Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Okay. Thank you. This is the planning board meeting of uh May 6th. We have a quorum. Is there a motion to open the meeting? Motion. Second. Second. All in favor? I. Okay. I don't see Jennifer yet, but thanks for joining us. No, I don't see her yet.

Okay, we have actually uh just a single item tonight. So, everyone all the lights are on our actually uh just a single item tonight. So, everyone all the lights are on our applicants here. This is an informal appearance for campus. This is 307 Milwood Road application for a site development plan approval. Steep slopes permit, tree permit, wetlands permit, application for storm water erosion and sedimentation control for construction of a garage building and a gravel surface access driveway.

Good evening. I'm Alan Pilp Engineering with me also ready bill and Ko Bay. So, um maybe Sabrina, hi there. Could you put up I can share my screen if you'd like. That that would be lovely. I just let me know which plan, you know, where you want me to be. Let's start on C 100. Okay.

The very beginning. Thank you. Nice. No bookmarks, huh? Was I supposed to provide bookmarks, too? Absolutely. More than just your flash cards.

Well, I'll just start anyway. Sure. So, the property itself, some of you may know it. It's at 37. It's 20 acres in size. It's in the R-1A uh district. Um I'll say it's somewhat rectangular in shape generally and there's an existing paid. It's getting pretty close page 297. Thank you.

That number of pages, it's a lot of paper. Um okay. Uh so it's it's there's access from an existing uh paved and gravel surface driveway from Milwood Road. It happens to be in the Genebrook Basin, which means it's in the New York City water sp water supply waterershed. The property Oh, look at that. That's good. I like that. Thank you, Sabrina. You're very welcome. So the property I guess you can't see that up here, but the property in the center I can see it.

I know, but I can too, but that's okay. So, the property contains a single family house in the center. That's kind of like the driveway. It's actually you're actually looking at the the u that sort of gray line is actually the uh uh the dirt path that's there as well, but there's a there's a driveway coming in off of Milwood Road. Uh the house is there. There's also a pool patio and a pool house on the property. I'll say most of the property is wooded. Um except for the area around the house and nearly north of the house. Um the wetlands are in the generally the southern and eastern portion of the property. You kind of see it. It's like the shaded area. I don't know if this will show anything much here. It doesn't. Bring my lightsaber next.

You might want to try the one next on Dennis's table.

Too good. Let me see. Oh, look at that. You got such good things. So the wetlands are here. Thank you very much. There it actually runs through here on the property. Um they happen to cover uh about 3 acres of the 20 acre property with 100 foot wetland buffer. Um it covers uh about 12.3 12.371 acres of the property. Um, I'll just say Getty Brook runs through here and there is a flood zone associated with it, but I think we showed in the paperwork that what we're proposing is outside the flood zone. Can you switch to C101, please, Sabrina? Thank you. Next page.

Thank you. Oh, this is excellent. Yes. So, you can see here um there's the existing house. There's existing driveway coming up. Um that's uh the pool house and and pool are located here. Um and what's being proposed is this new collector driveway here and it and there is an existing kind of like dirt path running here and most of this gravel driveway just basically follows that pathway. The building itself is like 68 by 50. Um that's the size of it. It happens to be on a slope. U there's uh quite a slope here from the pool house down to the um I call it the lower level here. Um so that's um uh I'll just say it happens to be constructed on that slope. Uh there's a a slope here when you're coming in off of the gravel driveway. Once you're down here, it's actually pretty flat. It's pretty gentle. Um and the driveway is going to be 12 ft in width. Um that's what's being proposed. It's a gravel driveway. That's all we're doing. Um Um I'll just point out too that the wetland buffer line if I can see it that clearly here, but the the wetland buffer lines around there or so. I think I can see it slightly over here. Yeah, you're probably pointing out well with me as well. So the the collector garage is outside the wetland buffer, but a portion of the the uh gravel driveway is within it because it then it follows the existing dirt path that's already present on the property. Um and I'll just say the disturbance of the buffer including the the driveway was calculated to be 10,916 square ft. Um and um I know we did a steep slope application. I just want to point that out. And if you go to C102 as well, please

