Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1139
DOCUMENT CONVERSION SERVICES PROVIDED BY IMAGING & MICROFILM ACCESS, INC. www.scanyourdocs.com 631- 589 -8100 25.56 -1-40 BOX 11 01139 IN ' I I,yL � 1' �6 I j �i . IN I IN r 01139 l lQlKAM COUffff DWARTNM OF �r1LTH ' . �; DfiYa� of Da ao�ld Baalib Sesroloae: c iliA N :Y 1�SU . B�laae or Frwli h / ; e• C�III+ICATB of CDIDUANCB ,ax - ,gam a/�Pa� ,• - .:. • ! -!ON S6WA� DL4lOSAL -SYSBM 'New hip Fas+•It' ,f P' 22 87 Owners T. Patterson' akes bore Drive_ W. & • Ravina Road. e"n -or • �..: K=i . ..Putnam 'Lake • f 5806 -8 & Ter: blip 25 56 :.,, 11111-16 1 40 5887 -9 Incl _ywnershi,�.�., Ow.ig�A�at)�ar .Barbara ''& ,William :Jones .. Date d Frevlo�a Approval 6/3/91 ' 1Da Ad w RD4= Box' 113, Sunset' Drive Town Patterson, N Y 12563 Date Subdivision Ab>;roved Fee --Enclose a,n,,,t. Modular 0.251 Acres 3 Lot A.e. FOI Sectlori Oeb X 3 6 ��.. 200, y S. Depth 1 of Na�bar'it Baias•a Dear Flow G P D .400 PC® Notleladon 4'Yega4ed When Pfll b Two SspeaM SeweeaDe -' Srti� a eaialat 1. • Giro Septic Tasik --A • 96', trigalleries •• ' To be oaai4�cbd b7 ? AfWrraa *thee Sttppb: - P . M .Soper Frei _ Addreio X MbDN F. Beal &Sons ��,�, P 0: Box_ "B", Brewster, N Y. 10509 :. .R 0 B Fill "` >Sect 1 on :' 1982:' 'sq.. t -; see_abov.e ,�1Q� 1 represent that I am wholly and c0111pNtily atponsit/1a for.tM a.sgri aria lo�a�ion of the proposed .system(si, 1j 'that .the separate saw --di sal stMK ✓I'l ibow deee►it1eA wiil'tli construeteA as shown on tM approv.0 amantlm.nt then to and. in acewdancl will the ttarWards, rules arm regulations or County b*Wmmt of • Ninth, and that on compkiticii thereof a "Cl rtifiEate of Conitruction Compliance , satisfactory to the Comrnissloner, of H"Nhwlll tie. slibnittted to the 644kmint, .and . a.,written gwrantep will be furnished the, owner; his successors, neMs or assigns by the builder, -that said bulkier, will /lace in „good operating Condition;any'.Part;of'diq Mwige disposal slntein during th.._pe!io0 oft** (2,),,years'Immediately following the date of the Isau- enq of n* app►oe l of the Certilkat._-_ cconArua;” complNnce of the orielnil system or any repgws thweto; 2) that, the armed ,wait oeii0i6e0 a6owe wNl tle boated as Mown on the approved Plan are that takl well will tri Installed in ecordance -'with the ndaids, rules ,and ipu ai�i%ni of'" tlii` 'Putnam County.OpaRnsant of Neagh. Date 6' .Noveiriber. 1992 signed P.E. -X- RA. _ .' ; Address RD9 -Fair Street, Ca 1,;N Y.. 10512 29206 . -. License No's APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION This approval expM•es•two years -hone the. data +issued unless construction of the building •has'heen undertaken and is revocable, for Cauej o! may ire :amendlid :of rnodihed when'consideiid ne' M- 'y by the commissioM -.of Meatth, Any change or alteration "of li"structkln /pubes a new permit. Approved. for disposal of domeRk sanitary eewagei- Y or .privateer water s y ly. Rev 10/8'8 eY � -�'� ��_ Title f �ro 8� PUTNAM COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DIVISION-OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES New Ownership Date 5 November 1992 Re: Property of Barbara & William Jones Located at Lakeshore Drive West & Ravina Road (T) Patterson Section 25.56 Subdivision of Putnam Lake Block 1 Lot 40 Subdv. Lot # 5806 -8 & Filed Map # 5887 -9 Incl. Gentlemen: This letter is to authorize John H. Prentiss Date a duly licensed professional engineer X or registered architect_ (Indicate to apply for a Construction Permit for a separate sewage system, to serve the above noted property in accordance with the standards, rules or regulations as promulagated by the Commissioner of the Putnam County Department of Health, and to sign all necessary papers on my behalf in -- connection - -with this - matter and, to supervise the construction of said system or systems in conformity with the provisions of Article 145 or 147, Education Law, the Public Health Law, and the Putnam County Sani- tary Code. pFESSIGP�F� %'\ >` Very truly yours, 144Fdoomi� /' RD9 -Fair Street Address Carmel, N.Y. 10512 Signed Owner of Property RD4 -Box 113, Sunset Drive Address Patterson, N.Y. 12563 Town Telephone X14- 878 -6170 Telephone DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 APPLICATION TO CONSTRUCT A WATER WELL PCHD PERMIT # ?,?'9_;z WELL LOCATION Street Address Town/Village/city Tax Grid Number den e t k,, rye Or P tt2rsJ 'WELL OWNER Name Mailing Address se° 9 %Mt- (V NY APrivate O Public USE OF WELL 1 - primary '2 - secondary Q RESIDENTIAL O PUBLIC SUPPLY O AIR /COND /HEAT P 0 BUSINESS O FARM O TEST /OBSERVATION 0 INDUSTRIAL O INSTITUTIONAL O STAND -BY ' ❑ ABANDONED O OTHER (specify, O AMOUNT OF USE YIELD SOUGHT %a_gpm /li PEOPLE SERVED_ /EST. OF DAILY USAGE2- Sal E7 REPLACE EXISTING SUPPLY ❑ TEST/ OBSERVATION 12. ADDITIONAL SUPPLY Q NEW SUPPLY NEW DWELLING 13 DEEPEN EXISTING WELL REASON FOR DRILLING 'DETAILED REASON FOR DRILLING WELL TYPE DRILLED 13DRIVEN CIDUG GRAVEL '" 0 OTHER 'IS WELL SITE SUBJECT TO FLOODING? YES A NO WATER WELL CONTRACTOR: Name {? �� ,y S��M ' Address: fig N, y '%�j�J9 IS PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY AVAILABLE TO SITE: YES _NO NAME OF PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY: TOWN /VIL /CITY ,DISTANCE TO`PROPERTY "FROM'NEAREST WATER MAIN:' LOCATION SKETCH & SOURCES OF CONTAMINATION PROVIDED e QE 9�Qev.'`C ,�� t S0. Z; � M�tr� � � �� 2 PARATE SHEET ���o►7n � P�[s�it?E. r"L� (date) (signature) PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A WATER WELL This permit to construct one water well as set forth above is granted under the provisions of Subpart 5 -2 of Part 5 of the New York State Sanitary Code, and provided that within thirty (30) days of the completion of water well construction, the applicant shall: 1. Pump the well until the water is clear. 2. Disinfect the well in accordance with the requirements of the Putnam County Health Department attached to this permit. 3. Submit a Well Completion Report on a form provided by the Putnam County Health Department. During all well drilling operations, the applicant any and all water or waste products from such well property and in such a manner as not to degrade or Date of Issue r 11/ _-7 19�T Date of Expiration ��_� 19 - ~L Permit is Non Transferrable White 3/89 Yello, shall take appropriate action to assure that drilling operations be contained on this of erw cont inate'surface or groundwater. Permit I s ing rOf f ' al copy: HD Fi e � Pink copy: Owner a copy: Bldg. Insp. Orange copy: Well Drillex PC -1 P PLJTNAM COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF, PLANS FOR A WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SYSTEM 1. Name and Address of Applicant: Barbara & William Jones Ravina Road & Lakeshore Drive West 2. Name of Project: Dwelling 3. Location T /V /C: T. Patterson 4. Project Engineer: John H. Prentiss, P.E. 5. Address: RD9 -Fair Street Carmel, N.Y. 10512 License Number: 29206 Phone: 914 -878 -6170 6. Type of Project: x Private /Residential Food Service Commercial Apartments Institutional Mobile Home Park Office Build;ng Realty Subdivision Other (specify) 7. Is this project subject to State Environmental Quality Review (SEAR)? Tyoe Status (Check Cne) Type I.. Exempt Type II. Unlisted x 8. Is a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) required? No Has DEIS been completed and found acceptable by Lead Agency? ........... :0. Name of Lead Agency 1''.- Is this project In °an'area under the cont-rol--of local-planning, zoning, or other officials, ordinances? ......... ............................... Yes 2. If so, have plans been submitted to such authorities? .................. Yes 3: Has preliminary approval been granted by such authorities? No Date Granted: 4. Type of Sewage Disposal System Discharge...... Surface'Water x Ground Waters 5. If surface water discharge, what is the stream class designation ?........ 6. Waters index number (surface) ........... ............................... 7. Is project located near a public water supply system? .................. No 8. If yes, name of water supply Distance to water supply over one mile .9. Is project site near a public sewage collection or disposal system ?..... No 0. Name of sewage system Distance to sewage system over one mile Date observed: 6/85 23. Name of health Inspector: R. Tutoni 4. Project design flow (gallons per day) ...... ............................... 400 z ?5..,Is State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Permit required ?..' No 26: Has SPDES Application been submitted to local-DEC Office? ............... 27. Is any portion of this project located within a designated Town or State ' wetland ? ................ .................................................. No 28. Wetland ID Number ........................................................ 29. Is Wetland Permit required? ............... .............`................. Has application been made to Town or Local DEC Office? .................. 30. Does project require a DEC Stream Disturbance Permit? .................... La 31. Is or was project site used for agricultural activity involving application of pesticides to orchards or other crops, solid or hazardous waste disposal, landfilling, sludge application or industrial activity? ........ YES or NO No 32 Is project located within 1,000 feet of existence of abandoned landfill, hazardous waste site, salt stockpile, landfill, sludge disposal site or any other potential known source of contamination? ..............YES or NO No DESCRIBE: 33. Is there a local master plan cr file with the Town or Village? Yes '34. Are community water, sewer facilities planned to be developed within 15 years? 5. Are any sewage disposa.l_areas _i.n_excess. of 15W slope ?. ........................ No -36. Tax Map ID Number .......................... .... ...................... 25.56-1-40...... - 317. Approved Plans are to be returned to: ................ X Applicant Engineer .If the application is signed by a person other than the applicant shown in Item 1, the application must be accompanied by a Letter of Authorization. Failure to comply with this . ::;provision may be grounds for the rejection of any submission. I hereby affirm, under penalty of perjury, that information provided on this form is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. False statements made herein are punishable as a Class A Xisdemeanor pursuant to Section 210.45 of the Penal Law. �. i ;)3IGNATURES & OFFICIAL TITLES: William Jones (joint owner) `':BAILING ADDRESS: RD4 -Box 113 Sunset Drive, Patterson, N.Y. 12563 Nalsiber of-BedroomsA9D Design Flow G - SeparaW Seiwierige,6 System conelst of .'Gallon Septic Tank en To be constricted by Water SaPP.�J' 11 b). .Sapply.From Addre ortPrivete' Sapply Drlfled by ' z �Ad Other Regalrements I represent,,! hat I am wholly and completely •responsiblefor,the,design,intl location of h a " Idescrvbed will be constructed as show Won the pproveq amendment there to and County, ,Department of,;'Fiealt� and that;on completion thereof a Gertificate of Co be submitted o the .Department ::and •a' written guarantee will be furnished th ow Place "in "•good. operating -condition' any -Part of :said sewage- ,d3posal -system. d,u`rmg mice `ot the•approval oi,dhe Certii,*6ie`of Construction Compliance ot;th' original will be located as shown.;on the:apProved, Plan and.that,said; well will b bin stalled .in cc County,Department'of,Health" e Date �� St,��er`t q� "p Signed 5 Address APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION This approval expues one year from the - d to i revocable for cause or may be amended or modified .when consid ere d necessaryp'y the { repure�s/ °'��new permit ppioveC� for disposal ofdomeslic'SbnRary °see r'6nd /o m L „PCHD Notll3catlon,le Rellitired When FN is completed ddrese - LL 4 ', the proposed systems) 1) that the: separate sewage,disposaLsystem in °accordance with `the stantlartls � =ides an r u a eons o ,; e`; Putnam am . nstwction.Gompliancet; sahstactory to the Commissloner,of.Healtri will ner, wccessois; Heirs or isiigns by the builder,'tha( said.tiuilder. will the pe►ib&, df: two (2).years, immediately toilowing thedate of the issu= system or any repairs the►eto;,2) that, the drilled well descritred above ordence :with the sia d's rulesf and `regu a ors of" the" Putnam . '•'P .E. 'RA. t ssued unless�-- construcfion of the budding has .been untlartaken and• is ..i Commissioner of Health Any ehange or alteration of construction j, .. ! ,.pr.i' to watei suPPly'•on1Y ' . - "= 7 j{{ Tdle -- __ ------ _ a .9 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division of Environmental Health Services TWO COUNTY CENTER - CARMEL, N.Y. 10512 (914) 225 -3641 APPLICATION TO CONSTRUCT'A WATER WELL PCHD PERMIT WELL LOCATION Street Address Lakeshore Drive Town Village City Tax Grid Number West & Rave nna Road T. Pattprnnn 4-6-13; WELL OWNER Name Diane Wiseman Address 19 Queen 103140 Private Public USE OF WELL 1 - primary 2 - secondary ®.RESIDENTIAL ❑ BUSINESS O INDUSTRIAL 0PUBLIC SUPPLY OAIR /COND /HEAT PUMP O FARM O TEST /OBSERVATION O INSTITUTIONAL O STAND -BY OABANDONED O OTHER (specify ❑ AMOUNT OF USE YIELD SOUGHT 5 gpm /# PEOPLE SERVED 4 /EST. OF DAILY USAGE 250 gal REASON FOR DRILLING NEW SUPPLY O PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SUPPLY OREPLACE EXISTING SUPPLY ODEEPEN EXISTING WELL O TEST OBSERVATION DETAILED REASON FOR DRILLING Residential Supply WELL TYPE ®DRILLED ODRIVEN DDUG GRAVEL OTHER IS WELL SITE SUBJECT TO FLOODING? YES X NO IF WELL IS LOCATED IN A REALTY SUBDIVISION, NAME OF SUBDIVISION: Putnam Lake Lot No. 5806 -7 -8.& 5887 =8 -9 WATER WELL CONTRACTOR: Name IS PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY AVAILABLE TO SITE: YES Address: X NO NAME.•OF PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY: TOWN /VIL /.CITY ,DISTANCE TO PROPERTY TROM NEAREST WATER MAIN:, LOCATION SKETCH & SOURCESyOF CONTAMINATION PROVIDED By: John H. Prentiss, P.E. �ON REAR OF THIS APPLICATION �0 SE ARATE SiiT Dwg.��l (S.O.2334) 17 October 1986 (date) (signature f PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A WATER WELL This permit to construct one water well as set forth above is granted under the provisions of Subpart 5 -2 of Part 5 of the New York State Sanitary Code, and provided that within thirty (30)'days.of the completion of water well construction, the applicant shall: 1. Pump the well until the water is clear. n4 ' f t th well in accordance with the requirem nts of the Putnam r_ . a 4 .ec e County Health Department attached to this permit. 3. Submit a Well Completion Report on a form provided by the Putnam County Health Department. Date of Issue: �'. 19 Date of Expiration- /,, 19 �� ermit Issuing f Permit is Non - Transferrable :. i I O Ttuo Dwe 4 v ii� .1 led, LA fc;'.5 �- re p_-- TAM FL MPARTMENT OF HEALTH =AN-,; SCALE: HOUSE, PLAITS APPROVED"Inul BEDROOM COUNT ONLY; BEDROOMS q r a _ A C��, f PUTNAM COUNTY : HEALT -W DEPARTMENT • `DIVISION. OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH-_SERVICES John M.- Simmons; M D_ . F Deputy Commis- sioner-.of Hea1`th' - - FIELD ACTIVITY REPORT'-_= Sheet of NAME INSPECTION Orig. Routine :'ADDRESS';-: ' C ��� �' h Orig. Complain Orig. Request = "> No.-:- Street Municipality (T) (V) (C)_:; ` Compliance Complaint Comp MAILING ADDRESS` Final' P.O. -Box Post Office Zip -Code Group Illness ` Construction - , TELEPHONE R'inspection PERSON'IN CHARGE = Field, Sampling Only OR:. INTERVIEWED ".. ='._ ?; 7 Field Conference Name and; Title , Other DATE- _ TYPE. FACILITY, TIME ARRIVED TIME LEFT �'`. t 9 - Explain FINDINGS: a u v• . v R, - 1�.!Ra :- l! ? i sib? �:ff L�_ a ✓ 0 ." EL ( b 2e - F INSPECTOR: ,.. TELEPHONE: -.. Sagnatuie aniir Title PERSOW IN,;CHARG'E- OR INTERVIFEWED: I° acknowledge 'recei..pt of a "copy' of -.this '54 SIGNATURE: •Field Activity, Report'. .:. - -- .TITLE •° _ - o &V 4. PU N M COUNTY DEPARTM� OF HEALTH - DIVISION OF, ENVIRONMERrAL HEALTH SERVICES INDIVIDUAL MTER SUPPLY & SUBSURFACE SE%GE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS" REVIEW SHEET - CONSTRUCTION PERMIT DATE REVIEWED;:., / /� h t' �� 5 r�,r�y�� �G� %�" �-'`�� °•°' Y BY: J' ,(Name of Owner) .(Street Location) !� COMMENTS YES NO DOCMRM Permit Application Corporate Resolution Plans -,Three sets s/s Engineers Authorization Design Data Sheet (DDS) SUBDIVISION Deep Hole Log Perc Consistent Perc Results (3) Fill 30" Perc Hole cd Other. -9� House 'Plans - Two sets .-. Z � / p� Var_ance RegieSt.-us =�=� LF trench provided REQUIRED DETAILS ON PLANS` required a o .X �:.� ,` Sewage System Plan 60 ft. max. Sewage System Hydraulic Profile - Gravity Flow 6, 2 t Z Fill Profile & Dimensions - Volume D or J Box;Trench /Gallery; Pump pit details Septic Tank - Size, Detail -141 y 4.1 °T Well Detail, Service Line if over ��, -•� -� r�r� �Sy'' Construction Notes Design Data Two -Foot Contours Existing & Proposed C2 �l Driveway &Slopes Cut -- ��- - rM € -,-M- •r :- '.Footing /Litter Curtain Drains T =--� -� x== Per -c =& Deep Holes"Loca "ted ,, Representative of Sewa e & sion Area _. _ g fin. ..._ ._. Expansion rArea; shown; gravity flow,suff. size If Pmt ,pd_Pit & D_Box Shown & Detailed oars 9House° No. of';Bedr Wells & SSDS's w /in 200 ft. of Property Located Property Metes & Bounds House Setback Necessary (Tight lot) House Sewer - 1 /4 " /ft. 4 "0; Type pipe No Bends; Max. Bends 45° w /cleanout SEPARATION DISTANCES SPECIFIED ON PLAN / Fields �e-c 1ri 10' to P.L., Driveway, Large Trees 20' to Foundation Walls 100' to Well; 200' in D.L.O.D, 150' pits ,, o-•�.e 100' to Stream, Watercourse, Lake (inc. expan) 15' to Drains- Curtain,Storm,Leader,Footing 25' to Catch Basin 10' to Water Line (pits -201) Septic Tanks 10' fran Foundation 50' to Well 15' Well to PL ' GENERAL, Legal Subdivision Subdivision Approval Checked v 7.0 Ex- approval SSDS Adj. Lots Checked Wetland (Town /DEC Permit R & D) Data On DDS Plans & Permit Same �, �/ � � �� J -� � �� ,.� ', M-W DESIGN DATA SHEET- SUBSUFACE.SEWAGE.DISPOSAL SYSTEM . FILE NO. Owner Dt a v,p tu t SrL wi a ki Address. Ak- At ire D nlks k A& kA 11 sd U. Located at ( Street) ,/' Sec:Th 4 Block ! 3 Trot , 2 (indicate nearest cross street) S'B69 -7 81 Municipality a Watershed Cra-Eo� SOIL PERCOLATION TEST DATA RBX1RED TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATIONS s Date of Pre - Soaking 3� 3 ��86 Date of Percolation Test 3&;/,3C HOLE NU-SER . CLOCK TIME PERCOLATION PERCOLATION Run Elapse Depth to Water,Fran Water Level No. Time Ground Surface In Inches Soil Rate Start -Stop Min. Start Stop Drop In Min /In Drop ., Inches Inches Inches 1 X320• f33t �i Z7 �-�• 2 ►3qi ►3U 14' 3 .4 l4-OS'144� -- K). - 17 --1+ 3 - Z.113K f338 t3 2 f338 1351: (4 3 ► 345+ 1 1414 U "w 3 4 5k Aj NOTES: 1. Tests to be',:•`repeated• at• -same depth until appraacimately equal soil rates are obtained at: each;�.;percolation test hole. All data to' be submitted for review. 2. Depth measurements to be made fram top of hole. rev. 9/85 TEST PIT DATA REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION . DESCRIPTION OF SOILS ENCOUNTERED IN TEST HOLES ` DEPTH HOLE NO. HOLE NO. --. HOLE NO. G.L. o' iSS w S.ne 1' 2' 13 ibW11 3' 4' 5' 6' 7! 8' 90 s , 10' , 11' 12' 7 13' 14' INDICATE LEVEL AT WHICH GROUNDWATER. IS ENCOUNTERED IVnv►.P INDICATE LEVEL TO WHICH WATER LEVEL RISES AFTER BEING ENMUNTERED DEEP` HOLD! OBSERVATIONS MADE BY: Ej :� T /J� �{,(', DATE: �8� DESIGN Soil Rate Used Min /1" Drop: S.D. Usable Area Provided No . 'of Bedrooms Two Septic Tank Capacity t o o o gals - Type Absorption Area Provided By L.F. x 24" width trench �Lqf"4�4 �� ± �' . oFESSw % Other _ ,[ � 3 ! . Name U�o �' e JOHN H. PRENTISS, p. E. Address RD9 FAIR ST 914- 878 -6170 s NO. 0 THIS SPACE FOR USE BY HEALTH DEPARTNIE U ONLY: Soil Rate Approved sq.ft /gal. Checked by Date PETER C. ALEXANDERSON County Executive Mr. John Prentiss RD #9, Fair Street Carmel, New York 10512 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services March 26,1987 RE: Proposed SSDS Diane Wiseman JOHN SIMMONS, M.D. Deputy Commissioner Lakeshore Drive & Ravino Road Patterson (T) TM 46- 13 -1.2 Dear Mr. Prentiss: Review of plans and other supporting documents submitted at this time relative to the above- captioned project has been completed. Ca -ents are offered as follows: 1. The precise location of existing wells and SSDS area for the following surrounding residences. a. The lot immediately north of the Wiseman lot. Both well and SSDS areas are- required. b. The existing well and SSDS area on the lot immediately south must also be spotted. C. The existing well on Koller residence must be precisely spotted in relation to the proposed SSDS. 2. The distance from the proposed SSDS to Putnam Lake must also be noted. Upon receipt of a submission, revised to reflect the above comments, this application will be considered further. Very truly yours, William Hedges, Jr. Sr. Environmental Health Technician WH:mk cc: J. Calbo, BI 110 OLD ROUTE SIX CENTER - CARMEL, N.Y. � 10512 (914) 225 -3641 PETER C. AIEXANDERSON County Executive Mr. John Prentiss, P.E. RD #9, Fair Street Carmel, New York 10512 Dear Mr. Prentiss: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services February 17, 1987 RE: Proposed SSDS Diane Wiseman - Lakeshore Drive & Ravine Road Putnam Lake, Patterson :TM #46- 13 -1.2 JOHN SIMMONS, M.D. Deputy Commissioner Review of plans and other supporting documents submitted at this time relative to the above- captioned project has been completed. Comments are offered as follows: 1. Please show locations of all surrounding wells and SSDS areas as they relate to the proposed well and SSDS. The location of the well and SSDS area on the lot to the north is of particular concern. 2. Please state house set backs clearly on the plans. - -Upon- receipt of a submission revised -to reflect the above ccaments, this.. _ application will be considered further. WH:mk Very truly yours, William Hedges, Jr.- .--- -- v_ "" .._...... Public Health Technician 110 OLD ROUTE SIX CENTER - CARMEL, N.Y. 10512 (914) 225 -3641 Building pope 6top soil , grade 12 "deep 3 — 3 /4'stone or Brava I , graded "0 perforated -stones pipe :TYPICAL CURTAIN DRAIN SECTION to absor Tion trench B B inlet � s to unction 4 on �owar late to absorption trench Both boxes) om of box must. be level an firmly supported to below f Fc below ground level, 2)Waterproofed masonry or concret, 3)T ight point pipe from septic tat 4) Baffles to insure equal distrit o C f _ --/ o or 7. � / i)r "� 1 T .. )r _ i 1 ! - 4 v� -✓- _ - :2 ° - +�✓ /- Y.... ; - -ice? . ��� f -V B14151 Iq JOHN H. PRENTISS. P.E. I RD9 FAIR ST 914 - 878 -6170 ' CAMEL. NEW YORK, 10512 i PLAN ° Limit of gravel = t c solid pipes , 's to next n seplic tank box - } T&C �' ERFLOW C 3 o >YSTEM 3 E PLAN Building pope 6top soil , grade 12 "deep 3 — 3 /4'stone or Brava I , graded "0 perforated -stones pipe :TYPICAL CURTAIN DRAIN SECTION to absor Tion trench B B inlet � s to unction 4 on �owar late to absorption trench Both boxes) om of box must. be level an firmly supported to below f Fc below ground level, 2)Waterproofed masonry or concret, 3)T ight point pipe from septic tat 4) Baffles to insure equal distrit o C f _ --/ o or 7. � / i)r "� 1 T .. )r _ i 1 ! - 4 v� -✓- _ - :2 ° - +�✓ /- Y.... ; - -ice? . ��� f -V B14151 Iq JOHN H. PRENTISS. P.E. I RD9 FAIR ST 914 - 878 -6170 ' CAMEL. NEW YORK, 10512 PUTNAM COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH d Re: DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES Date 4- Ju ( Property of �J�{ap Lf)�p vv�cxv� Located at (T) Q�d -4-e rs oo Section Block j 3 Lot (, 2 Subdivision of Pu -ha 04 Laj' t fy®C -2- 8 4 Subdv. Lot # s889 -f-9 Filed Map # Date Gentlemen: This letter is to authorize -/o A., /- . 01P44r s a duly licensed professional engineer or registered architect (Indicate to apply for a Construction Permit for a separate sewage system, to serve the above noted property in accordance with the standards, rules or regulations as promulagated by the Commissioner of the Putnam County Department of Health, and to sign all necessary papers on my behalf in connection with this matter and to supervise the construction of said system or systems in conformity with the provisions of Article 145 or 147, Education Law. tary Code. un ersigned: P.E. , R.A. , #I' Address RN FAIR S? 914 - 878-6170 CARREL, NEW YORK 10512 Telephone lic Health Law, and the Putnam County Sani- Very truly yours, Signed; d )Owner of Property 19 /JpPN, Address sue&, Ts fa,A�Y,o,l� Town 716 Telephone Dlvlebn of EnvWtn%6 bd E s :' CONSTBUCIION PEQMR :FOB AGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM ' r LolvtLed at Lakeshore Dr . W & 'Ravine Road Sabdlvbloa Niune Pu "tnam 'Lake c N 5$( .' X5:8! Oweor %AppueantN.riee Rob "ert W Jont?§ sx, � 11 Holiday Street -� a r 0.251' saldbi� a .Modular Lot ,�, 10400 x Number of Bel>rooms TWA Deatgn Flow G P D ' 1000 ,1 Sepaeate Setierage-System to consist of ZG bd Sep;k Tank an t To.be const&cted by �+ i ) Wate Sttpplyi Pltbilc Supply From ors X 'Private Stapply,DrWed`by R -0 B Fill section 1,982' Otber-'Regotretnente 1 represent .tliaf 1 am whtiliy and completely responsible for tte des�gn`ar above deseritietl will be conatrueted`ad shown on the approved amendmen [, County department of',Mealth „and that on eompleUOn thereo) a Cer1 `y be 4submittetl ao the, Department; ,written guarantee will be fur A pNCeiin good operating condition ariy, part of said sewsge.tlisposat y: ante of tM,epproval of the:Cectiflute,'of Construction Compliance, will be`louted as shoavn`:on the approved plan and that sold well will be ih t County Department of ;Health � x ' + { ': �' ,'• � f � 5 Mav 1',988 +, 9qA� rd9 Fair St � <Car -k� Address revocable for cause or TOY De amentled or modified, regUirWi & ,.new` permit vedfoi% for dispoul of+ Cate ARTNMT OF HEALTH er to Provide± Permit Se vkm. N Y 1051? gloe N, on CERTIF[CATE.OF COIVIPL[ANCE,. { - 1`peemlt M P 22 87 �.T. Pat- terson own ; or YULge ' 'Tut ' 4'6t h BkltNi 13 I oe' 8 =9�� -- - Aovlelon ❑ S.O. `2334 �F-- :'wee e�Peev1 uifa,►pproval'- 6 Apr11 1988 PAW,l Town ng, N Y 12564 r P i S Q f t FIII Section OnU X. De tti 3 6 r r . Volnme 2 0 0 y d 3 P � O a "PCSD NotlBcatlot u Reryolseil wben FW le completed : 2 . , 96' Tri al,leries Address ! station of tAe proposed systems) 1) ,that the'separate,'sewage :dti' osaI” stem + ere <to and in,accortlance with the stenGgrOS rules'an regu a ons,o e u nam S ate ^of Const(,uctlon,Compliance satlstactory to;tne Commissioner;of Health 'III led the'owne► his`suceessori, helrsor aligns by ,the Duikter „Ihitt'said builder will em _during the period of` wo'(2� yeais'tinh4dtitel` fo Ito vvI ,the ate... f A I f t eoriiginalksystem of "any repairs A hereto; 2) that the drilled well tlefc►Ibea above ' I r,ins ordan ith Z a standards rake and, repu a one oY, 'the Putnam r ; i x�.t .tK6 a c , =1 5 29206 License the date sued unless construction of t f, he building has been undertaken and is or by the Commissioner of Mealth Any change or alteration of,eonstruct'lon ge `and /or ate w ter'suppl +only tPOTNAIYI mium. ;DEPAa1`MENTOFiiEALTH � ; DlvtaiDn � EnvlraomenW Health Siivka. Carmel. N,Y lOSI? r• Engmeerbo Provide Peem1EN, CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE t�Pl N FOR S13WX DISPOSAL SYSTEM P - j :M P•22 87 r: P atter- -son - "Lakes ore Dr W & Ravina Road own or VIDIIQe s fi Sabdlvbbn Name Putnam Lake Sabd Lot N 58;06 7 8 & Taze t �� . - Rovlsloa ownerLA�uCaneName 'Diane, Wiseman meta �� ? � S 0•. .2334 ` Date of Prevloae , proval: 6 Ap r l l 19 8 7 M&IM2' A erg. 19: Queen St Town Staten` Island, NY 10314 ! M ular +cse BaudtoS Type t Aeea Fm Section Only ` 0 55.11 1 00 s % Depih 3 Ydttme 200 y s 3 , TW o A 40 0 r` r P.CHD Nottflcatlon h R when Flu b tom kted Nttmber of Bedrooms = DislgD Flow G "P D e4a1 P Sys to �� 10 0 � Tao�`ana 96 Trigalleries } ,. �P� Sewersae - - _To be constructed by A c Wate�`SapPb Pdbuc Sttpply From { , Aimee s• $` orr Private S>ulply. Druled by s — _Atid<e.e 7 t 7 - T . OtLerRel}alcenlena R::O B Fill Section, 1:982 Sq" Ft see ;above `. 1 represent that'1 am •wholly antl ;completely responsible for the despn and location of the propo etl systom(s) 1) that the.sepirate`sewage ` tlispoial, system above tlesc►�Detl`w�11 De "constructed as shown on the approver! amendmeht there to and'in,accordance with the stangirtls, rules an re Ions o e u ham County Ospartment of" MNKh :;antl that'on eompletron theeof a F CerGhute of Construetion Compliance satisfactory to the Commissaone� of H�itthwill M submitted to the Department; and a wirt en 'guaranteewill bs'turnished;tlie ownei, his`wcCessors, ,heirs or assigns by the builds that said builder: will ,? ` place 'in good 'operating.tonalitionnany 'pain` of Mb sswagestlisposal5 system -tlunng the per ad bf two 12j, YNrs irtimetliately follovvirg thedit* of thi isw y n t ante ;of theappioval of•, the Certiftuts.oftiConstructwn COmpllance,of tAe originaLsystem of -any repairs t�e►eto; 2) that the drilled well diaiDW itiow 4 y will ,prlouted ats "n.on the peprovsd pNn andthat said well will be install in `accordance with the standfros' .rules and regu a ,Ohs of aM Putnam 1 °? County Oepe►tment of MNlth ..� � �t '� � . - � _ x oats 24' "'F':ebruary 19'88 r sgnatl r v E - >RD9 Fair St r el 'NY' 105'12 Address License No SF i 292Q6 APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION Ths'approval`exprreftwoyears f�omthe tlaterrssued unless`constructron of the building has`Dean undertaken rind is, revocable for :cause or,.miy be,,mended or motlified hen) considered necessary: -.by the Commissions► of;Meilth. • Any change or iltiratiOn, of ,consfructioni .11 requires a- new.`permit Approved for tlrfposal of omeslic'sanrtary ' fewsge and private ter supsuply� only Y87 :'�Oete � Q'✓G�� 3 � : � � � �81v n PUTNAM COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DIVISIONOF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH. SERVICES Date 5 May 1988 Re:. Property of Robert W. Jones Located at Lakeshore .Dr. W..& Ravina Road (T) Patterson Section 46 Block 13 Lot 1.2 Subdivision of Putnam Lake Subdv. Lot # 5806 -7 -8 & Filed Map # Date 5887 -.8 -9 Gentlemen: This .letter is to authorize John H: Prentiss; a duly licensed professional engineer X or registered architect (Indicate to apply for a Construction Permit for a separate sewage system, to serve the above noted property in accordance with the standards, rules or regulations as promulagated by the Commissioner of the Putnam County Department of Health, and to sign all necessary papers on my behalf in 'connect,ion' with this-matter and to` supdrvi:s'e the cohstruction -of' said system or systems in conformity with the provisions of Article 145 or 147,, Education Law, the Public Health Law, and the Putnam County Sani- tary Code. y �A . PR f � � 4 tersigened; ```�,+/ ho• �Y0FTRE STPT��� R.A. , # Address JOHN H. PRENTISS, P.E. RD9 FAIR ST 914 - 878-6170 CARMEL, NEW YORK 10512 Telephone, Very truly yours, Signed _ Owner of Prope 11. Holiday Street Address Pawling, NY 12564 _ Town i 914 - 855 -9428 Telephone JOHN H. PRENTISS. P.E. CONSULTING ENGINEER n RD 9 - FAIR STREET CARMEL. N. V. 10512_ REGISTERED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED [. DELIVERED BY HAND PLEASE SIGN COPY ATTACHED [�J The Building Inspector of.. Town X] /Village of Pd-tL-ersoh Town [ ]/Village Office Sir /Ms. ( 914 ) 676 -6170 Re: Construction permit for single family residence. Applicant Bgrbqr-q 4 10 i 1 iaM j0Aes Street 2gven -t leoas{ Rr Ld1lceAare Prove Gbst TM # z.f(, -9..� I am submitting an application to construct a sewage disposal system serving a single family residence on the above captioned property, to the Putnam County Department _. of Health. In order to process this application the Health Department requires that the following information be, obtained from your office: 1. Prior to your issuance of a building permit A) Is Zoning Board approval required for any variances? Yes No B) Is any portion of the parcel located within a regulated wetland or its control area, and if so is a wetland permit required? Yes No C) Is any other local permit or approval necessary? Yes No If the answer to any of the questions above is yes, please contact the Health Department in writing (copy attached for your convenience) or by phone, 278 -6130 within 15 days of the date of this correspondence. If the answer is no, you need not respond to this correspondence. Respectfully, Name k . Morr;5 -,Sala doh4 H. Prentiss, P.E. Health Department Inspector Professional Engineer 1� �y a . k . PUTNAM COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES Date 24 February 1988 Re: Property of Diane Wiseman Located at Lakeshore Dr. W. & Ravina Road (T) Patterson • Section 46 Block 13 . Lot 1.2 Subdivision of Putnam Lake Subdv. Lot # 5806 -7 -8 & Filed ,Map # Date •5887 -8 -9 1 Gentlemen: This , letter is to authorize John H. Prentiss r . a duly licensed professional engineer. X or registered architect (Indicate to apply for a Construction Permit for a separate sewage system, to serve the above noted property in accordance with the standards, rules or regulations as promulagated by the,Commissioner of the Putnam County Department of Health, and to sign all•necessary, papers on my behalf in connection wiih this 'matter and to' su •' � .. ' ... • pervise the construction of said system or systems in conformity with the provisions of Article 145 or' 147, Education La ublic HealthJaw, and the Putnam County Sani- Q�OfESSIONqj F tary Code. y�o N. Very truly yours, 4 Signed > cY,-A-_. i NO 29206 �`� Owner of Property Counter ned : �Of THE S1 19 19 Queen St. Y.E., R.A. # 9 2 Address Address JOHN H. PRENTISS, P.E. R09 FAIR ST 914- 878 -6170 CARMEL, NEW, YORK 10512 Telephone Staten Island, NY 10314 Town AB �- k Telephone PUTNAM COUN'T'Y HEALTH DEPARTMENI. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES John M. Simmons, M.D.. Deputy Commissioner of.Health. - FIELD ACTIVITY REPORT - Sheet of INSPECTION NAME _ Orig. Routine Orig. Complain ADDRESS k.E'S D W. A►d O R A y i AI A _. Orig . Request No. Street Town TM No. Canpliance Complaint Camp MAILING ADDRESS Final P.O. Box Post Office Zip Code _ Group Illness Construction TELEPHONE _ Reinspection PERSON IN CHARGE Field, Sampling Only OR INTERVIEWED — Field Conference Name and Title _ Other DATE ,p TYPE FACILITY TIME ARRIVED i : TIME LEFT : a o Explain FINDINGS: FILL M,ATEI�.i; Ark Wks lag" ACEn i emj1!4 rsnMA is %Jyej',�. INSPECTOR: Maw TELEPHONE: Signature and Title PERSON IN CHARGE OR INTERVIEWED: I acknowledge this Field Activity Report. SIGNATURE: 6/86 TITLE: 1 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10.509 (914) 278 -6130 BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S. Acting Public Health Director CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM Jones/Wiseman Lakeshore Drive'& Ravina Road Lot 5806 -7 -8 5887 -89 P -22 -87 August 4, 1986 (T) Patterson TM 25.56 -1 -40 Original application submitted by John Prentiss, P. E. September 4, 1986 Revisions requested by Putnam County Health Department including limit to two bedroom design and design and fill section only. * March 3, 1987 Revisions requested by Putnam County Health Department including the addition of adjacent wells and SDS..to plans. - -. . . -. * March 26, 1987 More precise locations of surrounding wells only sewage disposal systems requested. Putnam County Health Department letter March 26, 1987. * .February 17, 1987 Putnam County Health Department requested, by letter, more precise locations of the well and SDS to the north (now Vozzella) and proposed setbacks for the proposed residence. April 6, 1987 Permit application and related material reviewed by John Karell, P. E. Director, Putnam County Health Department and okayed for approval. - - December-1.2, 1994 ..Field inspection again conducted by Hedges, Putnam County Health Department finding indicate Vozzell'a well and reported.sewage disposal system both located in front of Vozzella's residence. Jones proposed well could not be located any further than 85' from the area indicated to be Vozzella's septic system. No structure such as a residence, driveway or road, etc.,, located between Vozzella's reported SDS and the proposed Jones well location. December 14, 1994 Letter from Bruce Foley, Acting Director rejecting the application for a construction permit based on the revised location of the Vozzella's sewage disposal system. April 11, 1995 John Prentiss applied for a variance of 15' for the construction of an individual well on the Jones property. 85' from the proposed well to the reported sewage disposal system on the adjacent parcel to the north (Vozzella) * Minutes enclosed June 19, 1995 Variance request entertained at Board of Health meeting. * July 17, 1995 Continue variance request at Board of Health * August 21, 1995 Continue variance request at Board of Health * August 29, 1995 In accordance with the Administrative Rules of Part 75 Chapter II the request for a variance of the -- -- �......_....... Jones parcel, is denied. * Corr. enclosed _ ... _ .... �.�* -. . _- -• -- -- BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S. Acting Public Health Director DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New .York 10509A (914) 278 -6130 August 29, 1995 Barbara & William Jones RD #4 Box 13 Sunset Drive Patterson, NY 12563 Re: Construction Permit P -22 -87 Jones, Lake Shore Dr. West' and Rev i na Road (T) Patterson Lot 5806- 5508 -5887 -5889 TM. #25.56 -1 -40 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Jones: This Department has completed the review of your request for a specific •, waiver to construct a well at the above location. The decision by this Department was based on the following information. 1, On April 6',`1987, after a review of all required applications, soil analysis and other information required by this Department, the construction permit for a two bedroom residence on the above mentioned parcel was approved by this.Department for the applicant Diane Wiseman. 2. The permit was transferred'' to Robert Jories. in 1.988., On September.2, 1.9.94., the. construc.ti.m.