WETLANDS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES

May 10, 2005


Present
:       

Matthew Mastrantone, Chair                                                                       
Andy Galler
John Sussmeier
David Klotzle, Wetlands Inspector
Isabel Lopatin, Secretary

 

Absent:

Eric Lind


Guests:

Sarah Brown

Tim Cronin

Michael Day

Mark Helder

Joe Levy

Mike Margolies

Noah Matalon

Margaret McManus

Dennis Rotenberg
Stephen Wallis

Glennon Watson

Elizabeth Wood

Scott Wood

 

Material Distributed

 

Bowden:  plans and description (no application)

Ruggiero:  application and plans

Shishkoff: application and plans

Wood: additional plans for previously-submitted application.


The regular May meeting of the Town of Philipstown Wetlands Advisory Committee was held at Town Hall on May 10, 2005.  The meeting was called to order by Chairman Matthew Mastrantone at 7:34 p.m. 

 

Applicant:  Bird and Bottle Holdings, LLC

Representative:  Tim Cronin

Tax Lot:

 

Tim Cronin made introductory remarks about the history of the building and the nearby cottage, and what their current potential functions are.  In December 2003, the Board of Health, thanks to repeated septic failures, issued an order of non-compliance and  ordered that the septic system had to be pumped or repaired immediately.  The property went on the market shortly after that.  Bird & Bottle Holdings bought the property in July of 2004 and contracted with Mr. Cronin to evaluate the septic system and come up with a long-term solution.  The existing septic had junction boxes upon junction boxes, representing as many as 50 years of septic work.  To keep away from Indian Brook, Mr. Cronin kept working in this area with test holes. The soil profile deteriorated to the west, so there was no solution in that direction, but there was excellent soil for waste treatment between the cottage and the main building, which has a slightly higher elevation.  A traditional septic system would not work because they area with good soil was only about 60’ x 80’ (too small), so an absorption bed was planned and approved by BOH in December of 2004.  Work began but was on hold through the winter.  In February 2005, a DEC permit was issued, and the Philipstown wetlands violation was issued about six weeks ago, so he is now seeking WAC approval.  The absorption beds are within 100 feet of Indian Brook, but  Mr. Cronin did not know a permit was needed.  He thought of this work as an emergency repair, hence he wasn’t before WAC earlier, but he also said that if he had known a permit was necessary, he would have appeared to apply for one months ago.   

 

Inspector Klotzle (WI) said that the whole western section is probably wet soils, so the septic couldn’t go there.  It is an emergency repair situation, but the order was to pump out only; such orders state what is specifically to be done, and there was no order to build a new septic system in a regulated area.  The chain of ownership broke and the new owner didn’t know a Town permit was needed.  WI emphasized to the applicant and Mr. Cronin that issuance of DEC and County BOH permits do not forgive the need to have a Philipstown permit.  The work has been done very well and there are no disturbances too near the stream, and he has no problem with the septic or its location at this point.  A couple of small problems were corrected quickly. 

 

Mr. Sussmeier asked if the work was completed, and Mr. Cronin said that it almost was, the pumping system is being tested and there needs to be some back-filling, seeding and stabilization work done.  Mr. Galler said that he does not want to hold the new owner responsible for a professional consultant’s violation, but the consultant should be held responsible.  He said he was very disappointed in Mr. Cronin’s lapse of judgment.  Chairman Mastrantone expressed surprise at the fact that Mr. Cronin didn’t know he needed a permit, because he should know the town regulations by now.  The Chairman didn’t know how a failed septic system for an unused building could constitute an emergency.   Mr. Cronin offered the excuse that if the restaurant had been open, there would have been an emergency.  Mr. Cronin apologized for what he termed an oversight, and said that since the site is so visible he wasn’t trying to sneak something in.  The Chairman advised Mr. Cronin that there are laws, WAC needs to be consulted, and that he should not do this again.  Mr. Cronin said he will certainly pay much closer attention to the code.  The Chairman called for a motion to approve the permit.  Mr. Galler made the motion and Mr. Sussmeier seconded it.  The committee passed the motion that the permit be approved. 

