MILLERTON — Last week’s article entitled “Millerton Overlook environmental review begins� detailed the start of the village Planning Board filling out the Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) for the proposed affordable housing project, Millerton Overlook. The board began that process at its meeting on March 10.
However, the article erroneously stated that when the board approached the issue of protecting its wetlands, a 300-foot buffer was suggested based on a letter that Planning Board member Lance Middlebrook received from the county, centered on an inquiry he made on behalf of taxpayer Jeanne Rebillard. Rebillard and her husband, Brad, own property adjacent to the Millerton Overlook site at the intersection of routes 22 and 44.
It has come to the paper’s attention that what actually happened was that the Rebillards submitted an engineering report to the whole of the Planning Board from Allied Engineering Assoc. LLC, an independent engineering firm in Connecticut they hired. Middlebrook then took it upon himself to send the report, which had to do with a stormwater runoff system, to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
“I submitted an engineering report and whatever he did with that report, he did with it,� Jeanne Rebillard said. “It was an independent engineering look at the Housing Resources project.�
Housing Resources of Columbia County, Inc., is the not-for-profit applicant behind the Millerton Overlook project. The Rebillards said they got no response from the Planning Board regarding any of the previous letters they submitted about the runoff situation, so they hired an independent engineering firm to assess the situation.
“We paid for it,� she said. “We got nothing in writing back. All we got was Housing Resources challenging it because it was an out-of-state engineer. We did so because we didn’t want to jeopardize the work with anybody in state [who could be influenced by the project or those connected to it].�
“I sent it to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,� Middlebrook acknowledged. “And when they read it, that’s when they endorsed a 300-foot buffer [around the wetlands]. We always try to send whatever we can to any involved agency, whether it’s the DEC [Department of Environmental Conservation], the BOH [Board of Health], or, in this case, U.S. Fish and Wildlife.�
Middlebrook said Hudsonia (a nonprofit environmental research institute that educates and provides technical support to municipalities) also recommended a 300-foot buffer around the wetlands; the issue was not a new one as the Hudsonia report was done roughly 10 months ago.
“They based their information on the fact that it was a 100-year storm system, where it seems now it’s only a one-year storm system,� he said. “It gets complicated because storm systems are based somewhat on quantity and somewhat on quality, so U.S. Fish and Wildlife looked at that and I assume that’s what made them make that recommendation.�
Middlebrook added that the board sent Housing Resources to the agency to be “in consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife,� but that U.S. Fish and Wildlife told him they were in consultation and then Housing Resources just left and never came back.
“They need to be under consultation under the endangered species act,� Middlebrook said. “It’s mandated.�
The Planning Board member further clarified that on the night in question, he made the motion to enforce a 300-foot buffer around the wetlands. His colleague, Patti Lynch, seconded the motion. Planning Board member Carol Gribble was the third vote in favor of the 300-foot buffer. Planning Board Chairman Greg Lanphear and member John Gilmor both voted against the motion. The motion passed, however, with the three supporting votes.