- permi -t, for ..this parcel was .suspended by _. this',Diapartment. The reason for the suspension was -the discrepancy of the location of the sewage disposal system directly to the north.' The approved plans indicate a separation distance of 100 feet. The owner of the property to the north reported their existing sewage disposal system was not properly located on the approved plans and was considerably less than 100 feet to the proposed Jones well. Our Department has confirmed this. Based on.the above mentioned review and supporting information, the plans as. submitted are not in compliance with Part 75 of Chapter II Administrative Rules and Regulations and Article III of the Putnam County. Sanitary Code. Your request for a specific waiver is denied and the construction permit is hereby revoked. Should you have any questions concerning this matter please contact the writer. Very truly yours, i (r�u c e R. F ey, R. S. Acting Public Health Director BRF /JP cc: Paul Velardi, Esq. Tom Purcell, Deputy County Attorney BOARD OF HEALTH JULY 17, 1995 Board of Health Attendees:- Bernard, Hay, Block; Kamin, Schoolman, Ciaiola, Lebwohl, Weber Health Dept. Attendees:- Foley, Molinari Non - Voting Attendee representing.Bondi:- Velardi Meeting called,'to order at 7:00 P.M. Minutes of June 19, 1995 reviewed, Bernard made motion to accept, seconded by Block; motion - carried. Schoolman reviewed correspondence relevant to BRC program for the Nursing Department. Copies of letters to and from various officials were made available to the Board of.Health Members. Schoolman asked for department reports. Foley had no report. Schoolman asked Foley about Department's point of view.-on housing development in Mahopac that is built on New York septic disposal system. Foley gave report on continued surveillance study that is being conducted on the site. Ciaiola asked question on Hillcrest situation. Foley stated, it is not the Health Department's responsibility. Town of Southeast (Supervisor), had responsibility.to notify the residents as well as the County and the Health Department. Health Department received results June 13th, once received, immediate action was taken. A filtration system will have to be installed. DEC is coming on Friday. Molinari distributed Nursing Department report, discussing Migrant program. Also, reported.on her meeting with Bondi regarding the BRC program. Variance Hearing - Jones, letter had been sent to County Attorney for legal interpretation, also 'to-.Paul Velardi, representing Jones. Due to resignation of Dan Leary who was handling the.. case, response was' received asking. that...-. it be postponed for a month to next meeting so, that it can be personally discussed with Board of Health Members. Bracke - Variance Hearing - Foley stated, as part of the Hearing process, 7- day.neighbor notification of the meeting is required.. Mrs..Lang, another neighbor, did not receive-,.it. Mrs. Lang has indicated she has a well which is not shown on the plan and may be! an issue. Schoolman had to leave because of another commitment and turned the meeting over to Lebwohl who continued with Bracke Hearing. Ciaiola remarked that pi ope.rty.is within 100' of State regulated wetlands, therefore, will probably have to go through procedure of applying for permit from State of New York. Brackes were not aware of this. Ciaiola also indicated there are no flood plain elevations on the map, nor is storm drain shown where they propose-to put SDS system. Lebwohl informed the Brackes because of the location, they will apparently be required to get permit from the DEC because of closeness .to the wetlands. It is feeling of the Board, based on prior experiences, it made no sense for them to come before the Board before they talk with DEC. If the DEC refuses permit, it is not something the Board can override. O BOARD OF HEALTH AUGUST 21, 1995 Board" of Health Attendees:- " Hay-, Bernard, :- Block,- .Schoolman, Kamin, -Ciaio _a, Lebwohl Health Dept. Attendees:- Foley, Molinari Non - Voting Attendees:- Velardi (representing Bondi), Purcell, County Attorney Schoolman called meeting to order at.7:00 P.M. Executive session to follow. Schoolman asked if there were any additions, subtractions, or amendments to July 17th Minutes. Bernard made motion to accept Minutes as.written, seconded by Block. Motion carried. Schoolman read memorandum he had received from Lodes, County Attorney, in reply to letter written relative -to proposed modifications of the Putnam County Sanitary Code. In essence, the Putnam County Board of Health's proposed modification are permissible and in accordance with the State Constitution and the relevant statutory and case law. Copies to be-distributed to Board Members. Molinari presented Nursing Division report and inquired if there were any questions regarding the.department report she had mailed to members. Concerned about annual agency evaluation which should be looked at, reviewed by the Board, voted upon and sent with any recommendations the Board may have. Should be done as soon as possible as-we ' are half way into 1995. Had hoped with everyone receiving it in the mail, it could•be signed this evening. Schoolman will sign if no one has any problem.with it-. Bernard moved to accept the annual agency evaluation and concede it, seconded by.Hay. Molinari, on the recommendation from the Board in terms of any other statement the Board would - wish to put on the.form. Schoolman, does. 'Is increasingly concerned by three "group"s of- "health` care providers that° - ar-e - not - -working" in harmony- which. are, the Health Department, the hospital as a provider of not only nursing services, but other health-related services and the Physicians in the community. To make sure there is ar. optimization and naturalization of money, resources and effort, that every effort be made to get the three groups or their representatives together to develop what-should be a comprehensive plan 'to the County. Molinari replied, Municipal Health Services plans addressing collaboration of providers in community. Is in process of.being revised,due October 1st. Molinari states that issues not appropriate in relation to annual agency evaluation. Schoolman, Board is not making any statements,on report at this time. Molinari, they should at least say, reviewed by Board. Schoolman agreed, but said it is not an action. Bernard, looking over pages 4 and 5,_ where her general concerns were, statistical data, should add comment, reviewed,by Board and concerned about. lack of appropriate data rrec co tion ystem and monitoring the acceptability of the BRC contract. Foley distributed his Advisory report. Inquired if there were any questions on Revised Addition and Well Guidelines, self - explanatory Health Education Report and a letter which is going out to Physicians requiring the report of human granulocytic ehrlichiosis (HGE). Lebwohl, correction on House Additions Approval Guidelines, paragraph B, X62, word should read partitions instead of petition. Foley, correction will -be made, letters have not yet been sent out. r' -2- • a Kamin commented on correction.to Molinari's report. She will set it up. Schoolman, will do Variance Hearing on Jones-before going into Executive Session. County Attorney is. present. Foley announced that Bracke has withdrawn Variance application. They may resubmit. Schoolman welcomed everyone back on Jones' Hearing. Health Department will review issues that necessitated variance request after which everyone will be entitled to speak. Foley stated, in 1987, Jones' lot was approved showing reported location by Engineer, John Prentis of the Sanitary.System, 100.feet to the proposed well. In 1994, the Health Department became aware the sanitary system was not as reported on the original approval, but in fact, in front of the house-which measured 85 feet. Lot approval in.1987 with misinformation, misrepresentation,,whatever case may-be, would not have been approved in 1987. Department.of_Health suspended permit and is requesting the Board of Health to confirm that the permit be revoked. Board Members asked various questions which were answered by applicant, Jones and his Attorney,'Velardi. Adjoining property owners, also present,, voiced.their concerns. After much discussion, Foley made recommendation to revoke permit. 'Question arose, if Foley.has authority to revoke permit, why are the Board Members involved? Foley replied,.it had been presented to the Board as a variance.. The Department has done studies through the County-Attorney's office and.State Department of Health and found out the Director does have authority to revoke the permit, not the Board. Schoolman asked Foley to spell it out for the Board as to what his functions are. Foley read letter from'State Health Department, dated July 5th from James D. Decker, P.E. Chief, Residential Sanitation Sect., Bureau of Community Sanitation and Food Protection, wherein it is recommended that Section 3, Article•3 of the proposed Putnam County Sanitary Code be .--.,.,..,-revised .to..be _more.. cons istent..'with• _section -l5•, -6b,etc. -,• -for Individual -Water'! - Supply and Individual Treatment.Systems. The County Health Department official designated to consider and grant /deny written applications•for specific waivers should,be the County Commissioner of Health,;the County Public Health Director, the County Environmental Services, etc.,*rather than the County Board of Health with the concurrence of the Director. The County Board of Health may consider appeals to decisions rendered by the designated official regarding granting /denying applications for specific waivers. Questions and discussion followed from Board Members as to'the purpose.they serve. Schoolman made motion; since Foley is not granting a variance in this case and is not going to entertain any arguments to grant the variance, that the Board of Health no longer decide this issue and let all the parties meet with Foley at their own time and place, seconded by Bernard and Block.' Motion carried. After dismissal of Jones' delegation, deliberation followed .on authority of Board Members and the Department of Health. .Purcell spoke,on interpretation of legality /procedures. Kamin•requested Director's report, briefly, as to what he has done, to keep abreast of what has transpired'. Meeting adjourned 9:00 P.M. , BOARD OF HEALTH _. .. _ JUNE 19, 1995 Board of Health Attendees:- Bernard, Hay, Doyle, Lebwohl, Schoolman, Block, Ciaiola, Weber Health Dept. Attendees:- Foley, Hedges Non - Voting Attendee representing Bob Bondi:- Velardi Meeting called to order at 7:00 P.M. Subject to correction sixth paragraph, second page of May 15, 1995 Minutes, to show Ciaiola not Doyle, read letter he drafted to obtain legal opinion relevant to the County Sanitary Code. In addition, Weber, incorrectly listed as Health Dept. Attendee. Motion was made and carried to accept Minutes with above changes. Molinari, not being present, Schooman asked Foley about what is happening with BRC in the Nursing Dept. Foley replied, the matter still has not been resolved. Velardi stated she knew Bondi had a meeting with BRC and gave them a time frame in which to come up with a program. However, she did not know what the time. frame was. Variance Workshop Bracke Mairitou Station Rd. (T) Philipstown Hedges presented floor plan and map of Bracke's variance request to add a second floor to the existing dwelling. Variance is required because it exceeds 15%. Schoolman inquired how far the house is from the river and Ciaiola asked distance from. flood plains. Hearing is- scheduled for July .17, 1995. Foley distributed departmental report highlighting coordination of 1995 Tobacco - Free Awareness Project;-Bicycle Helmet Distribution Program, 3 ATUPA violations; concluded field testing of interactive -Radon Preventative Education Computer at Mahopac Library and conducted Lyme Disease Awareness Week activities. Molinari will either mail her report to Members or distribute at next meeting. Schoolman inquired about the appointment of another Environmentalist to the Board. - Ciaiola is to find someone that he can work with. Schoolman asked Foley to give up -date on Cutillo's Restaurant. Foley said the well was drilled, down 600', waiting for lab results before he attempts to hydro -frac well. • , Variance Hearing Jones, William Ravina Road (T) Patterson Applicant is requesting variance to construct a well 85' from septic system. Original permit was suspended due to the fact that the SDS on the 1987 survey was incorrect. Attorney Velardi is representing the applicant for variance. 6 0 -2- Hearing.- Jones (continued) After a lengthy discussion, a motion was made and carried to table the application until legal interpretation is obtained from the County Attorney. Foley should have the information by July 10th and will be sent out to the Members. Ciaiola stated he will be starting up the retesting program at local beaches. Has people lined up. Motion made and carried to adjourn. Meeting adjourned 8:35 P.M.' :R ;.,&RavIh4'A_d s, Putnam. ' Walli Robert ` Jdridk' o e r ag 1 o idaS�_- - Street-, Date , I �H .4 -Subdivision AQp M(3 d u Tyr , S Ti 6�411!011111111111mdsd by 47 in Sllp* t6btidm .9E i4i "Osstal . y ;;e niii, 4oP64�,ii r4,ll,,,��!.�, am , : "011i above diiscrib"IjWli bwc6,nstr&iii' Ills Poe goods operat q. -se 00c" an euthe�',A at Certificate of - c6astrual" "SdTo Pis ik , 147: ?1991 40 Fa APPROVEt)' FOR CONSTRUCTION: This 4Wovil iiiis r•voca6le ior'COMMI.Or r"y (64 alr,�iniwlfimi eoouMN an a,: disimets . I,o. OIIJ V,. new, 7,rn Re I Date. 7 t4 - I f 00 Cir, 7 CONNUMiCS 22-8 7� 'VI,, Patterson IRS& S6- -ih 4, "41 in Ap pmd awli nd ,-,N.. T., z12156'' a'e," the, gded. Am t jjn D 36 10 0, Noism"i Regsdked Wbeik FM Is coomplibed galleries WQOOSW -par& !X omm 56mrdahj• Wlth, the As ions, or., the TuInam iai64liCOMOIJiViCi.,.-'$§ti$ladory to'this Cornniiisi6nor Of Healthmil that '"'id)W04w, will, ppi.bo 'bfjvr4-(2)-Iy4jw,$ jj6wAdijt*ly followinj tMdate- O Atha .lM- St RA. Y 10512 ?9 Lk•nsf; No I , unless construction . I of the buildirq and is ' y, cliai* or, 'a iieral ion w construct 6n' Tit PUTNAM COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES John M. Simmons, M.D. Deputy Camnissioner of Health - FIELD ACTIVITY REPORT - Sheet of INSPECTION NAME : Orig. Routine Orig. Canplain ADDRESS ��Z// s� AV Orig. Request No. Street Town TM No. Compliance ., MAILING ADDRESS %&� P.O. Box Post Office Zip Code TELEPHONE ( Canplaint Camp Final Group Illness Construction PERSON IN CHARGE OR INTERVIEWED Name and Title DATE-�" 2 TYPE FACILITY TIME' TIME LEFT FINDINGS: Reinspection Field, Sampling Only Field Conference Other c11 Explain 2 /r,v- - o31 INSPECTOR: Signature and Title PERSON IN CHARGE OR INTERVIEWED: I acknowledge this Field Activity Report. SIGNATURE: 6/86 TITLE: 4 .DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services Geneva Road, Brewster,.-New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 rSeptember 2,. 1994 Barbara & William Jones RD #4 Box 113 Sunset Drive Patterson, NY 12563 Dear Mr.'& Mrs. Jones: .JOHN "XAAELL -V'. -P E.--M-S:, Publ-c Health Orector Re: Construction permit P -22 -87 Jones, Lakeshore Drive W & Revina Road Putnam Lake (T) Patterson Lots 5806 -5808 and 5887 -5889 TM #25.56 -1 -40. The above mentioned parcel was inspected by this Department on September 1, 1994. At that time, the north east property corner and a stake indicating a proposed well location were noted. Based on information received by this Department, the proposed well location is approximately 45 feet from the existing sewage disposal system to the north. The location of the existing sewage disposal system directly across Revina to the west, scuthwest of the proposed well location is also.reported to be less than the required 100' minimum. Based on the above information and the field inspection of September 1, 1994 the constructicn permit, P -22 -87 is hereby suspended. Please contact your engineer, John Prentiss, P. E. to revise the proposed well location and possibly the house and sewage disposal system location to meet all present code requirements. If you have any questions please contact this office at your earliest convenience. Very truly.yours, William Hedges Sr. Public Health Sanitarian WH/jp a e JOHN H. PRENTISS. P.E. CONSULTING ENGINEER RD 9 - FAIR STREET CARMEL. N.-Y-10512- ( 914 ) 878 -8170 April 11, 1995 Putnam County Board of Health 4 Geneva Road Brewster, NY 10509 Sirs: This letter is a formal request for a variance on the property of William and Barbara Jones, located on Ravina Road, Lake Shore West in the Town of Patterson. The variance they are seeking is permission to construct a water well that will be less than the required 100 foot separation (actually.90 t) from the existing sewage disposal system on the adjoining property to the North. Thank you for-your consideration. Yours truly, John H. Prentiss, P. E. y oF NEw�\ �r' �e � 187'00 SION� /.� 0 i t ii a e JOHN H. PRENTISS. P.E. CONSULTING ENGINEER RD 9 - FAIR STREET CARMEL. N.-Y-10512- ( 914 ) 878 -8170 April 11, 1995 Putnam County Board of Health 4 Geneva Road Brewster, NY 10509 Sirs: This letter is a formal request for a variance on the property of William and Barbara Jones, located on Ravina Road, Lake Shore West in the Town of Patterson. The variance they are seeking is permission to construct a water well that will be less than the required 100 foot separation (actually.90 t) from the existing sewage disposal system on the adjoining property to the North. Thank you for-your consideration. Yours truly, John H. Prentiss, P. E. y oF NEw�\ �r' �e � 187'00 SION� /.� 0 TOWN OF PATTERSON PUTNAM COUNTY PATTERSON. NEW- YORK 12563 JOHN N. CALBO Building Inspector April 5, 1995 Mr. .William Jones RD 44. BoY 113 Sunset Drive Patterson, New York 12563 RE:--,TM,- 46 -3 -23 (New TM-- 25.56 -1 -40) ALTARA DEVELOPMENT CORP. Ravina Road & Lakeshore Drive Patterson, New York TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Patterson Town Code requires five (5) lots based on ten thousand (10,000) sq.-ft. to be a buildable lot. In 1987 (Aug. 19) the Board of Appeals denied.the application based on improper frontage The requirement for frontage was a minimum of 75 feet. They, had 60 feet. This was the basis for'the denial. On December 1, 1987.,, a judgement..was ordered by the Justice of the Supreme. Court . granting the variance. Enclosed- is'the decision from the Supreme Court. If you need any further information or assistance, please do not hesitate to contact this office.' Sincerely, Calbo, " B ilding Inspector JNC /cs cc:` W. Hedges, Putnam County Health Department Teleohons 878 -6319 I[-- ------------------------------- - - - - -x :jALTARA DEVELOPMENT CORP., Petitioner, - against- THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN.OF PATTERSON, Defendant. --------------------------------- - - - - -X JUDGMENT Index No. 1163/87 The Petitioner, Altara Development Corp., having brought hon this action pursuant to CPLR Article 78, for an order .setting aside a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals ':of the Town of Patterson, which denied petit'ioner's application ::for an application for an area variance; and the respondent, :.Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Patterson,,having. :,appeared herein and having submitted the affirmation of Raymond I;Maguir:e; town attorney, sworn to the 29th day of October, 1987 and the record of the zoning board-of appeals in this 1matter in opposition thereto; and this matter having duly :come on to be heard by this-Court; and due deliberation having 'been had.-thereon; and the Court having rendered its.deci.sion :herein,, dated November 10, 1987, a copy of which is annexed I' Whereto;. I NOW; therefore•upon motion of JOHN A. PORCO, P.C., attorneys lifor Petitioner, Altara Development Corp.; it is hereby, ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED, that the decision of I i1the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of.Patterson herein, .�4 mil. 'dated August_19, 1987 be and hereby is annulled, vacated and. set aside; and it is further, < y ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED, that the respondent Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Patterson,'grant'the variance as requested by Petitioner Altars Development Corp. Signed this SIP day of December, 1987. I j E N T E R U0.9. FRED A. DICKINSON JUSTICE SUPREME COURT y }{r N A'' :'lz: `.l;% •:�+'k'...r;_ s �,:-' �`.:v;4:�a. �. ,fit: Y., .- .�.:+n..: ��•. . r� I I PAUL J. VELARDI VELARDI & VELARDI ATTORNEYS AT LAW BREWSTER -C:X MEL PROFESSIONAL BUILDING' ROUTE 6, BREWSTER. NEW YORK 10509 April 7, 1995 William Hedges Putnam County Board of Health Geneva Road Brewster, NY 10509 RE: WILLIAM AND BARBARA JONES VARIANCE REQUEST TAX MAP NO. 25.56 -1 -40 Dear Mr. Hedges: TEL. (914) 279 -4000 FAX ( 914 ) 279 -4236* CHARLES H. VELARDI OF COUNSEL Please be advised that this law, firm represents Bill. and Barbara Jones in connection with the above captioned matter. It is my understanding that they are seeking a variance of approximately 13 feet for the placement of their well since the proposed well is approximately 87 .feet from the septic of the adjoining property owner. It is further my understanding that the property which the Jones's now own was purchased with full Board of Health approv -al �in 1987. This approval was renewed.in 1989, 1991 and 1993. It wasn't until August - 1:9-94" when ' the - -property was surveyed and the well sited that the Board of Health approval was. suspended. This was due in large measure to the fact that the siting of the well on the 1994 survey was incorrect and made it much closer to the existing septic on the adjoining property. The proposed well has now been moved back to its original location which was on the Board. of Health plans in 1987 upon which previous approval was granted.' I wish to note in my client's behalf that 'there has been no substantial change in the property during the time period from 1987 to present. The property and work that has been done in connection therewith has cost more than $40,000-to my clients. The denial of this de minimus variance would render the-property without value and would be an extreme hardship to my clients. * Inclusion herein of this number does not constitute consent to service pursuant to CPLR 2103. Thank you for your consideration of,their proposal. Very truly yours, Y~ VELARDI & VELARDI,.ESQS. By: Paul J. Velardi PJV /tm . cc: William Jones 14..1011.4 (8!871 -••Tart 12 _ PROJECT t.D. NUMSER 617.21 . Appendix C - State• Environmental Ouallry Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART 1— PROJECT INFORMATION ITo be completed by Applicant or P -clec: sccrson t. A•PDUCANT snt,,sCA 2. Pao.tE::T NAVE W r v 3. PROJECT _CCAric : Mumcmality 0. County A. PRECISE LOC.-C-4 Street address and road intersections. 7rcminent :anomarx3. et, :r :ante ma :r 5. IS xNew OSO AC71GN: Esaansicn _ Moaiticauonlalteraticn 6, DESCAIeE PROJECT BRIEFLY: e- but lc�L 4- .9e -re - re *7e- SEAR 7. AMOUNT CF LAND AFFECT ED: Initially 0 o0 ac:est.5 Ultimately t'DBdo a::es4-• 8. WILL PROPOSED AC.jCN COMPLY WITH =EX :STING ZCNING OR OTHER EXISTING L-aNC -'S_ F_3•AIC7 :CNS? [P7 Yes ' No If No. describe briefly 9, WHA IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? _ - _ Residential 7—Industrial DCommercial 0Agncafture .=i,- kF =est:C.en state Ctrer Describe: 10. DOES ACTION INVCL' /E A PERMIT APPROVAL- OR FUNOING, NOW OR ULTIMASE_! F =CW A Y OTHE- GOVE�;NMFENTAL AGENCY (FEDERAL STATE OR LOCAL;? 0 Yes 1KNo It yes. list agency{sl and CerrniUaoprovals 11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACT.: ►I HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID'PERMIT OR APPP.CVAL? 0 Yes XNC it yes, !tit arency name and permittapproval t 12. A,S RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISnNd PERMITIAPPROVAL REQUIRE MOCIF.CATION? LJYes 0 No I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Caw � Applicantlsponsar Game: .7! Da • 1 i./ — iir . Signature: 1 If the action is in the Coastal Area, .and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment OVER .,. A. DOES ACTION EXCEED ANT U. No 8 wilt -AC-..10N RECEIVE= :Tay, De. svt erseged trf . anetni hti Yes air - aiiitty. lu VIEW AtPROVIM Alstartr- of other -naiuraf Or r wi . IdIiii, i6e�lei.'tigftifl�Ant �Ultatll. ft a lea t enec Veg'jiatlon or faun& r� ..3n. selllls A tammunity s exists F goals is offic. it accot x ;y C U en: :evei _06min ' t. or related acav je C. .3ubsecu 10, De C.. R!U* *Ler.-.L �, CS wag erm snort N.; I nc or her �atunf resources? r sn Oriellr EI Me T. PAN 14-1- A 8 � rou � `8 JJX s - - ffu 1 foa• _- Jwf lea /fw•` a ``8 8` ,�� »n uY--- ---- _r /8 tiQ fw ° -- - - - - - - - S. f_ 0 Iw -r -vw aOI Jrur t•A V 22 / / , / � � Jar h ro aW ✓ 8 •i - - - - - g 4 awlgg ry 14 - - - 23 ____w mm , V fru >ri 43 na (�T 8' ON — a ._- _-�•Ny____ FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY ....... ... ..... .... ......... ... ufan •Nn•. w.,lla Uxlw. lntq ellixitl •••,Hal 151.11 LIM IONp0 1 NOT TO BE USED FOR CONVEYANCES roan, us -- tenitu I'M nnntua onu¢Ia 1 Ina alt Sn1IN 0,R -JAMES 1W. %EVALL COMPANY .wlY • tnoa m 1 EC7 47 CENTER STR, OLD TOWN, MAINE down uK ala 1n Ilt run lrn r y ,I r P/O 23.11.2.1' N -� • — —r —r —r— — r- 1- r —r —r— — r —r —r— —r- —r —r— —r-r —r I I I 1 1 I I I 7Bl I 1 P/0 23148•Ir9 I I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1' I I / 1 1 1 731 I I 1 I I 741 I I 1 76 I R I 1 g 173 1 I 44 CON f1 +f I I, I 1 I 1 IN l I I g. ` „1 Y.v Na aaol o r1, 1+l � � Ni J � l •oro 1 ' �7? � J I I 1 1 1 Yn •uf Iron ». 1 a i 1 \ 11 \ \\ 1 4 61 1 1 1 1 1 70 I 1 I I I I I' I 1 671 I I 1, 1 I 166 I 1 1 163 1 11 \ \\ an• 169 I 1 1. I' 160 19, 1 I I- I 1 I: I . I i I I I I 1 1( 1 1 I I I 1 I, 1• 1 1 1 Spl xs I t l Iral1a�,IN,\ O JJnJI r/ 1 .oa Ilnr a�IN, '1 I 1 I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I I yNlapr \ N \ J S/// I J /If Ul, l U/I UN I JJ111: I f /// I /.sf I r I —1 fu 1 ra I Y 1 m 1114 1 1NN Ia a„ au Ian I I ayl pnl lJO ` `NJ �/ UAIJM /Ui/ •t. pif 1 ro ,ro NJ 1 I I aa, J!Y IIJV I yNl yy I ayl J/S/ 1111 1 lnJ 1 rm 1 rro I r/v � Jro N/ I ral 111.1 1 Sa/1 1111 ral fin I nn I f/n 1 I `tN ` k / / � 1' ,- l�'JI I �I I I 1 I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I �•1. I• ) 1 1 Nm ro +arh / f I I l / I I I. 1 ,,,, fan Ina • l DRIVE I rr/frl 1 I . f 1111 -- --- Yq �� O 1 1 161 I C fiur 32 I I 1 Jet 1 J / ,,1u � Iw/ ph 1 1 • 1 i - - IW= � 1 'tea ,.>a s0 / ;2/ / a /,I w, /I Slav z _ - -lfl ralra'raB ,�� 7 • /' `IT . a /,l f't IYN 31 b > g � 33 rul.v ra b ay Y 19 t N/ qtly /aI � L/l l,lft __.. - -114 4B r CIS ` Uf Y g 88... � - �8 7 Jay l /f b 8 8 � rou � `8 JJX s - - ffu 1 foa• _- Jwf lea /fw•` a ``8 8` ,�� »n uY--- ---- _r /8 tiQ fw ° -- - - - - - - - S. f_ 0 Iw -r -vw aOI Jrur t•A V 22 / / , / � � Jar h ro aW ✓ 8 •i - - - - - g 4 awlgg ry 14 - - - 23 ____w mm , V fru >ri 43 na (�T 8' ON — a ._- _-�•Ny____ FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY ....... ... ..... .... ......... ... ufan •Nn•. w.,lla Uxlw. lntq ellixitl •••,Hal 151.11 LIM IONp0 1 NOT TO BE USED FOR CONVEYANCES roan, us -- tenitu I'M nnntua onu¢Ia 1 Ina alt Sn1IN 0,R -JAMES 1W. %EVALL COMPANY .wlY • tnoa m 1 EC7 47 CENTER STR, OLD TOWN, MAINE down uK ala 1n Ilt run lrn r y ,I r trey,: septic tart �..-. ,, ' B — c 3/4 "stone or, Both boxes) SECTION B -B r r gravel j om of box must be level and firmly_- supported- to - belovr_ -frost line. Footing to _extend to 36" �o graded 0 erforated OVERFLOW y ( x \ stones: "1 p pipe below Around level, j 1I m 2)Water roofed masonry or concrete construction SYSTEM f E TYPICAL CURTAIN O� AIN 3)Tight joint pipe_ from septic tank to box and between an boxes TYPIC� L �_, 4))BaffI s to insure equal distribution may be required, ; PLAN SECTION .904-70 EY, TING SDS l 1I7 1 J�411O./ � CONSTRUCTLON NOTES :Basic Required Notes 1. All trees within l0 feet of.proposed `SSDS shall be removed. 2. `SSDS to be inspected by the design enf f� �.I �.G• J -/ architect a a I ¢¢¢� / r N 0 and the Putnam County He It jZ[>�Nl - 1 pp J Department after construction and pric -t-- /r. ..'•...,- to backfill. _�¢2 /� ( 'r /� i3. No trucks, machinery, building materia \ nor excavated earth shall be allowed - I /�� •� / �, _ -;. - /�� I� Q in the sewage disposal area. Constcu, Cp� :,.le- �;'-" ,W"' "'- ��� • of SSDS to be in accordance with thes, 'plans, any revision's thereto, and the 1 j rules and .regulatiops of the permft �.J- •` ir"..•��.� �j!;� % / ✓ - // / / - I Q..�,i. issuing governmental agency.: j _ • fis�. -� .: -- _ �r _ > _.. i - %. ✓_ .,.. -- `I 1 ` 4. 34inimum well yield of 5. gpm -iv requirr, Yields less than 5 m will be immedio gP .-reported to the Putnam Count De artm - �'- \ of Health. iJOtes. Aeguired when Fill Proposed - - - d ;j' �s: ' _ r.':: �•: ii;l rpsu �e �iloved;toestebi ?'lie or 3"4.'S S"- 9J ``v '^'Y`* n� -a"'- -I �:�, r• - f- ."O -vl' .:� r - - - .- i li' f� b0 to 90 days following placement and � l / A ,� � be inspected by the Putnam County Dep. D �✓i TCN ' t e .of Health for acceptance, prior to in ti y i �J IF't23 . - W _ ation of sewage system. Date of plat; M. ; _ a - ys � 'must be reported to Putriam.County. Dep. 2 05nu� L9v�ta -Oi_ _ ,- - - of Health...- I2 Run 'of bank fill shall be suitable -fo ,;�eva e absor tion _ g p ;t;;be.iree of fines r .other unsuitable material and shal ?- "f i i _-.an in =place percdlation rate at �lesst_equal- to'Lhat'in' the natural `so ' '.E,(,, - ••` -- _ ' r .efter� the requiired- stabilization peri -- � i � .•. i _ - ak - �'j .'•. -,j � .� •y-�� � r-�� v : ;. � � - .� ;The engineer /architect shall perform tD �Oi - — Pvmpbocrr ita./orcedcemenl 'Job .,r / .' -/9�• -- -- -- ---- -- _ - -- -- I /opao,grA%"PoemP. Praridr n t st in ihe'fill a final percolation e yC )t Jl�� JL�CLfJ�� - -_..- - - - -- --- -- - - - - -- -- foafmgrvben're�nnrd - a� moshctea/ -Impervious lay b all after stabilizatio k f - Defoi! -A' /loft vious fil c artier, shall r. _:�:_ tS a C3 ;Pe--a dense,clale aoil_with; little or - - e.f f z try= ;'3'}.i. t -;. max: =° ) _..; -. _ 1 �i ^ •tit= - � Y::. P - � ,,..P8y1S•Y �` :i� �" '�`�� � �c 5:c6. �,.bgr;' d - � `° �t �'� s •t'__ .. y �• ':� to a e 'absor t�ion »ea � � r�s Xz...� G='Q" r ¢ - _:�LxSE'.. - .••tx�.•'` r-/ _ _ ` i -� - � ,u .r- ,.,�,`x�,. .�,., -; - - - * roPOPr �ser•esnW vrlrf .___ ��(� _— `• __. _ — - -_-- y �_ dam. ihan ... T_� do f5, cas� >: f srda 15'm.n./ Y wa i ma, orbe a mrnlaw'p CO, ref QrdrocA Is no r .. O-1, I %npounfr above Co rte... 0'�• -. /- - S - / - era/ �- -� _ ddod - -- i . Po p clo } i �r ?. �.tx� 4 y:.., •.''�*si �. r - -._: ry��ic -x K31' �� tr -��,. /� '.�-" - ,. - .. i:. <�[.s` �' •;7 - F""r.,st I :�frop - :r:' iI - . . R - ..�i.J.:.l..Q.. � ' " •'i �3'z' +Y. .) I- j - -t� _ - '� : Flo-+ —� 42" x`•" :Fc ?:+F •�'' Ev'�. T _ - - -../). ^' mill Caner {. =_ 1.?%� .. -. _._ - ,.••;a_. -� -r :a -�,__- tA._[�.2'!.AJ:ST"rl..-LC - - -.. .. ._ ._ -_.._ - -. . :: - � _4 ' � � �, _ ° - ADAPrtR I .. �'� QIV -11 f CMG -'_ - -- - - -•`��"�r t -� So /td Rock: _ -�- ..___. -��..� .. -. �_-. t t i r i-w VP JOHN H. PRENTISS, P.E. CONSULTING ENGINEER RD 9 - FAIR STREET CARMEL, NY 10512 (914)878 -6170 Dear Madam / Sir 21 November 1994 Re: ' Proposed Sanitary Disposal System and Well Location for Property of William & Barbara Jones, Ravina Rd & Lakeshore Dr. West, T. Patterson (TM. 25.56-1-40) G Putnam, NY[ "Putnam Lake" Subdivision, Lots #5806-7- 8- 87- 88 -89] Enclosure: Copy of tax map with your property in red. The Putnam County Health Department requires that you be notified of the proposal for the Jones property, so that you have an opportunity to comment if you believe it may affect your own sanitary system and/or well. If you have any questions you may call me or Bill Hedges of the Health Department at (914) 278 -6130 before 5 December 1994. Cr- WIV John H. Prentiss, P.E. cc: PCDHV/ Owner File JHP /mm 01 :17 11d, ZZ 110,N] 117661 SOt15 ry 0' /. TRWREDI- _ ..SCALE 111.1110 OF AN INCH -- - - 1 -800 -345 -1 ----T1 T---7 - --r -- -- r- /- I-- "1-r`- --r-I- --f- -r- _r-r- -T--'r_-f• -T—f- > -.l -. T.. -1_-1. •y„ P/0448-VS „I ro! ! 1 731 I 1 1 1 14 18 TS 176 I 1 I 1 TI I I i I I I I 1 p I ,• ! I I I I �' 1 I I g I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 (ACON A u•e I Inn1 Ilrli 1nw lwml I 1 I I I c `t r! n, 1 110 I I I 11 I I I 1671 I I � I I I 1 1 1651 1 1,.. 169 18B 1 8 1 I I I I 1 I 1 I 166 1 I . 1, 11 • 1 1 11 w 1 ' I I- I I 1 I I I 11 I I I 1 1 1 ■ I ray! Ja•/ � vx \ rop /•a l •a, � � ynl r' 11 I va I rn. I r� I 1 I I I I I I 1 I 1 1 x} I xx 11 xx xx 1 yy ,a•1 „ ` � p p p mJ yir Y/J 1 rnJ 1 � I xii I ssr I !m I rnvl ytY 1 J.9J ssr 1 I lynx ralr•T!'I yT°I #D I x,r 1 7 aix �/ ra tim lrn, uu lifu nre uc fx :, Im uri zw Imneu Ivml ,, - Im un nn ILtm I I I ypl � .ya 7 I � l m� �� J•v xrr / I yw I r,,,al as I vx rro I rnJ I rn• l vn 1 yxl xv Jar (yv I rm I rm I yy I yr, Jnu I Jm I rm I J.ril Jro ynl yn I x�� 1 J/a ynl I � 52 / / 1 I 1 I I I I 1 I I 1 1 551 1 8 1 1 561 1 I 151 I 11 •/ 1541 I � Jn) / /' / / / /rixl I 51 I �. I I 1 1 18 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I• I •1 I I I I I I 1 1 1 I 1 l 0 1 I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I / land I DRIVE' , }e1 rJL as L 1 1 161 I L a,IY 32 1 �_ 2 / \ 4NJ I rarl yi,l rwl avr < - - - - -,Lr zs.l ssa Jp /nx• /� / // rai . 4y r•r,. u, 31 8 v b 33 iw,l' uv E .vai u 49 ,p /Ry ow ,p � 8 y � li ` rav x va Jw •.si 30 W; 4 5_ 8 29 a i 36 x» 8 Jm mr � Rr, rtri � p �� nee • 8 rob - - _ ^ 1pJ k ll► - - — .. ... _ ` Lvi raa • � `p `19 � � ` Jyr � Ime � p 8 - y w.• .i av 26 - - - , - - - - - . -vx - .wu 48 b x —.•+. _ _ _I_ �71 27__ 31.39 -r amm / / /,,,/ aY/ per' a J>� \ sI �'- Sc._r- u• - - -, /am / / h�Q -2T 9 o � s �`'• / a /rar / / /MfR(A,V fN 1 rmr I I / / pp/ •ti W 1 /yam/ rna /r;cl 8P4 25.84.1 -2b 412 - k / I run A55C55MENT PURPOSES ONLY NOT TO BE USED FOR CONVEYANCES 1 reverm n JAMES W. SEwALL COMPANY 147 CENTER STREET. OLD TOMII MAINE JY1 A / r22 i ylry i rxr - Jry_ .25 —; �, �/ ��,,� txJ xx - - -f J,i• i � 9 lam 6 1 xnl8 $ ar7J 44 i - ---y�, xrJ - - - ii n Y x'43 y:t - '^^' - - - Ncl.l al U15lN ICI INFUWATION waa �ta� � exrs¢e aeueL wool oltmal ...nNOI . nla rlet re0MO. wt+un M I 3 4i� �Z �f•J �`ib1 G3t113� �a Illle4 Lle[ -- M Lft ADpn+ Llla X141- Lu L.. C� � � a a. .c _ _.... k BRUCE R FOLEY, R.S. VFW Y 0�� Acting Public Health Director DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 December 14, 1994 John Prentiss, P. E. RD #9 Fair Street Carmel, NY 10512 Re: Construction Permit P -22 -87 Barbara & William icnes Lakeshore and Rovina Road (T ) Paterson TM #25.56 -1 -4:0 Dear.-Mr. Prentiss: Review of plans and other application materials relative.to a construction permit for the above - captioned property has been completes by the Department. Based upon such review and pursuant to the provisions of Article iii of the Putnam County'Sanitary Code and Part 75 ofthe State of New York Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations, you are hereby advised that the proposed method"of providing water supply and sewage disposal are considered' inadequate.as set.forth below, therefore,..approval of, these plans cannot be granted: 1. The sewage disposal system, on the parcel to the north of the proposed well, (Vonzzella TM #25.56 -1 -40) was originally shown on the approved plan. (Prentiss dated September 4, 1986 revised November 5, 1992) to be east of the Vozzella residence and 100' from the proposed well. Measurements taken by this Department on December 12, 1994 indicate the Vozzella sewage disposal system is located on the east side of this residence and no more than 85' from the proposed well on the Jones property. A minimum separation distance of 100' is required. Returned herewith, please find one copy of the sewage system plan. If you have any questions, please call me at ext. 151.', truly yours, Bruce R. Fo y, R. S. Acting Publitt Heaith Director BRF /Jp d - /&a-, �� Oy vt:.0 LA J (,l cz.0 C-C, loll 4x- -01 +L4- 1�, L . d y y'ktmuc ,c r cam., -&k-t- oo ruli — e* -.tee v �ke_ ( &ke Ca.aJi; Ell -O � u l 1 �I� y -LA a J 2a.�- 5�A(� 5 Ave- 1 1 a N PU� - ,,f Ae uSe- cam!\ d rvA ue J `J ran t SS i c�A ti bP 1 � GuSC- V (� P 1 jS� M L� Inc � 1 j Sc�n� \Co�-O(\ neS� olnd 1 y Cky z k C-10SA r\,At,��, c_�v.�� r,,A, 4 (l11 II � l ` �D occoLS� o o., Lac_`\ (L':kA �'\ n�A 1 r) z 3 -7r1 I W. P 1 ( :iAS �b c�nA i�'�. • \n ac�,� See C--kA r- e,-\� hew V-p,(J'OSQ Ci V���IS�'. Va c�y`� b�__ M ► AC Lns C\ r\b� S�C�W �'� �IjC-C3A\-o,^, D-- 4A'-S TA/1 CQ- `1C =t-lj - 6 (�A6 J °t 0.Cen \ll Z J I lNe :-hone. A ::, 131Y e� II L-- `I I s� Mme. b� cI Of P IP � G C\.CA- L-\ L'A\ r M, U\ r, q ,N `0 Lek G R ss, S�-QA \1�1- ly\�Il � L�T c nn� .-Vkvk (tit. J C-1, CA k S-S r\ .� \A � s q�Sc, a Y -1�7 AA- al 41 n i s c rte. �.S c a U�\ l �o` e RckV b� �e-�,,,, ;Ch5z C(!. (-c (1, `.Asicto\ d "\, 7 � as�3 -A 1111 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 MEMO TO: BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S. ACTING PUBLIC HEALTH DIRECTOR- FROM: WILLIAM HEDGES 1'� -SR. PUBLIC HEALTH SANITARIAN RE: JONES,. RAVINA AND LAKE SHORE ROAD (T) Patterson VARIANCE TM #25.56 -1 -40 DATE: May 24, 1995 BRUCE R. FOLEY, R,S. Acting Public Health Director The variance before the Board of Health address only the fact that the proposed Jones well is less than 100 feet from the existing sewage disposal system to the north (Vozella #25.56- 1 -39). The Vozella sewage disposal system was misrepresented as being in the rear (East) of the residence. The sewage disposal system actually exists in the front of the Vozella residence. A review of the permit issued to Wiseman and later to Jones on the proposed residence of Lot . #5.56- -1_ -40 .i nd.i cate many .def i ci enc i es which would, have to be addressed prior to the renewal of the permit. Revision which would be required if the Variance is granted would include, but not be limited to: 1. The maximum slope within the SDS area of 15 %. 2. All restrictive distances would be from the toe of slope of the fill section (if over 2 feet deep) and not from the edge of the leaching area as presently shown. Additional deep test holes and perc test would also be required. 3. Trigallies would not be allowed. The system would need .to be designed with 2, foot trenches only and 100% expansion area would also be required.. 4. All wells and SDS would need to be reverified by the design engineer and /or land surveyor. 5. The level of the lake including the high water overflow elevation at the dam would need to be noted on the plans. This contour would be used to determine the restrictive distance to the lake. 6. Standard notes and details would need to be updated. 7. Actuate topo would be required, showing existing and proposed elevations. 