DRAFT

WETLANDS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES

July 12 , 2005

Present:

Matthew Mastrantone, Chair
Andy Galler

John Sussmeier
David Klotzle, Wetlands Inspector
Isabel Lopatin, Secretary

Absent

Eric Lind

Guests:

Denise Enea

Edward Enea

Benjamin Fiering

Material Distributed

None

The regular July meeting of the Town of Philipstown Wetlands Advisory Committee was held at Town Hall on July 12, 2005.  The meeting was called to order by Chairman Matthew Mastrantone at 7:36 p.m.

Applicant: Enea

Representatives: Denise and Ed Enea

Tax Lot:

The Eneas need to rebuild their retaining wall that runs along the bank of Sprout Brook. The base is eroding faster than it should be because a neighbor built his wall higher than the stream bank, so more water has been hitting their wall. They made the point that they were not there to complain about their neighbor, they just wanted to build their wall properly.

The Inspector said that this work would not have an impact on any regulated area, because it was being done intelligently. The Chair asked if the wall had failed yet, and Mr. Enea stated that some sections have collapsed due to erosion, and if one were to stand on other sections, they would collapse. The Chair asked if the intent was to raise the wall, and Mr. Enea said no. He added that his neighbor had done that, and the result was that flow is undermining his own wall faster than normal. If he doesn’t do something major now, the problem will only get worse. The Inspector asked Mr. Enea if he had consulted Tom Monroe, and Mr. Enea replied that Mr. Monroe had asked him not to start a war of the walls. The Inspector said that DEC had left the neighbor’s case up to Mr. Monroe. Mr. Enea said he had spoken to DEC numerous times. The Inspector said he wants something in writing from Mr. Monroe. Mr. Enea restated that his wall is falling down and needs to be fixed.

Mr. Galler said he wanted to see photos, so Mr. Enea passed some around. Denise Enea asked why the neighbor hadn’t been made to take his wall down, and the Inspector responded that DEC had yielded authority to Tom Monroe. Mr. Galler asked why nothing had been done, and Mr. Enea said that Mr. Monroe had not answered that question. Ms. Enea commented that the neighbor would have stopped building the wall if someone had made him stop, but then added that she was not out to get him, she just wanted to get her own wall built.

Mr. Galler asked if the Enea’s wall was flush with the ground, and Mr. Enea replied that yes, it was the same as grade. The Inspector said that the application was fine as long as Mr. Monroe passes on it, and Mr. Galler asked why Mr. Monroe was involved. The Inspector replied that it was because he was the flood plain Administrator, and the DEC said they’d go by his decision. Mr. Enea commented that he had been through this a year ago between DEC and Mr. Monroe. The Inspector stated that it probably fell between cracks.

Mr. Sussmeier asked why the neighbor hadn’t come before the committee. The Chairman said that a construction narrative was needed, and that it should include such things as how the cement would be kept out of the water, how scaffolding would be placed and how the stream would be protected. The Inspector added that this narrative should be sent to him. Mr. Enea said that the neighbor had driven metal pipes into the ground and asked if scaffolding could be put in the stream. The Inspector replied “yes”, and repeated that notes about the work should be jotted down and given to him. He said he would also need something from Mr. Monroe. Mr. Galler moved that the permit be issued once the notes were given to the Inspector, and Mr. Sussmeier seconded the motion. It was passed unanimously.

Applicant: Bowden

Representative: Benjamin Fiering

Tax Lot:

Mr. Fiering reported that there was nothing to report, as he was waiting for Badey & Watson to finish the contour map.

Applicant: Hill

Representative: none present

Tax Lot:

No one was present to speak about this application but there was discussion.

