Columbus residents threaten borough with legal action
PUNXSUTAWNEY — A member of the Columbus Planned Community read a notice to Punxsutawney Borough from the Department of Environmental Protection at Monday’s council meeting.
Jim Tripp of Mulligan Drive, Punxsutawney, said the reason he was in attendance was to ask about the letter dated Nov. 18, 2022, and ultimately threatened legal action over the situation.
“I asked DEP to conduct an investigation into the building of the Columbus Planned Community, and stormwater runoff issues,” Tripp said. “In particular, the complaint reported that the development was not constructed with adequate stormwater facilities, resulting in property flooding and damage to roadways.”
Based on the department’s initial investigation, it appears that construction of the development started around 2005, which involved approximately 17 acres of earth disturbance and construction of about 44 buildings and associated utilities and roadways.
An additional construction phase occurred between 2015 and 2019, adding additional buildings.
Because the development involved one acre or more of earth disturbance, pursuant to 25 Pa. Code Section 102.5, the developer was required to obtain a NPDES stormwater permit prior to construction.
Neither the department nor the county conservation district were notified of the plans for the development by the developer or Punxsutawney borough.
“Under 25 Pa. Code Section 102.42, municipalities that issue building permits are required to notify the department or the county conservation district when it receives an application for a building permit, or other permits involving one acre of earth disturbance,” Tripp said. “Further, 25 Pa. Code Section 102.43 stipulates that a municipality may not issue a building permit or other permit for projects proposing earth disturbance activities requiring a NPDES stormwater construction permit until the department or a conservation district has issued or acknowledged such permit.
“Please be advised that failure to comply with the department’s rules and regulations could result in civil penalties and withholding of payment of funds payable to the municipality from the general fund,” Tripp said.
He added that suits may be filed by any aggrieved person, in equity against a violator of the Stormwater Management Act to a public nuisance.
“The department is not pursuing an after-thefact NPDES stormwater construction permit for the development,” he said. “The department does request that Punxsutawney Borough evaluate the stormwater concerns within the development and provide remedies, as
appropriate within its jurisdiction and authority, and going forward, any new construction involving earth disturbance activity be reviewed by the borough to ensure compliance with local, state and federal requirements.”
Tripp said that DEP provided contact information at rlybrook@state. pa.us or 814-332-6894 for a response or evidence to the contrary of the department’s findings.
The letter was written by Ron Lybrook, Environmental Group manager, Waterways and Wetland Program.
“At this point the borough manager (Toby Santik) received a phone call from Young Township, who received the same letter, asking him what they were doing about the letter,” Tripp said. “His reply was, due to the DEP not contacting (the borough) personally, we’re not doing anything.
“Again, as usual, it got blown off. As a result of the borough manager’s response, I will contact DEP and ask for enforcement action and withholding of funds to the borough,” Tripp said. “I believe the borough manager’s response, it is irresponsible and showing no regard for the taxpaying citizens of Columbus.”
“The worst part of this is that every borough council member knows that this happened, the borough manager knows and the code enforcement officer knows it happened,” Tripp added. “There’s no reason for this. In closing, I suggest the borough council reevaluate its duties and rein in positions such as the borough manager and code enforcement officer. These individuals have labeled us as private; this is their ploy to deflect responsibilities from the borough.”
Tripp said they are a subdivision of the borough and its codes have a chapter devoted to such areas.
“At this point you’ve left no other option for us than consulting an attorney,” he said. “Right now, we’ll see you in court and thank you for your time.”
In other business:
• Code enforcement officer report: Bill Williams, chairman of the Public Safety Committee, and Eric Story, council member, discussed their complaints with enforcement of minor repairs to someone’s property.
“We’ve been talking about this for a long time. I’ve been bringing it up every other month,” Story said.
He said the borough should not keep “nickel and diming residents” by requiring a building permit when they are not increasing or decreasing the size of the project..
“This council for years has been complaining about private property matters, and we hear people, especially older people, they charge $25 for a permit to change a couple of boards,” Story said.
Williams said that in the most recent case, the person was contacted by her insurance company and told that the boards needed to be replaced.
“Obviously, someone must have seen her do it and snitched and then she began receiving letters from code enforcement,” Williams said.
Nathan Frankenberger, Public Works chairman, said that he understands wanting to save money for the residents, but the borough’s codes in some cases are superseded by state UCC codes.
Story said he looked it up and found that for general maintenance, you don’t need permits.
“If you’ve got to replace a deck board so you don’t fall through it, I don’t care how many boards you’re replacing, you’re not increasing the size of the deck,” Story said. “First you have to pay for the permit, the lumber, and then you have to pay for this stupid inspection, and that’s a minimum of $65 for that.”
Story said that this is the next thing that the code committee needs to look at.
“If PennSafe is going by the state laws and you don’t need a permit for fixing shingles on a house and deck boards, then let’s get rid of it. They’re following the state law; quit nickeling and diming these people.”