HomeMy WebLinkAbout20230378 Washington St. and West Ave. Land Disturbance Public Comment (5) 1) Wetland Classification Challenge—
Whereas the NYSDEC letter to La6ella Associates (3/13/24) states that the `current' wetlands are non-
jurisdictional it does not address purported illegal actions to sever these non-jurisdictional wetlands from
jurisdictional wetlands across West Ave. Inquiries to date have shown no NYSDEC permit allowing for this DOT
severance of wetlands by removing the connection between the two wetland areas (under road culvert)
The regulations as they apply to DOT:
1. Freshwater Wetlands: According to the Freshwater Wetlands Act (ECL Article 24), the NYSDEC
regulates activities in freshwater wetlands, including those located outside the Adirondack Park. The
Department of Transportation may need a permit from NYSDEC if they plan to conduct activities that
alter or impact freshwater wetlands, such as excavation, filling, or construction.
2. Jurisdictional Determination: Prior to commencing work, the DOT would need to obtain a formal
jurisdictional determination from NYSDEC to determine whether a parcel contains State-regulated
freshwater or tidal wetlands. This determination would inform whether a permit is required.
In summary, the Department of Transportation was required to obtain formal jurisdictional approval from
NYSDEC to issue a permit to sever jurisdictional wetlands in New York State, depending on the specific location
and nature of the project
Without documentation from NYSDEC showing approval for the DOT action its maintained the action must be
considered illegal. A request has been made for NYSDEC to evaluate and provide supporting documentation
showing the act was legal, and if not, change the designation by reinstalling the culvert or by other
administrative means.
2) Improper characterization of hazards and incorrect completion of`Short Environmental Assessment
Form'
A second challenge is the improper use of an Environmental Assessment `Short' Form instead of the full
characterization report that is required for lands that have a history of uncontrolled and uncharacterized
dumping of waste (documented by Mohrs archaeological study and evidence on numerous surrounding
properties (reportedly buried car engines, doors, containers, asphalt, etc.). The owner stated that this action
is for land sale for development. The short form submitted requires answers to questions that don't apply to
the clearing of land but rather to the owner's documented intent of developing. Land disturbance, further
land development, and documented solid, potentially hazardous waste trigger the need for full
characterization.
3) Documentation of future purchaser obligation to mitigate significant trees
A third challenge is adding the important requirement about a complete inventory of significant trees and
some mechanism by which the planning board would put a requirement on a future owner to replace those
significant trees to be cut as part of any approval for the current owner to clear the land.