I'll just point out what we have done as well. This is a grading and utilities plan. What we're planning on doing is um attenuating the increase in um imperous services from the construction of the collector garage and conveying that to a bio retention practice which can be located here. It is located outside you can see the wetland buffer line there. So it's actually located outside of the wetland buffer wetland buffer being here. Um but there is a a vegetated swale which will take runoff basically this this slope that's here. The idea is to pick it up into a a vegetated swale here and then convey it into the bio retention practice here. So that's kind of like what's being proposed. Um and we're also picking up the runoff from the collector garage and conveying that into the bio retention practice. And um it itself is kind of like a standard bio retention practice um with um which is essentially like 60 ft by 36 ft x 12 in deep and it will provide peak rate attenuation and it also is size for the treatment of the water quality volume. Um with that maybe would you like to sure would you like to sort of go through the

the residential? Yeah, just to give you a quick idea of what the house looks like. Yeah. Do you want me to hold that? You can talk. Okay. Well,

we're gonna point put it up here. And um just to show you real quickly what the the building looks like. Um it's a as Allan mentioned 50 feet wide, 68 feet long, roughly 20 feet clear on the inside. The roof is about 25 ft to the roof surface with structure the that'll project down below that. Um this is just the foundation plan. This is the the floor plan. You see that we're essentially attaching the garage to the back of this pool house. Um as Alan mentioned, there's a steeper slope that comes off the back of the pool house. pool house and pool are all at the upper sort of very flat area. So, we're trying to keep the building as compact in terms of the use of the property uh and thereby attaching it. The grade continues down this way. So, there's really no meaningful difference between building it up against this poolhouse building or say further down into the property. It would just cause we thought more disturbance uh you know shifting it down. So, we've kept it up against that pool house. There might be a concept in the future of being able to come out of the pool house onto the roof of this building to potentially use that as a court surface for um so for a future use. But at the moment, it's just going to be a a plain old roof. Um quickly just uh you see that as I mentioned, it's 25 ft. Therefore, from driveway level up to the sophet of the roof, another 4ft high roof on top of that. We're trying to mimic somewhat the pool house building which has these slope roofs around it and some of the same materials in terms

of hardy plank siding and trim. Uh trying to give it a more residential feel to that uh to otherwise which is a large building obviously. So this is the driveway side. This is the downhill side. Uh and then downhill side facing the bio. Correct. Exactly.

RIGHT. This is probably this. So, if you can see this drawing at the top, that's kind that's the back side uh facing essentially east and seeing how the existing grade we're cutting into the grade, stepping the foundation of the building down and uh doing a couple little small stone stack retaining walls for grade purposes. We're trying to have windows on all three of the primary facade so that we get daylight into the building. Um and uh

how substantial are the are the retaining walls outside of the building along the side of the pool house? Minimal, right? Just enough to get uh you know to cut into the grade to get this upper window. And then further down the slope uh no retaining walls. Yeah. No additional retaining walls. We're just stepping the foundation to meet the existing grade.

Again, back to the front of the building. These are windows up here. There's glass in the overhead doors. So, trying to bring some glass into there. This last drawing shows a sort of section through the building. It'll be a steel truss system to hold up the roof and uh but you know, again, finishing the walls and uh you know, the walls to to give it a residential feel. So, that's a quick our quick overview of the architects. If your future use of the roof for some use, are you doing a Are you going to pitch the roof and then later put a flat deck on top? It'll have a pitch on it and then we'll do probably one of those um like a sleeper deck on top.

Not that, but the pedestal system, right? They have those adjustable pedestals. You can create the flat roof surface. Actually, if it becomes a sport court, there's there's a you know, there's a system for producing a sport court on that kind of pedestal. uh system, you know, two-ft panels and then they install a sport court on top of that. Do you need a second way down? Um, good question. I don't know. I haven't looked at that yet. Um, we do have the access from that pool house. Right. Right. Yeah, I'd have to look at that. It's interesting the idea to use the space. It's a big It's big use for something. Right. Right. Solar panels or something. It'll be a lacrosse field, right?

Long way down there. chase out that ball, right? No. So, so that's a, you know, it's just a concept in terms of and and again a reason kind of that we wanted to keep it up against that pool house building to see that we could take advantage of that access that way. Okay. So, and if you have any other questions on So, the the use of the building will be solely for u just storage of collector cars. No kind of mechanical uh work.

Not really. Just disassembly and reassembly. If I take things off and have send them out to be chromeed or put them back on. Yeah. We're not doing headach and things. I used to we maintain all the property, my wife and I. Used to be my wife and I and my four kids, but they decided to go off to college and get married and do all that and give me grandkids. So, um, you know, a lot of that equipment will go in there for the winter. Right now, it's outside and I can never get it ready for the but I guess the point of my question was that there would not be any, you know, mechanical work done on the cars inside. you know, oil change, that kind of stuff. Yeah, probably not. Probably not. Yeah. Well, I think that if there is, yeah, that um by the way, you have to introduce you official.

