HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985_05_23 Conservation Advisory Commission Minutes il
/I • , InEU ,:'--
correct4
��% RECEN,�� 1
TOWN OF MAMARONECK CONSERVATION ADVISORY COMMISSION ►1` 14
AND WATER CONTROL COMMISSION JOINT MEETING ';" Aub
ooiov N c��K �1
gRONECK
N Y. i
/ A regular meeting of the Town of Mamaroneck Conservation Advisory
Commission and the Water Control Commission was held on Thursday, May 23, 1585,pfr'-'
1
at the Weaver Street Firehouse. The meeting commenced at 8:05 P.M. �� ``
Members present: Dr. C. Alan Mason, Chairman
Mrs. Elinor Fredston, CAC & WCC
James Santos, CAC
Susan Amlicke, CAC
Mary Anne Johnson, Emeritus
Also present: Cliff Emanuelson, Conservation Consultant
James Anderson, Village of Larchmont Liaison
Thomas Amlicke, Town of Mamaroneck Liaison
Birgett Morse
Administrative Matters:
The minutes for the April 25, 1985 meeting were discussed and approved
for distribution. The next meeting of the CAC & WCC is scheduled for
June 13, 1985, at 8:00 P.M. , at the Weaver Street Firehouse.
EMC: Dr. Mason presented a map and discussed water quality standards;
material was given to Mrs. Fredston to review.
.
Annual Report: Dr. Mason will make a presentation of the C.A.C. 's Annual
Report before the Town Board on June 5, 1985.
Environment:
Coastal Zone Committee Submission Approval: Mr. Amlicke reported on the
presentation given by Wally Irwin and Shirley Tolley where technical comments
were suggested by the Town Council; the Town Board authorized submission
to Charles McCaffrey and authorized a letter to go with it.
Development Projects in Works: A discussion was held on the 55 storey
development planned at David's Island in New Rochelle; Jim Santos will contact
Page 2.
Gary Kassof for a briefing on the study to be undertaken on David's Island.
Mr. Amlicke requested Mr. Santos report to the Town Board on his findings.
Cherry Lawn: Mr. Emanuelson reported he checked the river and has not found
any new siltation in the river bed.
2155 Palmer Avenue: Dr. Mason reported that rather than resubmit an application,
Honda will realign the corner of the property.
Beringer Property: Mrs. Johnson reported that three members from L.I.F.E. Center
walked the property looking for plants to transplant into the Reservoir
Wildflower Garden.
Golden Horseshoe: no further updates have been received from the Scarsdale
Planning Board.
Hoffman Building: project is before the Planning Board this week; main concerns
are water retention and traffic flow.
,41): -
Historic Preservation:
Mrs. Johnson presented Birgett Morse, a member of MALFA. A discussion
was held on the archeological study being conducted in Larchmont.
Reservoir: Mr. Emanuelson reported the two metal signes will be picked up
Friday, May 24th; one will be installed on the Sheldrake Lane entrance and the
other just beyond the Reservoir House.
Mrs. Amlicke reported there is a lot of gardeners' refuse being left at Hommocks
Marsh.
Water courses and water bodies:
Mr. Emanuelson discussed Sandy Marafino's phone call regarding pool
discharges from Badger Camp. Mr. Emanuelson will follow up on this with
Mr. Hohberg and report back to the Commission. Dr. Mason suggested the
establishment of a pool cleaning period in the Spring to be coordinated with a
flush discharge from the Reservoir. •
Page 3.
Water courses and water bodies (cont'd) :
Storm Drains: Mr. Amlicke was designated by the Town Board to investigate
contamination of storm water drains.
Urban County: The Urban County proposal for flood control projects was
turned down by the county; a followup has been resubmitted. .
Solid Waste Disposal:
After a general discussion, Mr. Amlicke recommended a committee be
formed to make an indepth study and recommendations for the improvement of
the overall recycling program. It was stressed that supervision was
necessary and consideration should be given to a position of clerk-of-the-
works. Dr. Mason recommended Mrs. Gloria Allen and Mr. James Santo's be
appointed to this committee and a representative from L.I.F.E. should be named
as a member of this committee. This committee should Hake recommendations to
the Town Board on how to revitalize the recycling program. Mandatory
recycling of paper and glass was discussed. The Commission unanimously agreed
to the foregoing proposals. Mrs. Amlicke read Archie Messenger's letter ex-
pressing his concerns for the recycling program (copy attached) . .
Leaf Composting: A general discussion was held on leaf composting.
New Business:
Dr. Mason reported the Commission has two new members: Mr. Robert
Funicello (Village of Mamaroneck) and Mrs. Gloria Allen (Village of Larchmont) .
