ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING/PUBLICITY COMMITTEE

Monday, March 13, 2023 - 10:00 AM

 

 

Ike Tyler, Chairperson

Roy Holzer, Vice-Chairperson

 

Supervisor Merrihew called this Economic Development/Planning/Publicity Meeting to order at 10:03 am with the following Supervisors in attendance: Clayton Barber, Robin DeLoria, Stephanie DeZalia, Derek Doty, Charlie Harrington, Ken Hughes, Steve McNally, Noel Merrihew, Tom Scozzafava, Matthew Stanley, Joe Pete Wilson, Davina Winemiller, Margaret Wood and Mark Wright. Shaun Gillilland, Roy Holzer, Jim Monty, and Ike Tyler had been previously excused.

 

Department Heads present: James Dougan, Mike Mascarenas, and Anna Reynolds. Dan Manning was absent.

 

Deputies present: Dina Garvey  

 

Also Present: Jody Olcott - IDA, Jim McKenna - ROOST, Bruce Misarski and Megan Murphy - Housing Assistance, Elizabeth Lee - Cornell Cooperative Extension, and Holly Aquino.  Aurora McCaffery - Essex County Historian was absent.

 

 

MERRIHEW:  Good morning everybody. We will call the Economic Development Committee to order and first on the agenda.

 

OLCOTT: We submitted our monthly report, questions?

 

MERRIHEW: Questions for Jody, while she’s here? You are free to go.

 

 

***************************

 

            The next item on the agenda was Community Resources with Anna Reynolds reporting as follows:

 

REYNOLDS: Good morning, hello. Today, I have four 239M referrals. The first is in the Town of Westport, located at 38 Champlain Ave., it was the old firehouse. The proposal is a special use permit for a retail, office and potential brewery. A no comment letter, does not affect Essex County. It is within approximate of a State Road, which is why it had to be a referral to the County. So, a no comment letter is recommended.

 

 

 

ACTION OF THE ESSEX COUNTY PLANNING BOARD

ON REFERRAL RECEIVED FROM THE TOWN OF WESTPORT

 

            The following motion was made by Supervisor Hughes.

 

            Where, the Essex County Planning Board has considered the following GML 239 referrals at its regular meeting on March 13, 2023.

 

            REFERRAL                                                                            PROPOSED ACTION

Town of Westport - 38 Champlain Ave.                                         Special Use Permit                                                    

            Whereas, none of the referred, proposed actions does not directly impact a county road or county property.

 

            Be it adopted by the Essex County Planning Board that no recommendation or comment on the said referrals shall be or hereby is made, and the respective referring bodies may take such final action as they deem appropriate.

 

            This motion was seconded by Supervisor DeZalia and passed on a vote of 7 in favor, 2 excused and none opposed.

 

MERRIHEW: Questions or comments on the referral? Being none, all those in favor? Opposed? That carries, thank you.

 

REYNOLDS: The Village of Saranac Lake has proposed an amendment to the Development Code. They’re going to add definitions for public facilities; such as police station, firehouse and other safety facilities in certain districts within their code. A no comment letter is recommended.

 

MERRIHEW: Moved by Davina Winemiller, seconded by Mr. Doty.

 

 

ACTION OF THE ESSEX COUNTY PLANNING BOARD

ON REFERRAL RECEIVED FROM THE VILLAGE OF SARANAC LAKE

 

            The following motion was made by Supervisor Winemiller.

 

            Where, the Essex County Planning Board has considered the following GML 239 referrals at its regular meeting on March 13, 2023.

 

            REFERRAL                                                                            PROPOSED ACTION

Village of Saranac Lake                                                          Development Code amendment   

                                                                                                                                                 

            Whereas, none of the referred, proposed actions does not directly impact a county road or county property.

 

            Be It adopted by the Essex County Planning Board that no recommendation or comment on the said referrals shall be or hereby is made, and the respective referring bodies may take such final action as they deem appropriate.

 

            This motion was seconded by Supervisor Doty and passed on a vote of 7 in favor, 2 excused and none opposed.

 

MERRIHEW: Questions, comments? Being none, all those in favor? Opposed? Motion carries.