I store them now all the way. That's the problem. And when I want to drive one, I have to bring a car down to America, swap the car, and drive back up. So, that's what I'm avoiding. If you're going to speak up, could you come up? Oh, come to my Oh, oh, oh. I'm sorry. Yeah. So, I'm I'm basically storing equipment for the winter that you know I can go and when you want to upgrade a classic car, people do it. They do most of the work. So, if you want to take something off, have it done, you have it done. If you want, you put it tow it out, you tow it out to them. But that work should be done in the winter because you can't drive in the winter and you want to prep it for the spring. So, that's what it'll be used for. Is it Is the building heated and cooled? Heating. It's got heating.

Heating. Yeah, cooling. Yeah. Just enough to keep it. Just enough to Exactly. Right. You don't have to worry about everything freezing up. So, yeah, keep it whatever. Now, 55 degrees fine. 60° enough. That's it. But it will it will have storage lifts. Planning having a storage lift. So, another hydraulic to lift the car. Yeah. They're electronic. So, you can just pull a car and put a car on top. Oh, wow. Yeah. Just so like a parking thing that we see in the like a Exactly. like parking in stack parking in New York. Yeah, exactly. So, your capacity for cars would be what? What do you think? Uh um

for cars plus machinery, I figure I'm going to probably put eight cars. Okay. At least eight cars. And then I have uh a backhoe, a chipper, two lawnmowers, a leaf vac, a ton of stuff that we use on property for doing the M. It's a lot of property and it's a lot of maintenance, right? Yeah. So this, you know, as you get older, almost 70, I use machines instead of my back. Back doesn't work as well anymore. Yeah. So that's what it'll store. It'll store all that. Yeah. Bill, will you have some sort of drainage system inside, you know, in the floor there? Yeah. Right. Right. Right. Sorry. Yeah. Yes. Okay. And that goes to like a separator or something?

It will. Yes. Right. That's that seems like the direction of your question in terms of oil and other kinds of fluids to what happens with those. So, right. Yeah, it'll have to have an a separator tank in there, right? Otherwise, it's a bofuel retention basically. That's right. Oh, we have to separate that from the storm water. Okay, we'll do that. I think that's the point. Yes. No question. Yeah. Okay, good. Uh Sabrina, you got some uh questions or points, issues?

Um I do I I do. Um the uh these are just very general points. There's not a lot of planning concerns with the application. The house is already there. You know, they want to do the accessory structure. It's a type two action under the state environmental quality review act. Um when it comes to zoning, it is zoning compliant. um you know the access drive, the parking apron and the garage structure meets with all of the required zoning setbacks and it's all within the maximum allowable building and development coverage. Um there's only one issue that I saw on the plan set. There seems to be a conflict between the plan set and the secret documentation. Is there a public water supply serving the property? So that needs to be clarified. The answer is yes. There is a public water supply serving the house and the pool.

Okay. So, those water on the plan. It'll have to be corrected. I'll have to show where those are. And then um the rest of the comments really belong to the rest uh the environmental coordinator and the town. Alan, will you have a water line going to the new garage building as well or just draw from there? I think we'd have to. Yeah. there. I didn't point out there's a small bathroom in that that'll be in that building. Okay. So, we'll have to show that as well. You have to show that and then show the waistline too to the septic system. Yeah. It'll just have an injector pump going up. Correct. That has to be shown. Okay.

Sabrina, just a quick question. Was this property in front of us like five or six years ago for something else? No. Okay. I thought it No, this is the first time we've seen this property in my time here. Okay. And I'm thinking of something similar. You're thinking of uh the Bailey Farms property. Maybe. I don't know. I'd have to see a plan. Great. Uh Jeff, you had some uh questions or points?

I did. Um most of it revolved around there was a couple things with the the order design. So a couple details need to get um need to match with the uh design manual says um there was also water quality volume I think needs to be taken care of that can't be incorporated into the into the main uh treatment center. So there's got to be some pre-treatment done. Um, one thing that's not on here that I had seen before, which is I think why I missed it was there's this there's no steep slopes analysis that was I I believe they provided it was a like application uh meeting but um we should have that in the final set a steep slopes analysis that shows the disturbance of the steep slopes and um you know the the um the uh analysis with the waiting of the steep slopes being disturbed. Um but I can I can coordinate that with an engineer offline but that'll be something that needs to be addressed also.

Okay. But I mean other than that it was you know a couple notes need to get added um like like they noted. So we have to follow notice of intent. Um and then fill volumes and I asked for some changes to the self fencing just based on the based on the slope. Self fencing needs to be addressed a little bit differently when you're on a when you're when you have it on a slope. Sure. But unless I have any questions, I think everything was pretty straightforward. I would just say I'd like to have the opportunity just to talk to you about the bio retention because I know interior wise it was designed at 3:1. It's the exterior of it was not it was at 2 to1 just to try to limit disturbance but I don't know I don't know what other comments you had. So, something we can talk about.