 

Applicant:  Scott and Elizabeth Wood

Representative:  none

Tax Lot: 

 

Scott and Elizabeth Wood were present with new plans, which include a construction narrative and a change from three pipes to one.  The mouth of the pipe was changed from stone to mechanical.  DEC requested an arched crossing, so that was put on the plan, but the DEC permit has not yet been issued.  

 

WI made an intensive site visit with Mr. Lind.  Neither of them wants any fill in the wetland because there is lots of fairly unusual vegetation and wildlife there.  The plan would require filling a substantial portion of the wetland.  The statement on the applicant’s documentation that there won’t be a substantial effect on the wetland is not correct.  The wetland should be crossed over rather than filled, some of it must be replaced, or there must be some other mitigation measure.   Mr. Wood said he is concerned about the wetland and has appreciated it for years, since he grew up across the road from it,  but he also wants so live there.  Mr. Sussmeier asked how the bridging technique for crossing the wetland were.  WI mentioned using pilings, with metal bridgework to support the span.  This would allow air and light to get in, and almost mitigates the disturbance completely.  Pilings are driven in with no footings.  Chairman Mastrantone said that a rig big enough to drive pilings might do damage, and WI said that this method was not the only one for making the crossing.   Mr. Galler said that upon his visit to the property he was surprised to see a distinct divide where the forest ends and an amazingly intact wetland buffer begins.  The vegetation is amazingly intact.  Fill would bring in invasive vegetation, and it is important that this be done with minimal disturbance.    He doesn’t want to stop the Woods from building the site.  The WI stated that as fill escapes, the wetland soil and vegetation are forever changed.  The fill needs to be kept in place, perhaps with a gabian system. 

 

Mr. Wood said that he would like to bridge the whole thing, but he has cost concerns, and Mr. Sussmeier said that it would probably be cost prohibitive.  He asked what percentage of the lot is in the wetland boundary, and WI said that it’s a third of an acre, but he didn’t know the total area of the wetland.  He commented that this is bigger than anything that has been allowed in this town without mitigation.  Chairman Mastrantone said he wants a group visit with WI and Mr. Lind.  Mr. Sussmeier asked what could be done for mitigation if the work were done as shown on the plan.  WI said it would be difficult because an existing embankment means there is no place to replace the wetlands taken.  Mr. Wood indicated a place on the plan where he could possibly to it.  He indicated a place that has been filled in by the Town,  and Mr. Sussmeier said that was years of dirt road runoff.  Mr. Wood thought he could remove that material and use it elsewhere on the site.  WI said that if any work on the crossing could be based on gabian so there is no soil creep, it would be great, and Mr. Wood thought rip-rap might work.  WI mentioned rip-rap in a metal cage, and suggested that Mr. Wood let an engineer know what the committee’s concerns are, and Mr. Wood said that he had to start someplace, and that’s what the plan represented.  WI reiterated that a third of an acre is too much disturbance, so there must be mitigation trade-offs.  The Chairman said that everyone wants the Woods build their home, it’s just a question of finding the right way to cross the wetland.  This application will be on next month’s agenda.

 

Applicant:  Hill

Representative:  Michael Day of Joel Greenberg xxx

Tax Lot:

 

The Chairman initiated discussion by saying that this is an application for a well in a buffer and WI said that the line has to cross the stream.  There is no house yet, the lot is vacant.  Mr. Day said that the plan was to have the line go under the stream to avoid disturbance.  Holes would be dug on either side, then the passage for the line would be drilled.  WI thought that was a great idea, and added that there are no wetlands on either side of the stream.  Mr. Day showed photos and plans showing where the line would cross the stream.  Mr. Galler asked if the crossing were flagged so he could find it on the property, and also wanted to know where the septic was going.  Mr. Day said he would do that.  WI asked for stakes showing the septic and the stream crossing.  The Chairman wanted to make a site visit with the septic drawing.  WI said he was willing to issue the permit, but if the committee needed to make a visit he would wait.  Although Mr. Sussmeier was willing to rely on WI’s judgment, Mr. Galler wanted to see the site.  The Chairman said that with all the funny stuff going on Upland Drive, he wanted to see it, and Mr. Sussmeier rejoined that if there’s funny stuff, he wants to see it too.  Mr. Galler wanted to know if the owner planned to live on the property, but Mr. Day didn’t know.  Since that was the case, Mr. Galler felt he had to see the property.  The chair asked to have a drawing including the septic and to have markers placed on the site, and Mr. Day said it would get done in time for the weekend.  This application will be on next month’s agenda. 