 

 

REYNOLDS: Also in the Village of Saranac Lake. The High Peaks Church, located at 97 Will Rogers Drive, has a site plan review for a one-story addition to include accessibility to all three levels of the existing structure. A no comment letter is recommended.

 

MERRIHEW: Moved by Mr. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Doty.

 

 

ACTION OF THE ESSEX COUNTY PLANNING BOARD

ON REFERRAL RECEIVED FROM THE VILLAGE OF SARANAC LAKE

 

            The following motion was made by Supervisor Hughes.

 

            Where, the Essex County Planning Board has considered the following GML 239 referrals at its regular meeting on March 13, 2023.

 

                        REFERRAL                                                                            PROPOSED ACTION

Village of Saranac Lake - The High Peaks Church, 97 Will Rogers Dr.        Site plan review                                                   

                                                                                                                                                 

            Whereas, none of the referred, proposed actions does not directly impact a county road or county property.

 

            Be It adopted by the Essex County Planning Board that no recommendation or comment on the said referrals shall be or hereby is made, and the respective referring bodies may take such final action as they deem appropriate.

 

            This motion was seconded by Supervisor Doty and passed on a vote of 7 in favor, 2 excused and none opposed.

 

 

MERRIHEW: Questions, comments?

 

WINEMILLER: Is this the church, itself?

 

REYNOLDS: Yes, they’re extending the bottom floor to attach the elevator to the 3rd floor.

 

WINEMILLER: Okay, thank you.

 

MERRIHEW: Further questions? Being none, all those in favor? Opposed? Motion carries, thank you.

 

REYNOLDS: In the Town of Chesterfield, the Segerstrom Family, located on 604 State Route 9 is proposing a special use permit for the development of an RV Park. Again, this is approximate to State 9, so that’s why it triggered County review. The County has no comment at this time and a letter can be issued.

 

MERRIHEW: Moved by Mr. Hughes, second by Mr. Harrington.

 

ACTION OF THE ESSEX COUNTY PLANNING BOARD

ON REFERRAL RECEIVED FROM THE TOWN OF CHESTERFIELD

 

            The following motion was made by Supervisor Hughes.

 

            Where, the Essex County Planning Board has considered the following GML 239 referrals at its regular meeting on March 13, 2023.

 

                        REFERRAL                                                                            PROPOSED ACTION

Town of Chesterfield - Segerstrom Family. 604 St. Rte. 9                        Special Use Permit                                                  

                                                                                                                                                 

            Whereas, none of the referred, proposed actions does not directly impact a county road or county property.

 

            Be It adopted by the Essex County Planning Board that no recommendation or comment on the said referrals shall be or hereby is made, and the respective referring bodies may take such final action as they deem appropriate.

 

            This motion was seconded by Supervisor Harrington and passed on a vote of 7 in favor, 2 excused and none opposed.

 

MERRIHEW: Questions or comments?

 

BARBER: I just want to say that the Town of Chesterfield Board is in full support of this. This is going to be a campground, short-term campground, seasonal and we are in full support. We think it will be a great addition to the Town of Chesterfield.

 

MERRIHEW: Thank you, Mr. Barber. Further questions or comments? All those in favor? Opposed? Motion carries.

 

REYNOLDS: Just something to add, tomorrow, we’re supposed to have our EFC presentation. We’re going to have a conference call at 12:00, it’s going to be postponed. They’re going to ask me if I want to do a virtual, like a Zoom presentation, but I think if we can all agree, let’s postpone it, until we can get in person. You know, it’s more of a Q & A and just better to get to know them. So, that’s what I will propose, today. So, tomorrow we will not have the presentation.

 

MERRIHEW: Thank you, I agree with that. I think in person is what we really need.

 

REYNOLDS: Yeah.

 

MERRIHEW: Thank you for arranging that.

 

REYNOLDS: You’re welcome

 

MERRIHEW: Just on a note for Anna, the Town of Elizabethtown will be seeking the ability to purchase or transfer a portion of property that’s behind the public health building, here in Elizabethtown. It’s part of our water capital project that’s being mandated by the Department of Health. But, before Ways and Means, I will have all that diagram and explanation through the County Attorney for you all to review and then we’ll look at, at that time.