Yeah, absolutely. Regard to it because I'm I thought it was pretty much in conformance with the um with the design manual, the term I use. Um and we did sort of show that um that area uh to the north of it for pre-treatment, you know, that grass uh swale and things like that. Um there was that uh depressed area too before the bio retention. So we can talk about how to uh accomplish that. I'll do that offline with you. But thank you for your comments. Jeeoff, did you have we we spoke about the the retaining wall this morning? Yes. Confused.

So I mean the retaining walls I mean the retaining walls at um they look like they're between 10 10 ft on the on the upper side and and 12 ft on the lower side. Um, that's just based on my reading of the the top of top walls and and the grades. Correct me if I'm wrong. No, it's correct. No. Okay. So, I mean, that's pretty considerable. You know, 10 whole foot um, you know, tenants 12 foot high retaining walls. Just, you know, bring that to the PL

and and what we always require there, of course, is getting it stamped by an engineer for structural integrity, etc. That's that's typical. Everything would need to be you know this submit submit design and then uh certification at the end just indicating that it was constructed in conformance with the drawings and meets the uh bearing capacity settlement and uh capacity sets. I forget that they're sliding sliding. Yes. Thank you. No problem. Do we Jeff, do we have defense on top of those walls since they're so high?

Uh, that would be up to the building inspector. Um, you know, the answer most likely would probably not just a fence, but I mean a fence on the upper side possibly. depends on um if if you know we anticipate people um being on the upper side on the lower side, they may need to to design a uh a uh actually a barrier into that retaining wall to keep cars from dropping off the top. But normally that's you know we leave that at the hands of the building inspector. Okay. And I guess any kind of systems stepping that wall with uh multiple walls will probably increase the impacts. Yeah, that was the Yeah, having a terrace wall. Yeah.

Yeah. So, that was probably your consideration going with a higher wall. Okay. Okay. Anything else, Jeff? Lastly, just to do after our winter, which was rather more interesting this year than most, um would I arrange to do soil uh testing? Was that with Terry Row I should arrange or how should I arrange it through? Uh you can email me and copy Terry but yeah would probably be doing the inspection. Okay, very good. Okay, Dennis, you have some comments, questions.

Okay, thank you whenever I I always feel it necessary whenever you have to check yes to the cultural resources question. you know, just, you know, if we can put it to vent, you put it to vent. You don't necessarily want to let that float. So, um, I listed, you know, those resources that were on the mapping that I look at. None of these resources are on the property. Um, I understand why you had to answer yes, but I don't think that's going to, you know, affect this uh this particular project. As far as the wetlands delineation, um I just going by the map, I saw it was completed in December of 2024. But in visiting the site, you know, recently in in late April, uh the majority of flags were present and the labels on the flags were present. So I was able to correlate them uh you know to the to the plans. Uh so I I think the wetland boundary is you know still accurately depicted even though it may not have been technically um delineated uh within within the last year. I think it wouldn't change. Um, and I'll get to where just further investigation. Um, but I did have to put in because obviously um, since the world has changed since January 1 of 2025, I guess we should get a JD from the DEC to make sure you don't need a permit from them as well, unless you've done that already.

Can I ask a question about that? You may. Sure. Is interrupting you? No, go right ahead. Yeah. Okay. First of all, I know about the court case which had happened in Albany, right? which I've had I'll say in in the town of Lewisboro for example they said we're not dealing with this anymore because of the court case basically put it in suspended right however I did put out just so you know I didn't request it on February 5 it being May 5 it is now 90 days right they're supposed to do this

uh jurisdictional termination within 90 days afterwards you send a certified letter to the DEEC saying what are you doing are we doing something so I could send that out. But now we've hit the 90-day time frame and that's what I was told from the DEEC as to what to do. And this is not mapped as a DEC wetland, right? Correct. This is not mapped as a DC wetland. Okay. But I I normally just used to send them out, but I haven't heard a thing yet from the DEC. Okay. Yep. The law translating well into the environment once again. Um Okay. So,

it's always something. So, as far as uh the one spot that I don't know if you guys have have walked it after I um wrote the memo, uh it's kind of I described it, you know, it's on the existing path. And again, when I hit it, I was just like it's that experience of like the softest of softest soils, you know, in a non-title condition. Obviously, when you get like that black sulfidic smelling muck, you could sink right up to your you know what, like in one step. So, you you don't have that. But I I I just didn't know if maybe that is a seat where you know just the water decides to come out. But it really it it sits above where the wetland was delineated and it was definitely you know more saturated and hydrate than even even the wetland. So, um that's why I just listed, you know, just options as a reinvestigation. Like if it needs to be wrapped in as part of the wetland,

then so be it. Um if there's something on the site that has uh a pipe discharge that broke somewhere or whatever. I know in my experience, we've encountered, you know, where wetlands have gone away after water manes have been repaired and whatnot. you know, I'm talking 17 18 years of flowing water and certain so so that could be it as well. I just it's just an interesting feature, you know, to come upon it. I just need some sort of It's also at the bottom of the slope, too. So, Right. Right. But but it's still above the wetland that was line. So, it was like it was just so much more could be that way. Sure.