8. Effective erosion control would need to be designed and become part of the approval. Q ` -2- 9. Impacts of drainage from the site would need to be addressed and reviewed as it affects adjacent properties not only during construction but also during post construction. However the most important question facing the board at this time is-whether a variance should be granted based on misrepresentation by the previous owner of both parcels ( #25.56 -1 -39 and #25.56 -1 -40 Weiesman) and /or the engineer John Prentiss. If the Board agrees with the writer that the variance should not be granted, than the lot is deemed unbuildable and Mr. Jones is perhaps capable of recouping his losses thru a civil action. Granting of the above mentioned variance does not, however, insure that the construction permit will be renewed. Review and renewal would be based on full review as has been our policy in recent years. BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S. Acting Public Health Director DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 ,tune 5, 1995 Barbara & William Jones RD #4 113 Sunset Drive Patterson, NY 12563 Re: Variance Request Notice of Meeting Name: Jones Street: 113 Sunset Drive Town: Patterson Tax Map: #25.56 -1 -40 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Jones: Please be advised that the matter of your request. for 'a variance from certain provisions of the Putnam County Sanitary Code has been placed on the agenda for the next meeting of the Board of Health to be held on June 19, 1995 at 7:30 P. M. in our Health Department Conference Room, 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York: You or your representative must attend the meeting to present your case. Be advised,,attached "Neighbor Notification requests must- be satisfied. Very truly yours, Br ce R. oley, R. S. Acting Public Heaith.Director For the Board of Health BRF/jp tit r � w r :t I [ -- - -- • - -- -- t � �� � Codes , — • - -_ --. — a c �7l r t _, .. _� __.: �_ t Son • I�1...(� -_ -, ., } , l` II I — �.. .,U1 S ., :. ,._�.. _:_. ��:: - - -• -- 0.`n, - - -, T��L° �� r ,'�, a _.. _. __.Olt cs -- ._. -... _�.._ _......_. _.b... __....�.g _. _..�,..._._._ e Irv,...q_ � �- S��6 CKT 4 \t _ 1t 07F-A�� ' t l� 4_ Q 4ta� 67v S a e-s �j c� 9� • Kd- �-A- xcu c 4-�a`�� .......... - ------- --- .......... ........ ............. .. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of .Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 TO: Carl Lodes, County Attorney Dan Leary, Deputy County Attorney FROM: Bruce R. Foley, R. S. Acting Public Health Director RE: Suspension of Construction Permit DATE: June 26, 1995 ON BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S. Acting Public Health Director The following question was raised at the Board of Health meeting June 19, 1995 concerning the Jones variance. The Jones Construction permit for the installation of a individual sewage disposal system and well was suspended September 2, 1994. During the suspension, the..permit.expired December 7, 1994. _ The Rules and Regulations and guidelines have been revised and would require redesign prior to renewal. However, since the permit was suspended prior to renewal, and construction was unable to commence prior to the expiration, would reinstatement of the permit require updating the design to current standards or did suspension of the,permit freeze the approval and require only the variance dealing with the details of the suspension. A response prior to the July 17, 1995 meeting is appreciated. Thank you CARL F. LODES County Attorney PHILIP M. CAMPBELU' Risk Manager M E M O R A N D U M TO: FROM: DATE: DEPARTMENT OF LAW Bruce R. Foley Acting Public Health Director Thomas F. Purcell Deputy County Attorney July 14, 1995 REz Suspension of Construction Permit - Jones DANIEL F. LEARY First Deputy County Attorney THOMAS F. PURCELL Deputy County Attorney. LILLIAN DiLORENZO Deputy County Attorney KATHLEEN KING Sr. Legal Assistant In response to your memo dated June 26, 1995 regarding the above matter, please be advised as follows: Although your memo focuses in "on the question regarding the significance of a suspension, in my review of the materials in connection with this matter, it is clear that there are several issues to be resolved herein. I attempted to call you this week but.was unable to reach you since you were on vacation. I would like to discuss all of the issues involved before rendering an -opinion- -and Ahevee indicated, this - to Mr. Velardi and Tony Hay. Accordingly.' 'I have informed Mr. Velardi.and Tony Hay that I will not be responding to the substantive issues before Monday, July 17th. Please adjourn this matter to the next meeting date so that we will have an opportunity to meet and discuss all of the issues herein in depth. I am notifying Tony Hay and Paul Velardi of my request that the meeting be scheduled in August by copy of this memo. cc: Tony Hay, Legislator Paul Velardi, Esq. 40 GLENEIDA AVENUE - CARMEL, NEW YORK 10512 (914) 225 3641 Ext. 260 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 FAX COVER SHEET BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S. Acting Public Health Director DATE TO:. �)' ✓i 21A-( C FAX 6 Z CSQ 2�c FROM: Putnam County Health Department Division of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road. Brewster, New York 10509 NOTES/MESSAGES\ Number of pages to be transmitted inciudin covzr• sheet n VI Note to sender: Complete all entries in Fax Log In the event of transmission /reception difficulties, please contact our. office. 914 - 278 -6130 on eva Barbara & William Jones RD #4 Box 13 Sunset Drive Patterson, NY 12563 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Jones: - BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S. Acting Public Health Director DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Of Environmental Health Services Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 August 29, 1995 This Department has completed the review of your request for a specific waiver to construct a well 85 feet from a reported sewage disposal system. The decision by this Department was based on the following information. 1. On April 6, 1987, after a review of all required applications, soil analysis and other information required by this Department, the construction permit for a two bedroom residence on the above mentioned parcel was approved by this Department for the applicant Diane Wiseman. 2. The permit was transferred to Robert Jones in 1988 and renewed in 1991 and 1993. 3. On September 2, 1994 the construction permit for this parcel was suspended by this Department. The reason for the suspension was the discrepancy of the location of the sewage disposal system directly to the north. The approved plans indicate a separation distance of 100 feet. The owner of the property to the north reported their existing sewage disposal system was not properly located on the approved plans and was considerably less than 100 feet to the _ t proposed Jones well. _ ._...._ 4. The plans were revised maximumizing the separation distance from the proposed well to the reported existing sewage disposal system. The maximum separation distance between the proposed well and the reported existing sewage disposal system was 85 feet. A minimum of 100 feet is required. Based on the above mentioned review and supporting information, the plans as submitted are not in compliance with Part 75 of Chapter II Administrative Rules and Regulations and Article III of the Putnam County Sanitary Code. Your request for a specific waiver is denied and the construction permit is hereby revoked. Should you have any questions concerning this matter please contact the writer. Very truly yours, Bruce R. Foley, R. S. Acting Public Health Director BRF /JP cc: Paul Velardi, Esq. Tom Purcell, Deputy County Attorney JOHN N. CALBO Building Inspector TOWN OF PATTERSON PUTNAM COUNTY PATTERSON. NEW YORK 12563 September 7, 1994 Altara Development Mr. William Jones 11 Holiday Street Pawling, New York 12564 RE:. Building'Permit # 1149 - Ravina Road & Lakeshroe Drive West Patterson, New York _ Dear Mr. Jones, Telephone 878 -6319 Upon receiving official notice from the Department of Environmental Health, Putnam County, New York, revoking your SSDS (construction-permit P- 22 -87), the Town has no choice but to cancel your building permit for a single family dwelling until such time as you receive a:_re- approval from the Department of Health. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this .. office.. .. ..__.... .._.. .. .. Sincerely, 411 JAffN. Calbo; 6le- BtYilding Inspector JNC /cs cc: Mr. William Hedges, Sr. Public Health Sanitarian Mr. Timothy Curtiss, Town Attorney E£ -Z Hd 6- d3S h661 nwoo NvNind 01AV3O�Jd ,fir G Barbara & William Janes RD #4 Box 113 Sunset Drive Patterson, W 12563 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Jones: �.i r- lrDic 'N"'M Qrector TMENf�O.F'' HEALTH i4orr49 - Health Services &ewster; _ New York" ✓90509 914) _- 278-6130 September 2, 1994 Re: Construction permit P -22-87 Jones, Lakeshore Drive W & Revina Road Putnam Lake (T) Patterson Lots 5806 -5808 and 5887 -5889 TM #25.56 -1 -40. The above mentioned parcel was inspected by this Department cn September 1, 1 994. At that time, the'north east property corner and a stake indicating a,proposed- well location were noted. Based on information. received by this Department, the proposed well location is approximately 45 feet from the existing sewage disposal system to the north. The location of the existing sewage disposal, system directly across Revina tootthe west, southwest of the proposed well location is also reported to be less \t n the required 100',minimum. Based-on the above information and...the..f_ield inspection, of September' 1, 1994 the construction permit, P -22 -87 is hereby suspended: Please contact your engineer, John Prentiss, P. E. to revise the proposed well location and possibly the house and sewage disposal system location to meet all present code requirements. If you have any questions please contact this office at your earliest) convenience. Very truly yours, William Hedges Sr. Public Health Sanitarian WH/] p John Karen Jr., P.E., M.S. - Public Health Director Loretta Mql -.aA, kN., BSN - - -.... _ .Director of-Patient Services DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division of Nursing Services Geneva Road Brewster, New Yort 10509 914 - 278 -6558 FAX COVER SHEET DATE: r TO: �U LAG FAX #: -23 FROM: Putnam County Health Department es & QM La-.- _ - - - - - y �✓ Geneva Road, Terravest Corp. Park Brewster, New York _._.. _.... -- _........ Attention: Number of pages to be transmitted -- (including cover sheet) OUR FAX NUMBER'IS 914 - 278 -6085 In the event of transmission /reception difficulties, please contact our office. 914 - 278 -6558 2.1c.L� U °. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, . Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 MEMO TO: BRUCE R. FOLEY, R. S. ACTING PUBLIC HEALTH DIP,EC'Ti�R- - °-"-` FROM: WILLIAM HEDGES SR. PUBLIC HEALTH SANITARIAN RE: JONES, RAVINA AND LAKE SHORE ROAD '(T) Patterson VARIANCE TM #25.56 -1 -40 DATE: May 24, 1995 BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S. Acting Public Health Director The variance before the Board of Health address only the fact that the proposed Jones well is less than 100 feet from the existing sewage disposal system to the north (Vozeila. #25.56 -1 -039). The Vozelia sewage disposal system was misrepresented as being in the rear (East) of the residence. The sewage disposal system actually exists in the front of the. ,Vozel_la. residence. „ A,review of the permit issued to Wiseman -and later-to-Jones on the proposed residence bf Lot. #25.56 -1 -40 indicate many deficiencies which would have to be addressed prior to the renewal of the permit. Revision which would be required if the Variance is granted would include, but not be limited to: 1. The maximum slope within the SDS area of 15 %.,.... 2. All restrictive distances wouid.be from the toe of slope of the fill section (if over 2 feet deep) and.not from the edge of the leaching area as presently shown. Additional deep test holes and "perc -test would also be required. 3. Trigallies would not be allowed. The system would need .to be designed with 2 X trenches only and 100% expansion area would also be required.. 4. All wells and SDS would need to be reverified by the design engineer and /or land surveyor. 5. The level of the lake including the high water overflow elevation at the dam would need to be nbted on the plans. This contour would be used to determine the .restrictive distance to the lake. 6. Standard notes and details would need to be updated. 7. Actuate topo would be required, showing existing and proposed elevations. 8. Effective erosion control would need to be designed and become part of the approval. _� r i i t r 'Y. i 1 t" '' 11 '1 "t i ._ ,- , l y 1 L t . Y\ y. ) 1. ( t k I , 1 l , , - . , - '"' � , M J1. 1. f (. r f 5 x 2. yy 1 SLi,.. `• .s. 't ,a t 1 .T t rt, y La. w r , y,.!, y .1 \� t J Y' t't f i 1 7' 4 '1. y,- .V .. l 3 1 ., r.P, T j, i t 1 y 4 1 (. ,:` 9 Impacts of ;drainage from the site would need to be addressed and reviewed as . it affects,:adlacent :propertles' not only during construction but; also, during It, post construction `i w �., a nt 1 i. r f ay , -_ �y i i 4 y s} L 11 . ... Y i. 1 F 1 However Ythe most important question facing the: board at -this timM s whether.a ,i..,•: >.1 variance'should be granted based on`'misrepresenti — by:the previous owner 'of �� �` both parcels ( #25 56 1 39 and, #25 56 -1 40 We�esman) and /or the engineer John i j Prentiss _ "i , ,, , 1 3 s _. � , w , ' a ; t< N� �� b ;N t.t Fy1 a " {{,f } ! �' , �. f t ,yt . ?� )71 .p . i r Jt ti t ML .i l /t. i 1 :. z .1 , 1 t f s >« 1 a 1 * >, - y, fY i - y .,,-.,1i.." 'If the Board agrees with the writer that ,the vari600906-1 uldLA be' granted, - -than .: "' i ` St the lot `i s ° deemed unbui l iabl e and M-r Jones i s `perhaps capable of p'e 1 1 ... ; :'hi s F l losse'snthru a civil action I' y . 1 y } �` n x. r y ,^' _ 1 :. iv,'� try' ! tit !1 '+'9 4 °' t r t ,, -` %' { y ry 1 9" variance does not, however, insure.ythat they 11 1. ° , Grant i n of tpermbtvwi l l nb,- .. eI I :, ri construction ewed Review and`renewal would be based on full review as has been our policy in recent years `� 4t 1 7�z � �? /.' t ,' }� U 1 y f.. ,t xy t ti r �'� '}r 'a , r }- • ,a i . t < 1 l r. if • t Z : t t t { , t 11 t.1.y ..S.t1Y} ..l I F /� w !. ! u 1 r i F, <J 4 vr ,} .. t t .. 1. \ fi 1 t \ \ } � r .�4„ fi I SIT t I- t .: ` 1 . 1� M day 11. x. l.. L 1 {t,. t . y 4- 7 y i , } 1 N.y } t 1 ' \ , 1 ,1ti y .} ,y. f rr 1, �� !) 1 t - ^'., TL I.. ,yi L. b f- r .•.1 ,� ' 7 f t t J, 1. , 'y y1 , { t.l r'1 r V ^,11 1- , L t t i. J I y 1 SL JI e t i t 1 t f„ $ ,' yj 1 ,' 1 ^I ? 4 f t t T a.::. x t l+ q- t t .y 11 X11 t �.N, _ ` H,w- \ T i L. ut' } t *}, y - yr; x. ( 't.. .'L r w } z - e 1 L \ ' t 1 - F \ t t V : �_ y { 4 1 {: y... it -st 'f y 7 ,? i. t f ASS 1, �, '? `f f.: r 1. .' .� -. 1 f t t F, Y - t - y n' K y y ti ... y. .a l t L 1 . t,' �e ' t Y... i ^ , i i 1 ,-� , It •S Fx ( ti .1, € :.. _ - S 1 '' 1 S J .T { it 4, c .ti. 1 a� t ^.., t _ t t.? l t +, ' l� 1 ,. \'I ti 4 V .. r ,. � � 1V't fKI .< 4 L y I T -t C -.... 1 .it' , r.:." i } / Jr r J Y 1 , 1 t.i c 'wl. . f . . ti fy 1. ( ' �' �. FV. t6 I �. t y }i , C p� t 1 w ` y. y ;. 1 L 1 !1 t y �� - t f 1 '1 l '.•t \. .J l l 'l� 1 e y 1 ''✓t , t .t d^ at. 1)1t tl Jtr� t t'1 �. Jt sfit l�. C3 L�,r r t r P r 1 a * } I r'' ', Lir l xF a ., . is . � x, J 7 t r v. ; . irl. ". '( t ' r .� t 4 i `i.l V t 'tit•" ar t` •i- • - t 4 1 t,: t't , r 4 + 1 +. . f 1 U Y ( 1. + l� C ! ' } c 1, r i r t,y , T 141 y 'L I t)1 i t ( t` 1 k y �1 �'t 4 Y t t t 4 1 l l i y 1 ,t 41" 1 p .4 't. I '.t c t,• , t y • r w {V V — N DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services .4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 MEMO T0: BRUCE R. FOLEY,. R.S. ACTING PUBLIC HEALTH DIP,ECJtDR- °- °- ---- -- FROM: WILLIAM HEDGES SP,. PUBLIG HEALTH SANITARIAN .RE: JONES, RAVINA AND LAKE-SHORE ROAD (T) Patterson VARIANCE 'TM #25.56 -1 -40 DATE: May 24, 1995 BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S. Acting Public Health Director ...The variance before the Board of Health address only the fact that the proposed Jones well is less than 100 feet from the existing sewage disposal.system to the north (Vozella #25.56- 1 -;39). The Vozella sewage disposal system was misrepresented as being in the rear (East) of the residence. The sewage disposai. system actually exists in the front of the Vozella residence.:.: y: A review.of the permit issued,to Wiseman.and later to Jones on the proposed res- Bence of Lot- - #25-.56 -1 -40 - i nd i cate many d'efrci enc i es -'wh -i ch wou l d' have' to - be-' addressed prior to the renewal.of the permit. Revision which would be required if the Variance is granted would include, but not be limited to: 1. The maximum slope.within the SDS area of 15 %. 2 All restrictive distances would be from the toe of slope of the fill section (if over 2 feet deep) and not from the edge of the���eaching area as presently shown. Additional deep test holes and•perc test would also be required. 3. Trigallies would not•be allowed. The system would need .to be designed with 2 foot, trenches only and 100% expansion area would also be required.. a. All wells and SDS would need to be reverified by the design engineer and /or land surveyor. 5. The level of the lake including the high water overflow elevation at the dam would need to be noted on the plans. This contour would be used to determine the.restrictive distance to the lake. 6. Standard notes and details would need to be updated. 1. Actuate topo would be required, showing existing and proposed elevations. 8. Effective erosion control would need to be designed and become part of the approval. IIIIIIItIItItIIto : 9 -I mpac s 4of `-,drainage row- t he -'-,,s i t e would need be addressed I it a 'f .'f 6dtsadJ - ac'7e�...n... .. :t . - . -properties .n�6 -tonlY during ,cbn'str,4UIc construction but also p d -uIIr".i ng' post' cohstructioh I most :Jmp&ta t f ac i ng t h e 'board at. i s time is ,w ether, ante shoOTd`be granted based on misrepresentation b y he previous ;owner:b f s '(#25.561 39 :and '425.56-1 Mej §n Prentiss the -Board ,.agrees .with the 'writer ,t 'h be granted, �tthan otiisideembd:unbuildable and -Mr' .Jones -ls,per ha Os-I ecouping h'is's • Iossest,hru".�acivil"action t ' I Granting o ,:thej� ove,men mentioned varlAnce.ao"es not, ,however, Jnsure.--�thAt`:t he ' be-,r IItIttIIIIII.. .. ....... IIIttIII.. ....... . IIII... ....... I�11 IIIIItIIIIIItIIttI � ,, revs ew as has =been our policy i n recent; years , 5 , ` � ,' ' • DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 MEMO TO: BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S. ACTING PUBLIC HEALTH DIP,EP.dR -° - - FROM: WILLIAM HEDGES SR. 'PUBLIC HEALTH SANITARIAN RE:. JONES, RAVINA AND LAKE SHORE ROAD (T) Patterson VARIANCE TM #25.56 -1 -40 DATE:. May 24, 1995 BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S. Acting Public Health Director The variance before the Board of Health address only the fact that the proposed Jones well is less than 100 feet from the existing sewage disposal system to the north (Vozella #25.56- 1 -39). The Vozella sewage disposal system was misrepresented as being in the rear (East) of the residence. The sewage disposal system actually exists in the front of the Vozella residence. A review of the permit issued to Wiseman and later to Jones on the proposed _ . resi deince of Lot. #25- . -56 -; -40• i nd i cate many def i ci enci es whi'd-i woul d have--to-be ' �. addressed prior to the renewal of the permit. Revision which would be required if the Variance is granted would include, but not be limited to:' 1. The maximum slope within the SDS area of 15 %. 2. A11 restrictive distances would be from the toe of slope of the fill section (if over 2 feet deep) and not from the edge of the leaching area as presently shown. Additional deep test holes and perc test would also be required. 3. Trigallies would not be allowed. The system would need.to be designed with 2 foot trenches only and 100% expansion area would also be required.. 4. All wells and SDS would need to be reverified by the design engineer and /or land.surveyor. 5. The level of the lake including the high water overflow elevation at the dam would need to be noted on the plans. This'contour would be used to determine ..the restrictive distance to the lake. 6. Standard notes and details would need to be updated. 7. Actuate topo would be required, showing existing and proposed elevations. 8. Effective erosion control would need to be designed and become part•of the approval. , ;: ! • . F �F_: t . I. n t ^ i .- ,. i ! i . . f r N 'F 1 { 1 'nk t ;a,; r `c �:,, i A`J. a : . .1114 - �t ... � '. . � .. — * - * . y v.. r: e t T.s .. - .. : t. >' - F' r . I . _. .,. , . . , , ___.- .. . - � ' 1 { j f1 • ! - , I. t r 1 r. i at ` i . y ` j _1 4 ' t - f ` A, +• f t A � t f t 1 . a n , 1. c :v f 1 ` � ti � y 4 r S r i,.J , G 2 a ,' -�' ,! t F 1 i { 1 °' i' r� ,a t . F t t . }� t r !,, ti A. \ 1 1 t..� i A F Y ti >... ` ah 1 '1 i , , , � .9 :Impacts . ;.drainage from the site wou d,'need to "' be addressed ::and rev'i ewed as it affects adjacent properties; not only during construction but also during. °post construction `" • 11 x ,, t' i �. a 3 'fin i 3 .a7 t ., r 1 r v. t )l nl Y; 3 , However'the most important question facing - e board at this `'time' "is whether a ., J. t variance should ';be granted based on misrepresentation by'. previous�owner,:of 11. .. , �4 both" .... is ( #25 56 -1 .39 and #25 56 -1 '. Weiesman) and /or the engineer John *� ` k ri Prentiss T a s, , ,, <, , t 1 r r t .l w '� „ ^+ 4 ` i i t c. Y..cJ.. _ „`, 1 r. t f S F 4 a y 4 S 1_ t , t > t t c i '� ;_.`If the Board ag 1, R�:, l °' •� , , r - r I. `; F tees with,the writer: hat he variance shoul5tl not be granted, ,than'','' ;F the l.ot �s, deemed unbuildable and Mr. Jones is perhaps capable 1. of recouO�ng his F•' �. ;losses ,thru a civi 1 action ti ; t 4 F i ` ) r' •! ( .' r - k Granting of the above mentioned variance does',not,.lhowever, irisure.that.theF 1. � construction permit will.be renewed ' Review and renewal would be based 'on '::f "--_, . { review as>=ha's been our policy in. recent years t ` i. 1 .t t w a rvt f t s F^.. . � t.,y t t 6t I. 1 1 a t S ih ` Yi Yt'i he' lt�. Vt: sr' at 5 ' 3 i t F st t )4 t +,l .t ttb �'t n A�, n r. . w �' r+ Y'' +� w t t al$$ C : f t �F � N , 5i 1. tY i f 1 tY.� i 'f ! f 7 1 t 1' h. t t Y•t 14 C } j t 7 't x 1 ,i ): Ai: t I,, '`i,F °iv t' f `� '' ;! t ,.',,',r,*". i , e i 1 1 1,1 ..\ .� 5i Ir p S' ,' t T i ' C . V ,, j t S+ a vi 3 F r r, y_ a a' _ Th 4.� ,{ 1. y 1 (y 1. 1. ' ir .z , ti i r : t +, 4.� !.. t 1. { ! 1- 1 #" t t 1 7{ id•� k .fit \ t.. t.l. . :t. f, . 1 i� . t 1. A.. . 1 h i t i i ' . S A } . . r ,h t y , i % yl C t k } t c t . , { st c, I.. T t Y } . 11 ht 3 h 4�_ , ,� 5 ♦ f \ 4 3 r YN , ' 1 a .. e t .' + a Al v,a ,..I.. r z , ..y } _l ar , t , a ' t ' ; + "i r r H t 1. .. . s7 �.I t +t f - t 1. Se yl 4 i, l,s r 7' y ' r 1 a r.. �i r) it-, F { t r l 1 r a , 4 F la 1 S r 1 1 x .] �. \ 1 1 1� 1 n' 1 I. .. ., •:r a .. _; .. 1 ; C' .. ., r Y , - 1 p 1 1 � S t i 1 .. �.' .. . N , fi h t ISU ... . ' . .r .. , , µ 1 - t. ' PUTNAM COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DIVISION.OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES Date. 17 April 1991 Re: Property of Robert W. Jones Located at Lakeshore Dr. w & Ravina Rd. (T) Patterson Section 46 Block 13 Lot 1.2 Subdivision of Putnam Lake Subdv. Lot # 5806 -8 & Filed Map # Date 5887 -9 Incl. Gentlemen: This letter is to authorize John H. Prentiss a duly licensed professional engineer X or registered architect to apply for a Construction Permit for a separate sewage systemto serve the above noted property in accordance with the standards,Y•:rules 'or regulations as promulgated by the Commissioner of the Putnam County Department of Health, and to sign all necessary papers on my behalf in connection with this matter and to supervise the construction of:: "said system- or"systems in conformity with the provisions of Article 145 or 147, Education Law, the.Public Health Law, and the Putnam'County Sanitar y . Code Countersigned P.E., R.A., # RD9 -Fair St., Carmel, N.Y. 10512 Address 914 - 878 -6170 Telephone truly yours, ed y roperty Owner Address Town Telephone #.4: v. 1d�'!ET iZ,(�3 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 MEMO TO: BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S. .ACTING PUBLIC HEALTH DIP,EC�OR- FROM: WILLIAM HEDGES SR. PUBLIC HEALTH SANITARIAN BRUCE R. FOLEY., R.S. Acting Public - Health • Director RE: JONES, RAVINA AND LAKE SHORE ROAD (T) Patterson VARIANCE TM #25.56 -1 -40 DATE: -May 24,1995 The variance before the Board of Health address only the fact that the proposed Jones well'is less than 100 feet from the existing sewage disposal system to the north (Vozella #2.56- 1 -39). The Vozella sewage disposal system was misrepresented as being in the rear (East) of the residence. The sewage disposal system actually exists in the front of the Vozella residence. A review of the permit issued to Wiseman.and.later to Jones on..the proposed -- residence -of Lot #25:56 -1-40 .ind cate-many'cleficiencies'Which °would h'ave'fo be addressed prior to the renewal of the permit., Revision which would be required, if the Variance is granted would include; but.not be limited to: i. The maximum si.ope within the SDS area of'.15 %.. 2. All restrictive distances would be from the toe of slope of the fi.l1 section (if over 2 feet desp). and not from the,edge of the leaching area as presently shown. Additional deep test holes and perc test would also be required. 3. Trigallie's would not be, allowed. The system would need to be designed with 2 foot trenches only and 100% expansion area would also be required.. 4. All wells and SDS would need to be reverified by the design engineer and /or land surveyor. 5. The level.of the lake including the high water overflow elevation at the dam would need to be noted on the plans. This contour would be used to determine the restrictive. distance to.-the lake. 6. Standard notes and details would need to be updated. Actuate topo would be required, showing existing and proposed elevations. 8. Effective erosion control would need to be designed and become part of the approval. n DEPARTME,`T OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 FAX COVER SHEET BRUCE R. FOLEY. R.S. Acting Public Health t)irector 57 DATE TO: d FROM: Putnam County Health Department' Division of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road. Brewster, New Mork 1009 Number of pages to'be transmitted (including cover sheet). NOTES/MESSAGES'' OUR FAX NUMBER IS 914 -278 -7921 Note to sender: Complete all entries in Fax Log In the event of transmission /reception difficulties, please contact our office. 914 - 278 -6130 r r r Jl / 52 / l J 1 If 1 I J l If I If If / Q \ vry 5 svJJ , \ \ \ fJJO ' 64W \ \ say 60lf\ K +J t AlfEN / I IT / / I J /Jail / / I I tapW f I I 4if I I ! I PA 25.64-1.26 - e6 eJ i 53� ,i I I I I I 1 541 I' 18 I I I I I S i I I i 1 I i _ 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 N s! 1 120 001 1 1 100 cq 60 00 t Tic 00 I e.,2T DRIVE III 1• REVISIONS S ro�J I I I STATE LINE BTB7 pal. •''�o;.� \ \ I I i I .. 32 1 \°A \ n I I I I O o ' \ \ I 6GG1 \ I n < •�i \ \ OQ K/J f0•ll \\ \\ 10338 31 6J 6B f4, j1"/ �. 6XI J!',' i17 6642 a7 62 49 33 lot 31 :A� 4/Al - \ uwF _ rl�J 30 8 - - - - - - — ip 44 e9 f 13 34 S7VJ f T.1C' - "Vf - - - TAv \ • 103'8 -' - - - \ \ e s \I8 6tCO J9 /J \ - - — — — SAV 29 8 IC' I I t6 4e - - -- 6re/ \ 8 \ \ \� , - g g \ 19 \ \ �r.! Iol A2 \ \ \ Jf99 ti Ja7G \ \ \ \ Jm J!l/ \\ nrl 28 - - -- Jvr I \ y 7 1——' - -- ----- vx -- 46 1 i I ,fk 8 J115 27 - - -g 119 12 ,mil+ 39+ \. \ 2T .. Jau -J3t� - - 26 - - - - Jag! \ \ Jl.M JlrO / ay/ °eJ/ • / JAW a40 1!k 1fij Aw / "if - - -- /23 Jltf - - - - - / 14975 / .J.TF P/0 25.64 -I-35 — I - - ` -- - - - -ssr. r �+ s o 42 J6LtrS b.� 44- - c 8 g = - - - —1Al• Jd /1 12 69 147 69 Jr6� 431 411 1 t•N 15 4w �Y R REVISIONS S SPECIAL DISTRICT INFORMATION STATE LINE BTB7 32 1 50 r .tr! j1 f1 62 49 33 lot 31 :A� 4/Al - - - - - - - — ip 44 e9 f 34 S7VJ f T.1C' - - - - TAv • 103'8 -' - - - .l - - — — — SAV IC' I I t6 4e 1 1 g 47 7 mw wm i3 CC 9149 I eiV y 7 1——' - -- ----- vx -- 46 1 i I ,fk 8 I ,mil+ 39+ —� — I - - ` -- - - - -ssr. r �+ s o 42 J6LtrS b.� 44- - c 8 g = - - - —1Al• Jd /1 12 69 147 69 Jr6� 431 411 1 t•N 15 4w �Y R REVISIONS S SPECIAL DISTRICT INFORMATION STATE LINE BTB7 U 11 IN .• -7J RV o� vosoN O od I � PL yd > d• 0 i �•8� 70`� d ZQ A ? 'd d Q ^ /SL OCR 4 �r , � O, Q GP a�.. b _ bD M -f uin rte,. • . lw • '011114 4 d TORON7 o o rtr _g o A . UID OC s Q' OPN�O U cr N ? "-e -nv O A NEjL ? Egg'TER PL AL-TON PL p►� 0 PA' r OSV Od' PQ ~-NI RD w e w Q� .zoo �a .... co . . co PO pP f" Id 0 fm ego Aw- \-0 • • U.S: POSTAL SERVICE M CERTIFICATE OF MAILING .. r a ut °s < Received From: a r r i i� = A. Ptl' +Ei9TI5S P E • - � r � rtl 1K 1�1 8-6170 1 CARMEL, NEW YORK 100-2 c c 9 fib. one Place of ordinary ei 1 eddrarred to: c ^ •;i I i ary p N�. �,`.; N r_• . • y r Ms. A. IotLi �J •VO I �� s Qri West 3`- MAY BE USED FOR ooWSTIC AND INTERNATIONAL'MAIL, DOES 140T PROVIDE I p ` FOR INSURANCE — MSTMASTER I `i PS FORM Q U.S. Government Printing Office: 489.224 Ij g MAY We. 3817 m o m ; 1 U.S POSTAL SERVICE CERTIFICATE OF MAILING Received From:i IUV gr 13'NU 1141, PREN ISS, P.F. R09 FAIR ST 914 - 878$170 I R.IEL. NEW YORK 10:i_ t��•�; e One Plow of ordinary mail add mtsod to: -�, d _ Mr5. Y ihu-? -L— voQ 7-f- ( (a .•„6. •I i (�arE- EersonrNY.g2S'63 j Q MAY BE USED FOR OOM C• AND INTERNATIONAL 'MAIL, DOES 140T PROVIDE a . FOR INSURANCE — P05TMASTEi1 PS FORM ..... , MAY 9M.. 3817 a U.S. Government Printing OffiCb: 489 =224 <� T mp ) • r• n C 75 T m� � ym \• •Ml f h661 a m S . SO %t _ 1111 � y OY.+Ai-23��r} r , 7 C PUTNAM DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH A83-94-19 COMPLAINT OR SERVICE REQUEST RECORD TOWN PATTERSON DATE 9 1 94 REFERRED TO .AKEN BY BH TELEPHONE CALL IN PE ON CONFIDENTIAL REQUEST FROM John Petrillo IN ADDRESS ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH: Home Sewage Rodents Refuse• Public wat i Migrant Camp Other COMPLAINT OR REQUEST Well and property stocked for possible, cons_t. on vacant land on Lakeshore and Ravina Drive, Patterson. Neiahbor to north has septic system approx. 65' from proposed well. ACTION TAKEN BY G FINDINGS - . -FOLLO —U.P.- .INSPECTION -(s.).. _ . }AR£ BFI INGS_ 10 -T PRO" ABA DATE 77 O 'r if Gam- ESTIMATED TOTAL MAN HOURS SPENT -1 I , i ' ,s 4,�nI N t T;U Rww IOat ' V x r : 3�';-em COMM �ell� t�11111a� t1aeM aassasie vNls W{TfUMSM rNta WSTSUMINr SHOULD M U{ae ear aalW /afa 41i T THIS INDfNR1RF, made the 3. �' day d: March": . ometeen hundred and. -,eiehty eight zTT : <SB7'WF�7t1 hIAHI' WSRf" .re id a t'14rnuepn;Street, S a s tr ten island, � + , ` near cmNr'S and rr��+tt>�RtNE A`:`:TCF FS. hie wipe. j333t residing s ,� party ofthe first part and - ATUTAYI :TIC T. l['�!(�!"t'J9VIC T RtxlT 1130S`�V1Qb1t vtlx r -erYp�o-c�acYnn�e��ro ^�Yt�n�cpri'e�rip�i'c�+tn�ce� ear :t,�eyri�c�e�re at ; ;. r� 11',HolidnJ.;Street,.Pnwlinct, `Ipw,Ylilr u.ry + ,r t I , :!} ,/,,tr/t11v \' t .. .: J }. .. �{ t •i.. st, - `, 4 WRNFSSEiI, that t . parer' ed the Ent psrt,:III eatsideration of ten, dollars" raid atber .ahial>ae me�fdyeadoa 1 \ { paid by the Arty of the secondd pert does herehy.grant and release unto the party of the r0000d part, tes hdt� 4. ✓� , ' :t , or sueoerison twd as igm of the party of the teao d part tore.eR, f. �� ` ALL this eeream' lot ee or etp fmp . ^ ' D Pi pircd-of land with the'Dui1N ttiid roteseenn lbereoa eetrud, etttlsae` t ° ° }' lysn� sad Odn� is'eLa Town of •Patterson, . County of Putnam, Stbte of ,New < York known :and denignated An Lots Ntnrtbera ,5803, :580A, 59n5, .5806, i ,h 51107, :. 511QR,., S9A7, ,SORB, ;`SD09r ;58n0,;SA ^1 `land SR�7. on i: certain mttp of property` knrn�rt tas. "Fihhth gap; of :T.utnam ,take Putnam County. 'end filed in the Putnan County lt•lerk's A ice on J ie; r J v 4 r J ;, r4 � •t'` ' r r s K�i 1 f F ' TOGE ?HER wlUrall ngtit; title arnd.�nterest d any of theYOrti -of the first -. rt in and to any slrkAS and ^a, roads abutting lase above described premises to the`eente'r Imes thereof; TOGC'f1tE yr hh -.the a rtrnanees � t r tt ■rid all'.he state ind rlghts',of the party of ehe first pan to and to eOid premises 'TO HAVE AND TO HOLD`ehe pieinises heren':gianted unto the party of the seeand part., the heir :or sueeason tied isstgns of the party of the second " ri,torever r :l AND the party of the first j) � i`. l e. pa y' pan covenanu that the pony;oG.tlle fintpart, has not done orauRered anytfins .: vyherebyy'thesaid , prMrllses Kaye been,encumbered :in any way whatever except as aforesaid. ' !. 1 AND the partr'ol phi firirpsn, In eompbance with SMlon' IJ of the Lien' Law,'covenant that the prep of the first part; will receive the i sideration for.thit conveyance a id•will,hold :the right; to receive such eomid- k erition is a trust fund to br applied firsi'for the purpose of prying the Coat of the Im rovement and will rapply - 4 lhe;same'tirst to the tgyment, of tht cost of the improvelnent,before using any pert of the total of the same tot i} i1 i 3 rtl a any other purpose: fl The word perry ".shall be construed as at it parties ";whenever the arise of this indenture so reaulrea.• t k r` i a IN Wt'iNESS Wf{IJIFAF, the Arty of the first4pattt has duly executed this died :the'day ind year rat ahaiit t} Ra i i n;, Tar iim"Ck Ott Cki 1a'15MAN M't'INS.µIa xi'1 y S, eOSt P,lk. u Kj! ' L :7Sa P- g6 8 Standard N.Y. 11,74 Form 8002- 2.73— /arpain end We Deed with Covenant spaimt Grantors Acts—Individual or Corporalion•I.inale thee CONSULT YOUR LAWYER BEFORE SIGNING THIS INSTRUMENT -THIS INSTRUMENT SHOULD BE USED BY LAWYEI day of MARCH nineteen hundred and SEVENTY -EIGH THIS INDENTURE, mad e the Y BETWEEN jat9 GQL-OHAMMER an GERTRUDE GOLOHAMMER, his wife, .both residing RalAna Road, Patterson, Putnam County, New York party of the first DIANENISRU eesidingratT19 Queens Street, . Staten Island; New York, 12- %" party of the second part, WITNESSETH, that the party of the, first part, in consideration of Ten Dollars and other valuable a sideration paid by the party of the second part, does hereby grant and release unto the party of the apcc part, the heirs or successors and assigns of the party of the second pan forever. ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon erected; s ate, lying and being in the Town 'of Patterson, County of Putnam, State of New York known and designated as Lots Numbers 5803, 5804, 5805, 5806, 5807, 5808,• 5887, 5888, 5889, 5890, 5891 and 5892, on a certain map of property known as "Eighth Map of Putnam Lake, Putnam County and filed,in the Putnam County.Cotlnty.Clerk's-Office on March 20, 1931; file No. 149 G, together with all of the rights and `subject to all-of. the •restrictions .._......._ recorded in prior deeds to the above premises.` BEING the same premises conveyed to the Party of the First Part by Two Deeds recorded in the office of the Clerk of the County of Putnam in Liber,No. 523 of Conveyances. at Page No. 78 and Libet 523 of Conveyance at, 'Page No.. 16. Said premises herein described fronting an:Rabina Road 'and Lakeshore Drive, Putnam Lake, Patterson,..Putnam County, as shown and designated on the foregoing map. TOGETHER with all right, title and interest, it any, of the party of the first part of, in and to any stn and roads abutting the abov"escribed premises to the center lines thereof; TOGETHER "with the app tcnances and all the estate and rights of the party of the tint pan its and to said premises; TO HAVE A TO HOLD the premises herein granted unto the party of the second pan. the heirs or successors and an of tho party of the second part forever. AND the party of the first part covenants that the party of the first part has not done or suffered anyt ('I lwhcreby the said premises have been, encumbered in any way whatever, except as aforesaid. . AND the party of the first part, in compliance with Section 13 of the Lien Law, covenants that the par �:• • f the first part will receive the consideration for this conveyance and will hold the right to receive such ..''• e4cration as a trust fund to be, applied first for the purpose of paying the cost of the improvement anc apply, the same first to the payment of the cost of the improvement before using nny pan of the total c some for any other purpose. The word "parry" shall be construed as It it read "parties" whenever the scrive of this indenture to req IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the party of the first pan has duly executed this deed the day and year first i written, _._. _. - -IN PRESENCE.OF: ... CtiCJCK ll{,t Ci�� I SZ�sz . . marry G d ammer r •ht:�T- ,;....G PSG:- f" <;.. 11EEil >SG Il�ui bbd er ruude tioic arrmeer A On the t (.I day of March 1978 , before me personally came Harry Goldhammer and Gertrude Goldhammer !,to me known to be the individuals described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they executed the same. •'',i (� Rotary PI! icy S�,• at Now Yortf county 'dart. Clcd In 11-v. t:a. clk.s orT104 ` \C M Commiclien Expires Mares $0, }g7 STAT/'OVN& YOax. COUNTY OF w On the day of 19 , before mi personally came to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that he resides at No. that he is the of the corporation de"lic in and which executed the foregoing instrument; that hl knows the seat of said corporation; that the seat affixes to said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was st affixed by order of the board of directors of said corpora tion, and that he signed h name thereto by like order On the , of 19 , before am personally cae to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument. and acknowledged that executed the -arm STATS OF Ntiw'YDRK. COUNTY OF Yt On the day of 19 , before 'me personally came to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and ' say that . he resides at o. that he is the of the corporation desen'bed in and which executed the foregoing instrument; that he- knows the seal of said corporation; that the seal affixed to said instrument is such corporate seal; that It was so: affixed by order of the board of directors of said corpora- tion, and that he signed h name thereto by hike order.. TU (i t' ' STANDARD FORM M 01111 YORK so1R0 01 TITLI UMORRY/RITIR1 Vatdbwrd by . nine can title Insurance company NEW YORK DIVISION A Mt bff of Thf Cb"FIN n,M Iarnran CaNpv "ln Raadd at Riga wt of Agates. Tide Imaruao C-WW R87VRN I3Y WAIL M. DIANE WISEMAN ' 19 Queens._Stre-et Staten Island, New York sip me.. ' Recorded In the Clark's Office of g the County of Putnam on the l.(A..day of W aAe.Aj at.l.....hours andl3T..minutes..(,.M . o. In Book No ....�750 L4 ..........of...I�.atO L.) on page and compared. g zs.` ff.`s• - /J d Clerk y . F1 rt w m.oerl N.T. a.T. U.ys a00r ,ap.r-Im.YU..L .YfwrM+ " Crr.Aw � f i V e' aowk U(10 h u►wa atw06 uawo nta.ffa*au►� W mitts MUOM n W w tree ST u►vwm acv. .;, 11 r cb T1LLS,Q9Dl1Y'RJRE, made the 7�day of 'December . ninete�n hundred and eighty -four / BETWEEN S DI-ANE7W�{ SE., -, residing at 19 Queens Street, taten Island, g �New_Yo031'4 C/ I 1 pity of the firm part, and ?