 

REYNOLDS: Okay

 

MERRIHEW: Thank you very much.

 

HUGHES: Anna, good morning. The Town of Essex just passed an amended zoning law. Does that need to come to you, to us before it goes to the Department of State for approval?

 

REYNOLDS: Yes, yup. Typically, you would want our comment letter before adopting the local law, to be honest.

 

HUGHES: Okay, good to know, okay.

 

REYNOLDS: So, you could hold another public hearing or adoption hearing.

 

HUGHES: Okay

 

REYNOLDS: After submitting the proposal to us.

 

HUGHES: Okay

 

REYNOLDS: So, there’s a 30-day window where, when we receive your complete package, the 30-day review period begins, but within that timeframe you can hold your public hearing or adoption.

 

HUGHES: Okay.

 

REYNOLDS: So, say we have a comment that you disagree with or your town disagrees with, you can overturn our decision.

 

HUGHES: Okay

 

REYNOLDS: So, it’s just one piece of the puzzle.

 

HUGHES: Understood, most, the vast majority of modifications were more on the executive in function, not necessarily planning.

 

REYNOLDS: Okay

 

HUGHES: We’re going to do a comprehensive plan, but I’ll reach out to you.

 

REYNOLDS: Okay, because if it just administrative changes…

 

HUGHESL Yup

 

REYNOLDS: We won’t need to review it. If it affects different districts or land use, then we should.

 

HUGHES: I’ll share with you the recommended changes that were passed.

 

REYNOLDS: Okay

 

HUGHES: And we can talk about it.

 

DELORIA: Anna, what are the consequences if a community does not submit a 239M?

 

REYNOLDS: Your decision can be overturned.

 

DELORIA: Okay

 

REYNOLDS: It’s not a County Law, just to let everyone know. This is actually a State Law. We are here to collect all the materials and prepare this administrative review, so that you guys can have a complete package at your end. So, that if you have a neighborly complaint or a judgement, you have all the evidence that you need that the town did their due diligence to make their decision.

 

DELORIA: Okay and is there a statute of limitations on something being approved?

 

REYNOLDS: I don’t know that.

 

DELORIA: Okay, I’ll look into that.

 

MASCARENAS: Yeah, just so everybody understand. The County isn’t looking at any projects on whether we agree or disagree with the project and what the actual project is. We’ve had some confusion about that in the past. All we’re looking at is what are the impacts to County property. That’s all we’re looking at. We’re not looking, we don’t care what the project is. How does it impact us, is really what we’re charged with looking at.

 

MERRIHEW: Anything further? Any other questions or comments for Anna? Being none, thank you very much.

 

 

****************************

 

            The next item on the agenda was the Essex County Historian, Aurora McCaffrey was absent and no report was given.

 

*****************************

 

            The next item on the agenda was Cornell Cooperative Extension, with Elizabeth Lee reporting as follows:

 

LEE: I don’t really have any additions to my report this morning, but if anyone has questions I’m happy to answer. Basically, we’ve just been continuing the work that we’ve been doing with lots of support for farmers, lots of 4H programs, farm to school programs and work with the International Cuisine Trails, which would be an important part of our work going forward.

 

MERRIHEW: Thank you and I saw that you were in the process of setting up a pesticide collection day, running that through you.

 

LEE: We collaborate with a lot of different people and that’s one that we’re working on. Another collaboration that’s important to us is the Building Resilience in Essex County Families, that’s ongoing, also. 

 

MERRIHEW: Thank you, questions, comments for Elizabeth? Being none, thank you very much, appreciate it.

 

 

****************************

 

            The next item was the Regional Office of Sustainable Tourism (ROOST), with Jim McKenna reporting as follows:

 

MCKENNA: I’ll just hand out our end of the year report. So, that’s our end of the year report, it is online and we have a video that goes with it, but, obviously don’t have that, but just pointing out a couple of highlights.

