Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Board approves amended Anchorage‑on‑Hudson Lot 6 subdivision after erosion, stormwater and retaining‑wall clarifications
Summary
The Board approved amended grading and retaining walls for Lot 6 of the Anchorage‑on‑Hudson subdivision, requiring beefed‑up erosion and sediment controls and DEC stormwater permit coverage because the disturbance (.95 acres) approaches the 1‑acre threshold; retaining walls require building permits and third‑party inspections.
Get email alerts on the Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Darren Doce, representing Sal Tosco, presented an amended subdivision to revise grading on Lot 6 of the Anchorage‑on‑Hudson subdivision at 7 Mariners Court, including terrace grading and retaining walls to reduce steep slopes and create yard area. Doce said the house and driveway footprints are essentially unchanged, but retaining walls are necessary to achieve usable yards.
Neighbors raised concerns about stormwater and erosion; Anthony (on the record) described previous runoff that deposited sand on the road and asked how the project would mitigate runoff and how a proposed 12‑foot retaining wall would be constructed. Pat Hines (MH&E) said the area has a history of erosion and sediment control problems, that as‑built stormwater facilities had been impacted by sediment and required maintenance, and that the applicant must beef up erosion and sediment controls on the submitted plan. Hines recommended the applicant obtain DEC construction stormwater permit coverage despite the disturbance being just under the 1‑acre threshold (.95 acres) because it's close to the threshold and would protect the Town, neighbors and the applicant.
Jim Campbell (Code Compliance) reminded the public and applicant that retaining walls require building permits and inspections by a third‑party engineer with final sign‑off by the engineer before a certificate of compliance is issued. The Board, after receiving these clarifications and hearing no further public comment, voted unanimously to close the hearing and approve the amended subdivision subject to Pat Hines' conditions and the Planning Board attorney’s standard language.