Dennis, was that on the road between the wood lot kind of where we split wood and and down to the garage? It's actually just north of the um the the dirt path. That's where it is. Just to the to the Yeah. I mean, it was I I take this. I included that photo as to exactly where I experienced it. I think that's true number 73. So, you can keep that. I don't know my number. Oh, yeah. This is on the road down. Okay. The thing I was going to mention is we put wood chips on there periodically, right? On the road because No, and that's fine. I I absorb the moisture. That's why I don't have issue with that. No, it's like uh spongy.

Exactly. Having been on it's like I describe it, you know, sometimes when you're on wetland soils, you could you could feel the float. This is a float and slide. Like it's the most unconsolidatable soils. These histic pedons. It's like, you know, the joke is like a dead man can push an augur down two feet. You know what I mean? It's it's just they're so soft. So that's why again it was just a unique feature I was not expecting. So that's all I ask just to investigate you know what potential cause could be or if that is the condition.

Um so uh obviously by the way around that area according to the map it does seem to be a pipe that runs underneath the path. So it could very well be a leak perhaps from that pipe you know close net 373 in that area. Okay. Yeah. Could be. Yeah. Well, you're just following so much extra hydraology there that Yeah, could be the result. Is there a supply or 8 in uh storm pipe?

There's a crack in every time water comes slowing down this comes out and he's putting wood chips and stuff on top of it, he could be just compressing it. Yeah. Well, that's what Yeah, that would that wouldn't hide the hydraology. And I've seen people put wood chips down in wetland areas and then the skunk cab doesn't disappear.

So I tried to um which I guess you know obviously this would be you know discussion you know for the board is the improvement authority and obviously the applicant and myself. So you know you you have a number here that you describe as you know would be those impacts in the wetlands buffer but you know I I guess there is you know discussion here for you know what what what is considered you know a permanent impact what what might be a temporary impact and then what already exists and should that count towards an impact. So, for example, you know, this this path that is a foot path that's been maintained as a foot path. Obviously, it's a it's a it's a minimal intrusion, but still it's it's maintained as an area that, you know, you're not going to put in plants. You're not talking about using it to to functionally improve a weapon. You're talking about using it to access a weapon. So if you're now going to, you know, turn it into a a thorough fair where where cars could drive, well again the argument or the discussion is, you know, are we starting from zero or are we starting from well net minus the area that's used as a foot path. You know what I'm saying? So that is one way that that number potentially could go down. Uh and another as I mentioned in considering the vegetated swale um at the end of the day you know that that could be um populated with with native species and you know certain growth that although its function is to you know divert you know the water into the into the basin it's not development at the at the end of the day. So is there consideration for that to not necessarily represent a permanent impact but you know just temporary for construct constructing? So um I'm not making a decision one way or the other. Uh I'm just saying that you know if there's a way other than of course

obviously to you know redesign the project because my initial concern was that you know a quarter of an acre of mitigation feels like you know it it just hits you as a lot right? you know, how how would you do that? Is it going to be pockmarked? Is it contiguous area? What would what would even, you know, be considered for that? So, those were just mechanisms that I thought, you know, from a discussion standpoint, would that would that drive that number down so it wouldn't be as much mitigation. So, Dennis, um, when the ERB looks at these kinds of applications, um, you you guys see more of these than we do. um what's it take from the ERB? Do they look at this as a pre-existing uh net deletion from the impacts or do they not do they just say it's still an impact and maybe just consider it for mitigation purposes or or neither?

Right. I'd say it it it depends like for example you know when when people have to do um you know storm water and it's all going to be subsurface and then it's you know green space and if the area is already like existing lawn you're not they're not asking for mitigation for that you know um if you're expanding you know your deck but you know part of that deck expansion is going over what is existing patio you know then there's like some net met consideration there. So, so that's why I just, you know, figured it was worth, you know, just bringing up and, you know, to be part of the part of the discussion.

Yeah. Essentially, what we're doing is we're taking a non-veitated dirt path and turning it to a non-veated gravel path. So, the question, I mean, there's obviously some subsurface engineering so that it could accommodate the automobiles, but that's what I'm saying. Like, there's a Um there's a there's a corridor and then the corridor now is going to be a little bit wider but still be a corridor. Yes. So so you can't say the net is zero but but should it be the full amount? That's the that's the discussion at the end of the day. Well perhaps we can get some guidance from somewhere. Okay. Sure. So we can refine that number.