You know we look at social media. Just some of the numbers, Facebook; we have a total of 377,000 followers. That’s all of our Facebook sites combined together. You know we manage seven different social media accounts for the different designations. YouTube; we have 636,000 minutes watched on YouTube. Instagram had 235,000 likes. What’s good about that, I mean I’m just pointing out that by all the different sites together, we reach a lot of people with a lot of messages and a lot of the messages are the same and we interact between regions. So, that there’s a way that if Whiteface Region, for instance, as so many visitors, a lot of the same messaging goes throughout all of our regions and we attract names from all those and then combine them together.

Our websites had 2.32 million unique visitors. Meaning that somebody that’s not been on the site before, when they first come on, they’re considered a unique visitor. If they come again, they’re no longer unique. We had 6.7 million page views in all of our websites.

Some of the things that you’ll see in there and there’s lot to look at it, if you have a chance to look at. We did a new brand for the Whiteface Region, last year. Lake Champlain, first time adventure guide. Whiteface Region guide, we did for the first time, an Upper Hudson Rec Hub brochure, for both the summer and also winter. Whiteface Region got a new website. Town of Jay got a new logo. There’s a lot in there, I’ll just give you a couple of the highlights.

 A couple of other things I wanted to discussed was that we did get together with Supervisors from Minerva and also from Essex and we started talking about designation management and how we might structure moving that forward for all of our towns and I guess we spent a little bit of time on really trying to identify and give the definition to the difference between designation marketing and designation development and management. I think we made a little progress on that.

Also, we had a ROOST Board Meeting. We had the Supervisor of Jay and the Supervisor of North Hudson with us last week and we thought that was really good and both Supervisors were not shy, which I thought was pretty good. So, that was good. There was some comments from each. I think that was really good and I think, hopefully from their point of view, got a little feeling about how our Board acts and what our responsibilities are.

Has anybody been to War Canoe Spirits? I was there for lunch, Charlie, yesterday and it was great and a great atmosphere in Crown Point. It’s really a good place, so I encourage everybody to check that out when they get a chance. The building looks great. I mean the inside of it and the food was good. So, it was real good.

The only other thing that I’ll point out. You know, those World University Games are over, but you know the reason for those games and getting those facilities done was to be in a position to do other events. We certainly pointed out at the last meeting that the World Cup Ski jumping, that wouldn’t have happened with the improvements of those facilities and it’s the first time that that event has been in, really in our County since 1990 and in the State since about 2008 or so. So, that’s a great example. Another example is this past week. We had the NCAA Division I Skiing Championships, both in the Town of Wilmington and the Town of North Elba. Would not likely have happened without the improvements and what we’re seeing now is that, you know, with climate change and let’s be clear that it’s a struggle to plan a lot of these types of events. The way that our Essex County sports facilities are, now, we’re, people are lining up, because they know that we can guarantee it. So, I think we’re just starting to see the beginning of the results of getting those facilities upgraded for the University Games and it’s just going to be ongoing. I mean they’re sort of knocking on the door, if you know what I mean. They know that the facilities are up to world standards, plus they’re pretty much guaranteed that the conditions will be there.

So, that’s all I had.

 

MERRIHEW: Thank you very much. That is quite a report. Do we have questions, comments?

 

MCNALLY: Jim and I and MJ, that was an excellent meeting. The division between designation marketing and designation planning and we have some new groupings of towns that are going to work better than the four that we have now for this. There’s quite a difference with this. We could all use the designation planning, because it deals more with our infrastructure and being prepared to host people. You’re going to get out of it what you put into it. They’re not going to be able to come to your town and do your planning for you. They’re going to hold your hand and give you advice, but if you want to be involved in this project, you’re going to have to put in some time yourself and I think that’s the key that I pulled out of it. Don’t you, Ken?

 

HUGHES: Yes, I absolutely agree. You or maybe a proxy or somebody else in your town that wants to.

 

MCNALLY: So, we love the idea, I think it’s going to work out very well.

I just have one more question, Adirondack Experience in Hamilton County, the rising tide lifts all ships. They do a great job with the tourism. Do they contribute towards this?

 

MCKENNA: Yes, you mean Hamilton County? We have a contract with Hamilton County for $195,000.00.

