This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Politics & Government

Baxter Estates Hearing on Retaining Wall Wraps Up

Both sides in the dispute presented final comments in the last of three hearings on a resident's property.

No word yet on the fate of a gabion retaining wall built on the property of Philip and Phyllis Gallo on Locust Avenue in Port Washington. Yet those for and against concluded their cases and presented their final comments to Baxter Estates' Board of Zoning Appeals Wednesday evening at .

Before final comments were presented, Daniel Baker, the Gallos' attorney, explained the revised plans the Gallos had sent to Village Hall on Monday. In the revised plans, which Baker described as "less intense," three row of gabion cages would be removed, making the wall smaller than what was stated in the original plans. As was desribed at , Baker said the new plans were meant as a compromise, in response to feedback from the neighbors.

Joe Saladino, the village's building inspector, then shared his findings with the board. Saladino said he observed that the Gallos' garage was beginning to sink off its foundation, and agreed with the Gallos' explanation that this was why they decided to retain the slope in their backyard. However, he did acknowledge that their wall doubled in height from the original plans, and said it had to do with the Gallos doing the work themselves and ignoring their original permit's requirements.

Find out what's happening in Port Washingtonwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

"Unfortunately, the Gallos chose to ignore the requirements of the original building permit and decided to redesign and construct the wall to its present state without an amended building permit," said Saladino, who also cited a "lack of cooperation" as to why the hearings were being held in the first place.

Saladino noted that he found the wall to be safe "and not in any imminent state of collapse."

Find out what's happening in Port Washingtonwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Philip Gallo also spoke about the topic of water and other debris flowing down the slope onto the property of the Landsbergs, the other side represented in the dispute. He told the board that despite the large amount of rain and snow over the past few months, no runoff had been "gushing" from the wall. He did acknowledge there being runoff before, but said anything that landed on the Gallos' property, he himself cleaned up.

Despite Gallo's assurances, Nina and Warren Bernstein, the Landsbergs' daughter and son-in-law, presented photographs to the board, taken last week. In the photographs, runoff was shown on the property. Baker told the board runoff was normal, and the walls were being built in the first place as a way to curb it.

Patrick Fife, the Landsberg's attorney, presented his final comments first. He told the board that the Gallos' wall, no matter the final height, "is creating a continual problem," calling the wall a "burden on the community."

"The Gallos need to establish that there won't be any detriment to the surrounding neighborhood," Fife noted. In response to the Gallos' promise to conceal the wall with landscaping and plant life, Fife said it was "impractical" to think the wall would vanish if it was covered with ivy or hidden by trees.

The final word belonged to Baker, who responded to various points brought up in the past three hearings by the opposing side. He reminded the board that the findings of Thomas Gibbons, the engineer hired by the Landsbergs who testified at the , were "purely speculative" when he said the wall was in danger of collapse. Baker pointed out that the two engineers hired by the village and Saladino all agreed the wall was safe.

As he did in the previous two hearings, Baker reiterated that the Gallos had the right to build the wall as a way of retaining their property and they never meant for it to become a big problem for the community.

"This wall was developed with good faith – not to harm anybody and not to cause the stir that it has," Baker said.

With the hearing over, the meeting closed to the public, and the board left to decide the outcome. According to Yvonne Whitcomb, the village clerk, the results will be made public next week.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?