Right. Um, and then the final uh comment was just I I don't know if you had a chance to to take a look. Um, but I guess there was just some transcription errors for for my purposes in terms of uh the the report that was done um the tree report, right?

And then the numbers in the field and then what I observed in the field were were consistent. But I just, you know, I didn't look at every tree, but I just highlighted those three examples as bullets that on on your plan, they were, you know, identified as as the types of trees that uh I show here. But then after the dash where I put the word actually, that's that's what the trees, you know, had turned out to be in the field. So, for example, tree 69, if it's really a dead black dead black birch versus a 22in red oak, obviously that impacts, and again, that's not one of the trees that were proposed for removal, but I just wanted to

maybe just double check that because it may reduce the the removal numbers if there was a transcription error of, you know, you listed a tree that was alive, but in reality, the tree report shows that it was, you know, dead or declining or Norway maple or something to that Well, now would be a good time to observe the condition of the trees anyways. Right. Right. But that's but that's great. That's why you know like the number of discs is you know that's always the way to go because it's everybody's anchoring point. So that's it.

Um that pretty much just summarizes the comments. Um there was a recommendation I think uh Sabrina mentioned it in her memo that we might want to refer this to the ERV and think it's what are your thoughts on that that is necessary or important. Um I wouldn't want to slow up the application of course but um I don't know how often you guys meet.

Right. So I mean they meet once a month. The next meeting is uh May 18th. Um, you know, I I think they'd be they'll be pleased that the structure is out of the buffer. Um, but as again, I I think just as far as the number that we have here, that might be, you know, if you're looking for guidance, that might be an opportunity to see what the ERB's, you know, interpretation times would be and then that can come back, you know, to this board because I would have to draft a memo as sort of the results of that meeting. So I don't I don't necessarily see a downside to to recommending that. Well, it seems to me just one person on this that uh you know normally we would look at this and it's it's it looks like a big number in terms of impact but it seems also to be intelligently thought about and that is we're using reusing a path that's already there and although it's in the buffer um so long as we figure out what's going on around that tree 73 and and that soil that you discovered it seems to me that um it's one of those situations where that might be the lesser of of the evils then trying to change the root of the um road and move it out of the buffer alto together or more out of you know it just I don't know it just seems to be uh it seems that they put some pretty good thought behind it in terms of uh trying to mitigate the impact

right and I mean normally would just sit there and say a it's a number but that's that's huge it's just that's just too much but it's it's you know and they're putting down gravel route also Right. Right. So again, yeah, these are all these are all ways to

you know, again, just reduce the number. Right. Right. And then you know from there it could be you know another approach is to you know okay so in consideration of the site what would make sense in terms of you know because obviously you know there's no plan for you know I mean the tree code is the tree code. There's there's obviously a tree replacement component to this as well. So, you know, I'm just, you know, that has opportunity to be reduced just based on conditions of of the trees. It's a little it's a little more mathematical where I I think, you know, when it comes to the to the wetlands and looking at the wetlands mitigation. Um I know a lot of the engineers in Bobcola used to like use the term nebulous and I'm like well okay that's that's how you want to look at it because there's not you know some set formula but you know there's there's other considerations that can go in for you know thinking about a particular site and as Bob described you know what's existing what we're taking advantage of but but you know there still would need to be some consideration for you know expansion of footprint or something to that effect to to just offset that. That's

how wide is the path the existing path right now? You can drive a back down. So maybe it's hard feet, seven feet a tree. I'd say eight feet or so. Okay. Right now. So the expansion is what? Another 4T. Yeah. 12 feet. That's it. Thoughts? I think to take I think to move the roadway to move the roadway out of the buffer area. You correct me if I'm wrong. You're the engineer. I just do I play an engineer on TV. But I think if we move it out of the order, then we have to go into the slope, right? If we moved it up close to the house, we got to dig into the slope. So I think from a disturbance standpoint, yeah, it's a it's it's much more disturbing and a whole another set of trees comes down and is kind of existing where it is. That's why Yeah.

Right. Yeah. I'm not I mean the verbal alternatives analysis is fine. I'm not I agree. I'm not looking uh sorry all you buildable people. I'm not looking for another plan. But um again in terms of you know the the number that that you gave us is is truly the disturbance that's happening in the buffer. But I still think there's you know what's temporary, what's permanent, what's happening already existing and just you know we we could play the show game there. Maybe we can figure out a way to refine that number. Exactly. Right. That's fine. Okay. Sorry I went back on the other side of the fence for a second. Okay. When do you uh when does ERB meet next? May 18th. May 18th. I think that's the Monday, right? It is.