 

MCNALLY: Because, Hamilton County, as of now they do not have the occupancy tax.

 

MCKENNA: They do not. It comes out of their general.

 

MCNALLY: It’s wonderful, everyone should go to that museum. It’s wonderful. That’s all I have, thank you.

 

***************************

 

            The next item was the Housing Assistance Program with Bruce Misarski reporting as follows:

 

MISARSKI: Good morning, folks. We submitted our report to the Board of Supervisors. I just wanted to highlight a couple of things. As you see, our Rental Assistance Program and our Home Repair Program, Mobile Home Replacement, our Affordable Housing Development line of business. Then with our Home Buyer, I just wanted to let everyone know that we, this month got our second home, HUB Certified Housing Counselor, certified and now we have two certified housing counselors on staff. One will be focusing on foreclosure mitigation and default counseling and then our, Sarah Prey, our newest housing counselor, will be really focusing on home buyer assistance and counseling. First time homebuyer, she had her first client on Friday and things are going well. So, we’re looking for great things from her.

And then this month, my work has been quite a bit involving Albany and advocacy with housing programs for New York State and for rural New York. So, I just wanted to let you know that there’s a lot of talk in New York State with the Housing Compact, which was the Governor’s, kind of urging for all communities to increase their housing production and the Governor’s request is for 3% increase in housing units in downstate and 1% in each and every community, upstate. So, it’s a challenge and she’s trying to match that with funding to support it. So, there’s a lot of housing support in infrastructure development for housing, in single family development and for rental housing. One of the big things that we’ve been fighting for here, is small rental development that is funded for low and moderate-income families, primarily and you know we did see McKenzie Overlook come to Lake Placid, recently and that was a 60-unit project. We’re not likely to get any more of those, any time soon. There’s talk about maybe Ticonderoga landing a housing project in the next few years and it looks favorable, but it’s tough and usually these projects require 40-60 or more units of housing in a community and most of our communities of 1,000-2,000 people that’s not appropriate housing situation. So, we’ve been pushing for this small rental development program which was funded this year and it is not funded in the Governor’s budget in 2024 and although I know she wants, it’s a program she believes in, but waiting for the legislature to put some money back into that. So, right now we’re working on an application that’s funded this year, but hopefully we’ll have the program again next year and in the future years. So, that’s one of the big battles that we’re working on the State budget, right now.

 

MERRIHEW: Thank you, questions, comments?

 

DOTY: So, Bruce then, the program as a whole is more designed for more populous areas then these rural communities?

 

DOTY: The small rural rental development initiative is four units to 20 units and in communities under 25,000 people in population is what the proposed legislation. So, right now there’s a program that got funded for one year. There’s no legislation, currently that creates the program. Right now, it’s a one off program, but it’s something that we’ve been wanting in rural New York for a long. We don’t get to access those funds, unless you’re Plattsburgh, Glens Falls, Watertown, most of those projects go to communities of 25,000 or more and so we’re never going to get anything in Bloomingdale. You know, we aren’t going to get anything in Minerva, but we could build a 4-unit apartment building that would be perfectly suited for a small community like that, but without this program, there’s really no funding opportunities for us to do that.

 

HUGHES: You mentioned that you went to Albany to do some advocacy.

 

MISARSKI: Yup

 

HUGHES: Just curious if you could maybe provide some details? Who did you see? What were the reactions?

 

MISARSKI: We’ll, first we visited out legislative partners. We went to Senator Stec’s office. We met with our two assembly people and that was my first visit. Supporting our rural housing collation and rural advocates at legislative agenda. Which has a whole list of things, including ARPC funding, the certi program, increase for restore program. All these tools that we use and all of us and housing folks, we all use these programs and we have to advocate for them or they won’t be there and if we don’t have the tools, then we don’t have the ability to do work that we want.