 

Applicant:  Garrison Golf Club

Representative:  Glennon Watson, Badey & Watson

Tax Lot:

 

Engineer Margaret McManus accompanied Mr. Watson.  The Chairman had visited the site since the last meeting, and Mr. Sussmeier had reviewed the box of material.  He noted that the core area is expanding by one acre of impervious surface and was concerned with what would happen during a hundred-year storm.  He wasn’t sure that a 36-inch pipe would handle that much water.  Ms. McManus said that the pipes were designed for a 10-year storm, and that water will still go down the hill, as happens now.  She said that this was in accordance with Town standards. Overflow from the core area will go to the basin.  She had wanted bio-retention areas, but there was not enough flat land for that, and Mr. Sussmeier realized that was true.  Ms. McManus also stated that there was an increase in impervious surface, but that there was a lot of runoff already arriving at that point on the property thanks to its being a watershed for the surrounding 2,000 acres.  The Chairman asked if the impervious acre were parking, and Ms. McManus said it was not.  Mr. Galler asked how the 36-inch pipe would be cleaned, adding that there has already been much silting of the area.  Ms. McManus said that there would only be silting during construction, and that after that, erosion from run off would be eliminated.  Mr. Watson added that the pipe should be self-cleaning because of the steepness of its pitch. 

 

Mr. Galler talked about the clear-cutting that had already been done on the slope by the owner in order to improve the view.  This has caused a lot of run-off, and he considered this to illustrate the owner’s disregard for environmental issues.  He also said that the aesthetics of the retention pond is a nightmare although the engineering is fine.    Ms. McManus said the point shouldn’t be visible from the road because it is build up, put Mr. Galler thought it could look like a horrible hill of grass, so it should be designed so that no one notices anything was done there.  There was much discussion of the specifics of the ponds.  Mr. Watson said he had no issue with putting in a planting.  WI mentioned that last month there had been discussion about repairing washout, and Mr. Watson said that would not be a problem and that he would take WI’s recommendation.  Mr. Sussmeier reiterated his concern about the hundred-year storm, but thought that the proposed work would be an improvement over the current situation.  Ms. McManus said that planning for the hundred-year storm would require using three 36-inch pipes, and that the nation cannot afford to build for that.  Anyway, the DEC applications had been submitted.  Mr. Sussmeier said that he had built for the hundred-year storm on his property. 

 

The Chairman asked what should be done with this application at this point, and Mr. Sussmeier said it was a step in the right direction.  Mr. Watson requested a positive recommendation to the Planning Board with a planting plan, reviewed by WI, as a condition.  Mr. Galler said he needed to see a rendering of plantings to make it more tangible, and Mr. Watson was amenable to that.  The Chairman asked if the committee needed to see this before voting, and Mr. Galler said that a memo could be started, so the Chair said that was fine, but that the planting issue would be resolved at the next meeting. 

 

Applicant:  Wallis

Representative:  Glennon Watson, Badey & Watson

Tax Lot:

 

Mr. Wallis was represented by Glenn Watson; his entourage included his wife, Sarah Brown, and his architect, Mark Helder. 