�4l+RY' residing at RFD 12, Route 35, nmavalk Road, 1 Ra�onah, New York 10536 i t 1' party o(:the second put. �j1 V nWLSSETK that the party of the first pan. in consideration of . (569,500.00) l SIXTY NINE THOUSAND. FIVEA IUNDRED ---------------- ------- - - ---- dollar. a 1 kwfut money of the United Stites, paw by the party of the second part. don hereby grant and release unto the party of the second part. the heirs or sucormors and assigns of the parry of the second part forever. i ALL that eerwn plot. piece�or pied of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon erected, situate, 1 ing and being in the Town of Patterson, County of Putnam and State of f i Nyew York consisting of Lots Nos. 5803, 5804, and,.580.5,,.and_Lots ties. t, 58901, 5891and..589.2.as shown on a cert;ain-map entitled, "Eighth Hap ! of'Putnan Lake" filed in the Putnam County Clerk's Office on i 1., !:arch 30, 19]1 'ad Hap Ho. 'li9t:'whicti lots when taken together as' one parcel are more'particularly' bounded and described as followst t BEGINNING at a point on the easterly side of Ravina Road where the same is intersected'by the division line between Lots i Nos. 5892 and 5893 as shown on said map; running thence along said division line and continuing along the division line between Lots 5802 and '5003 on said map, South 880 43' 20" East 176.4)8 feet to the .weste_rly side of Shore .Dr.ive,;..running thence along the scone ' r, f South to 16'' 40" East 60.00 fecv to a point; running thence along ' the division line between Lots 5905 and 5806 and continuing along the 5 division.line between Lots 5839 and 5890 as shown on said map, North 880 43' 20" best 180.38 feet to the easterly side of Ravina Road, aforesaid; running thence alonq the same North 50 23' 37" Fast 60.18 feet according to said man (60.15 feet by actual measurement) } I to the point and place of BF,GINNItiG. SUBJECT to mining and mineral rights, if any, in the heirs. of Philip Philinse. SUBJECT to covenants and restrictions in Liber 200 co 124, repeated in Liber 286 cp 316. .i C; ' I .V 836 007 TOGETHER with an right, tide and interest, if any, of the party of the Art part In and to any streets and Aoads abutting the above described premises to the center lines thereof, LToGowA with the appurtenances and all the estate and rights of the party of the first part in and to said premises, TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the premises herein granted unto the party of the second part, the heirs or stswessm and assign of the party of the second put I AND the pasty of the first part covenants that the party of the first part has not done or suffered anything whereby the said premises have been incumbered in any way whatever, except as-aforessid. AND the party of the first part, in compliance with Section 13 of the Lien Law, covenants that the party of the first part will receive the consideration for this conveyance and will hold the fight to receivw such consid• eration as a trust fund to be applied first for the purpose of paying the cost of the improvement and will apply the same first to the payment of the cost of the improvement before using any part of the'total of the some for any other purpose. The word "party" shall be construed as If it read "parties" whenever the sense of this indenture so requires. IN WrrKM WHEREOF, the party of the first part hai duly executed this deed the day and you firm abovi written. In ratmea or 16 at*" W IR jk vt I Log T 881 ar..ft d N.I.a.T.L•. VMS VON t IN Id a adt deed, JULMI ewra =i G. INC.. ufWYLqS uS "[a8 alit �lm'e seta —!M. ar 1'my. • dryN .beer . CONSULT YOUR LAWYER KFORE SIGNING THIS INSTRUMENT -THIS INSTRUMENT SHOULD SE USED SY NLY THIS I NDENTURE, made the SI day of 1r wdty , nineteen hundred and 93 BETWM Catherine A. Jones, residing at 163 Rombout Road, Poughkeepsie, New York 12603 patty of the first part, and husband and wife William A. Jones and Barbara J. Jones, /residing at Sunset Drive, Patterson, NY 12563 party of the second part, WITNESSETH, that the party of the fire[ part, in consideration of Ten Dollars and other`valuable consideration paid by the party of the second part, does hereby giant and release unto the party of the second patt,•ihe heirs or successors and assigns of the party of the second part forever, ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon erected, situate, lying and being in thetrown of Patterson, County of Putnam, State of New York known and described as lots #5806, #5807, #5808, 05887, #5868 & #5889, on a certain map of property known as "Eighth Map of Putnam Lake, Putnam County ", and filed in Putnam County Clerk's.Office on March 20, 1931 as file number 149G. TOGETHER with all right, title and interest, if any, of the part • of the first part in and to any streets and roads abutting the above described premises to the center lines thereof; TOGETHER with the appurtenances and all the estate and rights of the party of the first part in and to said premises; TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the premises herein granted unto the party of the second part, the heirs or successors and assigns of the party of the second part forever. AND the party. of the first part covenants that the party of the first part has not done or suffered anything whereby the plaid premises have been encumbered in any way whatever, except as aforesaid. AND the party of the first Fart, in compliance with Section 13 of the Lien Law, covenants that the party of the first part will receive the consideration for this conveyance and will hold the right to receive such consideration as a trust fund to be applied first for the purpose of paying the cost of the improvement and will apply the same first to the payment of the cost of the improvement before using any part of the total of the same for any other purpose. The word "party" shall be construed as if it read "parties" whenever the sense of this indenture so requires. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the party of the first part hap duly executed this deed the day and year first above written. -7 /J _ n IN PREVN"^CE OF: yyl prin Y" 1 S� DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 Barbara & William Jones RD #4 Box 113 Sunset Drive Patterson, NY 12563 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Jones: JOHN KARELL Jr.. --P.E. M.S: • ••• Public Health Director September 2, 1994 Re: Construction permit P -22 -87 Jones, Lakeshore Drive W & Revina Road Putnam Lake (T) Patterson Lots 5806 -5808 and 5887 -5889 TM #25.56 -1 -40. The above mentioned parcel was inspected by this Department on September 1, 1994. At that time, the north east property corner and a stake indicating a.proposed well location were noted. Based on information received by this Department, the proposed well location is approximately 45 feet from the existing sewage disposal system to the north. The location of the existing.sewage disposal system directly across Revina to the west, southwest of the proposed well location is also reported to be less than the required 100' minimur6 Based on the above information and the field inspection of September 1, 1994 the construction permit, P -22 -87 is hereby suspended. Please contact your engineer, John Prentiss, P. E. to revise the proposed well location and possibly the house and sewage disposal system location to meet all present code requirements. If you have any questions please contact this office at your earliest convenience. Very truly yours, William Hedges Sr. Public Health Sanitarian WH /]p c c I H--z hj 04- w tr6t X aCL4 � S i /?Ou i n1 A Pi t /go roo ' a c-� I j 4, u e 6 ee-r� (a- rf l((X)4 (;, i (�g % kOLi o\e- •Q 202 W- Zoo /98 X 19(e 11-5�A -/t v/ 04./6 104- / 92 Putnam County Department of Health - Division of Environmental Health Services APPROVED TO PLACE FILL ONLY In accordanc6 with applicable Rules and Regulations of the Putnam County Health Department. (�Il�t� �EG'ftarl The engineer /architect shall perfc •Pumphourr �rrmfo,c'ed tvancn /a /ob. ".1:'. a final percolation test in the fi Slops oway Tian pump. Proud¢ .' ye, W e-1 after stabtliyati.on. foolrng when' re�„urd. +- =1 maslreszo( 3. :Impervious fill, clay barrier, sh; see Debi! A Note B >f be a dense ciayey soil . with littI, - I. - - , I ,_i - _ • - - - - -no sewage absorption capacity. i d a/s,de car,rq or dr,/( Ao% /o be d' er dram. H. Jhc ns a rn� I (25 m1n. Wv /! Catrn /O be a m,nurK bedrock rs na Scrae,reJ wrf,i - F'Pe � iVoie,fiyAl :aq/'' j !a° ! :d - !2' or k+ ear V/ colts•ratit.ri6m NnrF.s .O /-ro Bas.. Required No;e,s 1. All trees with'i.n 10 F-et of propns, ' 4 is SSDS shall be removed. }•, ; 2. `$SDS to be inspected by the design C[men( 9rou1 architect and the Putnam County Ile: __� i r tJ Department after construction 'and 1 jk , to backfilL. ' APT #DAp7ER 3. 'No trucks, machinery, building mar, nor excavated earth shall be allow, �+U Q YYPICAL SECTION in the sewage disposal area. Cons lir _ 7, "� of SSDS to be in accordance yi.th t' DRILLED '-WELL • III I plans, any revisions thereto; and SO8MfRS/6LE co NMECilom,..- 1:i G%Cf _ .. ._ _ rules and- regulations of the'permi" ;1. issuing, pnvernmental. agencl. W ELL;t I�ETAI S PL .nimam well, yi.el,d, -o.f S '5_ Ah Yrclds% less than gpm wi Li l,c Lmni 'to reported the Putnam County Depa IlD. of licalth: Notes L. Required when Fill Proposed 'Fill must be allowed to stabilize 60 to 90 flays following placement he inspected by the. Putnam County / of Ilealth for acceptance, prior to .ation of sewage system. Date of p " must be reported to Putnam County of Ilealth. ' 2. 'Run of batik fill shall b,-- suitable .sewage absorption, be free of fine or other unsuitable material and s . have an in- place pe•reblation rate least equal to that. in the natural after the required stabilization I The engineer /architect shall perfc •Pumphourr �rrmfo,c'ed tvancn /a /ob. ".1:'. a final percolation test in the fi Slops oway Tian pump. Proud¢ .' ye, W e-1 after stabtliyati.on. foolrng when' re�„urd. +- =1 maslreszo( 3. :Impervious fill, clay barrier, sh; see Debi! A Note B >f be a dense ciayey soil . with littI, - I. - - , I ,_i - _ • - - - - -no sewage absorption capacity. i d a/s,de car,rq or dr,/( Ao% /o be d' er dram. H. Jhc ns a rn� I (25 m1n. Wv /! Catrn /O be a m,nurK bedrock rs na Scrae,reJ wrf,i - F'Pe � iVoie,fiyAl :aq/'' j !a° ! :d - !2' or k+ ear V/ 4 is C[men( 9rou1 __� Fj Pt ,l ,o /r�•R oc `� APT #DAp7ER ,rr^ YYPICAL SECTION _ 7, "� DRILLED '-WELL • F.. I�• ."TYPICAL UMP SO8MfRS/6LE co NMECilom,..- 1:i G%Cf _ .. ._ _ - - ,, W ELL;t I�ETAI S Ah / y6mo 0" IN Imo' �a�s;p 194y DI Iq de holoo 1"A House o&,ye/ 6J`3 / /�I'1 �► Lit /i�S p Iyi •' lea /�.. Sor �p G O 7 G4I'#1;4 ROW 46000 3cq, j � / | --- | �9-- � | ------ | - } '\ 1 ---- �� "= .e.�- - - --- - --- Y- y`�.�., _tee. -_ _ __ - �..��� � �:..N....._ ..�. .�-- �.�..�� ...__�_...._.�. ....._ D iA �. • / o is . Nova, o «s d•� G /r/�s of k*iislv, Hoase twovw. e- tiv A &000v'.i, G. So,•� `o,.." -f Ra #ja. %Je,�& 1 7aw- C=�- - 4-80"45-71, t N 4 P/0 251481 1r9 l I 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 I lr, I I? I I I g 11' • 1 1 I I I 1 r a tft,14 hrJl 1 I I I I 1 I I I 1 J o 3 lry I / l l l `72� I 1 _�Y 32 1 ` 1701 I l � l l I I • I /•u1 a /,rAt�lM,l I I I I ` a q _ 7� � IYAI IIJ II I e ta'v 'Wly � $ li � frtv � Aw Yx) • ua� ,zar c 13 lau 1 I I I • 7 I lxnl I y -.1 Q' • 8 IV- 412 1 FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY NOT TO RE USED FOR CONVEYANCES roam n i JAMES W. SEWALL COMPANY 147 CENTER STREET• OLD TOWN, MAINE somc '1il '1771 � I I I T11 I g _: I 1 I• I I I I 1 m I 1 .,, a Ixn ua+ Iq u.l ,all �1._.l 11 1 I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I II I I l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 4 1 169 I� 18 1 I I 1671 1 1 I I � 6fi � � 11 1165 1 Il 11, I' 1 I" 1 I I 1 I I I I I I 1 1• 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I 1 I I I l 1 xxl xxll 14'1 Iv. Y'rl�)It IYAI rMl,mrl ra•1 J.wl �Ir'a'IrAr ,m•1rM Ir'i0l xAlxx xlrlxxl 1 un un ,m xw .a 11 w Ixal mw Ivl 1 Im un a.x I + +Iq� I lynll r r/v'rlu 1 ,n.l Jm I r/x1 vY rJA l >//A1 r+w I rxi I r/o 1 rxJ rill yq J I Ax I rxrl rxl rM I YA I � l I Yv YAI I 1 �I I I I 1 155,1 1 1 1561 I I 1571 I�I g' I 1 I I 18 I I I I I I I I I Y I I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 nn q•.x Irow I I I' I I ww DRIVE' w111O UK n- uK .wn uK aw, unl NA+IIn LIK aauu In UK 1 161 1 It _�Y 32 1 Q - i r,.•, ssl w s 'Aa J Iwx JI Z. F ` 8 44 ••Jt An • - -8 + ` a q _ 11 r. >1 JJ Im.n nv a _ _ _ 8 1111 ,,,!lu 49 I e ta'v 'Wly � $ li � frtv � Aw • ua� ,zar c 13 lau — � � ? _ — 101.11 I{• _ ' � fqY T,, AA 29 8 Y 36 rAJ b Jnr 47 4 `Ig � m Ail lulu Y fa/ g lax Ax - - - -l- --- 20 rm ___ - �2T - rav - 2 - I.- JJW . )22 i ,w i Aln V 1117 v: ,4r / • .. -- R u - i raa 2 o g "It ', u _ Iu n ' rMO uv re rxi IJI I��+ 6 P/025.64:1.35 w111O UK n- uK .wn uK aw, unl NA+IIn LIK aauu In UK AV 6 CARL F. LODES County Attorney PHILIP M. CAMPBELL Risk Manager M E M 0 R A N D U M• DEPARTMENT' OF LAW TO: Bruce Foley Acting Public Health Director P CFR UM: John arinody Deputy Count Attorney DATE: May 1, 1996 RE: Jones v. Foley Annexed is a copy of the Court's decision in the above referenced Article 78 proceeding. Briefly, the Court has denied the Jones' application for a "specific waiver hearing "; denied.Jones' application to apply the 1987 Putnam County Board of Health Rules and Regulations; and dismissed their petition. THOMAS F. PURCELL Deputy County Attorney JOHN J. CARMODY Deputy County Attorney LILLIAN DiLORENZO Deputy County Attorney KATHLEEN KING Sr. Legal Assistant Please give me a call if you have any questions regarding the Court's decision. JD:jw Enc. P.S. Thank you for the information regarding lead levels. 40 GLENEIDA AVENUE CARMEL, NEW YORK 10512 Tel. (914) 225-3641 Ext. 260 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW. YORK COUNTY.OF PUTNAM --------------------------------------- X In the Matter of the Application of BARBARA JONES and WILLIAM JONES, Petitioners, DECISION & ORDER - against Index No. 1923/95 BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S., as Acting Public Health Director of the Putnam County Department of'Health, Respondent. --------------------------------= -- - - -X BRAATZ, A.J.S.C. This is a proceeding brought pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules for an order annulling a determination by the Respondent denying the Petitioners' application for a specific waiver and revoking Petitioners' construction permit on . the grounds that said determination was arbitrary and capricious; remanding said matter back to the Respondent and the Putnam County Board of Health for a "special waiver hearing" pursuant to 10 N.Y.C.,R.R. Part 75 and the Putnam County Sanitary Code, Article III, and for other and further relief. Respondent has filed a verified Answer dated February 2, 1996,, to which the Petitioners have responded with a Reply Affirmation. The -.;.. Respondent has also filed a Supplemental Affirmation dated March 4, 1996. After carefully reviewing the papers submitted, the-file maintained by the County Clerk, and the applicable law, the application-is disposed.of as follows: FACTUAL BACKGROUND Petitioners are owners in fee of premises at Lakeshore Drive West and Ravina Road in the Town of Patterson, New York, consisting of a. residential vacant lot of .251 acres in size (Tax J Map 46, Block 13, Lot 1.2). On or about August 4, 1986, the Putnam County Health Department received an initial application for-.-e -a "Construction Permit for Sewage and Disposal System" in the name of Diane Wiseman, the then owner of said premises. On or about April 6, 1987, the permit application and related materials were reviewed by the Putnam County Health Department and subsequently approved. On that same date, a construction permit for a sewage disposal system and individual well was issued to Diane Wiseman. At the time.the original permit was issued, certified plans presented to the Health Department indicated the separation distance between the proposed well site on the premises owned by Diane Wiseman and the sewage disposal system on the property to the north was 100 feet. Said plans were prepared by the engineer for the project, John Prentiss, who had been hired by Diane Wiseman. Mr. Prentiss' plans included the location of the well on the southern most part of the premises which --was furthest away from the sewage disposal system -on the property to the north. (Verified Petition, Exhibit B). On or about March 3, 1988, the permit was renewed, r' without revisions, to Diane Wiseman. On September 19, 1988, the permit was transferred from Diane Wiseman to Robert W. Jones, the Petitioners' son, who purchased. said property. The construction permit was renewed on a.periodic basis by Robert W. Jones. On or about December 7, 1992, the permit was again renewed and transferred from Robert W. Jones to the Petitioners. It is undisputed by both sides of this proceeding that each time said permit was renewed the Health Department believed the separation 2 distance was. 100 feet, as required by State and Local regulations. On or about September 1, 1994, the Health Department made a field inspection of the premises after being contacted by the adjoining property owners. Petitioners were applying for renewal of the construction permit 'and had survey documents drawn. According to the Petitioners, the survey documents erroneously noted the well on their property to the northernmost side instead of the southern side which was shown on the original drawings submitted to the Department of Health. It was determined at that time that the separation distance between the proposed well location and the sewage disposal system to the north of the premises was 45 feet. This determination was later revised to be 85 feet. It was therefore concluded that the initial 100 foot measurement.had been incorrect. On September 2, 1994 the Health Department suspended Petitioners' permit. Petitioners were advised o.f . thi.s_de,c,isio.n .'b_y._.Letter__ dated.._ Sept .ember..2,..._199.4,...(Ve.z.if Answer,. Exhibit D). By said letter, Petitioners were advised to "contact their engineer to revise the proposed well location and possibly the house and sewage disposal system to meet all present Code requirements." On December 12, 1994, a second field inspection was conducted by the Health Department,. which indicated that the location of the Petitioners' well could not be any farther than 85 feet from the adjoining septic system. On or about December 14, 1994, Petitioners' application for a, construction permit was denied. By letter dated April 11,, 1995, Petitioners requested a 3 L variance from the Putnam County Board of Health. Petitioners applied pursuant' Article III of the Putnam County Sanitary Code for a specific waiver of the 100 foot requirement as applied to their particular property. (Verified Petition, Exhibit F; Verified Answer, Exhibit E). Petitioners' application for a variance was entertained at one variance workshop on May 15, 1995 and at least two Board of Health meetings on June 19, 1995 and August 21, 1995. At the August 21, 1995 meeting the Respondent denied the Petitioners' construction permit. Petitioners were advised in writing of said decision by letter from Respondent dated August 29, 1995 (Verified Answer, Exhibit.F). DISCUSSION Petitioners contend that the Respondent had no rational basis for his decision as he did not follow the. requirements of his own regulations in allowing a hearing before the Board of Health or giving' 'an "opinion as` to' the "hearth " hazard created' by the specif is waiver requested. Petitioners ask this Court to thereby remand this matter back to the Respondent for a "special waiver hearing." The Respondent asserts that there is no duty on the part of the Respondent and the Board of Health to hold a "specific waiver hearing" or any other type of hearing. The Court has researched the law on this issue and agrees with the Respondent. Specifically, the Putnam County Sanitary Code ( "Local Code ") provides for a review process by the Board of Health as set forth in Article III, §3(b), guided by the provisions of 10 N.Y.C.R.R. Part 75, §75.6 ( "State Code ") . Specifically, Section 4 .: P 75.6(b) of the State Code provides: "The State Commissioner of Health, his designated representative or the designated full -time city, county, or part- county health department official, may, on " written application, grant a specific waiver from a provision of this Part, where such waiver is consistent with the general purposes and intent of.this Part." (Emphasis added). The Local Code, Section 3(b) provides: "Any application for a permit to construct an individual sewage treatment system which is denied by the Department because it cannot meet the requirements, may be reviewed by the Putnam County Board of Health, who upon written application may issue a specific waiver from this Article, in accordance with Section 75.6 of 10 N.Y.C.R.R. Part 75, where such waiver is consistent with the general purpose and intent of this Article, upon proof of hardship with the concurrence of the Director, if it is his opinion that a health hazard will not be created by issuance of such specific waiver." (Emphasis added). The Court agrees with Respondent that this Court is • - • •- •"wit -h "out -- statutory authority to- g-ranrt- -t-he.- relief requested •i . e : , • a ' special waiver hearing, in that neither the State Code, nor the Local Code, provide for such a hearing. Section 75.6(b) of the State Code provides the decision to:grant a specific waiver is to be based upon written application which was done by Petitioners on April 11, 1995. Similarly, the Local Code provides that a waiver may be issued upon written application and requires concurrence of the Director before any waiver can be granted. It is noteworthy that the Petitioners themselves acknowledge in their Reply Affirmation that there is no specific procedure recognized by the Putnam County Sanitary Code as a "special waiver hearing." They 5 then change the original relief requested in their Order to Show Cause by stating that the "gist of the instant proceeding is to obtain an order of this Court reversing -the decision of the Respondent below.'.' (Reply Affirmation, P.2). Petitioners further argue that the Respondent should have considered the 1987 Putnam County Department of Health Rules and Regulations standards and not the present guidelines in deciding whether or not to renew the Petitioners' permit. Petitioners state that they should have been judged by the 1987 standards "since that is when the Errors were made by John Prentiss as the engineer for the then applicant, Diane Wiseman, as well as the Putnam County Department of Health in not noting the obvious errors on the submissions." (Verified Petition, p.7). Petitioners argue that their property i.s the last vacant lot on the road, and "none of the other properties on Ravina Road meet the present Putnam County D-ep- artm-ent—of -Health standards. "(Verified -Petition, 'p-.7) . The Petitioners, however, provide no case law whatsoever in support of their argument that the 1987 standards should have been considered r' by the Respondent. The Court therefore sees no legal reason to hold otherwise, especially since the Petitioners have brought the instant proceeding in 1996. Petitioners further argue that the Respondent's determination was arbitrary and capricious as the only reason provided by the Respondent in denying the Petitioners' application is that the construction plans were not in compliance with the applicable State and Local rules and regulations. 2 The standards for individual water supply and individual sewage disposal systems `in Putnam County are governed by 10 N.Y.C.R.R. Part 75 (State Code) and the Putnam County Sanitary Code,. Article III, (Local Code). Section 75.4(a) of the State Code states that "individual water supply systems shall be designed, constructed; and maintained in accordance with the standards of the State Commissioner of Health as set forth in Appendix 5 -B of this title." Appendix 5 -B provides that: "Wells shall be constructed... at a distance, from potential sources of pollution on the owners property or on adjoining properties, which is not less than that stated in Table 3 of this bulletin." Table 3 lists the suggested "minimum" distances between water and sewerage units, thus allowing for consideration of variables in determining safe distances between a well and sewage disposal system. However, the Court agrees with Respondent that other_ provisions-. of ... _the... State ..Code.. indicate. that._ the s.e " suggest.ed'.'.,....._......_._. _....... distances represent minimum distances. Specifically, Section 75.2 of the State Code states: "This part shall apply through the entire State of New York and shall represent minimum requirements for individual water supply and for individual sewage treatment systems." (Emphasis added). 10-N.Y.C.R.R. Part 75, Appendix 5 -B, Table 3, provides specific figures on the suggested minimum distances between water and sewage units. Table 3 indicates a requirement of a 100 feet separation distance from a sub - surface disposal field to a well. As to the Local statutory - regulations, Section III of the 0 Putnam County.Sanitary Code Appendix 75 -A also requires a minimum distance of 100. feet from a well to absorption fields. It is conceded by both sides that both the State Code and the Local Code (Putnam Sanitary Code) require that wells be construed a minimum of 100 feet from existing sewage disposal systems. However, Petitioners argue that the Respondents' adherence without justification to the 100 foot provision of both the State Rules and Regulations and the Putnam County' Sanitary Code. was without rational basis, and was arbitrary, and.capricious. Section 75.6 2(b) of the State Code provides that: "The State Commissioner of Health, his designated representative ... may on written application grant a specific waiver from a provision of this Part where such waiver is consistent with the general purpose and intent of this Part." Petitioners contend that the Respondent should have "identified the health hazard which would have been created by issuing a specific waiver" and in so failing rendered his decision irrational. (Verified Petition, p.3). Petitioners support their argument of arbitrariness and capriciousness by citing Respondents'.r letter to them of August 15, 1995, stating: "Based upon the above mentioned review and supporting information, the plans as submitted are not in compliance with Part 75 of Chapter II Administrative Rules and Regulations and Article III of the Putnam County Sanitary Code." Petitioners also cite the minutes of the Putnam County Board of Health meeting of August 21, 1995, in support of their argument that the Respondent failed to consider "the facts and A circumstances" of their particular case, which states: "Schoolman made motion, since Foley is not granting a variance in this case and is not going to entertain any arguments to grant the variance, that that Board of Health no longer decide this issue and let all parties meet with Foley at their own time and place ... Motion carried." (Verified Petition, Exhibit K). Respondent argues that adherence to the State and Local Codes in no way renders his decision arbitrary and capricious. He further states that he has not improperly or arbitrarily invoked the Code provisions in this case, and that his decision to deny the special waiver was consistent with the intent to "protect against possible health hazards created by placing a well too close to a sewage disposal system." (Supplemental Affirmation, p.3). Respondent thus maintains that his reliance 'on statutory requirements cannot be said to be "irrational." It is well settled that local officials have discretion in considering applications for variances and their determination will be sustained if it has a rational basis and is supported by substantial evidence in the record. Segal v. Zoning Board of,., Appeals of the Town of Bethel, et. al., 191 A.D.2d 873(3d Dept.1993); Lund v. Town Board of the Town of Phillipstown, 162 A.D.2d 798(3d Dept.1990); Conley v. Town of Brookhaven Zoning Board of Appeals, 40 N.Y.2d 309(1976). In making its determination, the Court finds that the Petitioners have failed to submit any evidence whatsoever, such as an engineer's report, to substantiate their claim that the Respondent's "denial of the special waiver was arbitrary and 9 capricious. Indeed, Petitioners' themselves acknowledge that "they are not engineering experts," yet they "conclude that "to the extent there is any potential health hazard caused by placing a well on the Petitioners' property as proposed, the potential hazard can be avoided by various engineering alternatives (i.e. well casing, chlorination, violet rays)." (Reply Affirmation, P.6.) However, the Petitioners provide absolutely no documentation to the Court in support of these conclusory statements. Additionally, the Petitioners have failed to provide this Court with any of the reports or evidence which Petitioners contend the Respondent failed to consider in making his determination to deny the specific waiver. CONCLUSION The Petitioners ask this Court to review and annul the Respondent's determination to deny Petitioners a specific waiver and °-" to remand- --th- is--•matter- back to -the. Putnam County Board-of_.- Health -.for. .._ a "special waiver hearing." The Petitioners, themselves, however, acknowledge in their Reply Affirmation that there is no statutory .r' authority providing for a special waiver hearing, and instead ask the Court to reverse the Respondent's determination on the ground that it was arbitrary, capricious, and irrational. Petitioners' application to apply the 1987 Putnam County Board of Health Rules and Regulations is denied on the grounds that the Petitioners have failed to cite any case law or statutory authority in support of this request. Respondent contends that he denied Petitioners' 10 application based on public health concerns and pursuant to 10 N.Y.C.R.R. Part 75 and Article III of the Putnam County Sanitary Code; but Petitioners contend that the record provides no rational basis for this determination. The Court finds that the Respondent's letter of August 29, 1995, states that his determination was based on an adherence to the State and Local Codes as well as soil analysis and other factors. Said, adherence to State and Local . regulations in and of itself cannot be deemed to be arbitrary and capricious. Additionally, the Petitioners have failed to submit any documentary evidence to justify their assertion of arbitrariness and capriciousness by the Respondent. Based on the foregoing, the instant Petition is hereby dismissed. Petitioners' application for other and further relief is denied. This shall constitute the decision and order of this Court. �. DATED: Carmel, New York April3O; 1996 Edward I. Sumber, P.C. Attorney for Petitioners 16A Fair Street Carmel, New'York 10512 -1391 Putnam County Department of Law Attorneys for Respondent County Office Building Two County Center Carmel, New York 10512 11 CARL F. LODES County Attorney PHILIP M. CAMPBELL Risk Manager DEPARTMENT OF LAW March 4, 1996 THOMAS F. PURCELL Deputy County Attorney JOHN J. CARMODY Deputy County Attorney LILLIAN DiLORENZO Deputy County Attorney KATHLEEN KING Sr. Legal Assistant Bruce Foley, R.S. Acting Public Health Director 4 Geneva Road Terravest Corporate Park Route 312 Brewster, New York 10509 RE: BARBARA JONES and WILLIAM JONES v. BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S., as Acting Public Health Director of the Putnam County, Department of Health Index No. 1923/95 Dear Mr. Foley: Enclosed please find the SUPPLEMENTAL AFFIRMATION with regard to the above referenced matter. Very tr�rly. yours J hn Carmody, eputy County A JC:jw Enc. 40 GLENEIDA AVENUE CARMEL, NEW YORK 10512 Tel. (914) 225 - 3641 Ext. 260 i o I ; _'.. SUPREME, COURT ..OF THE_ .STATE O.F ...NEW . YORK-.... , ...._._.... I COUNTY OF PUTNAM ----------------------------------- - - - - -X BARBARA JONES and WILLIAM JONES, INDEX NO. 1923/95 �i Petitioners, �I SUPPLEMENTAL i - against - AFFIRMATION II BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S., as Acting Public Assigned'to: Health Director of the Putnam;County Hon. William Braatz j; Department of Health, Respondent. ----------------------------------- - - - - -X JOHN J. CARMODY, an attorney duly admitted to practice law in the Courts of this State, hereby affirms under penalties of perjury: 1. I am a Deputy County Attorney with the Putnam County Department of Law, attorney of record for the Respondent BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S., as Acting Public Health Director of the Putnam County i Department of Health ( hereinafter referred to as "DIRECTOR FOLEY ") . I ks such I'am fully familiar with the facts and circumstances of this matter. l i 2. I submit this Supplemental Affirmation in response to Petitioners' Reply Affirmation, dated February 27, 1996 ( "Reply Aff. "). i I 3. Although essentially no new arguments are presented by Petitioners, certain points raised in their reply papers are erroneous and clarification is required. 4. First, by paragraph "2" of the Reply Affirmation, Petitioners indicate that by this action they are requesting an Order requiring - DIRECTOR FOLEY to issue a specific waiver pursuant to § 75.6 of 10 N.Y.C.R.R. Part 75. It is noted that this is not the relief sought in the Order to Show Cause, wherein Petitioners specifically request an Order reviewing the Respondent's decision, annulling the denial of the specific waiver and construction permit and remanding this matter back to the Respondent for a "special waiver hearing ". The distinction between these two (2) types of relief is not one of form over substance as Petitioners argue (See, iReply Aff., 1 3). Where Petitioners seek an Order remanding this j matter back for a "specific waiver hearing" the nature of the proceeding is one of mandamus, i.e. Petitioners seek performance of a nondiscretionary ministerial duty. (See, CPLR § 7803(1).) As has been demonstrated, there is no duty on the part of Respondent and /or the Board of Health to hold a "specific waiver hearing ", or any other type of hearing. The applicable statutes, i.e. Putnam County Sanitary Code, Art. III, § 3(b) and 10 NYCRR § 75.6, simply provide for a review of Petitioners' written application for a waiver by the Putnam County Board of Health. (emphasis added.) I There is no statutory right to a hearing. (See, Verified Answer, QQ 9 -20.) 5. Second, in arguing that the Board of Health is empowered to review its Director's decision to deny a variance, Petitioners have misinterpreted the clear wording of the statutes. (See, Reply Aff., 11 3 and 7.) i 2 I j _ _6 . ... _Section __3_.(b) of..the__Putnam County _Sanitary.. Code provides' ii that the denial of an application for permit by the Department [of !Health] may be reviewed by the Board of Health, who upon written I I; application may issue a specific waiver upon proof of hardship and with the concurrence of the Director. It is not the decision of the Director to grant or deny a waiver application that is subject ii j to review by the Board. Rather, it is the Petitioners' written application for a specific waiver that may be reviewed by 'the ,� Board. (See, Verified Answer, Exh. "A ".) 7. Third, Petitioners' argument that Director Foley's �! decision to deny the variance had no rational basis is without �( merit. (See, Reply Aff., 15 4 -6.) 8. The August 29, 1995 letter from Director Foley to Petitioners clearly delineates the Department's reasons for denying t Petitioners' request for a specific waiver. As indicated, one of ' the reasons- -for the - denial was' 'the fact' that the plans' as II submitted by Petitioners, were not in compliance with the applicable State and Local Codes. (See, Verified Answer, Exh. 9. Petitioner's have not argued, nor can it be argued, that 'i the referenced code provisions do not apply to them or that the Department has improperly or arbitrarily invoked the code i� provisions in this case. Further, inherent In the code provisions requiring minimum separation distances is the intent to protect against possible health hazards created by placing a well to close 3 It ,; a wag isposa - - -sys em. -- (- is again no e a e i loners - ii were given ample opportunity to present evidence of hardship or I! absence of health 'hazard.) (See, Affidavit of Bruce R. Foley, if sworn to February 2, 1996, and annexed to the Verified Answer ( "Foley Af f . ") , % 2.) 10. Director Foley acted rationally and well within his !i authority in denying the requested variance for the reasons stated in his August 29, 1995 letter to Petitioners. It cannot be said i! that his reliance on lawful statutory requirements was i "irrational ". 11. Fourth, Respondent takes issue with the statements !� contained in q 5 of the Reply Affirmation, including those made at I� footnote number 2. Specifically, Petitioners contend, without 'I offering any proof whatsoever, that (1) the adjoining property ;i owner's ( Vozzella ) well is "located no more than 50 feet from their SDS "; (2) that the well on the Vozzellas' property is "apparently" not contaminated; (3). that the drawing annexed as Exhibit "B" to the Reply Affirmation and as Exhibit "C" to the Order to Show Cause was prepared by John Prentiss. [NOTE: The Order to Show Cause does not attribute the drawing to John Prentiss, but indicates that it was part of Respondent's presentation at the August 21, 1995 meeting of the Board.); (4) that John Prentiss "presumed" that the Vozzella's SDS system was located in the rear of their property; (5) that John Prentiss did not know that the Vozzella's SDS was located in front of the property; and (6) that no records were 4 , - - -. - -. -- - - - -.- �- available- -.to.-Mr.--Prentiss--when - he -,. --- prepared - .a-nd -. submitted -- -.- Hpetitioners' plans. All of these assertions are made without evidentiary proof in the form of documentation and /or affidavit and should not be !I considered' by the' Court. Moreover, the argument presented with regard to the Vozzella's property is irrelevant to the .issue at l hand, as is Petitioners' assertion that they do not have any actual I remedies available to them by virtue of Mr'..Prentiss retirement. ;(See, Reply Aff., footnote 3.) is 'i 12. Finally, in response to Petitioners' assertion that '!Respondent has in two (2) other cases granted applications similar !i to Petitioners', it is noted that Director Foley assumed his position on the Board in September 1994. (See, Reply Aff., n 6 and Foley Aff. Iff 1.) Both of those decisions were rendered prior to I; �Ithat time and, as previously argued, involved separation distances i .11 of 95 and 93 -feet, respectively. (Foley Aff. q 26.) Further, as previously demonstrated, there were many more instances where I' specific waivers were denied by the Board for failing to meet ;minimum separation distance requirements. (See, Foley Aff., Q 26.) 