So, then my second day I was at the budget testimony of the houses, the Senate and Assembly’s housing budget testimony. So, that was very interesting. I sat there and listened to the commissioner’s testimony for two hours and then the grilling from the housing and the senate and assembly folks. That’s always interested because you’ve got the Governor’s representative, the housing representative and then you’ve got the legislative body, you’ve got this back and forth over budget priorities and interesting to hear downstate folks, like the areas around New York City, especially Nassau County and parts of Long Island really are not happy about the housing compact, because they feel like they’re in areas that are already fully built up and now they’re being challenged to increase by 3% and if you’re within a ½ a mile of a transit area, they want housing density of something like 250 units per acre. So, that, for them that means knocking down single-family neighborhoods and putting up high rises. How else are going to achieve that? Other than mowing down communities and turning them from suburban to urban. So, that doesn’t seem to be working for them. You know, but large parts of the State are really supporting this effort. So, a lot of the talk is around that discussion.

 

HUGHES: Thanks for that update, appreciate it.

 

MCNALLY: Did they happen to mentioned zoning?

 

MISARSKI: Right and really for local governments to find new policy ways to increase, in some way, zoning prevents more construction of more units.

 

MCNALLY: The zoning is the Adirondack Park Agency, is like hanging a rope around your neck and I mentioned this to Shaun and I mentioned this to the Governor, that AATV will have a meeting with some County reps on this. We’re not going to get housing unless we make some changes and that zoning. The zoning is driven by the Adirondack Park Agency. So, that is what our role is. I think of all the millions of acres, I think there’s 53,000 acres of hamlet in the entire Park, compared to 18 million of private land. So, that’s got to be addressed and also when you cover the zoning that also comes to a cell phone issue. There’s a lot to the zoning, but the zoning is not our issue here in this room. I think our towns have decent, fair zoning. The zoning is driven by the Adirondack Park Agency and they’re the ones that are going to make the move if we’re going to expand housing.

 

MISARSKI: Right, if you look at Minerva, you probably have 400-500 houses in one of Minerva. So, 1% is really 4 to 5 houses.

 

MCNALLY: Three houses

 

MISARSKI: So, that’s your goal. I’m sure you make it.   

 

MCNALLY: We could use 10 or 15 houses. The problem is, we do not have lots that anybody can afford, because everything is 3.5 acres or above or 8.7. The only people that can afford to build there are the people that can afford a big lot.

 

MISARSKI: Exactly

 

MCNALLY: Our hamlets need expansion, that’s what this all comes down to.

 

MASCARENAS: Mr. McNally, just so you’re aware and the rest of the Board’s aware. The Housing Task Force asked that we send a letter to the APA, DEC and OCR, requesting that we have a meeting on this program and kind of start to open up that dialogue in regards to, we’re in support of the Governor’s initiative on housing, but we need them to tell us how we can get it accomplished and break through some of those barriers that the State offices have created in terms of those zoning requirements that you talked to.

Another thing I might want to look at, down the road, I haven’t put full thought into this, yet. Is doing a study of our hamlet areas that we can prove with real data that we do or don’t have lots available. I think some hamlets we probably still do. North Hudson’s hamlet is pretty large for the size of North Hudson, but in the Town of Lewis, it’s less than a 1/10th of a mile. So, if we can show that with real information and real data in our hamlets and either we have the property, don’t have the property then could potentially approach the APA for some sort of hamlet expansion, down the road, once we have that information. I just got to figure out how to collect it properly.

 

 MCNALLY: AATV will be meeting with the Governor’s staff.

 

MASCARENAS: Okay, good.

 

MCNALLY: They reached to us.

 

HARRINGTON: Ah, yes. I think the APA needs to redefine or revisit the definition of hamlet, which now states that in order to have a hamlet it has to have a water district and a sewer district and for some areas in our towns that is totally not feasible. That’s a loggerhead with hamlet expansion.

 

MCNALLY: Not to mention, you’re dealing with a 50-year old document. A 50-year old plan.

 

HARRINGTON: As I said, it needs to be revisited.

 

MCNALLY: Right, it’s 50 years old, it needs to be.