There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned.
May 23, 1985
ARCHIE A.MESSENGER
56 PROSPECT AVENUE
LARCHMONT,N.Y.Ma 10538 1 L 1985 n Q C
985
Y
Dr . C . Alan Mason , Chairman
Conservation Advisory Commission
Dear Alan :
As you know, during my final year on the Conservation
Advisory Commission , I was assigned the responsibility for
coordinating the solid waste recycling progran in the
unincorporated area of the Town and the Village of Larchmont . My
objective was to see that the program, which included Wednesday
morning curbside pick-up of newspaper and the mixed paper, glass
and metals recycling activity at the Maxwell Avenue Town Yard ,
was adequately promoted in the community and that the operation
functioned smoothly and profitably .
In carrying out this responsibility, I assured that the
Daily Times continued to publicize the program and that placards
and signs were displayed within the covered area . I held
discussions with the L . I . F . E . Center regarding the mailing of a
flyer to homeowners or distribution through the elementary
schools concerning the recycling program, but although this was
done in the Village of Mamaroneck , it was not done within our
target area . This is therefore an effort which should be
undertaken by my successor .
I also made frequent trips to the Town Yard and spoke
with personnel there , including the foreman, Paul Newman,
regarding the appearance of the recycling area which , frankly, is
badly neglected . I have recommended that the area be kept as
clean as possible and that personnel be alert to the need of
citizens for 'directions and help in disposing of waste products
that they bring to the Yard for disposal . . - have also taken
these recommendations to Fred Kellogg, the superintendent .of the
Joint Sanitation Commission , as well as to Mayor Curnin and
Supervisor Battalia . They admit to having personnel problems
which they are trying to resolve in order to improve the
recycling operation and sanitation operations in general .
I also attempted , through Mr. Kellogg and Carmine De
Luca , to under- stand the recordkeeping aspects of the recycling
program. Correspondence with Mr . Kellogg, which is in the CAC
files , indicates some of the difficulties in this area . Volumes
and cost savings information is vital as a communications vehicle
to raise the consciousness of the community as to the tax savings
benefit of the recycling program .
I also tried to promote the idea of curbside pick-up of
glass with Mr. Kellogg and Mesdames Curnin and Battalia .
Consideration was given to a demonstration by an outfit in New
Jersey which markets special equipment for glass pick-up , and a
slide presentation was made by a representative at one of the CAC
meetings . However , because of union problems and the necessity
of re- tiring one of the present garbage trucks to accomodate the
•
new eqipment , the project was deemed not cost effective , and it /
was therefore put on hold . Q
The biggest disappointment of the year was the failure
of the local governments to successfully conclude negotiations
with the County for the leasing of the Town Yard as a solid waste
transfer station to be operated by the County on a trial basis .
While the original proposal called for an unacceptable relocation
of the recycling operation which would have had serious
drawbacks , it was hoped that the County would accept the CAC 's
recommendations among other safety and environmental conditions ,
for keeping the recycling operation where it is , with some
modifications . The conditions were , however, unacceptable to the
County, and negotiations for the transfer station have reached an
impasse .
In summary, I would like to say that the recycling
program is more important than ever, as a result of the increasd
• cost of having to haul waste to Charles Point, rather than to the
Croton landfill , and I hope that the CAC and my replacement as
recycling coordinator will continue to give it a lot of
attention.
Very truly yours,
4
C : Susan Amlich(e
May 1 , 1985 MEMORANDUM
To : Town Board , Town of Mamnaroneck
From : C . Alan Mason , Chairman - Conservation Advisory Commission
Re : Proposed Construction Moratorium in the Town of Mamaroneck
At the combined meeting of the Town of Mamaroneck Conservation
Advisory Commission and the Wetlands Conservation Commission on
Thursday April 25 , 1985 , a protracted discussion was held
concerning the proposed moratorium on construction within the
Town of Mamaroneck . With all save one member of each commission
present and voting , a motion was made , seconded and carried
expressing unanimous support , of those present , for the proposed
moratorium .
The members of the two commissions have long felt that the
unrelenting pressure to develop and pave-over the Town had
overwhelmed the ability of the Planning Board to deal with the
steady stream of large-project proposals under the existing
zoning law and what passes for a master plan in the tri-
municipal area .
This board has , during the past year , moved ,strengthen the
Planning Board by enacting a site plan review law and adding two
additional members to help carry the work load . In addition ,
the. presence of both counsel and a consulting engineer at •
planning board meetings has worked to reduce the chance of both
legal and planning mistakes .
