Town Of Charlton: Public Hearing

DRAFT

Minutes, Public Hearing to hear input on proposed Local Law #2 of 2005 Regulating the Use of Residential Outdoor Wood Burning Furnaces held at 7:00 P.M. on Monday, December 12, 2005 at the Town Hall.

TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Councilman Grattidge

Councilman Lippiello

Councilman Mitchell

Councilman Verola

Supervisor Acunto

Also present was Town Attorney Robert VanVranken.

The legal notice appeared in The Daily Gazette on December 3, 2005.

The meeting was called to order by Supervisor Acunto. The Town Clerk read the legal notice.

Supervisor Acunto – Section 2 states the purpose of this proposed law. The use of outdoor wood burning furnaces may provide an economical alternative to conventional heating systems. Concerns have been raised, however, regarding the safety and environmental impacts of these heating devices, particularly the production of offensive odors and health effects of uncontrolled emissions. This local law is intended to ensure that outdoor wood burning furnaces are utilized in a manner that does not create a nuisance and is not, to the extent possible, detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of town residents.

Specific requirements are in Section 6. Permit requirements are in Section 4.

There is a provision for an appeal of any portion of this local law.

The rules of the public hearing shall be as follows:

The Town Board is here to listen.

All comments shall be limited to 3 minutes.

All written comments will be accepted and included in the minutes of this hearing.

The Town Clerk will indicate when the speaker has 1 minute left.

Speakers will be called on in the order in which they signed up.

All speakers will be required to state their name and address for the record.

The Town Clerk will record all proceedings.

Mark Chotkowski – 1119 Peaceable Street – At this time I am installing at my house a coal fired outdoor boiler. The stack is 10’ high. You should cover all outdoor furnaces. Fuels used besides coal include corn, wood pellets and oil. Anything along those lines should be considered.

Doug Sargent – 258 Sweetman Road – I have had a wood burning furnace for 8 years. I object to the fact you are making this retroactive. I have not had any problem with my neighbors. It is near my woodshed. You will put an economic hardship on me if I have to change the position of the stove. An article said you would not allow me to burn it during the summertime. I use it for domestic hot water in the summer.

Ed Ladu – 21 Crooked Street – I support the banning of outdoor wood burning stoves within this law. I don’t believe it is proper or legal to make it retroactive. People that currently have these stoves are quite rural. The emphasis should be on the tight residential areas. One was installed near my camp in Galway. It smoldered. The emissions were noxious. We tried to restrict this person in Galway with no results. To permit these south of the village is unpardonable. Any person with a breathing problem will be affected. There will be state and federal legislation. Suggested a moratorium of 2 years to having these installed in residential areas.

Jennifer Wolf – 35 Featherbed Lane – If you have a certain amount of property, it will not affect people as much as if you had a smaller amount of property with neighbors close by. She feels it would be very difficult and unnecessary to propose any fines, changes, or permits on pre-existing structures.

Helmut Wolf – 35 Featherbed Lane – I recently installed a stove. The newer units burn clean.

That should be considered.

Torben Aabo – 220 Sweetman Road – In Section 2 under “Purpose”, I would like to see you get very specific that this furnace is for residential or home heating only.

Henry Pokrzywka – 2077 Maple Avenue – Who prompted this?

Councilman Grattidge – It was brought to our attention from the building and zoning department.

Chris Mitchell – 389 Sweetman Road – I think restrictions for the residential area would be permissible. In the agricultural area, you would cause a hardship on farmers and others. A lot of farms have 2 or 3 units. The way it is written now it would be restrictive and hard to enforce. I would ask that the agricultural district be exempt.

Jim Edgar - 28 Jenkins Road – When I was at the Town Board meeting 2 months ago, it was my understanding that there hadn’t been any complaints in the town about these stoves. You are writing a law that nobody has asked for about a problem that doesn’t exist. These stoves are $6,000-$8,000 installed. You burn $2,000 in wood a year. People are not going to run out and buy these things. A lack of a grandfather clause is not right. You will put a hardship on them.

Janet Reville – 53 Crooked Street – Trying to perceive issues or potential problems in residential areas is good but I feel strongly that residents that do have these and have been using them in the residential area or agricultural area, I think it is unfair to ask them to do any changes at this time.

Ed Ladu – Elliott Spitzer has asked for federal control of these units. Mr. Ladu read portions from an article that was in The Daily Gazette in November.

Jerry Belisle – 425 Stage Road – Feels the Board should review the comments made tonight before taking any action. Don’t impose something on the people that they don’t need.

George Eggleston – 11 Florence Avenue – I am in a development area. I burn wood in an in-house furnace. Mine emits smoke. They all do. I don’t understand how we can ban these.

Eileen Stone – 724 Charlton Road - Asked if one of the main issues was stack height?

Councilman Grattidge – Yes. Research from our Environmental Commission found that sack height was very important in relation to other buildings because of the down-draft effect that you get.

Supervisor Acunto stated that any written comments or documentation that residents felt were pertinent to this topic should be brought to the town clerk. Probably nothing will happen on this issue tonight.