 

SCOZZAFAVA: So, just to pick up where Charlie left off. You’re absolutely right and in my community, we’re fortunately have a lot of hamlet. We do, when they did the map, they just went through, you 5 zip codes, where the populated areas were, they made them a hamlet with the exception of Grove Hills, which is moderate intensity, which is the most condense populated area in the entire Adirondack Park, so whatever genius that drew those maps up, back then. I don’t even think they went out to be honest with you. In our situation in Moriah and we have a very large infrastructure system with water and wastewater, but most of that dead ends at the end of the hamlet. We tried, years and years ago, Mike, where you live, Tarbell Hill, once we put water and sewer down, that’s still moderate intensity, but that had some potential there, but it’s all modern intensity. So, I agree with what you’re saying, Steve, they absolutely need to take a look at maps that they did over 50 years and take a look at these areas and a lot of those areas, today, usually it’s moderate intensity that is just outside the hamlet area and I am sure in a lot of communities those areas, today have water and sewer. Where it should be re-designated as hamlet. There is a lot of it the Governor’s obviously doesn’t understand that is involved in this. It’s not just a question of building houses, you’ve got to have the infrastructure there to support those homes.

 

STANLEY: I think this is a great opportunity to open the dialogue to hamlet expansion, because of stuff has happened in 50 years, Irene. The Town of Jay sits along the AuSable River and the amount of property we lost in our hamlets, to be able to build on by FEMA buyouts. We need to expand the hamlets so we can actually gain and meet some of these state mandates. So, I think taking the initiative that the Governor has set out there and start to use her words against some State agencies I think will be a great thing.

 

MERRIHEW: Thank you for that input.

 

MCNALLY: Yeah, AATV has been working on this hard, we do have a meeting that’s been postponed this week. But, again this comes back to being prepared. Each town needs to know where their hamlet is and they need to plan moving forward. I have a plan. I have two hamlet and I am going to try to combine them, put them together, because there’s houses visible on every spot on that land. There’s no reason that’s not hamlet, but again you have to be prepared. So, when you meet these people, you can’t just say, I want a hamlet expansion. You’ve got say here is where it makes sense for the people of, in your town. So, you have to be prepared, I think that’s what we’re going to get out of this meeting with them. I think the people that have the hamlet expansion plans for their communities are the ones that are going to see the benefits or it and this is a really a good time. We got a bite of the apple, because she’s been saying, we need zoning change. Well, the zoning is the Adirondack Park Agency. So, we’ll see how she is about zoning changes, but be prepared, please.

 

SCOZZAFAVA: And have some money, because it’s not that simple to say, hey, I want to expand the hamlet from, you know from Plank Road down to Fisk Road. We got to do a map plan and report. You’re going to have to hire an engineer. I mean there’s a lot involved in it.

 

MCNALLY: Right, but you don’t need to do that upfront. Another thing they’ve always done, if you ask for 500 yards, they’re going to give you 100 yards. They never give you want you ask for. I don’t know if that’s something in their handbook for all employees (laughter). The first rule in their handbook. So, shoot the moon on these and hope for the best.

 

HARRINGTON: Yes, the Town of Crown Point has explored hamlet expansion with the APA and we found it to be a very easy process and the APA did not try to present all kinds of hurdles in regards to this. So, I believe that they are open in this. Another thing that has to be concerned are the need for mini-wastewater systems instead of the major system that supports the whole town. The Adirondacks has valleys and hills and this creates a problem with pump stations. Whereas, if you had mini-wastewater systems that would eliminate those issues. There’s a lot to be explored here.

 

MERRIHEW: Indeed there is.

 

DOTY: I would just like to confirm, Mr. Harrington just said that APA is open to discussion; we were the benefactors of density increases for the High Peaks System, which is 270 units. So, yes, new director, lot of new staff, open to talking. I just recently met with Barb and I offered an invitation to come speak to this Board. She’s very open to it. Would like time to plan things that are on our minds and she’d bring some of her top staff people, as well. So, I think bridging that cap with good communication is the secret to any success.

 

MERRIHEW: Thank you for reaching out. That would be a nice opportunity, some day at Economic Development to invite them here, you’re right.

Further questions or comments to come before the Committee? Being none, we stand adjourned.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AS THERE WAS NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THIS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING/PUBLICITY COMMITTEE, IT WAS ADJOURNED AT 10:40 AM.

 

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

Dina Garvey, Deputy

Clerk of the Board