The present Town Board , as well as the prior one , recognized the
need to have an updated Master Plan in effect as a strong legal
and function foundation for Planning Board actions .
A Joint Village of Larchmont/Town of Mamaroneck Planning Group
has been working for two years to help achieve a more coordinated
•
approach to development and has now undertaken an updating of the
Master Plan .
IIP
The Joint Village of Larchmont/ Town of Mamaroneck Coastal Zone
Management Committee is well along in its efforts to produce a
coordinated local waterfront revitaliztion plan . Much useful
information has been gathered and appropriate recommendations
made which should help in the drafting of zoning law and
preparing a new master plan
The combined efforts of these two bodies present an opportunity
to produce an effective and coordinated master plan and zoning
code . This opportunity should not be allowed to slip away .
For this reason we feel that this is a most appropriate time for
a moratorium on development as this will provide a moment of
stability in what has been a very fluid situation . Without a
moratorium , that which needs protection may well be destroyed
during the time it takes to implement the protective legislation .
Thank you for permitting us to be of service .
( See attached copy of a letter dated , July 31 , 1982, addressed to
the Planning Board Chairman . Of particular interest is the •
second paragraph on the last page . )
S
May 8 , 1985 MEMORANDUM
•
To : Town Board , Town of Mamnaroneck
From : C . Alan Mason , Chairman - Conservation Advisory Commission
Re : Final Draft Environmental Impact Statment Re . Proposed
Maxwell Avenue Solid Waste Transfer Facility .
There are a number of conclusions with which the Conservation Advisory
Commission must take issue in the F.E.I.S. on the Maxwell Avenue Tranfer
Facility Proposal.
1 . Reference Page 25, § J, 112. This section and paragraph speaks of proposed
actions by the county to insure the continued operation of the recycling
program. In view of the proposed new location for the recycling operation and
the land demands of the county in the lease agreement, a more accurate
assesment would be that the proposal will insure its speedy demise.
The county has insisted on exclusive operation and control of the middle-level
parking lot now used for the glass and metal bins. When pressed on the need 1
for this area, Mr. Davies, among others, asserted that it was needed for
parking. Further discussion disclosed that the vehicles to be parked on this
level were to be the large tractor trailers to be used to haul the compacted
refuse to Charles Point. Since we are assured that these vehicles will not be
stored at Maxwell Avenue overnight, we must assume that said storage will �be
for trucks waiting to be placed under the loading hopper between runs to
Charles Point. Surely he knows better-.
The concept that he was trying to sell us was that the empty trailers would
•
join the stream of collection vehicles going to the upper level and then divert
into the middle-level parking lot. Since there is not enough room for them to
turn around in this lot, they would have to either back up the hill or, if
having gone up the hill forward, back down the hill after first crossing the
up-hill bound stream of collection trucks waiting to unload.
( 1 )
Unless parking an empty tractor-trailer on the bottom level were made a felony, lb
no driver is going to go through all these machinations for the short period
between runs to Charles Point . Surely there must be a more plausible reason
why the county feels it needs this middle-level lot.
Unfortunately the violence done to the recycling program far outweighs the
questionable benefit of taking this lot for county use. The recycling effort
has resulted in considerable savings to the town both in the non expenditure of
funds for the disposal of newsprint, and other materials, as solid waste, but
also the monies paid by solid wast recyclers to the town and village. The
proposal to "consolidate" the recycling effort into an area southwest of the
old incinerator building places it in position where it can only interfere with
normal town yard operations and require citizens attempting to recycle material
to traverse the busiest part of the yard. The yard is already very congested
during the early part of the day and the proposed site of the recycling effort
will only further congest the yard and interfere with Highway Department
•
operations.
Many people are intimidated by the bustle of activity in the yard and the size
of the vehicles involved. To ask them to run this gauntlet will only
discourage rather than encourage participation in the program.
A far more sensible approach would be to consolidate 09e recycling program in
the area of the middle level parking lot , with certain topographic .
modifications, and use the area suggested by the F.I.E.S. for the recycling
operation to park the large trucks between runs to Charles Point. This is
where they will in fact be waiting anyway as it is adjacent to the bottom of
the hopper and will not conflict with the movement of collection trucks.
As sketch was submitted by the C.A.C. showing this proposal both before and
after the submission of the Draft E.I.S. but no mention was made of it in the
Final E.I.S. Additionally, following a meeting with the Supervisor during
( 2)
ill
September 1984, Mr. Kellogg was asked by the Supervisor to assist the C.A.0 in
producing an appropriate sketch depicting the C.A.C. proposal. It seems to
have died there.
