The East Hampton Town Trustees have assessed fees for five docks that had been modified without trustee approval.
Last month, the trustees set a new application fee for docks, floating docks, platforms, walkways, and/or bulkheads in waters under their jurisdiction, aimed at structures that were modified without their consent. In 2021, they had imposed a moratorium on the construction of new residential docks and similar structures, in order to conduct an inventory and survey that would identify any that were noncompliant or unapproved.
The trustees banned applications for docks in most waterways under their jurisdiction in 1984, extending the prohibition to all but the eastern shore of Three Mile Harbor in 1987. At the end of 2023, they updated their policies to create uniformity in residential dock management, across all harbors and for all residential dock-agreement holders.
Based on aerial photography and other surveys, the trustees determined that some docks and related structures had been in place for a long time but were never included in trustee records. Those that were altered fell into two categories, John Aldred, a deputy clerk of the trustees, told his colleagues last month: Those that appear to have been modified prior to the 2021 moratorium, and those modified after. Both, he recommended, should be subject to an as-built fee.
As of Aug. 1, a dock owner receiving a notice that their dock is incongruous with trustee records will be afforded an opportunity to reconcile by submitting an application, supporting documentation, and the standard $125 application fee. If the trustees determine that unauthorized improvements were made after the moratorium was implemented but nonetheless approve the alterations, a one-time as-built permit fee of $8 per square foot will be assessed, or a flat fee of $600, whichever is greater.
In addition, if unauthorized improvements have been in place for two or more years prior to Aug. 1, the standard dock fee of $1 per square foot will be charged for the entire structure, backdated for up to two years.
Should the applicant deem the terms unacceptable, they must return the dock to its prior dimensions and/or configuration. If unauthorized “or otherwise questionable” improvements are approved by the trustees and the improvements were made at an indeterminate time prior to the dock survey and/or moratorium, or the trustees determine that they are de minimis, and/or inconsistencies cannot be reconciled, the entirety of the structure will be subject to the standard $1 per square foot annual structure fee as of Aug. 1 and also backdated two years.
When they met on Monday, Mr. Aldred said that the five docks in question “were enlarged or changed in some way from what we have in our records. Some after the moratorium went in place, and some prior to that moratorium.” A committee had been formed to examine and recommend whether or not to accept the changes made to noncompliant docks, and what monetary penalty should be assessed for those that are accepted.
At 100 Gerard Drive in Springs, a floating dock at the end of a long walkway over a marsh has been replaced with a fixed dock of the same dimensions but without a trustee permit, Mr. Aldred said. A winter storm “wiped out the floating dock” and part of the walkway, “so the committee felt that was something we should allow to be left in place.” The walkway is not under trustee jurisdiction, he said, as the marsh under it is included in a survey of the property.
The committee recommended accepting the changes and assessing the fee of $8 per square foot.
At 22 Maidstone Park South in Springs, a floating 20-by-20-foot dock comprising interlocking plastic blocks has been attached to a fixed dock, Mr. Aldred said. “This was done before the moratorium, apparently,” he said. “That, we felt, was also something we could accept at the minimum back charge, if you will,” backdating the fee for two years.
At the same property, a set of steps into the water was added to an existing fixed dock after imposition of the moratorium, Mr. Aldred said. “The committee felt that that wasn’t really egregious enough, was fairly minimal, and we should allow that to stay,” he said. “Since it was done after the moratorium, that would be charged at the $8 per square foot, one-time charge.”
At 26 Duke Drive in East Hampton, Mr. Aldred spoke of “a fairly large dock,” part of it fixed and with four 20-foot-long sections of floating dock that had been permitted at four feet wide but were in fact six feet wide. “The committee felt these should be returned to the four-foot width,” he said. “The penalty is you have to put it back to what was approved there.”
At 63 Louse Point Road in Springs, another floating dock of interlocking plastic blocks “has different sizes at different times in different years,” Mr. Aldred said. The committee recommended that the dock be accepted at its current dimensions. “None of this enlargement was done post-moratorium, so this is one of the lesser charges,” he said, and it would be assessed the minimum fee, backdated for two years.
The trustees unanimously voted to accept all of the committee’s recommendations.