The meeting was adjourned at 7:35 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

Gail Hanchar

Town Clerk


DRAFT Minutes, Public Hearing to hear input on proposed Local Law #2 of 2005 Regulating the Use of Residential Outdoor Wood Burning Furnaces held at 7:00 P.M. on Monday, December 12, 2005 at the Town Hall. TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Councilman Grattidge Councilman Lippiello Councilman Mitchell Councilman Verola Supervisor Acunto Also present was Town Attorney Robert VanVranken. The legal notice appeared in The Daily Gazette on December 3, 2005. The meeting was called to order by Supervisor Acunto. The Town Clerk read the legal notice. Supervisor Acunto – Section 2 states the purpose of this proposed law. The use of outdoor wood burning furnaces may provide an economical alternative to conventional heating systems. Concerns have been raised, however, regarding the safety and environmental impacts of these heating devices, particularly the production of offensive odors and health effects of uncontrolled emissions. This local law is intended to ensure that outdoor wood burning furnaces are utilized in a manner that does not create a nuisance and is not, to the extent possible, detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of town residents. Specific requirements are in Section 6. Permit requirements are in Section 4. There is a provision for an appeal of any portion of this local law. The rules of the public hearing shall be as follows: The Town Board is here to listen. All comments shall be limited to 3 minutes. All written comments will be accepted and included in the minutes of this hearing. The Town Clerk will indicate when the speaker has 1 minute left. Speakers will be called on in the order in which they signed up. All speakers will be required to state their name and address for the record. The Town Clerk will record all proceedings. Mark Chotkowski – 1119 Peaceable Street – At this time I am installing at my house a coal fired outdoor boiler. The stack is 10’ high. You should cover all outdoor furnaces. Fuels used besides coal include corn, wood pellets and oil. Anything along those lines should be considered. Doug Sargent – 258 Sweetman Road – I have had a wood burning furnace for 8 years. I object to the fact you are making this retroactive. I have not had any problem with my neighbors. It is near my woodshed. You will put an economic hardship on me if I have to change the position of the stove. An article said you would not allow me to burn it during the summertime. I use it for domestic hot water in the summer. Ed Ladu – 21 Crooked Street – I support the banning of outdoor wood burning stoves within this law. I don’t believe it is proper or legal to make it retroactive. People that currently have these stoves are quite rural. The emphasis should be on the tight residential areas. One was installed near my camp in Galway. It smoldered. The emissions were noxious. We tried to restrict this person in Galway with no results. To permit these south of the village is unpardonable. Any person with a breathing problem will be affected. There will be state and federal legislation. Suggested a moratorium of 2 years to having these installed in residential areas. Jennifer Wolf – 35 Featherbed Lane – If you have a certain amount of property, it will not affect people as much as if you had a smaller amount of property with neighbors close by. She feels it would be very difficult and unnecessary to propose any fines, changes, or permits on pre-existing structures. Helmut Wolf – 35 Featherbed Lane – I recently installed a stove. The newer units burn clean. That should be considered. Torben Aabo – 220 Sweetman Road – In Section 2 under “Purpose”, I would like to see you get very specific that this furnace is for residential or home heating only. Henry Pokrzywka – 2077 Maple Avenue – Who prompted this? Councilman Grattidge – It was brought to our attention from the building and zoning department. Chris Mitchell – 389 Sweetman Road – I think restrictions for the residential area would be permissible. In the agricultural area, you would cause a hardship on farmers and others. A lot of farms have 2 or 3 units. The way it is written now it would be restrictive and hard to enforce. I would ask that the agricultural district be exempt. Jim Edgar - 28 Jenkins Road – When I was at the Town Board meeting 2 months ago, it was my understanding that there hadn’t been any complaints in the town about these stoves. You are writing a law that nobody has asked for about a problem that doesn’t exist. These stoves are $6,000-$8,000 installed. You burn $2,000 in wood a year. People are not going to run out and buy these things. A lack of a grandfather clause is not right. You will put a hardship on them. Janet Reville – 53 Crooked Street – Trying to perceive issues or potential problems in residential areas is good but I feel strongly that residents that do have these and have been using them in the residential area or agricultural area, I think it is unfair to ask them to do any changes at this time. Ed Ladu – Elliott Spitzer has asked for federal control of these units. Mr. Ladu read portions from an article that was in The Daily Gazette in November. Jerry Belisle – 425 Stage Road – Feels the Board should review the comments made tonight before taking any action. Don’t impose something on the people that they don’t need. George Eggleston – 11 Florence Avenue – I am in a development area. I burn wood in an in-house furnace. Mine emits smoke. They all do. I don’t understand how we can ban these. Eileen Stone – 724 Charlton Road - Asked if one of the main issues was stack height? Councilman Grattidge – Yes. Research from our Environmental Commission found that sack height was very important in relation to other buildings because of the down-draft effect that you get. Supervisor Acunto stated that any written comments or documentation that residents felt were pertinent to this topic should be brought to the town clerk. Probably nothing will happen on this issue tonight. The meeting was adjourned at 7:35 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Gail Hanchar Town Clerk
Town of Charlton Main Index