13. Based upon the foregoing, it is respectfully requested i that Petitioner's Order to Show Cause be dismissed in its entirety. :Dated:- Carmel, New York j March 4, 1996 5 CARL F. LODES County Attorney PHILIP M. CAMPBELL Risk Manager THOMAS F. PURCELL Deputy 'County Attorney LILLIAN DiLORENZO Deputy County Attorney DEPARTMENT OF LAW KATHLEEN KING Sr. Legal Assistant February 2, 1996 Bruce Foley, R..S. Acting Public Health Director 4 Geneva Road Terravest Corporate Park Route 312 Brewster, New York 10509 RE:-BARBARA JONES and WILLIAM JONES v. BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S., as Acting Public Health Director of the Putnam County Department of Health Index No. 1923/95 Dear Mr. Foley: Enclosed please find the VERIFIED ANSWER with regard to the above referenced matter. _.. ._. :_ _.... V t Y you -rs.0...:, hn Carmody, Deputy County Attorney JC:jw Enc. 40 GLENEIDA AVENUE - CARMEL, NEW YORK 10512 (914) 225 3641 Ext. 260 P -1 c0umv ,OF PUTNAM BARBARA JONES and.WILLIAM .ONES;' Petitioners, - against. - RRUCE' R'. FOLEY, R.S ., as Acting. Public, Health,Director of the Putnam County Department of Health, Respondent. SUPPLEMENTAL AFFIRMATION PUMM COUNTY DEPARIMIT OF IM Attorneys for - Respondent Office and Post Office Address County Office' Building 40 ,Gl.eneida Avenue Carmel, New Fork 10512 (8,1.41 225 -3641 To Attorneys) for Service of a copy of the; witi?ri is hereby admitted, Dated, Attorney (s) for Sir;- Please take notice'. o Notice of EritYy that the within is a (certified) true copy ,of a duly entered in the office .of the clerk: of, the within named court on 19 Notice Hof Settlement that an order of which the within is a -true copy will be presented for settlement to thd'HON. one of the judges of the within named court, at on 19 at M. Dabed, Yours etc. PUMM COUNTY 1 AR OF LAW Attorneys for To Office and Post Office Address Attorney { s) for County Office Building Two County Center Carmel, New York 10512 Y,.. CF Y D , SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE _ - �1EW COUNTY OF PUTNAM ----------------------------------------- X BARBARA JONES and WILLIAM JONES Petitioners, against' - BRUCE R.-FOLEY, R.S., as Acting Public Health Director of the Putnam,County Department of Health, a1 m; INDEX'NO. 192395 VERIFIED ANSWER WITH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Respondent. -------------------=--------------- - - - - -X Respondent, BRUCE R. FOLEY, as Acting Public Health Director of the Putnam County Department of Health, by his attorneys, THE PUTNAM COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF LAW, for his answer to the Verified Petition herein, alleges as follows: 1. Denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations contained in 1[ 1 of the Verified Petition. 2'.- - - Admits t'he allegations' contained- ' in 9[ 2 of the Verified Petition and affirmatively states that Bruce R. Foley has been acting Director since September 1994. 3. Denies the allegations contained in 1 3 of the Verified Petition, except .admits that the Putnam County Department of Health, on or about April 6,' 1987, did approve a Construction Permit for Sewage Disposal System in relation'to.property located at Lake Shore Drive West and Ravina Road in the Town of Patterson, New York (Tax Map 46, Block 13,; Lot 1.2). Thereafter, said permit was renewed.to Robert W. Jones on September 9, 1988 and again to William Jones and Barbara Jones on December 7, 1992. On or about i �i ii I� __._ _...I_�... $.eptember_2,_..1994_, _._the Putnam: County Department of ,Health - -suspended ,f said permit. 4. Denies the allegations contained in Q 4 of the Verified Petition, except affirmatively states that 10 NYCRR Part 75 sets the standards for individual water supply and individual sewage treatment systems, including the required 100 foot separation distance between wells and sewage disposal systems. The Department is also guided by the Putnam County Sanitary Code, Article III, §3(b). Petitioner's were advised of the Department's intention to suspend the permit by letter dated September 2, 1994. Information received by the Department up to that time indicated that Petitioners' proposed well location was approximately 45 feet from an existing sewage disposal system to the north. At the present time, the exact distance is not known. However, Petitioners concede in their papers that the proposed well site is less than the required minimum 100 feet from an_ existing: sewage- treatment system, to wit: 85 feet. 5. Denies the allegations contained in J[ 5 of the Verified Petition, except affirmatively states that petitioners were advised of the Department's decision to revoke said permit by letter dated August 29, 1995. 6. Denies the allegations contained in 1 6 of the Verified Petition. 7. Denies the allegations contained in 1 7 of the Verified Petition, but affirmatively states that the decision of the Q. e Director is final. M oreover,. pursuant- to. Putnam- County ..Sanitation - Code, Article III, §3(b), Petitioners are not entitled to a hearing i on their written application for a review of the Department's I (� denial of their permit application. 8. Denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations contained in n 8 of the Verified 1i Petition. FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 9. As demonstrated below, there is no statutory authority for the granting of such relief. 10. Petitioners have alleged that that they were denied a fair hearing on their application for a specific waiver of the 100 foot requirement. (Verified, Petition, 1[1[ 5 and 6.) By this Article 78 proceeding, Petitioner's seek, inter alia, a special waiver hearing before- the Board "of'-H'ealtli-Pursuant -to_ 10 ' NYCRR Part* 75. 1.1. The Putnam County Sanitation Code provides for a review process by the Board of Health when an application for a permit to construct an individual sewage treatment system (or water supply system, i.e. well) is denied because it does not meet specified requirements. This process is set forth in Article III, §3, subdivision (b) of the Putnam County Sanitary Code ( "Local Code "), and is guided by the provisions of 10 NYCRR Part 75, §75.6 ( "State 3 ..Code ") .- - -.- . (Copies - of.- - the- -- -re- levant -- sections of these annexed hereto as Exhibits A and B respectively.) P Codes - - are '- - 12. Section 75.6(b) of the State Code provides, inter alia,: The State Commissioner of Health, his designated representative or the designated full -time city, county or part-county. health department official, may on written application grant a specific waiver from a provision of this Part, where such waiver is consistent with the general purposes and intent of this Part. 13. The State Code does not make mention of local boards of health; and it clearly designates the health department official as the authority for granting waivers. 14. The Local Code does not deviate from the State standard, although it does allow for review by the Board of Health. Section 3(b) thereof - provides: Any application for a permit to construct an individual sewage treatment system which is denied by the Department ` because it cannot meet the requirements, may be reviewed -by the' Putnam County Board of -Health, who, upon. written application may issue a specific waiver from a provision of this Article, in accordance with Section 75.6 of 10 NYCRR Part 75, where such waiver is consistent with the general purpose and intent of this Article, upon proof of hardship and with the concurrence of the Director, if it is his opinion that a health hazard will not be created by issuance of such specific waiver. 15. The review by the Board of Health is designed to assist the Director in making a decision. However, the Local Code clearly requires the concurrence of the Director before any waiver can be granted. This concurrence requirement is consistent with the State Code. 4 v �i 16. Accordingly, . the,___.f nal._,_,decis.ion.. ,.with .,regard--. to_. the. granting of waivers lies exclusively in the hands of the Director. it !' 17. Further, neither the State Code nor the Local Code ii affords Petitioners with the right to a hearing on their li application for a waiver. i, �I 18. Section 75.6(b) of the State Code clearly provides the decision to grant a specific waiver is to be based upon "written application ". There is no mention of a right to a hearing on the application. I 19. Likewise, §3(b) of the Local Code provides that a waiver � I ; may be issued "upon written application" which "may be renewed by i the Putnam County Board of Health ". Again, there is no mention of a right to a hearing on such application. 20. Based on the foregoing, Petitioners' assertion that they were denied-,a -fair--hearing--is without-'f ouadation- iri 'that they Were... ! never entitled to one. Moreover, this Court is without authority ' �! to grant the relief requested, i.e. a "special waiver hearing" in . I that neither the State Code, nor the Local Code provides for such (� a hearing. Petitioners are entitled to a review of their written application which as demonstrated below, they have already been 1! afforded. 5 II. e SECOND.-AFFIRMATIVE-DEFENSE - - - - -' - - 21. The Director's decision not to approve the requested I variance was neither arbitrary nor capricious, but was firmly based upon statutory authority and established precedent. 22. Furthermore, despite allegations to the contrary, Petitioners were afforded an opportunity to be heard before the Board of Health with respect to their application for a variance. 23. Standards for individual water supply and individual sewage disposal systems in Putnam County are governed by 10 NYCRR Part 75 ( "State Code ") and the Putnam County Sanitary Code ( "Local Code "). 24. As evidenced by the accompanying Affidavit of Respondent, BRUCE R. FOLEY, sworn to February 2, 1996 ( "Foley Aff. "), Mr. Foley duly adhered to all applicable separation distance standards provided - for in both the State and Local -Codes in rendering his ; decision to deny the requested variance. 25. Section 75.4 of the State Code, which references Appendix 5 -B thereof, speaks to "suggested" minimum distances between water and sewage units, thus allowing for consideration of variables in determining the safe distance between a well and a sewage disposal system. (See, Exh. "G -111.) 26. However, other provisions of the State Code indicate that these "suggested" distances represent minimum requirements. In defining the applicability and scope of Part 75, §75.2 specifically 6 I I I �j !� states that: "This Part shall _through . the entire, ,State of.•..,_ ii New York and shall represent minimum requirements for individual i water supply and for individual sewage treatment systems." (Emphasis added.) (See, Exh. 11G-111.) ii. 27. 10 NYCRR Part 75, Appendix 5 -B, Table 3, provides tispecific figures on the suggested minimum distances between water and sewage units. Clearly indicated therein is a separation distance of 100 feet from a subsurface disposal field to a well. (See, Exh. "G -3 ".) 28. Moreover, under the heading "Suggested Specifications For Water Well Construction to Serve Small Water Supplies ", the State Code specifically states that,the well shall be constructed at a distance.... which is not less than that stated in Table 3, (emphasis added). (See, Exh. "G -4 "). 29. In rendering decisions relating to the placement of wells in light of existing sewage disposal systems, the Department of Health has also, historically been guided by the provisions of Appendix 75 -A of the State Guide pursuant to §3 of the Putnam County Sanitary Code. As per Appendix 75 -A, a minimum distance of 100 feet from a well to absorption fields is required. (See, Foley Aff. 9 24 and Exhibit "H" ) 30. The above ref erenced'statutory provisions clearly mandate a minimum separation distance'of 100 feet between a proposed well 7! °' ° V ' u s It _location.._and . an -existing sewage "disposal system..___ Director Foley I s- - .. . I �I adherence to this standard is in no way arbitrary or capricious. ! 31. Further, in denying the Petitioners' application for a variance, Director Foley's decision was in accordance with established precedent of the Health Department. (See, Foley Aff., i IT 25 and 26.) i. 32. Finally though not entitled to a hearing under the statute, Petitioners were afforded an opportunity to present evidence before the Board in support of there application for a +i variance on three separate occasions. At each of these occasions, iitheir attorney was present and lengthy discussions were held. It I I was only after a third meeting, on August 21, 1995, that Director i ;} Foley denied Petitioners application for the reasons stated in his �I i letter to Petitioners dated August 29, 1995. (See, Foley Aff., �[�[ 20 and 21 and Exh. 'T ".) 33-:- Based upon "the "foregoing, `it `is "submitted' that Director' Foley's decision to deny Petitioners' request for a variance is well founded in statutory authority and precedent, and should not be disturbed by this Court. �I 8; i .WHEREFORE,. it is -- -respectf -u1 ly. requested -that - the Petition -be denied and this special proceeding dismissed in its entirety. IDated: Carmel, New York. February 2, 1996 Of counsel; John Carmody Deputy County Attorney Yours etc., Carl F. Lodes County Attorney Putnam County Department of Law Attorneys for Respondent 40 Gleneida Avenue Carmel, New York 10512 9 ............ .. .... ..._. _ IV SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF-NEW-YORK -- COUNTY OF PUTNAM --------------- . -------------------------- X BARBARA JONES and WILLIAM JONES Petitioners, - against - BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S., as Acting Public Health Director of the Putnam County Department of Health, Respondent. ----------------------------------- - - - - -X t i INDEX NO. 192395 AFFIDAVIT BRUCE R. FOLEY, being duly sworn, deposes and says.: 1. I am the Acting Public Health Director of the Putnam County Department of Health ( "Health Department "). I have operated in such capacity since September 1994. As such, and based upon the file maintained by the Health Department, I am fully familiar with the facts asserted herein. 2. I understand that the action herein, Petitioners, BARBARA .. _ ,.._ ......._..._.._ . ...... _ .. - ... _ . _ .._ ...._..._....... JONES and WILLIAM JONES, seek a review of my decision to deny their request for a specific waiver from the requirements of 10 NYCRR 1 Part 75 ( "State Code ") and Appendix 75 -A and the Putnam County Sanitary Code ( "Local Code ") relative to a Construction Permit for a well and sewage disposal system on certain real property located at Lakeshore Drive West and Ravina Road in the Town of Patterson, New York (Tax Map 46, Block 13, Lot 1.2) (the "Premises "). 3. It is my further understanding the Petitioners also seek an Order remanding this matter for "a special waiver hearing" before myself and the Board of Health. i i ..:.. FACTS I 4. On or about August 4, 1986, the Health Department received an initial application for a "Construction Permit For Sewage Disposal System" in connection with the Premises. This application was submitted by John H. Prentiss, P.E. in the name of i Diane Wiseman, the then owner of the Premises. (See, Exhibit "C" annexed to'the Verified Answer.) 5. Thereafter, the Health Department requested and received certain revisions relating to the design of the proposed construction on the Premises, including the precise locations of the well and sewage disposal systems both on and adjacent to the Premises. 6. On or about April 6, 1987, the permit application and related materials were reviewed by John.Karell, P.E., Director, Putnam County Health•Department, and okayed for approval. On that same date a construction permit for a sewage disposal system and individual well was issued to Diane Wiseman (hereinafter the "Permit "). By its own terms, the Permit was set to expire in one (1) year. '(See, Exhibit "C ".) 7. At the time the original Permit was issued, certified plans that were presented to the Health Department indicated that the separation distance between the proposed well site on the Premises and the sewage disposal system on the property to the 2 a . north -o€ the -. Premises was 100 feet- as '-required,- by - the--State and Local Codes. 8. On or about March 3, 1988, the Permit was renewed, 'without revisions, to Diane Wiseman. Thereafter, on September 19, 1988, the Permit was transferred from Diane Wiseman to Robert W. Jones. 9. On or about June 3, 1991, the Permit was again renewed in the name of Robert Jones. j; 10. On or about December 7, 1992, the Permit was again ;; renewed and transferred from Robert Jones to Petitioners BARBARA JONES and WILLIAM JONES. 11. On each occasion when the Permit was renewed, the Health i j Department relied upon the aforementioned representation that the relevant separation distance was 100 feet. 12. On or about September 1, 1994, the property corners of the Premises were staked by a surveyor, who also staked the proposed well location. At that time, the adjoining property owner contacted the Health Department expressing concerns over the proposed location of the Petitioners' well in relation to the adjoining property owner's existing sewage disposal system. In response, on or about September 1, 1994, the Health Department made a field inspection of the Premises. 13. It was determined at that time that contrary to initial submissions, the separation distance between the proposed well 3 G . . # e 0 0 location--and the _sewage ._disposal_ system to the north of. the. - Premises was less than the required distance of 100 feet. 14. On that basis, on or about September 2, 1994,.the Health Department suspended the Petitioners' Permit.. Petitioners' were advised of this decision by letter dated September 2, 1994, a copy of which is annexed to the Verified Answer as Exhibit "D ". 15. The purpose of suspending the Permit, as opposed to immediately revoking it, was to give Petitioners an opportunity to submit evidence of compliance with Code requirements and /or make whatever revisions in their plans as may necessary to ensure Code ; compliance. 16. It is noted that the report on the field inspection by i the Health Department initially indicated that the distance•from i the adjoining sewage disposal system to the proposed well site was .4.5. feet.. . Shortly thereafter it was discovered that this determination was based upon unapproved plans and a misplacement of' the proposed well site. The correct measurement from the reported location of the adjoining property owner's sewage disposal system to the corrected well location on Petitioners' Premises was found to be approximately 85 feet; still less than the required 100 feet. 17. On December 12, 1994, a second field inspection was i conducted by William Hedges, Senior Public Health Sanitarian for the Health Department. At that time, based on the reported locations of the adjoining property owner's well and sewage i 4 D disposal system, -.-it was determined -that the- -Petitioners' proposed,* well location could not be any further than 85 feet from the adjoining septic system. 18. Based upon that determination, on or about December 14, 1994, Petitioners'. were advised that their application for a construction permit was denied. 19. By letter dated April 11, 1995, John Prentiss, P.E., advised the Health Department that Petitioners were formally requesting a variance on the Premises seeking permission to fconstruct a water well that would be less than the required 100 foot separation distance from the existing sewage disposal system ' on the adjoining property to the north. (A copy of this letter is annexed to the Verified Answer as Exhibit "E ".) I 20. Petitioners' application for a variance was entertained at three-(3) Board of Health meetings, on June 19, 1995, July 17, 1995, and August 21, 1995. Petitioners, together with their attorney, were present at all three (3) meetings. Lengthy discussions were held at each of the meetings and Petitioner's were i given every opportunity to come forward with evidence in support of their variance request. 21. At the August 21, 1995 meeting, pursuant to my authority under the Putnam County Sanitary Code, Art. III, §3(b), I made the decision to deny petitioners' variance request and revoke the Permit for the reasons stated in my letter to Petitioners, dated 5 11 II II li Ii- August - 29, - 199:5-;-- a_-copy-of - whch-i•s annexed to- -the. Verified--Answer--- - - II I as Exhibit "F ". II 22. Specifically, my decision was based upon a review of all II required applications, soil analysis and other information required by the Health Department, together with the information that came is to light in September 1994 regarding the discrepancy in the I 1 nr-ati nn of i-h= cvi ci -inn cccanno wo +cm eli y- i^*lns +^ the nor +-h e%f 4-he I Premises. It was uncontested by Petitioners that the separation 1! distance between this existing sewage disposal system and their Ij proposed well location was considerably less than the required 100 feet. iI ij i; 23. Both the State Code, at 10 NYCRR Part 75, and the Local' Code (Putnam County Sanitary 'Code), at Article III, .§3, require that wells be constructed a minimum of 100 feet from existing '1 sewage disposal systems. Specifically, 10 NYCRR Part 75, Appendix 5 -B, provides that wells "shall be constructed... at a distance, from potential sources of pollution on the owner's property or on ad-ioinina properties, which is not less than that stated in Table 3 of this bulletin." Table 3 lists the suggested minimum distances between water and sewerage units. Of relevance here is the suggested separation distance of 100 feet between a well and a subsurface disposal field. As indicated, the aforementioned i section of Appendix 5 -B relating-to well construction states that the separation distance should be no less than indicated in Table i 6 I I -3. -(Copies-of the referenced- pages of`'Appendix 5 =B are annexed to the Verified Answer as Exhibits G -3 and G -4.) 24. Furthermore, 10 NYCRR Part 75, Appendix 75 -A, the provisions of which are adopted by the Health Department pursuant to Article III, §3 of the Sanitary Code,-also require a minimum separation distance of 100 feet from a well to a sewage absorption field. (A copy of the referenced sections of Appendix 75 -A is annexed to the Verified Answer as Exhibit "H ".) 25. It is my opinion as Director that the aforementioned minimum separation distances are required to ensure safe water supplies to individual residences. Any distance less than the required 100 feet can potentially create a public health hazard. Of further concern in the present case is the fact that we are dealing with adjoining properties. Petitioners have proposed placing their well in a location which is considerably less than the required separation distance from the adjoining property owners' sewage disposal system. In so doing, not only do Petitioners risk potential contamination of their own water supply, but they place any future occupants of the Premises at risk- - 1 possibly without their knowledge or knowing, content. 26. In rendering my decision to deny Petitioners' request for a variance, not only did I rely on statutory authority, but I adhered to a substantial number of precedents dating back to 1987. Annexed to the Verified Answer as Exhibit "I" are copies of minutes from several Board of Health meetings at which approximately 7i I , i �' twent six 26 similar re uests- for- variances. •were - considered- -f -rom 1:I October 20, 1986 to February 10, 1995. Of those twenty -six (26) i! requests, only five 5 were approved.. Of the five 5 that were i; q � Y ( ) PP ( ) j� approved, only three (3) dealt specifically with requests for variances from the Code provisions requiring a minimum separation distance of 100 feet. In two (2) of those instances the separation distances involved were 95 feet and 93 feet, respectively. (See, Exhibits I -1 and I -15.) In the third instance, the proposed well location was 75 feet from the sewage disposal system, but 110 feet from the adjacent property. In all other instances when similar I j variances were sought, the requests were denied for failing to meet i the 100 foot minimum separation distance requirement. (See, Exhibits I -2 (82 ft. - denied, 63 ft. - denied, 45 ft. - denied, 80 ft. to adjacent property - denied); I -4 (70 ft. - denied, 70 ft. /90 ift. to adjacent property - denied, 65 ft. - denied); I -5 (within fI 100 ft. - denied, 40 ft. - denied, 80 ft. - denied); I -6 (60 ft. - 'i denied), and I -9 (84 ft. - denied, 70 ft. /90 ft. off site i; denied).) 1 e , e . - -27 . - Based on -the above,- I- respect -fully submit -to the Court that my decision to deny the Petitioners' request for a variance was well- founded in statutory authority and precedent, and-was in no way arbitrary or capricious. RUCE R. L Y Sworn to, before met- this �"� day of -- zX�-�v c�,C,� 199 L J// No r P is i JOHN CARMODY Notary Public, State of New York No. 41- 4967940 Qualified in Queens County Commission Expires June 11,ry9_.Ip_ M -5- h. The issuance of any approval or certification pursuant to the provisions of- this Code shall not be construed as a guarantee by the Director or the Department or any employee or agent that 'the system has been properly constructed or will function satisfactorily, nor shall it in any way restrict the actions or powers of the Director in the enforcement of any law or regulation. Section 3. Design and Construction of Sewage Treatment Systems a) No system for the subsurface treatment of sewage shall hereafter be approved unless it is designed and constructed in accordance with the following: 1. 10 NYCRR Part 75 and Appendix 75 -A 2. "Program Review and Policies for Subsurface Sewage Treatment and. Water Supply Facilities for Single Family Residences" as published by the Director. b) Any. application for a permit to construct. an individual sewage treatment system which is denied by the Department because it cannot meet the requirements, may be reviewed by the Putnam County Board of Health, who upon written application may issue a specific waiver from a provision of this Article, in accordance with Section 75.6 of 10 NYCRR Part 75, where such waiver is consistent with the general purpose and intent of this Article, upon proof of hardship and with the concurrence of the Director, if it is. his opinion that a health hazard will not be created by issuance of such specific waiver. I -5- h. The issuance of any approval or certification pursuant to the provisions of- this Code shall not be construed as a guarantee by the Director or the Department or any employee or agent that 'the system has been properly constructed or will function satisfactorily, nor shall it in any way restrict the actions or powers of the Director in the enforcement of any law or regulation. Section 3. Design and Construction of Sewage Treatment Systems a) No system for the subsurface treatment of sewage shall hereafter be approved unless it is designed and constructed in accordance with the following: 1. 10 NYCRR Part 75 and Appendix 75 -A 2. "Program Review and Policies for Subsurface Sewage Treatment and. Water Supply Facilities for Single Family Residences" as published by the Director. b) Any. application for a permit to construct. an individual sewage treatment system which is denied by the Department because it cannot meet the requirements, may be reviewed by the Putnam County Board of Health, who upon written application may issue a specific waiver from a provision of this Article, in accordance with Section 75.6 of 10 NYCRR Part 75, where such waiver is consistent with the general purpose and intent of this Article, upon proof of hardship and with the concurrence of the Director, if it is. his opinion that a health hazard will not be created by issuance of such specific waiver. s § 75.6 TITLE 10 HEALTH 75.6 waivers; general, specific and local. (a) General waiver. (1) The State Commissioner of Health may on written application suppoirteRd" y- documentation grant a general waiver from a provision of this Part, subject to ap- propriate conditions, where such waiver Is consistent with the general purpose and intent of this Part, to a full -time city, county or. part-county health department. (2) Such waiver shall Include the effective date, the time period, if any, for which the waiver is granted, the requirement(s) being waived and any other limiting con- ditions such as types of systems, local conditions or geographical. areas where the waiver can be used. (b) Specific waiver. The State Commissioner of Health, his designated representa- tive or the designated full time city, _county or part- county health department official, may on written application grant a specific waiver from a provision of this Part, where such waiver is consistent h the general purpose and Intent of this Part. The applicant receiving such wal2r must a advised in writing if the design or conditions approved do not meet State standards and the potential consequences of such deviations. Systems with a surface discharge are prohibited and are not eligible for a waiver. (c) Local waiver. (1) The State Commissioner of Health or his designated repre• sentative may on written application from a municipality, in areas where a city, county or part - county health department does not exist, grant a local waiver to allow the use of an alternative -type sewage treatment Qystem as shown In Appendix 75•A of this Title. (2) Such waiver shall indicate the limitations and conditions of installation, and require that the installation be certified' by the municipality, a licensed professional engineer, registered architect, or other person authorized under the Education Law to design such a system as complying with the standards and waiver. Historical Note Sec. filed May 17, 1967; renum. 75.1.6, filed Aug. 28, 1967; new filed Aug. 17, 1978; ands. filed: Feb. 20, 1990 eft. Dec. 1, 1990; March 6, 1990 eff. Dec. 1, 1990. 75.7.75.9 Historical Note • Secs, filed May 17, 1967; renum. 75.1.7 - 75.1.9 filed Aug. 28, 1967 eff. Aug. 28, 1967. SUBPART 75.1 Historical Note Subpart 75.1 added by renum. Part 75, filed Aug. 28, 1967; repealed, filed April 28, 1972 eff. May 1, 1972. Sections 75.1.1 =75 1.9 Historical Note Secs. added by renum. 75.1 -75.9, filed Aug. 28, 1967; repealed, filed April 28, 1972 eff. May 1, 1972. SUBPART 75.2 Historical Note Subpart filed Aug. 28, 1967; repealed, filed April 28, 1972 eff. May 1, 1972. Historical Note Sections 75.2.1 - 75.2.6 Historical Note Secs. filed Aug. 28, 1967; repealed, filed April 28, 1972 eff. May 1, 1972. SUBPART 75 -3 Historical Note Subpart filed Feb. 18, 1969; repealed, filed April 28, 1972 eff. May 1, 1972. 194.156 H 3 -31 -92 pR��riNf�� �CRMiT r 7 Rev. 3/86 `� � 1`� PUTNAM COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH "� „`t Division of Environmental Health Services. Carmel, N.Y. 10511 Engineer to Provide Permit M q UU on CERTIFICATE OF COMPJJANCE – ypc%14i1CT10N PERMIT FOR SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM Permit 9 75 44cated at � y,.Q+ ke < a Ye � �9�z�p,q Ra q c{ a Town or Village Subdivision Name �jndym •g53, Subd. Lot #1W 1-+8 d Tax Map---,OP(. Block Lot 087 -8-9 Renewal_.__❑ Revlsloa. (] Owner /Applicant Name ht? Ni 1 CP,��� r g/ Date of Pre ous Approval Melling Address ` J �i� �'� 2L, Town S zip t _ Building Type' Q4s` qV— Lot Area Fill Section Oaly Depth tl Volume Number of Bedrooms rQ1 i o Design Flow G /P /D 6 PCHD Notification Is Required Whea Fill Is completed Separate Sewerage System to consist of i Q00 Gallon Septic Tank add 94- r 111 ( r, i, i -I To be constructed by = Address Water Supply; Public Supply From Address or: + , Private Supply Drilled by _Address Other Requirements - -- k=Q "� r"t� (r S�a-bb 14 i I reDresent that 1 am wholly antl completely responsible for the design and loca tion of the proposal system(s); 1) that the separate sewage disposal system above described wi11 be cons ructed as shown on the approved amendment there to and in accordance with the standards, rules and regulations of the Putnam County Oepartmens __6f..HeMth_and that On- completion thereof's "Certificate of Construction Compliance" satisfactory to the Commissioner of Healthwill be "submitted to the Department, and a written guarantee will be furnished the owner, his successors, heirs or assigns by the builder, that said builder will Place in good operating condition any Dart of said sewage disposal system during the period of two (2) years immediately following the date of the issu- ance of the approval of the Certificate of Construction Compliance of the original system or any repairs thereto; 2) that the drilled well described above will be located as shown on the approved plan and that said well will be installed in ccordanca with the scan ds, rules and regulates ions of the Putnam County Department fof Health, L ' Date �e..i,e,_. �y.�.r 19R` Si9netl P.EE. X R.A. Address L-1 icense No 1-92-64. APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION: This approval expires one year from the date issued unless construction of the building has been undertaken and Is revocable for cause Or may be amended Or modified when considered necessary' by the Commissioner of. Health. Any change or alteration of construction reQVu ref new Der pproved for disposal of domestic sanitary sewage.'and/pj pliXite water supply only. date �1�s /i • /� /� ^f /fi °�U /_� 7 Title IS PUBLIC WATE7 SUPPLY/ AVAILND,t.P JU �y -�• �--- -� % / ) � 1 r NAME OF PUBLXC WATER/SUPPLY : DISTANCE 76 PROPE Y FROM QEARE fLOCA)TI SKETCH & SOURCF OF CO ON REA OF THIS ctobe 1986 ) TOPN /VIL /CITY ST BOATER B Joh H. Pre tiss, .E. ITON P VIDED � Owg•��1 50.2 34ON OIL E ARA .Z SH T - . / Fe CON This per it to con truct wate provisi ns of Subp rt 5 -2 Part provid d that within thir (30) (sign - ureo PERMIT S RUCT A LATE WELL well'as set f rth ab ve is g anted u der th 5 of the New Y rk Sta e Sanit ry Code and days of the completion of water well const.ruc ion, U c c m Y .N K^76"' X.. P.6. M.S. Publlo. Health Olreetor DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 September 2, 1994 Barbara & William Jones RD #4 Box 113 Sunset Drive Patterson, NY 12563 Re: Construction permit P -22 -87 Jones, Lakeshore Drive W & Revina Road Putnam Lake (T) Patterson Lots 5806 -5808 and 5887 -5889 TM #25.56 -1 -40. Dear Mr. & Mrs. Jones: The above mentioned parcel was inspected by this Department on September 1, 1994. At that time, the north east property corner and a stake indicating a proposed well location were noted. Based on information received by this Department, the proposed well location is approximately 45 feet. from the existing sewage disposal system to the north.. The location of the existing sewage disposal system directly across Revina to the west,.southwest of the proposed well location is also reported to be less than the required 100' minimum. Based on the above information and the field inspection of September 1, 1994 -the, construction permit, P -22 -87 is hereby suspended. Please contact your engineer, John Prentiss, P. E. to revise the proposed well location and possibly the house and sewage disposal system location to meet all present code requirements. If you have any questions please contact this office at your earliest convenience. Very truly yours, William Hedges Sr. Public Health Sanitarian WH/] P C - /'I-. 7- t) ,o. T i - .,..._.. •,e ...�,;;....t.N� L, ..1 ." FI` =t i>, T.C.r•..+sefp�:F3 !v?�.ti h �...°y. . , C-sir. 0 &-ti April 11, 1995 Putnam County Board of Health 4 Geneva Road Brewster, NY 10509• Sirs: This letter is a formal request for a variance on the property of William and Barbara Jones, located bn Ravina Road, Lake Shore West in the Town of Patterson. The variance they are seeking is permission to construct a water well that will be less than the required 100 foot separation. (actual Iy 90±) from the existing sewage disposal system on the 'adjoining property to the North. Thank you for.your consideration. _..:.......... _ Y y ours I John H. Prentiss, P. E. / C''Ewrg9f jg w Fo Mme A9O�ssp��� S E P 5 L 199 VELAR,I & VELARDI DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Serves 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 Barbara & William Jones.. RD #4 Box 13 Sunset Drive Patterson, NY 12563 Dear Mr. & Mrs.'Jones: M U J BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S. - Acting Public Health Director August 29, 1995 Re: Construction Permit P -22 -87 Jones, Lake Shore Dr. West anu r?evina Road (T) Patterson Lot 5806 -5508- 5887 -5889 TM #25.56 -1 -40 This Department has completed the review of your request for a specific waiver to construct a well at the above location. The decision by this Department was based on the following information. 1. On April 6, 1987, after a review of all required applications, soil analysis and other information required by this Department, the construction permit for a two bedroom residence on the above mentioned parcel was approved by this Department: for the applicant Diane Wiseman. 2. The..permit was transferred to Robert ,Jones in-1"988. - ...... 3: --Ors- September 2-, 1994 the construction°•pe-rmit--for--•thi-s- -- parcel was suspended by this Department. The reason for the suspension was�the discrepancy of the location of the sewage disposal system directly to the north. The approved plans indicate a separation distance of 100 feet. The owner of the property to the north reported their existing sewage disposal system was not properly Iodated on the approved plans and was considerably less than 100 feet to the proposed Jones well. Our Department has confirmed this. Based on the.above mentioned review and supporting information, the plans as submitted are not in compliance with Part 75 of Chapter II Administrative Rules and Regulations and Article III of the Putnam County Sanitary Code. Your request for a specific waiver is denied and the construction permit is hereby revoked.. Should you have any questions concerning this matter please contact the writer. Very truly VFevy, yours, ruce R. R, S. Acting Public Health Director BRF /jp cc: Paul Velardi, Esq. Tom Purcell, Deputy County Attorney 74.6 °TITLE•10 HE4.LTH 74 :6 Variances. (a) The commissioner may on written application grant a var- iance from a specific provision of this Partin a particular case, subject to appropriate conditions. where such variance is In harmony with the general purpose and Intent of this Part. (b) The commissioner may impose more stringent requirements In a specific case when necessary to assure an adequate and satisfactory water supply and sewerage facility for the subdivision. . Historical Note Sec. filed Nov. 9, 1966 eff. Jan. 1, 1967. 