Reference Page 13, § D, 1j 1 . Surface oil is indeed a problem in the town yard.
The mitigating measure seems to be for the Town and Village to get rid of their
old trucks and have their places taken by county trucks which presumably will
not get old. We are expected to believe that simply because the trucks are
owned by the county, seals will not leak, hoses will not rupture, and
crankcases will not drip. When this issue was raised with Mr. Davies, he said
that the trucks will still be new and in good shape by the time the 3 or 4 year
contract ends. Now we have learned that, in fact, the county had no intention
of pulling out of Maxwell Ave. at the end of 3 or 4 years, but expected to stay
•
on into the indefinite future.
This expectation was indeed well founded. Once the Joint Garbage Disposal
Commission had disposed of its compacting trailers, as provided for in the
agreement with the county, it would have been at the mercy of the county, or
perhaps even private carting industry contractors, for the transportation of
its solid waste to Charles Point.
The spector of private contractors waiting in the wings, ready to assume the
privileges and obligations of the contract negotiated in good faith between the
Joint Garbage Disposal Commission and Westchester County should be a matter of
deep concern for all officials who share the burden of protecting the taxpayers
purse. Once the Joint Garbage Disposal Commission had disposed of its own
ability to transport garbage, it would be powerless to bargain forcefully with
a vendor in an service industry where competition is not always intense as one
would like.
Reference Page 23, §. G, 1 . What is referred to as an expression of concern
over routing of Village of Mamaroneck garbage collection trucks to Maxwell Ave.
has crystallized into an outright rejection of the I 95 routing which was such
( 3 )
a prominent part of the assurances offered to residents of both the Village of
Larchmont and the Town of Mamaroneck who expressed concern over a stream
garbage trucks passing through their respective streets. ;+
The Village of Mamaroneck Mayors' , both past and present, points are well
taken. Garbage collection trucks are not geared for highway speeds without
running the engines at very high speeds. They are geared for stop and go
driving with 40 miles-per-hour as an average top speed. Mayor Noto is quite
correct in his concern over the unnecessary wear and tear on the vehicles.
Apparently the willingness of the Village of Mamaroneck to assume the burden of
the proposed routing has been overstated by the proponents of this project.
Alternative routes are alluded to but nothing of substance is presented in the
F.E. I.S.
Reference Appendix E. Both the chairman of this commission and one of the
members of the Mamaroneck Town Council are schooled in the interpretation of
the material of the type presented in Appendix E of the F.E.I.S. Both have
expressed concern that the material is incomplete in that no frame of reference
is given within which a reasonable interpretation of the data presented can be
made.
N4
In the course of the preparation of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement
and the later Final Environmental Impact Statement certain problems in the
handling of solid waste by the Joint Garbage Disposal Commission have been
highlighted. It is not the purpose of this me;norandum`to discuss those •
problems as they are not germane to the issue of the negative impact of the
proposal except to the extent that the may exacerbate those problems.
One such area is the spillage of oil and other liquid waste on the ground in
the town yard area. The proposal speaks of the need to regrade an area near
the entrance to the yard to insure that the drippings are directed to the
near-by storm sewer. The implication is that discharge into the storm sewer is
a solution. In fact, that is only the beginning of a new problem. All the
storm drains in the area, both within and without the yard, eventually
( 4)
discharge into the Premium Marsh area. Simply getting this discharge into the
storm drains more quickly and directly has a certain simplistic appeal but not
much substance.
Recommendation
It is the considered recommendation of the Conservation Advisory Commission
that the town not consent to the take-over of a portion of the town yard by
Westchester County or its successors for the operation of a solid waste
transfer facility because:
1 . To permit such a takeover would place the Town of Mamaroneck and the
Village of Larchmont in a most disadvatageous bargaining position when
attempting to provide solid waste transport to Charles Point;
2. The town yard is only marginally adequate for present Town/Village
operations and the land demands by the County of Westchester are excessive;
1111 3. The recycling operation, which with proper placement could be greatly
enhanced, would be destroyed under the present proposal;
4. Those safeguards though to have been incorporated in the original
agreement by hard, good-faith bargaining by town officials have now proven to
be illusions. '~
.
5. It is now apparent that the town can do the job for itself at least as
cheaply as the county can do it. Once again the projected cost savings to the
taxpayers have proved to be illusions. A look at the tax bill of any home _
owner in the town will confirm this.
A reasonable solution might be for the town to act as a vendor of this service
rather than a vendee and seek payment for transporting garbage. We certainly
do not want to go out of business and then find that we have to go to bid for
someone to haul it for us.
( 5 ) •