 

Mr. Watson introduced the application by stating that the property is about ten acres on East Mountain Road North, just north of the intersection with East Mountain Road South.  It consists of dry land, two wetlands and a steep rise to a high point, with some flat land way in the back.  It is part of a sub-division flat that was approved by the Board of Health in 1976, and purchased subject to securing a BOH permit so a septic could be built.  Proposed activities are building a driveway, house and septic system.    Mr. Wallis and Ms. Brown want to live on the property, and Mr. Wallis said it would be a unique, passive solar home with a green design.  There will be a sod roof, an active PV system and it will be part of the environment.  There will be no blasting, he wants to work with the land that’s there.  He showed a model of the home.  He has received a BOH permit and Steve Coleman has flagged the wetlands.  The DEC application is in.  WI stated that the house is in an envelope all within the buffer, and the septic is out by the road.  Mr. Wallis said that the spot for the house is on a raised rock shelf, and that declines into a stream.  He went into detail about the property.  WI said that the only other level area is on top and it is a long way from the road.  He asked what the soil was like.  Mr. Watson said the soils are medium so slow, 31 to 35, and then consulted the septic plan, which was made by Larry Belluscio.  WI wanted test data, and Mr. Watson said he would send it.  There are six inches of topsoil on clay loam.  It is ChB Charlton.  WI said that was good enough, but that Mr. Lind had said he’d have trouble doing all that work in and near a wetland.  No one else had visited the site. 

 

WI was concerned about the proximity to the wetland, and wanted the committee to visit the site and comment.  Mr. Mastrantone suggested that construction of such a house would take five to fifteen years.  WI thought nothing could be done about the location of the septic, but his experience was that if it is pre-approved, it didn’t have to be changed.  Mr. Galler was very concerned about the septic being in the buffer.  He stated that approval of the subdivision in 1976 doesn’t imply that the septic system and its placement shouldn’t be up to current standards.  Mr. Watson disagreed, saying “yes it does.”  Mr. Galler asked for copies of BOH documents, and Mr. Watson said he would try to provide them, but that some would be in storage.  Mr. Galler said that the committee has never permitted a septic to be placed in a buffer.  Mr. Sussmeier said that BOH approval from way back has to be brought up to today’s requirements, and that could force the septic to be moved to another location on the property.  WI thought that there might be better types of septic system, and he will find material about it.  Mr. Wallis concluded the discussion by saying that he would be interested in a more progressive and cleaner system.

 

The committee will make a group visit to this property and the application will be on next month’s agenda. 

 

 

Applicant:  Dennis Rotenberg

Representative:  none

Tax Lot:

 

Mr. Rotenberg is a violator who decided to turn himself in and apply for a permit.  He filled in a wetland off his driveway with material taken from an excavation near his existing house.  WI issued a Stop Work Order and he appeared to talk to the committee about how he should undo this illegal work.  There were also other violations on his property.

 

WI noted that the road Mr. Rotenberg lives on, Hummingbird Lane, is covered by several inches of water when it rains.  Mr. Rotemberg said the road has been in for 27 years, and it had standard metal culvert pipes which have probably settled by now, so rainwater covers the road.  WI said that Mr. Rotenberg needs to make the property more viable.   Only five copies of documentation were brought, so three more were requested. 

 

The application requests permission to

remove fill from the wetland

replace the driveway culvert pipe and replace it

remove scrap metal, wood, tires, cement, etc. from the buffer

            reduce the vehicle inventory. 

Only one vehicle is left now, and it will soon be moved.

 

The Chairman asked where the removed fill would put, and Mr. Rotenberg said “up the hill”.  The Chair asked WI if there was any problem with that, and was told “no”.   WI wants WAC to look over the application and make comments.  He asked the applicant about the replacement of the pipe, and was told it would be done later in the summer.  Mr. Rotenberg said that Tom Monroe had rescinded the permit for his pole barn, and that he needed the excavator back for one day to take the dirt out of the hole, which would take two hours.  He wanted to have the footings for the barn dug at the same time rather than pay extra to have the excavator return.  He wondered if there was any way he could get the permit to dig his footings while the dirt was being dug out.  WI said he would have to be on-site and able to get in touch with Tom immediately, and it might be possible to work it out.  Mr. Sussmeier asked if footings were needed for a pole barn and whether it was in the buffer.  Mr. Rotenberg said it was a foundation and not in the buffer. 