Yeah. Can you get your revised figures into Dennis on that issue for the ERB for their meeting on May 18? I could I cannot attend that meeting. However, I would not be able to attend. Okay. The next meeting after that is I guess June 15th. Trying to find that. I'm just trying to find what were you getting out of that? Yeah. doesn't show that. Well, it should be down in this area here. Yeah, Dennis, we could be at Okay. Yeah. No, that's fine. All right. And I'm sure Randy go to that meeting the 18th. What day?

Yes. Again, if we, you know, if we think it's necessary, we can refer to the ERB on that narrow issue. Then we can get the recommendations of the ERB um and hopefully support uh frankly uh based on those revised figures and revised impacts um so right now there's a dirt path from the driveway back to this correct that's clear yes absolutely and it's current condition is dirt yeah it's it's not there's no there's no other surface it's just is it impous however pvious the dirt surface is it's compacted And

yeah, I mean it's not like it's heavy vehicles going down there. So there's no real cars. Two warm paths with a clump of grass going down the middle. No, it's not even quite like that. It's just it's just basically a dirt path, but um it's a road. Yeah, it's it's not really a road per se at all. You know, you know, roads get compacted from a lot of vehicular traffic. This is not that way right now. For sure not. It's not the clay of old Boring Brook Road if you're thinking of that that compacted gray. It's not quite that. Um it's not the wood chip path of the east village which has just been placed. I would say it's somewhere in between. Okay.

And you did say you're going to have internal floor drains in the building. Yeah. Yeah. You going to have a snow melt system or anything if you're bringing your equipment in during the winter? Are you snowb blowing your or plowing plowing this stuff and that's going to be in here. Yep. So that's the internal drains will take care of that when it melts inside. Yeah. You'll have oil water separator and and then that will drain into the rain garden or honestly I don't know. I know we have to have an oil separator. I don't know if that means that gets pumped out. Pumped out. I think it does. I think I'd rather see that. Yes, I would think so. In my humble opinion.

Yeah. You know, my kids always say I'm never humble. So, and you're not going to be using it very much in the winter much more than you're using it now. So, I I don't imagine you salted or anything like this. You pass. We try not to do that. Yeah. That just makes a mess anyway. Yeah. Okay. Just a matter of old cars and you may be doing oil changes. You may be doing things in there. Just making sure that any contamination that comes out on the car doesn't go into the into the wetland buffer. Well, it's like in a driveway, right? Same thing with a driveway, right? Power wash your cars and something comes off it,

right? It goes into rain gardens and things like that. So, keep the operation clean like Sydney Sweenies. Yeah, it's nice when they're clean. Any thoughts? So, questions? I mean, I'm agnostic in going back to the RB. If they can make it to the RB, great. I'm I'm in the middle. I know. Yeah. As long as I As long as we're not losing any time. Yeah.

Um because we would meet again on Would you have material ready for the 19th? You probably won't be ready for our 19th meeting anyway because we already have closed that material. So, we're not losing any time in in terms of you're coming back to us with the information that Jeff has asked for and Dennis has asked for. So, um as soon as we have that, we'll get you scheduled. Um and and take it from there. Uh at some point, we have the schedule public, but what we do at on some of these kinds of applications is schedule the public and also the resolution ready at the same time. Sure. Trying to get you. Did you guys want to do a sitewalk or anything like that?

No, we could do that. could do that coordinate with the RB as well. They're interested. Okay.

I mean, I would say in preparation for that meeting to me it it's probably more significant, but whatever your determination is for this area, you know, um just because if you have to go through wetland, you kind of want to we have to document that, right? If that's the reality, then that's the reality. Um so, Uh that obviously would you know factor in in in in into the mitigation like it would be it would be harder to make the wetland segment go away because of you know existing proposed whatnot especially from the soils component as opposed to the what's in the buffer and just functioning as a as as a pedestrian path. um as far as if you know you want to um use them to hear my opinions as to you know the memo that I wrote here saying you know this is a number that represents the disturbance but uh we feel that you know and the environmental coordinator wrote a memo to discuss these points that this doesn't all necessarily represent permanent disturbance and that it's just a number that represents disturbance. Some as a consequence of construction, other is more permanent in that it's actually less of a number, less of a footprint to worry about. Um, you know, what what what a compensatory mitigation would look like for for something like that. um you know it may just be worrying about the storm water at the end of the day you know because I mean there are some trees that are getting removed so then you know there may be some consideration but I don't think you necessarily have to go in uh unless you want to you know let your you're thinking in your proposal this is a consequence of the discussion

okay and I guess for the benefit of this board obviously right now It's listed as like 60 countries to be replaced. So I I don't know how you want to handle that, but that's something that you know obviously needs to be vetted.