74.7 Other environmental factors. Upon request the developer shall provide the commissioner or his authorized representative with a report and such plans as may be needed, covering the following environmental factors: (a) the method of solid waste collection and disposal: (b) the extent to which proposed land uses and structures may cause air pollution; (c) the methods for grading to prevent changes in soil percolation capacity and to provide for adequate collection and disposal of surface and ground water; (d) the methods to prevent contravention-of surface and ground water quality stand. ards,, (e) the effect on the subdivision of environmental pollutants or hazards either on the property or from surrounding areas, resulting from such facilities, activities or condi. tions as industrial or commercial structures or operations, highways, solid waste dis- posal sites, swamps, quarries, sink holes, limestone deposits, gravel pits, airports, watercourses, agricultural, uses, flood plains and unstable soil condition: and (f) the potential effect of the subdivision on environmental factors in surrounding areas. Historical Note Sec, filed Nov. 9, 1966 eff. Jan. 1, 1967. PART 75 STANDARDS FOR INDIVIDUAL WATER SUPPLY AND INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTVMS (Statutory authority; Public Health Law, § 201(1)(1) ) Sec. Sec, 75.1 Statement of purpose 75.5 Standards for Individual sewage treatment 75.2 Applicability and scope systems 75.3 Definitions 75.6 Waivers: general, specific and local " 75.4 Standards for Individual water supply sys- tems , Historical Note Part ( §§ 75.175.9) filed May 17, 1967: redesignated Subpart 75.1 and Subpart 75.2, Mel Aug. 28,196T', new Part ( §§ 75.1.75.5) filed Jan. 8, 1974: amds. filed: Feb. 20, 1990 eff. Dec. 1, 1990: March 6, 1990 eff. Dec. 1, 1990. Amended Part title and statutory authority. Section 75.1 Statement of purpose. The rules contained in this Part have been promulgated to protect the health and safety of those persons who must use an individual 194.154 H 3 -31 -93 CHAPTER II ADMINISTRATIVE RULES AND REGULATIONS § 75,5 -water supply- system,an-individual- sewage. reatment system. or.both,whenamunialpal - - -- or communal system is not available. Historical Note Sec. filed May 17, 1967; renum. 75.1.1 filed Aug. 28.1967; new filed Jan. 8, 19T4; amds. filed:. Feb. 20, 1990 eff. Dec. 1, 1990; March 6, 1990 eff. Dec. 1. 1990. 75.2 Applicability and scope. This Part shall apply through the entire State of New York and shall represent minimum requirements for Individual water supply and for Individual sewage treatment systems. Historical Note Sec. flied bfay 17, 1967; renum. 73.1.2, filed Aug. 28, 1967, new filed Jan. 8, 1974; amds. filed: Aug. 17, 1978; Feb. 20, 1990 eff. Dec. 1, 1990; btarch 6, 1990 elf. Dec. 1, 1990. 75.3 Definitions. As used In this Part, the following words and phrases shall have the following meanings: (a) Individual water supply system means a water supply Intended to supply one or more single parcels of land, except when supplied by a public water supply as defined In Part 5 of this Title. (b) Individual, sewage treatment system means a facility serving one or more par- cels of land or residential households and treating sewage or other liquid wastes for discharge Into the groundwaters of the State, except where a permit for such a facility Is required under the applicable provisions of article 17 of the Environmental Conser- vation Law. (c) General waiver means a waiver that exempts any portion of the standards for Individual water supply and /or for Individual sewage treatment systems because of unique local conditions. (d) Specific waiver means a waiver granted in an Individual situation because of a hardship or other circumstance that makes it impractical to comply with a standard for Individual water supply or for individual sewage disposal systems. (e) Local waiver is a waiver that allows the routine use of alternative -type sewage treatment system(s) by a municipality. V Historical Note Sec. filed May 17,1967; renum. 75.1.3, filed Aug. 28,1967; new filed Jan. 8.1974: amds. filed: Aug. 17, 1978; Feb. 20, 1990 eff. Dec. 1, 1990; March 6, 1990 eff. Dec. 1, 1990. Amended (b), (c); added (e). 75.4 Standards for Individual water supply systems. (a) Individual water sup- ply systems shall be designed, constructed and maintained in accordance with the stand- ards of the State Commissioner of Health as set forth in Appendix 5 -B of this Title. (b) All treatment devices for an individual water supply must be designed, con- structed, installed and maintained in accordance with standards acceptable to the State Commissioner of Health as set forth in Appendix 75 -B of this Title. Historical Note Sec. filed May 17.1967; renum. 75.1.4 filed Aug. 28,1967; new filed Jan. 8, 1974; amds. filed: Feb. 20,19M eff. Dec. 1, 1990; March 6, 1990 eff. Dec. 1, 1990. 75.5 Standards for individual sewage treatment systems. Individual sewage treatment systems shall be designed and constructed In accordance with the standards of the State Commissioner of Health as : at forth In Appendix 75 -A of this Title. Historical Note Sec. filed May 17,196T; renum. 75.1.5 filed Aug. 28,1967: new filed Jan. 8,1974; amds. filed: Feb. 20, 1990 eff. Dec. 1, 1990; March 6, 1990 eff. Dec. 1, 1990. 194.155 H 3.31.9•_' § 75.6 TITLE 14 HEALTH 75.6 Waivers; general, specific and local. (a) General waiver. - -- - -(1)- The State Commissioner of.Health may on-written application supported by documentation grant a general waiver from a provision of this Part,, subject to ap- propriate conditions, where such waiver is consistent with the general purpose and Intent of this Pant, to a full-time city, county or part - county health department. (2) Such waiver shall;include the effective date, the time period, if any, for which the waiver Is granted, the requirement(s) being waived and any other limiting con - ditions such as types of systems, local conditions or geographical areas where the waiver can be used. (b) Specific waiver. The State Commissioner of Health, his designated representa- tive or the designated full-time city, county or part - county health department official, may on written application grant a specific waiver from a provision of this Part, where such waiver Is conslstent•&11h the general purpose and intent of this Part. The applicant receiving such wai 'r must a advised in writing if the design or conditions approved do not meet State standards and the potential consequences of such deviations. Systems with a surface discharge are prohibited and are not eligible for a waiver. (c) Local waiver. (1) The State Commissioner of Health or his designated repre- sentative may on written application from a municipality, in areas where a city, county or part- county health department does not exist, grant a local.waiver to allow the use of an alternative -type sewage treatment Qystem as shown In Appendix 75 -A of this Title. (2) Such waiver shall Indicate the limitations and conditions of installation, and require that the installation he certified by the municipality, a licensed professional engineer, registered architect, or other person authorized under the Education Law to design such a system as complying with the standards and waiver. Historical Note Sec. filed May 17, 1967; renum. 75.1.6, filed Aug. 28, 1967; new flied Aug. 17, 1978; amds. filed: Feb. 20, 1990 eff. Dec. 1, 1990; March 6, 1990 eff. Dec. 1, 1990. 75.7.75.9 Historical Note Secs. filed May 17, 1967; renum. 75.1.7- 75.1.9 filed Aug. 28, 1967 eff. Aug. 28, 1967. SUBPART 75.1 Historical Note Subpart 75.1 added by renum. Part 75, filed Aug. 28, 1967; repealed, filed April 28, 1972 eff. May 1, 1972. .Sections 75.1.1 - 75.1.9 - : • Historical Note Secs. added by renum:, 75.1 -75.9, filed Aug. 28, 196T; repealed, flied April 28, 1972 eff. May 1, 1972. SUBPART 75.2 Historical Note Subpart filed Aug. 28, 1967; repealed, filed April 28,1972 eff. May 1, 1972. Historical Note Sections 75.2.1 - 75.2.6 Historical Note Secs. filed Aug. 28, 1967; repealed, filed April 28, 1972 eff. May 1, 1972. SUBPART 75.3 Historical Note Subpart filed Feb. 18, 1969; repealed, filed April 28, 1972 eff. May 1, 1972. 194.156 H 3 -31 -92 i Rurfaee water auppliss. Water from lakes, streams, ponds or creeks is polluted. It should not be used for drinking, cooking, dairy or other food processing purposes without elaborate treatmen yhirh may include sedimentation, coagulation, filtration and ehl - ination, as approved by the health department. In an ewer ey small yu.nttities of surface waters can be made acceptable for ink- ing purposes by boiling or Leary disinfection (Page 46). LOCATING A WELL Figurt 6 shows a typical lot layout for and at tank system. Table :f gives suggested mi • stn tisstanees en water and sewerage units, although unde certain eircumsta he health department may require or permit PRIVATE WATER SUPPLY 8 SEINAM DISPOSAL LAYOUT -.a10 . �a. oa— a --- s.a..r I +�v cover i sa WX a rr err w w so'a r.. �N try.�,oi.a s....r. I.�N �Yrly \W Mrs,. • al' a rr. . a+.w r.ry r►I s,1 t.rt. 64 ti r.�. s,1• q.... a -a llgore a 22 One cannot generalize and say with certainty how far away a sewage disposal system must be, or through what depth of soil or distance sewage must pan to be purified. Organic pollution travels a short distance through fine Land, silt or clay. but will travel indefinite distances through coarse gravel, fissured rock, dried-out cracked clay, or solution channels in limestone. The safe distance between a well and a sewage disposal system is dependent upon many variables, including the hydrology and geology of the area and chemical, physical and biological processes. In general, wells (and springs) should not be in an area subject to flooding They should be uphill teem any privy, barnyard, em. pool, file field, leaching pit or other sewage disposal system and located with consideration to the factors noted below. Overburden and source of water. The type, Amount and char. acteristics of the overburden above the water - bearing formation largely determine the ability to remove the bacterial pollution intro- duced in the soil. The smaller the effective site and uniformity coefficient of the soil particles, the greater the removal of organic Pollution. (Chemical pollution, on the other hand, can travel great distances without chance.) Hence a sewage disposal system in a sandy clay or silty loam could. be located closer to a well than a sewage disposal system in coarse gravel. A sewage disposal system in a soil layer about 5 feet deep over crevictd or fractured rock should be at a greater distance from a well than one in n soil layer 20 feet deep over rock. The slope of visible rock outcrops will also indicate the direction of flow of soil water and hence pollution with respect to the well location. If rock or clay lies at a shallow depth between the earth overburden and waterbearing formation, then sealing of the well easing with temeut grout becomes more important than the separating distance from sources of pollution. Well construction and well location. Generally speaking, the deeper a well and casing Ilse less likely will be pollution of the well, provided the annular spars, around the well casing is seated with cement grout. If the depth of the easing and amount of cement grouting is reduced, then the well had better be located further away from sewage disposal systems. Where rock is close to the surface, very careful well construction, including proper depth of cuing and cement grouting, will provide the best protection against pollution in addition to maximum separation from sewage disposal systems. 24 v� Aa- WELL LOCATION SKETCH Fie.. I 23 TABLE 3 5uggeolod Minimum Distant" Between Water &ad Sewerage Units (in feet) * ij w cmr:.r .............. U—. I" .... ................ L N'O-u- b .......... sm 46—j lo0• ................. 30 . ............. ................. -1 -1. n' C-4 CP C? O 7R, ■® MEEK ME 'o o'm ©.' t�� I NEW, �� WELL LOCATION SKETCH Fie.. I 23 TABLE 3 5uggeolod Minimum Distant" Between Water &ad Sewerage Units (in feet) * ij w cmr:.r .............. U—. I" .... ................ L N'O-u- b .......... sm 46—j lo0• ................. 30 . ............. ................. -1 -1. n' C-4 CP C? O H� X W 5. Conatmotlon SUGGESTED SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER WELL a• Construction of the well shall comply with the requirements o CQNSTRUCfION TO SERVE SMALL of Table 5 and other standards given in this bulletin. WATER SUPPLIES b. Construction shat► seal oR, insofar as practicable. water- bearing formations that are or may be polluted. i. 64neral e. The well shall be constructed to that no unsealed opening will • Water wells shall be of such materials and located. constructed, be left around the well. developel, and protected as described in this bulletin and in d. The well shall be thoroughly developed by proper means to acenrdanee with good well drilling practice. produce maximum yield, clearing it of all excessive amid, silt said turbidity. 2. Location e. Water used for well construction shall be of .►tisfaetory a. The well shall be constructed in an accessible location which unitary quality. is not subject to flooding, still at a distance, from potential sources t. If the well is finished in a sand or gravel formation, the driller of pollution on the owner's property or on adjoining properties, shall furnish and install a metal screen of proper diameter, design which is not less than that stated in Table 7 of this bulletin. and standard manufacture, which shall permit maximum trans- i b. When a well tsibested adjacent to a building, it shall be so mission of water without clogging. located that the center line of the well, extended vertically, will 6. Grouting clear any projection from the building by not lea' than five feet. The top of the. well easing shall be readily accessible. Orouting as required by Table 5 shall be performal aid plaetd as deseribed.in this bulletin. 3. Depth The well shall be developed from a water - bearing formation at 7. Yield Tat a depth greater than 20 feet below the ground surface. Before being put into use, the well shall be tested for yield std drawdown for at least 4 hours duration. The test pump shall have 4. Cuing a capacity At least mtal to the pumping rate at which it is expected ' a. The well easing shall be new wrought iron or steel well easing the well will be pumped during its usage. The test primp shall be pipe which complies with ASA Standard B36.10- 1959 or AWWA installed to operate continuously until the water level Ass stabilised Standard for Deep Wells A100.58. and, at this point, the yield and drawdown determined. Periodic b. The depth of the casing shall comply with the requirements water level observations shall be made during the drawdown and • of Table 5 of this bulletin, and the top of the eating shall terminate subsequent recovery periods. A minimum sustained well yield of 12 inches above the ground surface or pumphouse floor, and two 5 gallons per minute shall be obtained. feet above-possible flood level. e. The well casing diameter for a well in rock shall be not less 8. Disinfection o than six inches (four inches in sandstone or nand and gravel). The well shall be pumped until clear and then disinfected as Go d. Each section of casing shall be joined with standard drivepipe explained in this bulletin. couplings and ample full - threaded joints, or by proper welding, so x that all joints shall be sound std watertight as installed in the well. 9. Gapping e. Well casing alignment shall not interfere with the proper ' Temporary capping of the well until the pumping equipment iv w o install ation said operation of the pump. inxtalled shall be attoh that no pollutant can enter the well. tcDa 55 56 H� X W r APPENDIX 75 -A (b) Separation requirements: FIGURE 1 ABSORPTION FIELD SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS CONTOURS . (2' INTERN Is•MfN. xr MIN. 1E MOIERTY LINE 71 STREAM WILL POND .1 100' min 1 1 25 min 100' min i •oRYWIL i 1? MI I HOUSE 1 i 1 10' MIN, 311, AG 1' a 1 I TANK 1 I I 1 1 of 18VTION I ox 1 I � 1 i• � 1 1 1 IV AY �AOf EX1A7t3fON • I 1 /1ELD STREET f10UR E 1 A/SOR/TION FIELD SE W A TION R f Ot IA EMVM 194.787 H 3.31 -92 ° a a APPENDIX 75 -A ° FIGURE 2 " SEEPAGE PIT SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS WELL 1 PROPERTY. Uhl 1 1 1 MEAN HIGH 1 uarl:a NaaK 150' MIN. POND. \1 .A I. SEPTIC TANK 10'A IN 100'MIN. DISTRISVI10N 1 D IVEW Y 1 Sx Eff. D:amet 30' min SEEPAGE PITS STREET FIGURE 2 SEEPAGE PIT SEPARATION REGUIREMENTS 194.788 H 3 -31 -92 APPENDIX 75 -A SEPARATION DISTANCES FROM WASTEWATER SYSTEM COMPONENTS To Stream, Lake, water - Well or course (c), Property System Components Suction Line (a) or Wetland Dwelling Line House sewer 25' if cast iron 25' 10' 10' (watertight joints) pipe, 50' otherwise Septic tank 50' 50' 10' 10' Effluent line to 50' 50' 10' 10' distribution box Distribution box 100' 100' 20' 10' Absorption field' 100 (b) 100' 20' 10' Seepage pit 150 (b) 100' 20' 10' Dry well (roof.and 50' 25' 20' 10' footing) Raised or mound system 100' 100' 20' 10' Evapotranspiration- 100' 50' 20' 10' absorption system Composter 50' 50' 20' 10' NOTES: (a) When sewage treatment systems are located in coarse gravel or upgrade and in the general path of drainage to a well. the closest part of the treatment system shall be at least 200 feet away from the well. (b). bfean high water mark. (c) For all systems involving the placement of fill material, separation distances are measured from the toe of slope of the fill. (d) Soil investigation: (Y) The highest groundwater level shalfbe determined and shall include the depth to the seasonal high groundwater level and type of water table — perched, apparent, or artesian. (2) If a subsurface treatment unit such as an absorption field is planned, at least' four feet of useable soil shall be available over impermeable deposits (i.e., clay or bedrock). Highest groundwater level shall be at least two feet below the.proposed trench bottom. Where systems are to be installed above drinking water aquifers, a greater separation distance to bedrock may be required by the local health depart- ment having jurisdiction. At least one test hole at least six feet deep shall be dug within or immediately adjacent to the proposed leaching area to Insure that uniform soil and site conditions prevail. If observations reveal differing soil profiles, additional holes shall be dug and tested. These additional holes shall be spaced to indicate whether there is a sufficient area of useable soil to install the system. Treatment systems shall be designed to reflect the most severe conditions encountered. If the percolation tests results are inconsistent with field determined soil conditions, addi- tional percolation tests must be conducted and the more restrictive tests must be the factor used for the system design. 194.789 H 3 -31.92 uct00er :eV, -Iyb6 - The. Putnam County Board of Health meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m. on October 20, 1986. Members attending were: Raymond S. Jones, President; Sara McGlinchy, Gregory Quinn, and. Michael Schoolman, M.D. A quorum was not present. Department of Health attendees were: Dr. John Simmons and John Karell. The minutes of the September 15, 1986 meeting were corrected to reflect that Michael Schoolman seconded the officer nominations, not Elaine. Krueger (next to the last paragraph). Gregory Quinn then made a motion to approve the minutes of September 15, 1986, Michael Schoolman seconded this and it carried. A variance was requested by Mr. and Mrs. Virgilio who own property at Caryl and Lake Shore Roads in Lake Carmel. 1. I` Mr. Carter of Joel Greenburg's office presented the variance request for this property which had previous EDH approval in August, 1986 based on information that a neighbor's septic system was 25 feet from the property line. Recent information and in- spection confirmed that the neighbor's septic system is only 15 feet from the Virgilio propertly line,not 25 feet, which provides only 95 feet separation distance between the proposed Virgilio well and two neighbors' septic systems. 100 feet is the minimum well to sewage system separation distance allowed for approval. After dis -- cussion, the variance was unanimously- approved by the Board of . Health. A variance request by Golub was postponed indefinitely at Mr. Golub'. s request. .._ ._. • • - - -- A letter was received from Charles Bronfman, Esq. representing Mr. Auer requesting a re- hearing. A response will be sent to him stating that there is no additional information to approve the variance request. Dr. Simmons gave his report: 1. State Office of Health Systems Management held.a meeting in Putnam County last week asking questions about how the public health system delivers services and what are current and future issues regarding public health in Putnam County. Low -key interviews with concerned citizens were conducted. Additionally, problems with the system, especially DEC, were discussed with State officials and it was also stated that surveys studying cost containment or quality, control are not always accurate. The State may help in applying for grants. Gregory Quinn expressed his appreciation for the state's communication with local people and Mr. Jones is looking forward to hearing feed- back from other County Boards of Health. . 2. Flu vaccine clinics - -over 600 senior citizens have been vaccinated. Putnam County Board of Hea Meeting March 30, 1987 The Putnam. County Board of Health Meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m. on March 30, 1987. The meeting was held at the Conference Room, BOCES Building T3 in Carmel. A quorum was present. Members attending were: Raymond S. Jones, President, Sara McGlinchy, Gregory Quinn, Dr. Michael Schoolman, Dr. Geraldine Zamoyski, and Arlene Rice (representing County Executive, Peter C. Alexanderson). Health Department attendees were Dr. John Simmons, John Karell and' Elaine Krueger. A variance was requested by Mr. Kenneth DeFreitas of Lakeport Drive in Putnam Lake who proposed a sewage disposal system 82 feet from his own well water supply when 100 feet is required. Tom Daly, O.E. presented the case stating that adjacent lots are vacant and they were prepared to double case the well, install a disinfectant system in the well pump, and include a hold harmless clause in the deed to protect the County from being included in future lawsuits due to this variance. After discussion, the Board disaporoved this variance request. A variance was requested by Mr. Puccini of Lake Mahopac who proposed a. well which is 115 feet from a neighbor's se-1/age System when 150 feet is required.. One issue was :whether the neighbor (Mt. Cohen) has a cesspool or a septic system. Mr. Puccini claimed that another neighbor (Mr. Sillens) 'on the ....o.then....s.id.e.. of . Mr.- Puccini-, recently instal -led • a we l•1 closer than - 150 feet to �Ir. Cohen's sewage system and questioned the accuracy and consistency of the distances involved. The Health Department had suggested that Mr. Puccini install the well across the street on his own property. After discussion, Gregory Quinn made a motion to approve the variance with a double -cased well. Sara McGlinchv seconded this. Sara suggested that this be tabled until next month in order to validate the kind of sewage system that Mr. Cohen has. A variance was also requested by Parkt:;est Properties who had been issued a permit to build a well in April, 1985. This permit expired and Parkwest then reapplied. However, in the meantime, a neighbor built a well. The proposed sewage system is 63 feet from the proposed well, in order to maintain 100 feet from this adjacent well. Mr. Tom•Daly, P.E. again presented the variance request stating that the well would be double- cased, an ultraviolet disinfection system would be installed and a "hold harmless" clause would be added to the deed. Sara McGlinchy made a motion to approve the variance. Dr. Schoolman seconded this and the motion was denied. The Board discussed the process of pending well permits for adjacent properties. OCR Che only restrictive distance which is. not unmet is the 20 foot distance to the louse. The well to.SSDS and SSDS to lake distance of 100 feet is provided-- Ir.. _ Jones. asked �mr .. Kar�ll what is the reason for the 20 foot setback f rom -the >SDS to the 'house. Mr. Karell indicated to'reiuce the possibility of sewage entering the basement. Discussion followed from several residents of. the Tom of Kent who stated that they were opposed to the granting of the variance, including Ray Singer, Jean Noel, Arthur Singer, Ethel Perrin, Jim Baker, Mike Consentine and,William Noel.. Sara McGlinchy made a ;ration to approve the variance, seconded. by Dr. Zamoyski. Ray Jones and Sara McGlinchy voted in favor of the motion, Peter Alexanderson, Gregory Quinn, Dr. Zamoyski, Dr. Chang voted against. The variance was denied. 2. Haldak variance: Lake Peekskill, house is supplied with summer water. Proposed well is located 45' from existing sewage disposal system 90' away from 2 adjacent wells. Gregory Quinn made, motion to approve - Sara McGlinchy seconded motion. The motion was unanimously denied. 3. Gulgeon Variance: Wildwood Knolls, Lake Dscawanna - summer water - proposed well is located 60' fran existing sewage disposal system - 80' from sewage disposal system to adjacent lots. Sara McGlinchy made motion to approve variance. Ray Jones seconded motion. Motion was unanimously denied. Minutes of September 21, 1987 were reviewed - Greg Quinn made motion to approve Dr. Zamoyski seconded motion. Minutes oe re unanimously approved. John Karell gave his report: 1. Revis"ed Septic regulations: The recommendations as set forth on the attached memorandum were approved unanimously. The Director was requested to consider expanding the restrict -ive- distance. fran a SSDS to a strewn to 200 feet and report back to the board. 2. C & D Landfills - John Karen will talk to Richard Gardineer to develop R regulations to control the import of C & D waste into Putnam County landfills. 3. Tire S:' Peter Alexanderson would like an emergency meeting of the Board of Health as soon as Judge Zaidens' report comes in. 4. Hazardous Waste: Pesticide Clean Up Day - 30 different people deposited approximately 1700 pounds of waste. Budgeted $10,000.00 final total approximately $12,000.00. Based upon the amount of material collected the Cleanup Day was considered a success'. 5. Lake Secor: as the result of the snow storm on Sunday October 4, 1987 power was out in the Water Treatment Plant & Sewage Treatment Plant., The Emergency generator failed to operate at the ST.0 on Sunday. The'Putnam County Health �1 `'• September 21, 1987 _.. _..The. -P.utnam._County. -Board of Health Meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m. - Members attending were: Raymond S. Jones, President, Sara McClinchy, Gregory Quinn, Michael Schoolman, S. Daniel Selden Arlene Rice, representing Peter Alexanderson Absent: called in: Dr. Zamoyski, Dr. Kenneth Schwartz Department of Health attendees were: Dr. John Simmons, John Karell, Jr., and Mrs. Elaine Krueger. Two variances were requested (1) Mr. & Mrs. Calderone, Hawthorne Road, Town of Kent, presently sharing a well - their new well would be 75' from Sewage �E,.... p Disposal System and 110' from adjacent property (direct line of drainage to the Fell.) The Board voted unanimously to grant Mr. &firs. Calderon their variance. (2) Mr. & Mrs. Frehm would like to convert their summer home to -an all year round home. Sara McClinchy made a motion to approve their application, Ray Jones seconded motion. The Board unanimously opposed the application. Dr. Simmons gave his report: - one (1) case of measles at Camp Cummings handi- capped children's camp. - discussed Board of Health Plan and Board of Health Public. Health Director - Lyme disease - significant cases in Putnam County - Shigellosis - one camp had over 150 cases. State will be looking for better regulations. ((Same camp as measles case). - One (1) case of rabies.. first case since 1939,- fox John Karell gave his report: Budget - upgrade two clerical positions. Placed back in budget - will go to legislature. Lake Baldwin Water System: The Lake Baldwin Water District installed above c_oun. piping to provide adequate pressure to the upper area of the distribution system in June 1987. The district has approved funding to install below ground pioinc prior to the winter of 1987. Plans are expected to be filed shortly for o r' Lake Secor: The emergency filter provided additional %:ater to meet the needs of the District during the peak s=. er months. The Tc,rn has been asked to lcok into a long term solution to the problem of meeting the.peak needs of the District. Relative to the gas chlorination facility which 4ras previously indicat =_- to be inadequate, the Town has corrected the inadeauacies. Tires: A hearing was conducted with Judge Zaidens - hearing was completed end Judge Zaidens' report is expected shortly. Graymcor: Samples collected by the County Health Cepartmnent and Graymeor indicated no major contravention of standards. D.E.C. notified Graymoor of certain conditions that have to be met prior to continuation of any landfill operations. tbvember 5 is the date after which a pe_riit will be required for the C & D Landfill operation. C & D Landfill: John Karell, Jr. was asked to look into any existing local regulations regarding C & D landfills. Radon: $1200 was proposed in the 1988 Radon testing. The Director of Environmental Health recommended certain revisions to the present policies and regulations for construction of subsurface sewage disposal systems. The County Executive had asked the Director to review all regulations. The proposal were discussed and the Board wished to spend the ne:&- month to consider the revisions and will take action at the ne_�<t meeting. Pesticide Cleanup date is scheduled for October 17, 1987. � -3 • BOARD -OF HEALTH NOVEMBER 30, 1987 The Putnam County Board of Health Meeting was called to order at 7:50 p.m. __.. Members attending were: Ray Jones, President, Arlene Rice, Michael Schoolman, Sara McGlinchy, and Gregory Quinn. Department of Health Attendees: John Karell, Jr.,.Dr. John Simmons. Absent: Mrs. Elaine Krueger Five variances were requested: 1. Temple Israel Well Permit, Lake-Peekskill. Temple Israel has Lake Peekskill water supply. Would like own well proposed well is 70' from existing septic system. Joel-Greenberg, R.A. had an enlarged scale to show he was able to get well 75 feet from septic system. Ray Jones made' a motion to approve, Sara McGlinchy seconded motion. Motion was denied. 2. Labracio: Application for a Septic System & well. Septic System is within 200' and in line of drainage to a well across the street. Distance is 100' and in direct line of drainage. Gregory Quinn made a motion to approve, Sara McGlinchy seconded motion. Motion was denied 3. Cooper Variance: Mr. Zieler, P.E. submitted preliminary layout. John Karell, Jr. sent correspondence to Mr. Zeiler - application did not have 100' from well. Sewage system 'is 100' from adjacent lot. Proposed well 70' from own septic and two other septics, 90' from third system. Gregory Quinn made a motion to- approve, Ray Jones seconded motion. Motion was denied. 4. Jones Variance " "' Existing situation - shares_ well with Mr. & Mrs. Burkhardt. Mrs. Jones proposes to drill her own well. Proposed well location is 65' from existing SSDS. Mrs. Jones is a summer resident. Gregory Quinn made motion to approve. Sara McGlinchy seconded.. motion. Motion was denied. 5. Taylor Harper Variance Engineer redesigned layout which showed foundation moved back 2 feet which should accomodate provisions of septic fields 20 feet from house. - plans were approved by John Karell, Jr. last week, plan meet the standards. Taylor Harper would like a variance as it is.an unnecessary hardship on him due to the fact he is not accomplishing anything by moving foundation. Ray Jones - applicant is asking if he has.to move foundation or will Board readdress variance. Michael Schoolman made motion to reconsider - Sara McGlinchy ,seconded motion. Motion was unanimously denied. e� Putnam County Board of Health Minutes - - .February 22, 1988 The Putnam County Board of Health meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. Members attending were: Ray Jones, President, Michael Schoolman, Louis Tartaro, Dr. Seldin, Arlene Rice, representing Peter Alexanderson. Absent: Sara McGlinchy Department of Health attendees: John Karell, Jr., Dr. John Simmons. Absent: Mrs. Elaine Krueger Two variances were requested: 1. McCormack: Town of Kent, Stanwick Road. Proposed well. within 100 feet of sewage systems. Dr. Schoolman made motion to deny variance, Dr. Seldin seconded motion. Motion was unanimously denied. 2. Freeman: Town of Kent, Dingley Road. proposed septic 90 feet from well. No other encroachments. variance was tabled until John Karell could get legal advise Z rom County Attorney as to what courses of action the Board has for the variance in respect to the situation as it exists now with illegal subdivision. Minutes of February 1, 1988 were reviewed. Arlene Rice made a motion to approve minutes, Louis Tataro seconded motion. Dr. Simmons noted the minutes do not reflect the enormous problem of Aids which he discussed at the last meeting and presented a .....written report. Motion to approve February 1, 1988 minutes.were unanimousl "y approved: Arlene Rice advised Board that Monday night at County Building, Solid Waste holds its meeting. Louis Tataro said he thought Solid Waste changed nights. Arlene Rice to investigate. Ray Jones read Elaine Krueger's report in her absence. Report is attached. Dr. Simmons gave his report. 1. Many citizens have approached him on the landfill in Patterson, that is.an illegal dump. Apparently hospital waste, DEC is taking care of problem with input from our Department of Environmental Health Services. 2. S cases of lyme disease 2 cases of Salmonella 2 Meningitis No significant trend from usual pattern. Many changes in treatment of sexually transmitted disease other than AIDS, Significant problem with syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia and a variety of other sexually transmitted illnesses. N - 2 - A. Variances 1. Viola request: West Lake Blvd. Town of Carmel, bordering on Lake Mahopac. Existing house adjacent to viola property has two wells, Mr. Viola proposes a septic system which will be 100 feet from each neighboring well, 200 ft. is required between the septic system and one - -, well which is in the direct line of drainage to the well. There is,no other place on the lot to put the septic because of the Lake, the distance between the well in question and the septic is-just over 100 ft. Sara McGlinchy made a motion to accept the variance, Arlene Rice seconded the motion. All in favor of the motion, none, all those in opposition, 5 votes against motion. The Board voted to deny this variance because: a) The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal systems in effect this day, specifically the requirement to: "Maintain a 200 foot separation distance between the proposed sewage disposal system and a well on an adjacent property, that well being below and in direct line of drainage from the proposed sewage disposal system." b) It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a .potentia 1--pub I is hea l t-h- haza"rd*. "— 2. Fulton Variance: The Ftiltons propose to increase the living space in their house by adding an upstairs, thereby increasing their living space by 77%. it is necessary to show the septic expansion area that is available to accommodate the proposed addition. The site plan indicates the septic area is limited by the house location and the well location ori'this lot, therefore area to expanded the septic area is not available. The well is presently located approximately 40 feet from the septic system. Michael Schoolman made a motion to accept the variance. Sara McGlinchy seconded motion. All in favor - none - all in opposition five The Board voted to deny the variance because: a) The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal systems in effect this day, specifically the requirement to: "Maintain a 200 foot separation distance between the proposed sewage disposal system and a well on an adjacent, property, that well being below and in direct line of T °9 z� i b) - 3 _ 6 drainage from the proposed sewage disposal system." It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. 3.. Rosenbaum variance Proposing septic system within 200 feet of Lake Sagamore and there is not 100% expansion area. This is the first variance that the Board has received under the new regulations. The Board did not act on the variance, since the Rosenblums were not present. Mr. Harris gave his opinions as to why the variance should not be granted. The Rosenbaums and Mr. Harris will be notified when the Board has its next meeting. 4. Bellamy variance Muscoot Road West, Town of Carmel proposed 2 bedroom house on 100' x 100'lot. This original request for a 60 foot separating distance 60 feet to.gallies, has been revised to 80 feet. Representing Mr. Bellamy for his variance request was Mr. Boniello, Joe Bellamy, Tony Piasani. they are requesting variance for their own well. They propose to double case the well. Sara .M.cG,I- .i.nchy.. mad e. a. motion to acce.pt.- variance, Arlene Rice seconded motion. All in favor, none, all in opposition 6. The Board voted to deny the variance because: a) The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal systems in effect this day, specifically the requirement to: "Maintain a 200 foot separation distance between the proposed sewage disposal system and a well on an adjacent property, that well being below and in direct line of drainage from the proposed sewage disposal system." b) It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would-constitute a potential public health hazard. 