 

WI asked that the wetland be marked and put on the map.  Mr. Rotenberg asked if the surveyor wasn’t supposed to have done that.  WI said they had to hire somebody to do that.  The Chair, perusing the narrative, thought it might be better to get the smaller things done before removing the fill.  WI said that removing the fill was the main thing, and once that was done he could remove the violation and Mr. Monroe might be able to issue the permit for the barn.  The Chair asked about the excavation, and WI said he wanted to be there when it was started, and to see it when it was finished.  He also said that if the wetland vegetation did not come back, the wetland had to be planted.  He thought it would come back in 6 – 12 months, but if it didn’t he had to have that situation covered. 

 

WAC agreed with the WI’s suggestions.  WI and the applicant will be walking the property soon to look at the order in which things had to be cleaned up.  There was no motion made about the permit. 

 

 

Applicant:  Noah Matalon

Representative: 

Tax Lot:

 

Mr. Matalon, who is a violator, had been seen atop construction machinery moving many yards of soil in a wetland on his property.  WI approached him while he was doing this, and asked him what he was doing in a wetland, and Mr. Matalon explained that he had filed for a driveway permit and BOH approval to build an addition to his house, which he had received.  Tom Monroe had him go to BOH before accepting applications for any Town permits.  The BOH approval was required to show that the addition conformed to the existing septic, that is, to make sure he wasn’t adding bedrooms.  WI asked Mr. Matalon if BOH had told him to put extra fill on top of his septic field, to which Mr. Matalon replied “no”.  He said he did it just because he was there with the excavator.  The driveway will lead to a small parking area, and Mr. Matalon was clearing for the parking area in a wetland. 

 

The Chairman described the scene of Mr. Matalon’s violation:  a large excavator behind the house on a quarter acre of property with 100 yards of mud and water and a big stump dug up.  He asked if Mr. Matalon hadn’t known he was in a wetland or had gone beyond the scope of his driveway permit.  Mr. Matalon replied that he had no knowledge of the wetland code, and the Chair was surprised that someone in the construction business didn’t know about it.  Mr. Matalon said that most of his experience was in Manhattan.  The Chair asked about the people downstream, because Mr. Matalon was pushing so much mud towards the stream, but WI said that Mr. Matalon was only affecting his own property.  When he bought the property he took a look at a tax map that clearly indicates a wetland, but without him knowing what the code was, he didn’t know about the law, just that he had a wetland.  WI said that the wetland is actually much close to his house than shown on the tax map, and that if he’d look at the map in Town Hall he would have seen the same thing.  He asked if anyone else from the Town had been to the site recently, and this was not the case.  Mr. Matalon knew he needed a driveway permit and a building permit, and his plan was to grade an area in anticipation of putting in the driveway. 

 

The Chair stated that Mr. Matalon’s experience was only in large metropolitan areas, and Mr. Matalon said he had only been working around here for two years.  He had spent twelve years doing museum construction and landmarks in New York City.   The Chair asked for confirmation that Mr. Matalon is advertising for work locally, and was told “yes”.  Mr. Galler asked if Mr. Matalon had a building permit for the extension and was told no, just a driveway permit and BOH approval.  The architectural drawings were not finished yet. 

 

Mr. Galler thought there were two issues:  ignorance of the law, which is no justification for breaking it, and a bigger issue, which is that the Highway Dept and Building Dept do not look at the Town Wetlands Map when issuing permits.  He thought there should be a better map.  WI said that in Carmel anything that crosses any permitting authority’s desk goes to him also, so that he can verify if there is a wetland.  Secretary Lopatin interjected that Maryann Landolfi checks the wetlands map when permit applications go to the Building Dept, and has caught a lot of situations where a wetlands permit would be required.  Mr. Galler said that there are houses that have been built without getting wetlands permits, and he thought the builder had no clue that he needed a wetlands permit.  WAC needs to have a discussion with Town Board about wetlands issues that get in under the radar.  He then said that in Mr. Matalon’s case, discussion should be about remediation, and there is also a pile of debris in the wetland.  Mr. Matalon said that at least half of the pile was there when he bought it, and he had added to it, but it was nothing to do with his excavation.  WI said that he had told Mr. Matalon that he would have to repair the wetland under supervision and currently apply for a permit to put in the driveway, all of which would be within one hundred feet of the wetland.  He should then go on from there, which will include filling the hole and regrading the area and planting something like annual ryegrass which will die off and allow native wetland plants to come back in.  Since so much is disturbed, it’s now difficult to tell where the wetland boundary is, so WI will have to determine that by looking at the soil with the aid of a Dutch augur.  