I thought the application said I thought it was less than that. I thought the application said just from the Xes, I didn't see that many. It was listed on C104. They want to just based on the red X's, it doesn't look like anywhere near them. That was replacement. That's not how many are coming down. So that's the calculations for replacement based on diameter. Oh, okay. Yeah. I wasn't saying that's how many are removed. That's the replacement. Okay. Got it.

Dennis, can you remind us the there's also the option of the payment into a tree fund. I have to look that up for for the for Ry's purpose. Can you what that is? It's like two 250 per replace tree plus 10%. Contingency.

It's likely though on a a property of this size that we'll find places for the 63 trees. Yeah. I mean, we've we've seen people put a lot of trees on much smaller piece of property than this. So, it doesn't have to be just along the roadway that you're you're putting in. Okay.

Do you agree with the conditions of the trees? Well, I think I need some clarifications. There's a few that have to be clarified. Yeah. As far as going through the tree report and then looking at the trees, yeah, I was fine. There was a couple species I didn't agree with, but that doesn't materially change the application. It's just for us plant geeks. Um, and honestly, you know, this was done with snow cover and no leaf out. So, you know, melting snow and leaf out allowed me to confirm two IDs that I'm not sure I would have gotten in February either. So, it's of no consequence. Okay. Great thoughts. I'm good. I'm good. refer to the ERB and not lose any time.

Yeah. If there's a benefit, Sure. Yeah. It seems to me that um when Allen supplies with the uh supplies of net figures, I think it would be helpful to have that kind of support for the application. Normally, you see something this large, wow, this is this is huge. But I don't think it really is in this case personally. That's what Okay. And if we want to schedule a a site visit, we can certainly do that. Well, what would you like us when you're serving and what time? Just check yourself for ticks afterwards. That's all. When you go down there, especially this year. Yeah.

Really active. Yep. We're not frankly I've been there. So, uh, and I know property. So, but if you guys would like to go, we can do it. If not, I mean, I don't think it's that dramatic an application. Yeah. I don't know if they do a cit after the custom car the cars are there. He had

mute yourself. We're hearing about the recipe. What you making? Sorry. I was muted. You're fine. Great. Okay. So, we'll see you uh whenever you get that your material together and then uh uh we'll refer this to the ERV for the May 18th meeting. Okay. Jot down the results right away for us. Be the first one of the year. We don't get many applications anymore. Do we have an early June meeting or is that one post at home? Is that the tax one? We have June 2nd and then June 17th. Okay. Is there a one that we skipped?

Is there one that's on Wednesday in June? June 17th, right? Yeah. Oh, so your second meeting in June will be Wednesday. Yes. Okay. Yeah. Tax day is on Tuesday. If I project, if we're in good shape from the second, would we be eligible for public hearing on six 17th? Could be. Good. Okay, that'd be great. Thank you. And you're not doing the site, is it? Just No, we're gonna pass on the taste. Got plenty. Great. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Good night. Good night. Good night, Sabrina. Good night. Good night.

Okay, we have uh one last thing. This is the minutes of April 21. Any questions, changes, um etc. Okay. No comments. If not, I had a couple of minor words. Uh if not, is there motion to adopt the minutes of April 21? Motion. Second. Second. All in favor? I. And is there a motion to close the meeting? Motion. Second. Second. All in favor? I I. Great. Thank you.

Before you close off though, we did want to make a note, Sabrina, about the annual planning awards dinner. Yeah, we were we were selected. Um, Cook Crossing is being awarded um a planning award. Uh, the town is the recipient of it and the dinner is on June 3rd. June 3rd, 6:00. So, if you would like to attend, we're trying to get as many Newcastle representatives as possible to attend the dinner. Um, depending on the number will depend on whether or not the town will cover the cost of the dinner. Um, so please let Felicia know if you would like to come.

Where is it? I'll send out an email. Uh, Windro on Hudson. It's in Austin. Where? What's it called? Windrose on Hudson. The old uh Croinville GE site. Oh. Oh. Oh. The Oh, I know the place you're talking about. Oh, okay. It's in Croenville. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. that old GA conference center. Mhm. Oh, yeah. I hear it's very nice. Okay, great. Perfect. Okay. All righty. Excellent. Finally all these years. Bob, what's that? Get to go to dinner. I already ate. Listen, we missed the boat.

Good night, all dinner. It's actually uh we won one other one for the building itself. Oh, okay. Yeah. For the affordable housing. This award is for the multi-use at the site. Oh, okay. So, it is the retail, the office, the town homes, and the affordable. Are we still recording? Yeah, I think we're still online.