5. Freeman Variance Freeman: Subdivided in 1983 or 1984, originally. The Board asked the Putnam County Attorney what the legality were surrounding the issuance of this variance. We were advised to request that the Town of Kent submit their views on the matter. We received a letter from Mr. Landwaard, Chairman of E _ ` l i � e MINUTES OF MEETING BOARD OF HEALTH NOVEMBER 21, 1988 ATTENDEES: Ray Jones. President, Dr. Schoolman, Sara'McGlinchy, Louis Tartaro, Dr. Block and Dr. Leibwold Health Department Attendees: Enid Carruth; John Karell, Jr., and Rita Brown Absent: Dr. Chang, Dr. Selden and Peter Alexanderson Regular meeting of the Board of Health was called to order at 8:10p.m. Interviews for the Board of Health Membership were conducted. Interviewed were; Mr. Cassidy, Ms'. Brophy & Dr. Casamassima. Three other applicants were interviewed at the October meeting, namely; Dr. Doyle, Mrs. Utter & Mr. Riordan. After discussion, Dr. Liebwold made a motion to accept Dr. .Doyle and,Mrs. Utter to the Board of Health, pending Legislature approval. Sara McGlinchy seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved. r. Liebwold made a motion to accept September Board of Health minutes, the motion was seconded by Lou Tartaro. September minutes were unanimously approved. October Board of Health minutes were discussed. Lou Tartaro made'a motion to accept October Board of Health Minutes, Sara McGlinc•hy, Aeconded ..the.,.mo.ti.on..._..October. Board of - " 'Heal`th"Minutes were unanimously approved. Ray Jones informed the Board that Dr. Chang had resigned. Dr. Liebwold made a motion to accept Dr. Chang's resignation. Dr. Schoolman seconded the motion. All members were in favor of the motion. Dr. Schoolman made a motion to accept Dr. Casamassima to the Board of Health. Dr. Liebwold seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved. Ray Jones will write a letter thanking Dr. Chang for his services on the Board of Health. Variances: Spain Variance William Spain, Siemunds Place, Town of Carmel, Mr. Spain has a piece of property on Lake Mahopac which is adjacent to his existing residence. The proposal to develop this property was rejected by the Department of Health as the proposed SSDS could not meet the 200 foot set back from Lake Mahopac. Under the ^ld regulations the proposal would have met Health Department standards. Spain was advised to: 1. Consider resubmission of the proposal for a two bedroom house, 2. Show 100-M expansion area if possible: 3. Move the sewage system as far from the lake. as possible. A financial hardship would exist if Mr. Spain is unable to use this piece of property since he has paid taxes on this piece for many years. Also this lot is Part of a Town of Carmel approved subdivision. .1 2 aceda Variance North Brewster Road, Town of Southeast b Mr. Neceda's proposal was rejected in 1986 based on the weii being 77 feet and 78 feet from adjacent sewage disposal area. Mr. Neceda having submitted to the Board the wrong set of plans was asked to resubmit plans as a two bedroom dwelling with appropriately revised SSDS area. LaRussell Variance Route 52, Town of Kent Mr. LaRussell owns a dry cleaning business on Route 52, he now has one apartment over the store. Mr. LaRussell wishes to build a second apartment above the building. With today's standards, his system does not meet the regulations. Mr. LaRussell would like to place this apartment on the existing system. Dr. Schoolman made a motion to accept the variance, Sara McGlinchy seconded the motion. The variance was unanimously denied. The Board voted to deny this variance because: a) The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal systems in effect this day, specifically the requirement to: "Maintain a 150 foot' separation distance between the proposed sewage disposal system consisting of leaching pits and the well on this property" and provisions of a sewage disposal area of . sufficient size to accommodate the proposal. o) It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. c) A hardship has not been demonstrated. -Knot-Hole'-Site Plan Variance Route 22, Patterson, NY, formerly J.J. Restaurant Existing well is less than 100 feet from the septic. T. Charles Henke (Baldwin & Cornelius) represented the applicant. Applicant intends to convert this building, formerly a restaurant, to a wholesale wood working business with two employees. The separation of the well from septic is 60. feet. The applicant contends there will only be two. people working-in the store and that there is no need to move the well as the restaurant had been allowed to operate with these-conditions existing. Dr. Schoolman made a motion to accept the proposed variance, Dr. Liebwold seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously denied. The Board denied the variance because: a) The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal .systems in effect this day, specifically the requirement to: "Maintain a 100 foot separation distance between the proposed sewage disposal system and the well on this property ". b) It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. c) A hardship has not been demonstrated. T° L G John Kare11 gave his report. Viola Variance, septic system located above and in direct line of drainage to two (2) wells, no proof has been submitted that the well was drilled, without a permit and after- our regulations were in effect. The applicant's attorney has requested that the Board take steps to obtain the well log from Torlish. 3t was the opinion of the Board that it was not the responsibility of the Departrent to obtain the dcocument.s cf proof, but that of the applicant. .Mr. Karell did send a letter to Mr. Torlish requ6sting a copy of the well loci. A. response has not been received to date. Lance Freeman, Variance was denied by the Board twice, and overturned by a Judge' in an Article 78. When the Board denied Freemanla variance, the Health Department placed Mr. Freeman on the agenda with our Hearing Officer, for an administrative hearing for an illegal subdivision; inlight of the Article 78 action, the Administrative Hearing was ad.journed,.pending resolution of the Article 78 and any aooeal. The Board is making a recommendation to the County Attorney to file an appeal in the Freeman matter. Sara McGlinchy made a motion to send a letter to Mr. Spain. Dr. Schooiman seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved. Marathon Battery: EPA doing remedial action, EPA has circulated an draft record of decision, which among other items includes: 1?) leave the vault and it's contents in place. EPA is reconsidering removing the contents of the vault based 'upon public outcry. incl.uding.Putnam County. Department of Health and M`(S _..___...... _.... -._.. 2) EPA in 19'5 took soil samples, from backyards in the area of the plant. The samples contained elevated cadmium levels. DEC conducted more extensive sampling, approximately 40 backyards early in September- 19'8, and found more backyards with elevated cadMium levels. The Department is awaiting health advisory from the State Health Department before releasing results. cr° . •q BOARD OF HEALTH FEBRUARY 27, 1989 Attendees: Ray Jones, Louis Tartaro, Dr. Anthony Casamassima, Dr. Dan Doyle, Elizabeth Colhoun, Dr. Paul Lebwohl, Dr. Michael Schoolman, & Sara McGlinchy. Absentees: Dr. Seldin, Dr. Charles Block, Peter Alexanderson, County Exec. Health.Dept. Attendees: John Karell, Jr., Enid L. Carruth & Rita Brown Regular meeting of the Board of Health Called to Order at 7:30 P. m. Minutes of January 30, 1939 were reviewed. Dr. Doyle made a motion to accept the Minutes, Louis Tartaro seconded the motion. January Minutes were unanimously approved. Variances: Spain, Siemunds Place, Mahopac, NY (T) Carmel Mr. Spain wishes to construct a house on an existing lot which is next to hi.s present residence. The system was designed by Cashin Associates.- The system- -meets - •today's- standards except that it-can - not meet the 200 foot restrictive distance to Lake Mahopac or the 1000 expansion area. It can provide the 50, expansion area and the 100 foot distance to Lake Mahopac that was the standard prior to October 1987. Dr. Schoolman asked what the actual distance from the border line was. The primary system is 118 feet and to the expansion area is 100 feet. The Director of Environmental Health Services, John Karell,Jr., indicated that in his opinion as public health hazard would not be created by installation of a subsurface sewage disposal system of this size and in the area shown on the plan. Dr. Casamassima asked what created a hardship. Discussion followed and Mr. Spain referred to his letter to the Beard which discussed the hardship. Sara McGlinchy made a motion to approve the motion. Dr. Lebwohl seconded the motion. Sara McGlinchy spoke against her motion.. Ray Jones spoke for, the motion. The vote was taken five; (5) were in favor-, Lou Tartaro, Dr. Casamassima, Mrs. Colhaun, Dr. Lebwohl and Ray Jones. Three (3) were against, Dr. Doyle, Sara McGlinchy and Dr. Schoolman. 2 The Director of Health stated for the record that the separation distance between a lake /well and subsurface sewage disposal system in the State regulations call for 100 feet. The reason why the Board had imposed a 200 foot regulation to ;lakes and water sources for extra protection, and to decrease the possibility of environmental degradation. Preliminary Review of Variances 1) Hill Street Associates_ No preliminary review, a representative of the Department went out to witness perc test holes and the holes were filled with water. This project will not be placed on next month's agenda. 2. Barone. (T) Kent -Pere rates were high. Poor soil conditions, steep slopes. The proposed well is located below a septic area, although there is a 100 foot separation. A septic is in the direct line of drainage to the proposed well, 200 feet is required. This matter will be placed on the March agenda. 3. Connor,. South Lake (T) Kent Applicant submitted an application for an addition to their house. The distance between the septic to the lake is less than 100 feet and to an adjacent community water supply well less than 200 feet. The Board feels no more time should be' spent o'n' "this application. This matter will be heard in March. t. Mautone, (T) Carmel The size of the lot is 100 x 100. Two bedroom house on 1/4 acre. The applicant would like approval of well to septic distance of 70 feet and a well to property line distance of 5 feet. This variance will be put on the Agenda for March. 5. Fred DiAquardi (T) Kent, 7 Hills Lake Mr. DiAguardi spoke of his concerns in regard to a permit issued to Thomas Cavanaugh. Mr. Karell will meet with the DiAguardi's and discuss their concerns. Old Business "No Smoking Regulations" - Mrs. Carruth has not been able to meet with County Executive. Mrs. Carruth suggested Mr. Jones, on behalf of the Board of Health write a letter to the County Executive asking for this code to be enforced after a press release from his office. Sara McGlinchy made a motion that Ray Jones, on behalf of the Board, write a letter to Peter Alexanderson :asking when the Code will be implimented. Dr. Doyle seconded the motion. All were in favor of this motion. BOARD OF HEALTH APRIL 17, 1989 Attendees: Ray Jones, Dr. Casamassima, .Dr.. Doyle, •Elizabeth Colhoun, Dr. Seldin, Dr. Schoolman, Lou Tartaro, arriving late, Dr. Block and Dr. Leibwold. Absent: Sara McGlinchy and Peter Alexanderson, County Executive. Health Department Staff Members Present: Enid Carruth, John Karell, Jr., and Rita Brown. Regular meeting of the Board of Health was called to order at 7:30 p.m. Minutes of the March 20, 1989 were discussed. Dr. Casamassima made a motion to accept the minutes as written, Dr. Doyle seconded the motion. The minutes were unanimously approved. Variances Cavalino, Terry Hill Road, Town of Kent Accessory apartment Mr. Cavalino reviewed his variance with the Board. A preliminary discussion followed. The Cavalino variance was scheduled for the May Board of Health meeting. Barone Variance, Valhalla Road (T) Kent Mr. Barone stated that the septic system on an adjacent property is 100 feet from his well, but cannot maintain the 200 feet required due to direct line of drainage. In addition, steep slopes in the sewage area were'discussed. _ Dr. Doyle made a motion to approve the variance as proposed, Dr. Casamassima seconded the motion. A vote was taken, seven members were against the motion .(Dr. Casamassima., Dr. Dole, Dr. Schoolman, Lou Tartaro, Dr. Seldin, Mrs. Colhoun and Ray Jones). The Board'denied the variance because: 1. The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal systems in effect this day, specifically the requirement to: "Provide a 200 foot separation distance between a well and a subsurface sewage disposal which id in direct line of drainage to the well, 100 feet are provided. 2. The proposal does not provide a sewage distance area in which ground slope does not exceed 15 -20 %; 25% slope is provided. 3. It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. 4. A hardship has not .been' demonstrated. ,l , b Ki` O BOARD OF HEALTH May 15, 1989 Attendees: Ray Jones, Dr. Doyle, Sara McGlinchy, Dr. Casamassima, Dr. Seldin, Dr. Schoolman, arriving late Dr. Leibwold and Dr. Block. Absent: Lou Tartaro & Peter Alexanderson Health Department Attendees: Enid Carruth, Rita Brown, representing John Karell, Jr., Michael J. Budzinski, Sr. Public Health Engineer, Environmental Health Services. Regular meeting of the Board of Health was called to order at 7:50 p.m. Minutes of April 17th, 1989 were discussed. Dr. Schoolman made a motion.to accept the Minutes, Dr. Doyle seconded the motion. Five members were in favor of approving the Minutes, one abstention. Variances: Cavilino, accessory apartment, Terry Hill Road, (T) Kent Review of plans submitted showed the well is less than 100 feet from the septic system. The plans showed no expansion area. Dr. Schoolman made a motion to accept the variance, Sara McGlinchy seconded the motion. A vote was taken, five members were against the motion (Dr. Doyle, Dr. Seldin, Dr. Schoolman, Sara McGlinchy & Ray Jones, three members abstained (Dr. Liebwold, Dr. Block &.Dr., Casamassima. The Board denied the variance because: I The Board denied the variance because: 1. The existing well is located 84 feet from the existing subsurface sewage disposal system, 100 feet is required. 2. Based upon the "As- Built" plans submitted, sufficient sewage disposal area does not exist to serve a 4 bedroom house. 3. Expansion area cannot be provided on the lot 100 feet from the well. 4. It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. 5. A hardship has not been demonstrated. 'n I I b .cone Variance Muscoot West E Gleneida Blvd. (T) Carmel .apresented by John McNamara of Bibbo Associates and Mr. Noviello. Proposed sewage system is designed for a two bedroom house, the, sewage system is less than 70 feet from the well, 90 feet to another offsite septic area. No expansion area has been.provided. Michael Budzinski read a letter from Mr—Young, a neighbor. Dr. Liebwold made a motion to accept the motion, Dr. Schoolman seconded the motion. Seven members were against the variance (Dr. Doyle, Sara McGlinchy, Dr.. Schoolman, Dr. Seldin, Dr. Casamassima, Dr. Block b Ray Jones. One abstension - Dr. Liebwold. The Board denied the variance'because: 1. Maintain the minimum 100 foot separation distance between the well and sewage disposal system on this property. 2. Maintain the minimum 100 foot separation distance between the well on this property and sewage disposal system on two adjacent properties. 3. Provide a 50% expansion area. 4. It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. 5. A hardship has not been demonstrated. Old Business Tire Removal: Inspected on May 8, 1989 . Approximately 100,000 tires'removed to date. ,Berns Status: Examination before trial has been postponed to July 7, 1.989 Cost of Services Analysis: attached Drought Status - as of Friday May 12, 1989 total reservoir storage in NYC system at 86 %. Expect to top 90% over weekend. Normal at this time 100 %. Westchester and NYC to make decision shortly to revise restrictions on drought status. Polito - Putterman Article 78 Re: Katz property Suit cited Health Department and Town Zoning Board Approvals. Health Department Approval left standing by Dickinson. town Approval remanded back to Zoning Board for rehearing. -T-_9 U BOARD OF HEALTH July 24, 1989 Attendees: Ray Jones, Dr. Doyle, Dr. Casamassima, Dr. Seldin, Lou Tartaro, Elizabeth Calhoun, Sara McGlinchy, Dr. Lebvoll, Peter Alexanderson, arriving late Dr. Block. Absent: Dr. Schoolman Health Department Attendees: John Karell, Jr. Loretta Molinari Dr. Kamin, Medical Consultant Variance: Schultz - Lake Valhalla (T) Philipstown Presentors: Mr. Schultz, Fred Zenz, P. E. This variance was turned down in 1988. Schultz filed an Article 78 against Putnam County. The Article 78 decision by Judge Dickihhon remanded the application back to the Board for a rehearing because the Board of Health Minutes did not reflect the reasons for denying the Variance. Mr. Karell, Mr. Schultz and Mr. Zenz presented information to the Board. After reviewing the plans and considering the discussions, Dr. Lebwohl made a motion to approve the Variance as proposed. Dr. 'Casamassima seconded the.motion. A vote was taken six members were against the motion (Dr. Lebvold, Dr. Doyle, Dr. Casainassima, Dr. Seldin 8 Lou Tartaro, Mrs. Calhoun) two members abstained (Dr. Seldin b Sara McGlinchy) The Board denied the variance becauset 1. The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal systems in effect this day, specifically the requirements to: a) maintain a 150 foot separation distance between the proposed sewage disposal system consisting of tri- gallies and two wells, the proposed well and the well on the adjacent property to the east, lots 85 and 80. A 100 foot separation distance is provided. b> Install the sewage disposal system in an area where slopes do not exceed 15%. Slopes in the sewage disposal area range from 25% to 36% and 3 feet of fill is proposed to provide addition depth of soil over shallow ledge rock. 2. It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from,design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. 3. A hardship has not been demonstrated. f fir' BOARD OF HEALTH October 16, 1989 Attendees: Ray. Jones, Dr. Doyle, Elizabeth Colhoun, Dr. Block, Dr. Schoolman, Dr. Lebwohl Absent: Dr. Casamassima, 'Lou Tartaro, Sari 'McG] i nchy & Peter A l exanderson Nv;j l th Department Attendees: John Harell, Jr., .Dr. Hamin Board of Health meeting Started at 7:50 p.m. Variance: Cyprus - Putnam Lake, (T) Patterson Presentor: Mr. Ettari, P. E. Two (2) bedroom house, individual well, individual subsurface disposal system. Proposed well is 165 feet from an uphill sewage system and in the direct line of drainage. 200 feet is required. All other standards are met. After reviewing the plans and considering the discussions, Dr. Lebwohl made a motion to approve the Variance as proposed. Elizabeth Colhoun seconded the motion. A vote was taken six members were in favor of the motion (Dr: Doyle, Dr. Schoolman, Ray Jones, 'Dr. Block, Dr. Lebwohl 8 Mrs. Colhoun) Tuliano - (T) Putnam Valley Presentor: Mr. Juliano Proposed 3 bedroom house will be on less than 1/2 acre utilizing leaching fields. Proposed well is located 100' from the sewage system which consists of galleys, therefore, a 150' separation-distance is required. The septic system is also only 100' from a.well on,-an,. —adjacent property. 150-feet "is required. After discussing the proposed variance Mr. Juliano was advised that before the.matter will be considered for a variance by the Board of Health, the Department must be provided with documentation from the Town of Putnam Valley Building Department that this property is a legal building lot. Dr. Schoolman made a motion to postpone decision on this variance until Mr. Juliano received proper paperwork from the Town of Putnam Valley. Dr. Doyle seconded the motion. All members were in favor of this motion. Michael Schoolman made a motion to require that no variance should be scheduled before the Board of Health until the Director is provided with proof from the local building inspector that the parcel in question is a legal building lot. Dr. Lebwohl seconded the motion. All members were in favor of this motion. s 4 BOARD OF HEALTH December 18, 1989 Attendees: Ray Jones, Lou Tartaro, Elizabeth Calhoun, Sara McGlinchy, Dr. Block, Peter Alexanderson, County Executive. Health Department Attendees: John Karell, Environmental Health Loretta Molinari, Nursing Services Dr. Kamin Variance: Juliano, Maple Avenue (T) Putnam Valley Mr. Juliano, his wife and father attended as well as neighbors, Mr. & Mrs. Thorton, Mr. & Mrs. Lucas and Mr. Frank Gaglione, This variance had been first reviewed by the Board on October 16, 1989. The applicant had been requested to submit proof that the property is a building lot under Town Zoning. This documentation was provided by Marvin O'Dell and the Town Attorney. After further review and discussion Sara McGlinchy made a motion to grant the variance. Lou Tartaro seconded the motion. Five (5) Board members denied the motion (Dr. Block, Betsy Calhoun, Lou Tartaro, Sara McGlinchy, Ray Jones) Peter Alexanderson abstained. The motion was denied. 1. The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal systems in, effect this day, specifically: - °-- -- - - -- -The -proposed- well --and- -two wells on adjacent -pruperties are located 100 feet from the proposed subsurface sewage disposal system consisting of gallies. 150 feet is required. 2. It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards :could constitute a potential public health hazard. 3. A hardship has not been demonstrated. Smoking Code: Sara McGlinchy made a motion to adopt the State Smoking Code as Article VII of the County Code. Betsy Calhoun seconded the motion. All members were in favor of the motion. Food Code: It was proposed to adopt Part 14 of the NY State Code as Article II of the Putnam County Sanitary Code. This would update County Code to NY State Codes. Betsy Calhoun made a motion to adopt Part 14. Dr. Block seconded the motion. All members were in favor of this motion. Article XII: Public Health Nuisance. Mr. Spain, County Attorney will be reviewing this Article upon adoption by the Board. Sara McGlinchy made a motion to table this Article until all members could review same. Betsy Calhoun seconded the motion. All members were in favor of this motion. 1 'a . BOARD OF HEALTH December 17, 1990 6 A Attendees: Sara McGlinchy, President, Arthur McCormick, DVM, Donna Bernard, Gregory Quinn, Dr. Daniel Doyle, Raymond Jones, Dr. Michael Schoolman Absent: Dr. Charles Block, Dr. Anthony Casamassima, Dr. Paul Leb,wohl, Peter Alexanderson Health Department Attendees: John Karell, Jr., P.E., Public Health Director, Loretta Molinari, Dir. of Patient Services Meeting called to order at 7:40 P.M. Motion to accept minutes of November 19, 1990 made by Dan Doyle, seconded by. Donna Bernard. Unanimous. Minutes accepted. NEW BUSINESS Variance: John Bozkurtian Lake Mahopac (T) Carmel 'Present: John Bozkurtian William Besharat, Architect- Neighbors: John & Phyllis Bourges 521 South Lake Boulevard, Lot'3 Variance is for a reduction in the required 200' separation distance to Lake Mahopac from the proposed SSDS. A 3 bedroom home on public water supply is proposed. Mr. Bozkurtian states hardship in that the property is vorthless if the variance is denied, since the entire lot is vithin the 200' required.separation distance. Neighbors John & Phyllis Bourges vere present and indicated that they ovn the adjacent property vith an easement on Mr. Bozkurtian's lot. They have no objections to this house being built, but their chief concern is that no damage come to his septic system area. Mr. Besharat, the architect, stated that the construction will in no way interfere with this section of property.' T -► 3 a O BOH MINUTES 2 12/17/90 ?lotion by Ray Jones to accept plan as presented. All opposed. Motion denied. It is suggested by the Board that the plans be changed to show a 2 bedroom dwelling and that the septic be located in the rear of the property, creating a wider separation distance from the lake. OLD BUSINESS Putnam County Landfill - Mr. Karell, Mr. Alexanderson, Mr. Spain and the Putnam County Legislature attended a Federal Court hearing on Monday, December 10, 1990. The judge suggested that the landfill issue be settled out of court. A survey will be prepared to show the location of the waste. A pre -trial conference is set for January, 14, 1991. Loving Care Dry Cleaners - The Health Department has completed their reviev of the plastic enclosure proposal, along with DEC and the State Health Department. A letter has been sent to Loving Care Dry Cleaners with comments and concerns. It is expected that test sampling be conducted in January or February, 1991. Graymoor - The Health Department is still in the process of trying to contact John Tartaro to bring him in for a hearing. DEPARTMENT °REPORT'S _. ---- - - - - -- - - - - - -- Nursing report dispensed by Loretta Molinari (attached). Loretta requested that she have time at the January, 1991 Board of Health meeting to review the bulk of this report, which is a recap of 1990. Motion made by Ray Jones to sign and approve the summary report for the Annual Agency Evaluation previously presented to the Board by Loretta. Seconded by Dan Doyle. All in favor. Unanimous. Communicable Disease =, An investigation is being conducted regarding a possible outbreak of pertussis at a local welfare motel. There are several children living at the motel. Surveillance nurse is contacting area physicians regarding influenza cases. She will continue this special flu surveillance over the next several months. Hepatitis B and measles titers have been drawn from nursing staff members. Immunizations will be provided as needed per results. Immunizations - The BIB immunization is now being offered at Health Department clinics at 2, 4, 6 and 15 months per State recommendations (previously only one dose required). STD's - Jack Karell met with Dr Kamin and an STD state representative regarding the need for syphilis screening and treatment at high risk facilities, including the County Jail. Jack has written a letter to Sheriff Thoubboron regarding this issue. Z � -3 George Plcska, 9 Locust Ct. Mahopac, NY 10541 Dear Mr. Flcska: a & DEPARTME T OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Service: 4 Geneva Road, Brexster. View York 10:09 (914) 278-5130 BRUCE R. FOLEY. R.S. Acting Public Health Director February 10, 1C95 : Variance Reques Floska, Tan. arack- Rcad (T) Carmel 76.5-1-112 You are hereby advised that your request for a variance from the provisions of Article I:I of the Putnam County Sani;a -! Ccde and t ^e zz:andards of the Futnam County Pealth Department relative to design Of a S::CSJrface sewage disccsa system and well to serve the above cact'cned property has been considered by the Putnam Ccunty Eoard of'Healt:•, on January 23, 1994 and. '.as been approved with the foilcwing terms..and conditions: 1 . Well to be double cased 2. Ufitra Violet disinfection to be ins-:--!led. "The censtructicn of this sewage discesal system may ce•eubject to local wetlands resulaticns. Yeu should contact local wetlands officials in this regard." "You are referred to Article 128.1. of the official ccmpiiaticn of Cedes, Rules and Regulations of the State of New York, Title 10, relative to the need for approval of individual sewage disposal systems by the City of New York. You should contact Ci ty 'Of f i ci al s in this retard." Very truly yours, Ir chae _ Sch flan President, Board of Health MS /BF /jp cc: BI (T) Carmel d 0 . George Ploskp 9 Locust Ct., Mahopac, N. Y. - Q_1FM Fg 4 6 December 6, 1994. Department of Health Division of Envi.ronmcntal Qcalth Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, N. Y. 10509 ATT: Ur. Michael Sehoolman, Hoard Prosidon.L REF: Tamarack Road, Mahc ?ac known on Tax ,Map V6.5-1-14' Dear Mr. Foley: Iii accordance with year raquest, p' case accept ::h--:s letter as formal notice tc be placed on the Dccember :meeting for the purpose c- requesting approval of the � e1ow Listed variances. :1. The proposed well is shown 93' from the existing sewage disposal syscam to the south. Regulation C,11.1. for 1001. �...._._.._._.....__..1,_.The. :.proposed_ sewage disposal system is considerec in direct line of deaf. ;,a'gd With e:c -st_'na-well •or. lot 50 and shown with a separation distance of !00'. Regulations call for 200'.' 3. The existing well on lot 4 is shown 11-0 from proposed SDS and considered in direct line of drainage from a portion of the proposed sewage disposal system. ?. minium of 200' is required according to regulations. 4. The proposed sewage system is 140' froM, Lake Mahopec and regulations require 2001. If these variances are-not approved by the board it would deny us the right to use our property for building :our' -':..* future home and render to property almost worthless. We respectfully request your approval and thank you for your interest in this matter. �l J Gcoro P os a SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY. OF PUTNAM BARBARA JONES and-WILLIAM JONES Petitioners, -,against - BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S., as Acting Public Health 'Director of the .Putnam County Department of Health, Respondent. VERIFIED ANSWER- PUTNAM CWNI'Y DEPAMNENT OF LAW .Attorneys €or Office and Post Office .Address County Office" Building Two County,',Center 'Carmel, a New York 10512 225 -3641 To Attorneys} for Service of a Y copy of the within is hereby admitted. Dated, Attorneys) for Sir; - Please take notice Ct Notice of Entry that the within is a (certified) true copy of a duly entered in the office of the clerk of the within named court on 19 Notice of Settlement that an order of which the within is a true copy will be presented for settlement to the HON. one of the judges of the within named court, at on 19 at M. Dated, . Yours etc. PUTNAM COUN'T'Y b ARTMEN't' OF LAW Attorneys for To Office and Post Office Address County Office Building Attorney (s) - for : Ztao County Center Carmel, New York 10512 DATE 2/2/96 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 TO: John Carmody Law Dept. FAX COVER SHEET FAX #: 225 -0539 FROM: Putnam County Health Department Division of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road. Brewster, New York 10509 Bruce Foley, Acting Public Health Director Number of pages to be transmitted 10 (including cover sheet) NOTES /MESSAGES OUR FAX NUMBER IS 914 -278 -7921 Note to sender: Complete all entries in Fax Log In the event of transmission /reception difficulties, please contact our office. 914 - 278 -6130 .... -- BRUCE R. FOLEY', 'R.S. - Acting Public Health Director FEB-01 -1996 12:55 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT CARL F. LODES County Attorney PHILIP M. CAMPBELL Risk Manager DATE: TO: TO DEPARTMENT OF LAW FAX TRANSMITTAL FORM 2787921 P.01 THOMAS F. PURCELL Depart, County Attorney LILLIAN DiLORENZO Deputy County Attorney KATHLEEN KINQ Sr. Legal - Assiao nt FAX #: FROM: r �Toheanly NO. OF PAGES: CRy2 r, + Document is also being mailed: Yes ( no . ; 60,11bajCk- 9C-fL� 0Ur)0J �i �u,� hCtx tlium�il U1 0:S39 �aml't,�yA The information contained in this facsimile is confidential and is intended only for the use of the named addressee. if the reader of this message is not the named addressee or the person responsible to deliver it to the named addressee, you are hereby notified that any use of this facsimile or its contents, including dissemination or copying is strictly prohibited. If you have received this facsimile in error, please immediately notify the Putnam County Department of Law by telephone (914) 225- -3641 Ext. 260 and mail the original facsimile to us at the above address. we will reimburse your telephone and postage expense for doing so. Thank you. 40 GLENEIDA AVENUE - CARMEL, NEW YORK 10512 (914) 225 3641 Ext. 260 FEB -01 -1996 12:55 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO 2787921 P.02 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF PUTNAM ----------------------------------- - - - - -X BARBARA JONES and WILLIAM .JONES_ -- INDER NO. 192395 Petitioners, AFFIDAVIT - against - BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S., as Acting Public Health Director of the Putnam County Department of Health, Respondent. ------------------------------------ - - - -.X BRUCE R. FOLEY, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I am the Acting Public Health Director of the Putnam County Department of Health ( "Health Department "). I have operated in such capacity since September 1994.. As. such, and based upon the file maintained by the Health Department, I am fully familiar with the-facts asserted herein. 2. I understand that the action herein, Petitioners, BARBARA JONES and WILLIAM JONES, seek a review of my decision to deny their request for a specific waiver f om the requirements of 10 NYCRR Part 75 ( "State Code ) and the Putnam County Sanitary Code ( "Loca Code ") relative to toe Gonstr ction ce a well on tain �eal ?_Q1 � `� property located at Lakeshore, Drive West and Ravina Road in the Town of Patterson, New York (Tax Map 46, Block 13, Lot 1.2) (the "Premises ") - 3. It is my further understanding the Petitioners also seek an Order remanding this matter for "a special waiver hearing" before myself and the Board of Health. FEB -01 -1996 12:56 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO 2787921 P.03 FACT 4. On or about August 4, 1986, the Health Department received an initial application for a "Construction Permit For Sewage Disposal System" in connection with the Premises. This application was submitted by John H. Prentiss in the name of Diane Wiseman, the then owner of the Premises. (See, Exhibit "A" annexed to the verified Answer.) 5. Thereafter, the Health Department requested and received certain revisions relating to the design of the proposed construction on the Premises, including the precise locations of the well and sewage disposal systems both on and adjacent to the Premises. 6. On or about April 6, 1987, the permit application and related materials were reviewed by John Karell, P.E., Director, Putnam County Health Department, and okayed for approval. On that same date a construction permit for a sewage disposal system and_. individual well was issued to Diane Wiseman (hereinafter the "Permit "). By its own terms, the Permit was set to expire in one (1) year. 7. At the time the original Permit was issued, certified plans that were presented to the Health Department indicated that the separation distance between the proposed well site on the Premises and the sewage disposal system on the property to the �A FEB -01 -1996 12:56 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO 2787921 P.OA north of the Premises was 100 feet as required by the State and Local Codes. 8. On or about March '3,. 1988, the Permit was renewed, without revisions, to Diane'WisemAn. Thereafter, on September 19, 1988, the Permit was transferred from Diane Wiseman to Robert W. Jones. 9. On or about June 3, 199}., the Permit was again renewed in the name of Robert Jones. 10. On or about December 7,. 1992, the Permit was again renewed and transferred from Robert Jones to Petitioners BARBARA JONES and WILLIAM JONES. 11. On each occasion when the Permit was renewed, the Health Department relied upon the aforementioned representation that the relevant separation distance was 100 feet. 12. On or about September 1, 1994, the property corners of the Premises were staked• by a surveyor,_ who also staked the :. c proposed well location. At that time, the adjoining property owner contacted the Health Department expressing concerns over the proposed location of the Petitioners' well in relation to the adjoining property owner's existing sewage disposal system. In response, on or about September 1, 1994, the Health Department made a field inspection of the Pis: [Its a spections- by-the- Hea-lt-h- Depa-r-tmen- in rel4tion -to-pe ene"ls were not mandatp� »n *�' •�} ??.- 1994.j `(2 �S FEB -01 -1996 12:5? FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO 2787921 P.05 13. It was determined at that time that contrary to initial submissions, the separation distance between the proposed well location and the sewage disposal system to the north of the Premises was less than the required distance of 100 feet. 14. On that basis, on or about September 2, 1994, the Health Department suspended the Petitioners' Permit. Petitioners' were advised of this decision by letter dated September 2, 1994, a copy of which is annexed to the Verified Answer as Exhibit "D ". 15. The purpose 'of suspending the Permit, as opposed to immediately revoking it, was to give Petitioners an opportunity to submit evidence of compliance with Code requirements and /or make whatever revisions in their plans as may necessary to ensure Code compliance. 16. It is noted that the report on the field inspection by the Health Department initially indicated that the distance from the adjoining sewage disposal system to the proposed well site was 45 feet. Shortly thereafter it was discovered that this determination was based upon unapproved plans and a misplacement of the proposed well site. The correct measurement from the reported location of the adjoining sewage disposal system to the corrected well location on Petitioners' Premises was found to be approximately 85 feet; still less than the required 100 feet. 4 FEB -01 -1996 12:58 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO 2787921 P.06 17. On December 12, 1994, a second field inspection was conducted by William Hedges, Senior Public Health Sanitarian for the Health Department. At that time, based on the reported locations of the adjoining property owner's well and sewage disposal system, it was determined that the Petitioners' proposed well location could not be any further than 85 feet from the adjoining septic system. 18. Based upon that determination, on or about December 14, .1994, Petitioners' were advised that their application for a construction permit was denied. i 19. By letter dated April 11, 1995, John Prentiss, P.E., advised the Health Department that Petitioners were formally requesting a variance on the Premises seeking permission to construct a water well that would be less than the required 100 foot separation distance from the existing sewage disposal system on the adjoining property to the north. (A copy of this letter is annexed to the Verified Answer as Exhibit "E ".): 20. Petitioners' application for a variance was entertained at three (3) Board of Health meetings, on June 9, 1995, July 17, 1995, and August 21, 1995. Petitioners, together with their attorney, were present at all three (3) meetings. Lengthy discussions were held at each of the meetings and Petitioner's were given every opportunity to come forward with evidence in support of their. variance request. A FEB -01 -1996 12:58 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO 2787921 P.07 21. At the August 21, 1995 meeting, pursuant to my authority under the Putnam County Sanitary Code, Art. III, $3(b), I made the decision to deny petitioners' variance request and revoke the Permit for the reasons stated in my letter to Petitioners, dated August 29, 1995, a copy of which is annexed to the Verified Answer as Exhibit "F ". 