 

Mr. Matalon said his biggest concern is his ability to proceed with his addition.  WI explained that he will need a wetland permit for the addition as well, and what he’s asking Mr. Matalon to do is mitigate the damage.  He will lift the Stop Work Order so that can be done, and the permit should be applied for in the meantime.  Mr. Matalon will apply for the driveway and the addition at the next meeting.  He was told to bring a survey, and he wanted to do the drafting himself, but Ms. Lopatin said that plans were only acceptable if done by, a landscape architect, an engineer, or a licensed surveyor.    Mr. Matalon pointed out that he proposed to dig a fish pond [this was the “hole” referred to earlier] and that it’s in the wetland.  He was advised not to make a pond in a wetland, because it would be a wetland taking.  The code tries to help people with driveways and houses, but ponds in wetlands are difficult to maintain.  Mr. Matalon will submit a plan made by the appropriate professional, get the wetlands flagged by a professional, and make sure the wetlands boundary and 100-foot buffer are on the plan.  He was told that Tina Merando could give him a copy of the requirements for plans.  He was not convinced he could get everything done by next month, but said he would see what he could get together for the permit application.  Ms. Lopatin pointed out that once he’s gone through the process himself, he will be able to do it for his clients.  He said that it would be helpful if he could just walk into Town Hall and get all permit applications in one place.  WI said he wanted to recommend to Town Board that a packet be provided with a list of permits that might be needed for any property.  This application will be on next month’s agenda.   

 

Inspector’s Report

 

Violations were noted.

 

Julius Kovacs on Schuyler Lane was building a retaining wall in his backyard and was reported.  A Stop Work Order was issued and he will apply for a permit.  He had asked his contractor about permits, and was told that if the wall was three feet high or less, no permits were required.  WI wants to get a list of all licensees so that a mailing about the wetland regulation can be sent as official notice.  Otherwise, he and Tom Monroe should put together a permit checklist.  Referring to Mr. Matalon, the Chair said that he had gone way beyond the driveway area, so lack of communication about regulations was not entirely the problem. 

 

The stream violation on Route 403 has also been subjected to a SWO.  The stream had been dredged by machine.  If it had been done by hand, it wouldn’t be a violation.  There is no problem with building the stone wall, but dumping fill into a stream to build a wall on top of it is bad for the stream.

 

At 1976 Route 9, several houses are being built.  There is a DEC permit from a number of years ago, when WAC was accepting DEC permits and saying that no Town permit was needed.  Mr. Galler asked what a number of years ago was, and WI replied “five”.  The DEC permit had been renewed in 2002, and had just gone out of date.  The law does not say that a permit from another authority means that no Town permit is required.  The Chair pointed out that this is a moot point because the DEC permit has expired, and WI said that Mr. Monroe hadn’t taken any action because there was a DEC permit.  WI will go after them and require them to get a permit.  They now have silt fences up, and WI will call DEC and perhaps issue a Stop Work Order.  He mentioned that the watercourse is a trout stream.  Mr. Galler brought up the issue of two houses on one private driveway, because he thought the Town did not approve such arrangements. 

 

Minutes of April 12, 2005

 

The minutes were considered.  The Inspector wanted some things attributed him to be changed, and the Secretary wanted to make some immaterial editorial changes.  Mr. Galler moved that the minutes be approved in advance of these changes and Mr. Sussmeier seconded the motion, which was carried. 

Other Business

 

There was discussion of combining WAC and CAC.

 

Closing of Meeting

 

Chairman Mastrantone requested a motion to adjourn, which was made by Mr. Galler with Mr. Sussmeier seconding, and the motion passed unanimously.  The time was 9:44.