that has some Town Board members concerned about the legal ramifications of the project.

The federal Army Corps of Engineers is scheduled to begin a massive reconstruction and re-configuration of the 500-foot revetment that protects the foot of the bluff next year. But the revetment itself is owned by the Montauk Historical Society, which raised the funding for the current revetment’s construction and state law prevents the federal funding that is to pay for the $14 million project from going directly to a private entity.

Legislation has been proposed in the State Legislature to change the law, allowing the money to go directly to the historical society, but it probably won’t be addressed by state lawmakers until the beginning of 2009, when the legislature reconvenes.

One alternative is for the town to take ownership of the revetment and accept the money for the project, which will be managed by the Army Corps. If the town declined, Suffolk County could also take ownership of the revetment to facilitate the project.

Supervisor Bill McGintee told Town Board members Tuesday that he would rather see the town be the intermediary for the historical society on the project than the county. The town would take ownership of the land the revetment is on and would not have any responsibility for the project or the lighthouse, he said.

But councilmen Pete Hammerle and Brad Loewen expressed concern that the town could be found liable if the revetment failed or caused unforeseen damage to the surrounding areas; or the arrangement could preclude the town from suing if the revetment were to cause erosion to town property in Turtle Cove, directly to the west of the revetment. Mr. Hammerle said he was not completely convinced that the project is a good idea in the first place.

“Will Turtle Cove still be there 10 years after the revetment goes up? No one knows,” Mr. Hammerle said. “I’d like to see us left out of it. I’m not sure how I feel about the project as a project ... I’m not sure it’s the right thing to do. It’s the Army Corps way. They have a history of screwing some things up.”

But Mr. Hammerle did not directly oppose the project and said he would rather see the state pass the legislation allowing the money to go to the historical society.

Mr. McGintee noted that the Army Corps of Engineers is “the only game in town” and would be doing a number of projects with the town in the coming year, including the dredging of Montauk Harbor inlet and, the town hopes, the replenishment of sand eroded from Montauk’s ocean beaches. The supervisor also said that detailed engineering studies of the project showed there would not be erosive effects to neighboring properties from the revetment.

Acting Town Attorney John Jilnicki said that the wording of the proposal from the state for the town to take ownership of the revetment made it clear that it was purely a financial agreement; he said it would not bind the town legally to the project or preclude it from taking legal action with regard to the new construction. He said he would do further research to clear up any legal questions.

The revetment proposal has been challenged by the Surfriders Foundation, a national surfer advocacy group, because of fears the revetment will change wave patterns near the lighthouse and disrupt surfing conditions in the area. The Surfriders have proposed that, rather than shoring up the revetment, the lighthouse itself should be moved back from the eroding bluff. Engineers for the Army Corps have warned that the 212-year-old concrete lighthouse, which was commissioned by President Washington, may not hold up to the rigors of being moved. The move has been estimated to cost more than $25 million.

The reconfigured revetment would provide another 50 years of protection for the bluff, according to its proponents, The bluff has eroded more than 250 feet since the lighthouse was built. The current revetment was completed in 1992. Engineers say it is not high enough to keep waves from crashing over it and eroding the bluff. The new configuration would also extend the toe of the revetment further to the east and west.