Mr. Galler stated that there was a workshop about Upland Drive and Ridge Road about a year ago, where it was decided that no building permits would be given until the road was improved. Inspector Klotzle said that giving the applicant a wetland permit does not give him a building permit. Chairman Mastrantone said that having a Wetland Permit in hand gives the applicant more leverage with the County BOH and other permit-granting agencies. The Inspector wondered what reason there was to deny the wetland permit. The Chairman said it was because WAC was referring the application to the Planning Board, and requested a formal motion to that effect. Councilman Hosmer said that the applicant had to fix the road before he could get anything done. Mr. Galler said it wasn’t fair to Dennis Santucci who is rebuilding hundreds of feet of road to bring it up to town standard. The Inspector asked Mr. Galler if he was saying that this was not a buildable lot, and Mr. Galler replied that there was an interim decision by PB and TB, that if you wanted to build a house on Upland Drive, Ridge Road or Cliff Road, you had to upgrade that road to just below Town standards. Mr. Santucci complied, and Mr. Galler thought that if other applicants didn’t have to comply, the Town would be vulnerable to a lawsuit from Mr. Santucci. Therefore, this applicant needs to go to the Planning Board. The Inspector said that PB needed to notify him that this is not a buildable lot or he could ask PB to tell him that. He added that since the application was not being pushed he could hold off, but that by law he had to give the permit within a reasonable time frame unless someone else in the town tells him officially not to. Secretary Lopatin suggested that this application be handed over to a different permitting authority. Councilman Hosmer said that TB had made a resolution not allowing anyone to build on these roads without improving them, so the Inspector asked if TB would be the permitting authority, but Councilman Hosmer suggested that PB should be brought in. The Inspector asked if he should write the applicant a letter stating that he was no longer the permitting authority and that PB has to make the decision, and Councilman Hosmer agreed. The Chair asked for a motion to refer this application to PB. Mr. Galler made the motion and Mr. Sussmeier seconded it. The motion was carried and passed unanimously.

Inspector’s Report

Councilman Brower had called the Inspector about Mr. Raju’s property, which includes the deli in Garrison. A few trees were cut down a year ago, and material was piled up. However, it was not being stored in the wetland. The Inspector said he would send him a letter saying that he saw what was going on and that no material should be stored in regulated areas. Councilman Hosmer, Mr. Sussmeier and Secretary Lopatin mentioned Mr. Raju’s violation of the 1990s, when he was storing material in the buffer and took months to remove it. At this time, the buffer was 50 feet. The Inspector said there were some other problems on the property.

Mr. Matalon was not ready to come in yet, but should appear in August. Mr. Galler commented that some flagging had been done on that property, and the Inspector replied that it had been done but was not quite accurate: it needed to be 10-12’ closer to the house. Mr. Galler added that Mr. Matalon was supposed to supply the committee with a survey, and the Inspector said that Mr. Matalon was working on that now. The improved wetland line will be put on the survey, dark topsoil has to be put in the area and vegetation has to be established.

The Chairman then asked about Maddocks. The Inspector said material had been submitted but lost in Town Hall, so he issued the permit. A deck is being put on the house, intruding ten feet into the buffer. The inspector required a silt fence during construction. He added that if it had been more than that he would have asked him to appear in front of the committee, adding that he wants to get everyone done during the dry season. The Inspector then said that he had given Mr. Shelley his permit, based on Mr. Monroe’s report. Secretary Lopatin said she wanted it on record that the loss of the Maddocks material was not due to anyone connected with WAC.

Inspector Klotzle asked Mr. Galler about the letter he was going to write concerning the Wood application. Mr. Galler replied that he had an internal memo for the committee to look at. The Inspector said he had given the permit, and Mr. Galler rejoined that the memo was for the committee’s internal use, and he passed copies of it out. The Chair asked if construction had begun yet, and if the Woods knew they had to notify the Inspector before starting, and the Inspector said they knew that. He said he would take a look because he would be nearby for other reasons.

Minutes of May 10, 2005

Mr. Sussmeier moved that the minutes be approved, and the motion was seconded by Mr. Galler. The motion passed unanimously.

Minutes of June 14, 2005

Mr. Galler pointed out a typo in the minutes regarding measurements of the Wood’s buffer. This was noted by the Secretary. Mr. Sussmeier had also found typos, which he showed to the Secretary. The Secretary said she would start putting page numbers on the minutes, and the Inspector reminded her to put tax map numbers on them as well. Mr. Galler moved to approve the minutes as changed, and it was seconded by the Chair. It passed unanimously.

Other Business

Mr. Sussmeier asked to review Mr. Galler’s memo about the Wood application, which was done. Because of additional discussion about paving part of the drive that had occurred when the Woods were not present, the Chairman asked about amending the permit or contacting the applicants directly. The Inspector said he had issued the permit, so he would contact John Delano, the applicant’s engineer, telling him what the requirements were. Inspector Klotlze suggested bringing the applicants in to discuss the paving, and Secretary Lopatin if applicants could be brought in after a permit was issued. The Inspector replied that permits could be amended and since he hadn’t been notified that work had started….[sentence not completed]. The Chair said that it was a legitimate oversight and he didn’t see any problem with it. The Inspector said he would suggest it and see what happens. He then said that it should be written into the law that permits can be amended. One reason for doing this is that permits are not always acted on immediately, and circumstances, such as what’s going on upstream, can change before work is begun.

Closing of Meeting

The meeting was adjourned at 8:22 on a motion by Mr. Galler, seconded by Mr. Ssussmeier, and approved unanimously.