22. Specifically, my decision was based upon a review of all required applications, soil analysis and other information required by the Health Department, together with the information that came to light in September 1994 regarding the discrepancy in the location of the existing sewage 'system directly to the north of the Premises. It was uncontested by Petitioners that the separation distance between this existing sewage disposal system and their proposed well location was considerably less than the required 100 feet. 23. Both the State Code, at 10 NYCRR Part 75, and the Local Code (Putnam County Sanitary Code), at Article III, $3, require that wells be constructed a minimum of 100 feet from existing _ sewage disposal_ systems:, Specifically., 10 NYCRR Part 75, Appendix. 5 -B, provides that wells "shall be constructed... at a distance, from potential sources of pollution on the owner's property or on adjoining properties, which is not less than that stated in Table 3 of this bulletin." Table 3 lists the suggested minimum distances between water and sewerage units. of relevance here is the suggested separation distance of 100 feet between a well and a 6 FEB -01 -1996 12:59 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO 2787921 P.08 subsurface disposal field. As indicated, the aforementioned section of Appendix 5 -B relating to well construction states that the separation distance should be no less than indicated in Table 3. (Copies of the referenced pages of Appendix 5 -B are annexed to the VerifiedAAnswer as Exhibits G -3 and-G -4.) 24. Furthermore, 10 NYCRR Part 75, Appendix 75 -A, the provisions of which are adopted by the Health Department pursuant to Article III, S3 of the Sanitary Code, also require a minimum separation distance of 100 feet from a well to a sewage absorption field. (A copy of the referenced section of Appendix 75 -A is annexed to the Verified Answer as Exhibit "H ".) 25. It is my opinion as Director, that the aforementioned minimum separation distances are required to ensure safe water supplies to individual residences. Any distance less than the required 100 feet can potentially create a public health hazard. Of further concern in the present case is the fact that we are dealing with :.adjoining, properties.' -Petitioners.. have proposed placing their well in a location which is considerably less than the. required separation distance from the adjoining property owners, sewage disposal system. In so doing, not only do Petitioners risk potential contamination of their own water supply, but they place any future occupants of the Premises at risk- - possibly without their knowledge or knowing content. 7 FEB -01 -1996 12:59 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO 2787921 P.09 26. ..... Tn. rendering my decision to deny Petitioners' request for a variance, not only did I rely on statutory authority, but I' adhered to a substantial number of precedents dating back to 1987. Annexed to the Verified Answer as Exhibit "I" are copies of minutes from several Board of Health meetings at which approximately twenty -six ( 26 ) similar requests for variances were considered from October 20, 1986 to February 10, 1995. Of those twenty -six (26) requests, only five (5) were approved. Of the five (5) that were approved, only three (3) -dealt specifically with requests for variances from the code provisions requiring a minimum separation distance of 100 feet. In two (2) of those instances the separation distances.involved were 95 feet and 93 feet, respectively. (See, Exhibits I -1 and I -15.) In the third instance, the proposed well location was 75 feet from the sewage disposal system, but 110 feet from the adjacent property. in all other. instances when similar variances were sought, the requests were denied for failing to meet the 100 foot minimum separation distance requirement. (See, Exhib-its-1-2 -(- 82-ft. - denied, 63 ft. - denied, 45 ft. , - denied, 80 - ft. to adjacent property - denied); I -4 (70 ft. - denied, 70 ft. /90 .ft. to adjacent property - denied, 65 £t. - denied); 1 -5 (within 100 ft. - denied, 40 ft. - denied, 80 ft. - denied); I -6 (60 ft. - denied), and I -9 (84 ft. - denied, 70 ft. /90 ft. off site - denied).) 0 8 FEB -01 -1996 13:00 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO 2787921 P.10 27. Based on the above, I respectfully submit to the Court that my decision to deny the Petitioners` request for a variance was well.- founded in statutory authority and precedent, and was in no way arbitrary or capricious. Sworn to before me this day of , 199 Notary-Public BRUCE R. FOLEY TOTAL P.10 F, FEB -01 -1996 12 =55 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO SUPREME COURT OF THE STAR'S OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF PUTNAM W--------------------------------------- x BARBARA JONES and WILLIAM JONES Petitioners, - against - BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S., as Acting Public Health Director of the Putnam County Department of Health, Respondent. ------------------------------------ - --- -g 2787921 P.02 INDEX NO. 1923/95 AFFIDAVIT BRUCE R. FOLEY, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I ant the Acting Public Health Director of the Putnam County Department of Health ( "Health Department "). I have operated in such capacity since September 1994. As such, and based upon the file maintained by the Health Department, I am fully familiar with the facts asserted herein. 2. I understand that the action herein, Petitioners, BARBARA JONES and WILLIAM JONES, seek a review of lay decision to deny their request for a specific waiver from the requirements of 10 NYCRR 4. iX Part 75 ( "State Code ^'j and the Putnam County Sanitary Code ( "Loca _ Code ") relative to t#e Gonstr'T)ction a well onain �eal ` property located at Lakeshore Drive West and Ravina Road in the Town of Patterson, New York (Tax Map 46, Block 13, Lot 1.2) (the "Premises ") . 3. It is my further understanding the Petitioners also seek an Order remanding this matter for "a special waiver hearing" before myself and the Board of Health. FEB -01 -1996 12:56 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT FACTS TO 2787921 P.03 4. On or about August 4, 1986, the Health Department received an initial application for a "Construction Permit For Sewage Disposal System" in connection with, the Premises. This application was submitted by John H. PrentisAn the name of Diane J Wiseman, the then owner of the Premises. (gee, Exhibit "A" annexed to the Verified Answer.) 5. Thereafter, the Health Department requested and received certain revisions relating to the design of the proposed construction on the Premises, including the precise locations of the well and sewage disposal systems both on and adjacent to the Premises. 6. On or about April 6, 2987, the permit application and related materials were reviewed by John Karell, P.E., Director, Putnam County Health Department, and okayed for approval. On that same !date a construction permit for a sewage disposal system and individual- --well- was issued to Diane Wiseman' (lier®inafter the "Permit ")., By its own terms, the Permit was set to expire in one (1) year. 7. At the time the original Permit was issued, certified plans that were presented to the .Health Department indicated that the separation distance between the proposed well site on the Premises and the sewage disposal system on the property to the 2 FE5 -01 -1996 12:56 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO 2787921 P.04 north of the Premises was 100 feet as required by the State and Local Codes. 8. On or about March 3,. 19.88, the Permit was renewed, without revisions, to Diane Wiseman..Thereafter,, on September 19, 1988, the Permit was transferred from Diane Wiseman to Robert W. Jones. 9. On or about June 3, 1991, the Permit was again renewed in the name of Robert Jones. 10. On or about December:7,. 1992, the Permit was again renewed and transferred from Robert Jones to Petitioners BARBARA JONES and WILLIAM JOKES. 11. On each occasion when the.Permit was renewed, the Health Department relied upon the aforementioned representation that the relevant separation distance was 100 feet. 12. On or about September 1, 1994, the property corners of the Premises were staked by a surveyor,. who also staked the proposed well location. At that time, the adjoining.property owner contacted the Health Department expressing concerns over the proposed location of the Petitioners' well in relation to the adjoining property owner's existing sewage disposal system. In response, on or about September i, 1994, the Health Department made a field inspection of the Prem3..see. It_ -is noted that field ctions by the Health Department in relation to permit renewals were not mandated until August 22, 1994.1 �S Vk s-- v 3 FEB -01 -1996 12:57 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO 2787921* P.05 13. it was determined at that time that contrary to initial submissions, the separation distance between the proposed well location and the sewage disposal system to the north of the Premises was less than the required distance of 100 feet. 14. On that basis, on or about September 2, 1994, the Health Department suspended the Petitioners' Permit. Petitioners' were advised of this decision by letter dated September 2, 1994, a copy of which is annexed to the Verified Answer as Exhibit "D"'. 15. The purpose of suspending the Permit, as opposed to immediately revoking it, was to give Petitioners an opportunity to submit evidence of compliance mith Code requirements and /or make whatever revisions is their plans as may necessary to ensure Code compliance. 16. it is noted that the report on the field inspection by the Health Department initially indicated that the distance from the adjoining sewage disposal system to the proposed well site was 45 feet. shortly thereafter it was discovered that this _. :..:. _..... -..._- - -• __ -..- •- -- --determination -was -based -upon unapproved plans' Add-a idisplacement of.. the proposed well site. The correct measurement from the reported location of the adjoining sewage disposal system to the corrected well location on Petitioners• Premises was found to be approximately 85 feet; still less than the required 100 feet. 4 FEB-01 -1996 12:58 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO 2787921 P.06 17. On December 12, 1994, a second field inspection was conducted by William Hedges, Senior Public Health Sanitarian for the Health Department. At that time, based on the reported locations of the adjoining property owner's well and sewage disposal system, it was determined that the Petitioners' proposed well location could not be any further than 85 feet from the adjoining septic system. 18. Based upon that determination, on or about December 14, 1994, Petitioners' were advised that their application for a construction permit was denied. 19. By letter dated April 11, 1995, John Prentiss, P.B., advised the Health Department that Petitioners were formally requesting a variance on the Premises seeking permission to construct a water well that would be less than the required 100 foot separation distance from the existing sewage disposal system on the adjoining property to the north. (A copy of this letter is annexed to the Verified Answer as Exhibit IT".) 20. Petitioners' application for a variance was entertained at three (3) Board of Health meetings, on. June 9, 19950, July 17, 1995, and August 21, 1995. Petitioners, together with their attorney, were present at all three (3) meetings. Lengthy discussions were held at each of the meetings and Petitioner's were given every opportunity to come forward with evidence in support of their variance request. 5 FEB -01 -1996 12:58 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO 2787921 P.O? 21. At the August 21, 1995 meeting, pursuant to my authority under the Putnam County Sanitary Code, Art. III, $3(b), I made the decision to deny petitioners, variance request and revoke the Permit for the reasons stated in my letter to Petitioners, dated August 29, 1995, a copy of which is annexed to the Verified,Answer as Exhibit "F ". 22. Specifically, my decision was based upon a review of all required applications, soil analysis and other information required by the Health Department, together with the information that came to light in September 1994 regarding the discrepancy in the location of the existing sewage system directly to the north of the Promises. It was uncontested by Petitioners that the separation distance between this existing sewage disposal system and their proposed well location was considerably less than the required 100 feet. 23. Both the State Code, at 10 NYCRR Part 75, and the Local Code (Putnam County Sanitary Code), at Article III, $3, require that wells be constructed a minimum of 100 feet from existing i ..sewage disposal systems. Specifically, 20 NYCRR Part 75, Appendix _ ................ 5 -B, provides that wells "shall be constructed... at a distance, from potential sources of pollution on the owners property or on adjoining properties, which is ro _eM than that stated in Table 3 of this bulletin." Table 3 lists the suggested minimum distances between water and sewerage units. of relevance here is the suggested separation distance of 100 feet between a well and a 6 FEB-01 -1996 12:59 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO 2787921 P.08 subsurface disposal field. As indicated, the aforementioned section of Appendix 5 -B relating to well construction states that the separation distance should be no less than indicated in Table 3. (Copies of the referenced pages of Appendix 5 -B are annexed to the Verified Answer as Exhibits G -3 and Gr4.) 24. Furthermore, 10 NYCRR Part 75, Appendix 75 -A, the provisions of which are adopted by the Health Department pursuant to Article Iii, S3 of the Sanitary Code, also require a minimum separation distance of 100 feet from a well to a sewage absorption field. (A copy of the referenced section of Appendix 75 -A is annexed to the Verified Answer as Exhibit -a".) 25. It is my opinion as Director, that the aforementioned minimum separation distances are required to ensure safe water supplies to individual residences. Any distance less than the required 100 feet can potentially create a public health hazard. Of further concern in the present case is the fact that we are .dealing with_: adjoining .properties..- ..-Petitioners have proposed .. __ _ ....._.. placing their well in a location which is considerably less than the required separation distance from the adjoining property owners' sewage disposal system. In so doing, not only do Petitioners risk potential contamination of their own water supply, but they place any future occupants of the Premises at risk- - possibly without their knowledge or knowing content. 7 FEB -01 -1996 12,59 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO 2787921 P.09 26. In rendering my decision to deny Petitioners' request for a variance, not only did I rely on statutory authority, but I adhered to a substantial number of precedents dating back to 1987. Annexed to the Verified Answer as Exhibit "I" are copies of minutes from several Board of Health meetings at which approximately twenty -six (26) similar requests for variances were considered from October 20, 1986 to February 10, 1995. Of those twenty -six (26) requests, only five (5) were approved. Of the five (5.) that were approved, only three (3) dealt specifically with requests for variances from the Code provisions requiring a minimum separation distance of 100 feet. In two (2) of those instances the separation distances involved were 93 feet and 93 feet, respectively. (See, Exhibits I -1 and I -15.) In the third instance, the proposed well location was 75 feet from the sewage disposal system, but 110 feet from the adjacent property. In all other instances when similar variances were sought, the requests were denied for failing to meet the 100 foot minimum separation distance requirement. (See, Exhibits- I -2- (.82 ft. - denied, 63 ft. - denied, -- 45 ft. - denied, 80 ft. to adjacent property - denied); I -4 (70 ft. - denied, 70 ft. /90 ft. to adjacent property - denied, 65 ft. - denied); I -5 (within 100 ft. - denied, 40 ft. - denied, 80 ft. - denied); I -6 (60 ft. - denied), and I -9 (84 ft. - denied, 70 ft. /90 ft. off site - denied).) 0 FEB -01 -1996 13:00 FROM PUTNAM COUNTY LAW DEPT TO 2787921 P.10 21. Based on the above, I respectfully submit to the Court that my decision to deny the Petitioners' request fora variance was well- founded in statutory authority and precedent, and was in no way arbitrary or.capricious. BRUCE R. FOLBY Sworn to before me this day of , 199 Notary Public TOTAL P.10 9 I CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM Jones /Wiseman Lakeshore Drive & Ravina Road (T) Patterson Lot 5806 -7 -8- 5887 -89. TM 25.56- 1 -40'• P -22 -87 August 4, 1986 Original application submitted by' John Prentiss, P. E. September 4, 1986 Revisions requested by Putnam County Health Department including limit to two bedroom design and design and fill section only. March 3, 1987 Revisions requested by.Putnam County Health Department including the addition of adjacent wells and SDS to plans. * March 26, 1987 More precise locations of surrounding wells only sewage disposal systems requested. Putnam County Health Department letter March 26, 1987. * February 17, 1987 Putnam County Health Department requested, by letter, more precise locations of..the well and'SDS to the north (now Vozzella) and proposed setbacks .for the proposed residence. April 6, 1987 Permit application and related material reviewed by John Karell, P. E. Director, Putnam County Health Department and okayed for approval. 4 , I o ° I December 12, 1994 Field inspection again conducted by Hedges, Putnam County Health Department finding indicate Vozzella well and reported sewage disposal system both located in front of Vozzella's residence. Jones proposed well could not be located any further than 85' from the area indicated to be Vozzella's septic system. No structure such as a residence, driveway or road; etc., located between Vozzella's reported SDS and the proposed Jones well location'. December 14, 1994 Letter from Bruce Foley, Acting Director rejecting the application for a construction permit based on the revised location of the Vozzella's sewage disposal system. April 11, 1995 John Prentiss applied for a variance of 15' for the construction of an individual well on the Jones, property. 85' from the proposed well to the reported,sewage disposal system on the adjacent parcel to the north ( Vozzella) Minutes enclosed June 19, 1995 Variance request entertained at Board of Health meeting. * July 17, 1995 Continue variance request at Board of Health * August 21 1995 Conti nue-Variance' request at Board "of Health August 29, 1995 In accordance with the; Administrative Rules of Part 75 Chapter II the request for a variance of the Jones parcel is denied. * Corr. enclosed BOARD OF HEALTH AUGUST 21, 1995 Board of Health Attendees:- Hay, Bernard, Block, Schoolman, Kamin, Ciaiola, Lebwohl Health Dept. Attendees:- Foley, Molinari Non - Voting Attendees:- Velardi (representing Bondi), Purcell, County Attorney Schoolman called meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Executive session to follow. Schoolman asked if there were any additions, subtractions, or amendments to July 17th Minutes. Bernard made motion to accept Minutes as written, seconded by Block. Motion carried. Schoolman read.memorandum he had received from Lodes, County Attorney, in reply to letter written relative-to proposed modifications of the Putnam County Sanitary Code. In essence, the Putnam County Board of Health's proposed modification are permissible and in-accordance-with the State Constitution and the relevant statutory and case law. Copies to be distributed to Board Members. Molinari presented Nursing Division report and inquired if there were any questions regarding the department report she had mailed to members. Concerned about annual agency evaluation which should be looked.at, reviewed by the Board, voted upon and sent with any recommendations the Board may have. Should be done as soon as possible as-we are half way into 1995. Had hoped with everyone receiving it in the mail, it could.be signed this. evening. Schoolman will sign if no one has any problem.with it-. Bernard moved to accept the annual agency evaluation and concede it, seconded by Hay. Molinari, on the recommendation from the Board in terms of any other statement the Board would wish to put on the form. Schoolman, does. 'Is increasingly concerned by three groups of health care providers that are not working in harmony which are, the Health, Department, the hospital as-a provider of not only nursing. services, but other health related services and the Physicians in the community: To make sure there is ap optimization and naturalization of money, resources' and effort, that every effort be made to get the three groups or their representatives together to develop what.should be a comprehensive plan to the County. Molinari replied, Municipal Health Services plans addressing collaboration of providers in community. Is in process of being revised,due October 1st. Molinari states that issues not appropriate in relation to annual agency evaluation. Schoolman, Board is not making any statements on report at this time. Molinari, they should at least say, reviewed by Board. Schoolman agreed, but said it is not an action. Bernard, looking over pages 4 and 5,.where her general concerns were, statistical data, should add comment, reviewed by Board and concerned about lack of appropriate data correction ystem and monitoring the acceptability of the BRC contract. Foley distributed his Advisory report. Inquired if there were any questions on Revised Addition and Well Guidelines, self = explanatory Health Education Report and a letter which is going out to Physicians requiring the report of human granulocytic ehrlichiosis (HGE). Lebwohl, correction on House Additions Approval Guidelines, paragraph B, #2, word should read partitions instead of petition. Foley, correction will be made, letters have not yet been sent out. a� -2- Kamin commented on correction to Molinari's report. She will set it up. Schoolman, will do Variance Hearing on Jones before going into Executive Session. County Attorney is-present. Foley announced that Bracke has withdrawn Variance application. They may resubmit. Schoolman welcomed everyone back on Jones' Hearing. Health Department will review issues that necessitated variance request after which everyone will be entitled to speak. Foley stated, in 1987, Jones' lot was.approved showing reported location by Engineer, John Prentis of -the Sanitary.System, 100 feet to the proposed well. In 1994, the Health Department became aware the sanitary system was not as reported on the original approval, but in fact, in front of the house which measured 85 feet. Lot approval in 1987 with misinformation, misrepresentation, whatever case may-be, would not have been approved in 1987. Department of. Health.suspended permit and is requesting the Board of Health to confirm that the permit be revoked. Board Members asked various questions which were answered by .applicant, Jones and his Attorney,'Velardi. Adjoining property owners, also present, voiced their concerns. After much discussion, Foley made recommendation to revoke permit. Question arose, if Foley.has authority to revoke permit, why are the Board Members involved? Foley replied,.it had been presented to the"Board as a variance.. The Department has done studies through the County Attorney's office and.State Department of Health and found out the Director does have authority to revoke the permit, not the Board. Schoolman asked Foley to spell it out for the Board as to what his functions are. Foley read letter from State Health Department, dated July 5th from James D. Decker, P.E.,Ghief, Residential Sanitation Sect., Bureau of Community Sanitation and Food Protection, wherein it is recommended that Section 3, Article-3 of the proposed Putnam County Sanitary Code be revised to be more consistent with Section 75, 6b, etc., for Individual Water' Supply and Individual Treatment.Systems. The•County,Healtb Department official °designated toconsider' and-grant/deny written applications,for specific waivers should be the County Commissioner of Health, the County Public Health Director, the County Environmental Services, etc.,'rather than the County Board of Health with the concurrence of the Director. The County Board of Health may consider appeals to decisions rendered by the designated official regarding granting /denying applications for specific waivers. Questions and discussion followed from Board Members as to the purpose.they serve. Schoolman made motion, since Foley is not granting a variance in this case and is not going to entertain any arguments to grant the variance, that the Board of Health no longer decide this issue and let all the parties meet with Foley at their own time and place, seconded by Bernard and Block. Motion carried. After dismissal of Jones' delegation, deliberation followed .on authority of Board Members and the Department of Health. Purcell spoke on interpretation of legality /procedures. Kamin requested Director's report, briefly, as to what he has done, to keep abreast of what has transpired. It Meeting adjourned 9:00 P.M. BOARD OF HEALTH �+ JUNE 19, 1995• Board of Health Attendees:- Bernard, Hay, Doyle, Lebwohl, Schoolman, Block, Ciaiola, Weber Health Dept. Attendees:- Foley, Hedges Non - Voting Attendee representing Bob Bondi:- Velardi Meeting called to order at 7:00 P.M. Subject to correction sixth paragraph, second page of May 15, 1995 Minutes, to show Ciaiola not Doyle, read letter he drafted to obtain legal opinion relevant to the County Sanitary Code. In addition, Weber, incorrectly listed as Health Dept. Attendee. Motion was made and carried to accept Minutes with above changes. Molinari, not being present, Schooman asked Foley about what. is happening with BRC in the Nursing Dept. Foley replied, the matter still has not been resolved. Velardi- stated she knew Bondi had a meeting with BRC and gave them a time frame in which to come up with a program. However, she did not know what the time.frame was. Variance Worksho Bracke Mainitou Station Rd. (T) Philipstown Hedges presented floor plan and map of Bracke's variance request to add a second floor ' to the existing dwelling. Variance is required because it exceeds 15%. Schoolman inquired, how far the house is from the river and Ciaiola asked distance from flood plains. Hearing is scheduled for July 17, 1995. Foley distributed departmental report highlighting coordination of 1995 Tobacco - Free Awareness Project; -Bicycle Helmet Distribution Program, 3 ATUPA violations; concluded field testing of interactive Radon Preventative Education Computer at Mahopac Library and conducted Lyme Disease Awareness Week.activities. Molinari will either mail her report to Members or distribute at next meeting. Schoolman inquired about the appointment of another Environmentalist to the Board. Ciaiola is to find someone that he can work with. Schoolman. asked Foley to give up -date on Cutillo's Restaurant. Foley said the well was drilled, down 600', waiting for lab .results before he attempts to hydro -frac well. Variance Hearing Jones, William Ravina Road (T) Patterson Applicant is requesting variance to construct a well 85' from septic system. Original permit was suspended due to the fact that the SDS on the 1987 survey was incorrect. Attorney Velardi is representing the applicant for variance. a -2- Hearing - Jones (continued) After a lengthy discussion, a motion was made and carried to table the application until legal interpretation is obtained from the County Attorney. Foley should have the information by July 10th and will be sent out to the Members. Ciaiola stated he will be starting up the retesting program at local beaches. Has people lined up. Motion-made and carried to adjourn. Meeting adjourned 8:35 P.M. BOARD OF HEALTH JULY 17, 1995 Board of Health Attendees:- Bernard, Hay, Block, Kamin, Schoolman, Ciaiola, Lebwohl, Weber Health Dept. Attendees:- Foley, Molinari Non - Voting Attendee representing Bondi:- Velardi Meeting called;'to order at 7:00 P.M. Minutes of June 19, 1995 reviewed, Bernard made motion to accept, seconded by Block,-'motion carried. Schoolman reviewed correspondence relevant to BRC program for the Nursing Department. Copies of letters to and from various officials were made available to the Board of Health Members. Schoolman asked for department reports. Foley had no report. Schoolman asked Foley about Department's point of view on housing development in Mahopac that is built on New York septic disposal system. Foley gave report on continued surveillance study that is being conducted on the site. Ciaiola asked question on Hillcrest situation. Foley stated, it is not the Health Department's responsib ility. Town of Southeast (Supervisor) , had responsibility. to notify the residents as well as the County and the Health Department. Health Department received results June 13th, once received, immediate action was taken. A filtration system will have to be installed. DEC is coming on Friday. Molinari distributed Nursing Department report; discussing Migrant program. Also, reported.on her meeting with Bondi.regarding the BRC program. Variance Hearing - Jones, letter had been sent to County Attorney for legal -interpretation, also to Paul Velardi, 'representing Jones. Due to resignation of Dan Leary -who --was- -handling the. case,.* res'p'onse was;:received asking that it be postponed for a month to next meeting,so that it can be personally. discussed with Board of Health Members. Bracke - Variance Hearing - Foley stated, as part of the Hearing process, 7 day neighbor notification of the meeting is required. Mrs. Lang, another neighbor, did not receive it. Mrs. Lang has indicated she has a well which is not shown on the plan and may began issue. Schoolman had to leave because of another commitment and turned the meeting over to Lebwohl who continued with Bracke Hearing. Ciaiola remarked that property is within 100' of State regulated wetlands, therefore, will probably have to go through procedure of applying for permit from State of New York. Brackes were not aware of this. Ciaiola also indicated there are no flood plain elevations on the map, nor is storm drain shown where-they propose. to put SDS system. Lebwohl informed the Brackes because of the location, they will apparently be required to get permit from the DEC because of closeness to the wetlands. It is feeling of the Board, based on prior experiences, it made no sense for them.to come before the Board before they talk with DEC. If the DEC refuses permit, it is not something the Board can override.- ,r clrMM COUNTY DEPARDEW OF HEALTH - DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES INDIVIDUAL WATER SUPPLY & SUBSURFACE,SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS -REVIEW SHEET - CONSTRUCTION PERMIT ;' ✓� i DATE REVIEWED- BY: (Name of Owner) (Street Location) MMENTS YES NO x •_._,.._.�,. , 1, � , trench provided required 60 ft. max. ..k 1 '.. ,... DOCUMENTS Permit Application Corporate Resolution Plans - Three sets s/s Engineers Authorization Design Data Sheet (DDS) SUBDIVISION Deep Hole Log Perc Consistent Perc Results (3) Fill 30" Perc Hole cd Other House plans - Two sets If PWS - Letter /well appl. Variance Request REQUIRED DETAILS ON PLANS Sewage System Plan Sewage System Hydraulic Profile - Gravity Flow Fill Profile & Dimensions - Volume D or J Box;Trench /Gallery; Pump pit details Septic.Tank - Size,. Detail Well Detail, Service Line if over Construction Notes Design Data Two -Foot Contours Existing & Proposed Driveway & Slopes Cut Footing /Gutter Curtain Drains._. Perc & Deep Holes Located Representative of Sewage,& Expansion Area Expansion Area;shown ;gravity flow;suff. size If Pumped Pit & D Box Shown & Detailed )House - No. of Bedroans Wells & SSDS's w /in 200 ft. of Property Located Property Metes & Bounds House Setback Necessary (Tight lot) House Sewer - 1/411/ft.'4 "0; Type pipe No Bends; Max. Bends 450 w /cleanout SEPARATION DISTANCES SPECIFIED ON PLAN Fields 10' to P.L., Driveway, Large Trees 20' to Foundation Walls 100' to Well; 200! in D.L.O.D, 150' pits 100' to Stream, Watercourse, Lake (inc. expan) 15' to Drains- C=tain,Storm,Leader,Footing 25' to Catch Basin 10' to Water Line (pits -201) Septic Tanks 10' fran Foundation 50' to Well 15' Well to PL GENERAL Legal Subdivision Subdivision Approval Checked Ex- approval SSDS Adj. Lots Checked Wetland (Town /DEC Permit R & D) Data On DDS Plans & Permit Same .i ?ETEH C. ALEXANDERSON County Executive Mr. John Prentiss, P.E. RD #9, Fair Street Carmel, New York 10512 Dear Mr. Prentiss: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services February 17, 1987 RE: Proposed SSDS Diane Wiseman - Lakeshore Drive & Ravine Road Putnam Lake, Patterson qM #46- 13 -1.2 JOHN SIMMONS, M.D. Deputy Commissioner Review of plans and other supporting documents submitted at this time relative to the above - captioned project has been completed.. Comments are offered as follows: 1. Please show locations of all surrounding wells and SSDS areas as they relate to the proposed well and SSDS. The location of the well and SSDS area - -on the lot to tthe north is' of part cuiar concern. 2. Please state house set backs clearly on the plans. Upon receipt of a submission revised to reflect the above comments, this application will be considered further. , WH:mk Very truly yours, William Hedges, Jr. Public Health Technician County Executive )ERSON Mr: John Prentiss RD #9, Fair Street Carmel, New York 10512 Dear°Mr. Prentiss: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services March 26, 1987 RE: Proposed SSDS Diane Wiseman Lakeshore Drive & Ravino Road. Patterson (T) TM 46- 13 -1.2 JOHN SIMMONS. M.D Deputy Commissioner Review of plans and other supporting documents submitted at this time relative to the above - captioned. project,has'. been- completed.. Comments are offered as- follows: 1. The precise location of existing wells and SSDS area for the following surrounding residences. a. The lot immediately north of the Wised lot. Both well and SSDS areas are required. b. The existing well and SSDS area on the lot immediately south must also be spotted. C. The existing well on Koller residence must be precisely spotted in relation to the proposed SSDS. 2. The distance from the proposed SSDS to Putnam Lake must also be noted. Upon receipt of a submission, revised to reflect the above continents, this application will be considered further. Very truly your s, William Hedges, Jr. Sr. Environmental Health Technician WH:mk DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S. Acting Public Health Director MEMO TO: Carl Lodes County Attorney DATE: January 25, 1995 FROM: Bruce R. Foley, R. S. Acting Public Health Direct RE: Board of Health Variances Enclosed please find copies of Board of Health Minutes for the past.10 years (1986 -1995) at which time variances were considered by the Board of Health. The list may not be complete. Some variances considered did not relate to well /septic separation and some may have inadvertently missed during my review. If you have any questions or would like a thorough review of these files, please contact the writer at your earliest convenience. Although the majority of the variances requested were denied, please note that the Board of Health did grant a variance, similar to Jones, in 1995 (Ploska). �h George Ploska 9 Locust Ct. Mahopac, NY 10541 BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S. Acting Public Health Director DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 2 78 -6130 February 10, 1995 Fe: Variance Fecuest Ploska, Tamarack Road (T) Carmel TM- 76.5 -1 -1L Dear Mr. Plcska: You are hereby advised that your request for a variance from the provisions of Article III of the Putnam County Sanitary C--de and the standards of the Putnam County He -alth Department relative to the design of a s:--t-surface sewage disccsal, system and,well to serve the above cacticned property has been considered by the _ Putnam County Board of Health on January 233, 1994 and has been approved with the following terms and conditions: 1. Well to be double cased 2. Ufitra Violet disinfection to be installed.. "The construction of this sewage disposal system may be•8ubject to local wetlands regulations. You should contact local wetlands officials in this regard." "You are referred to Article 128.1 of the official ccmpiiaticn of Codes, Rules and Regulations of the State of New York, Title 10, relative to the need for approval of individual sewage disposal systems by the City of New York. You should contact City Officials in this regard." Very truly yours, l� ,� � :.� r. chae _..Sch�lnan President, Board of Health MS /BF/ j p cc: BI (T) Carmel - --- 27:C P.et.06 -__`� _:3 -PM F92 George Ploska 9 Locust Ct., Mahopac, N. Y. December 6, 1994. Department of Health Division of Environmental !:calth Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, N. Y. 1.0509 ATT: Dr. Michael Sehoolman, Board Prosident REF: Tamarack Road, Mahopac known n . Tax Map #76.5 -1 -14 Dear Mr. Foley: Ih accordance with ycur raquest, ploase accept phis letter as formal notice to be placed on the December meeting for the purpose c= requesting approval of Che below listed variances. 1. The proposed well is shown 93' from the existing ,sewage disposal system to the south. Regulations call. for 1001. The proposed sewage disposal system is considered in" direct . line_ of_ 'dra:. ^age .with existing well on lot 50 and shown with a separation "distance' of •100". Regulations call for 200'. 3: The existing well on lot 4 is shown 120 from proposed SDS and considered in direct line of drainage from -a portion of the proposed sewage disposal system. A minium of 200' 'is required according to regulations. 4. The proposed sewage system is 140' fror:. Lake Mahopac and regulations require 2001. If these variances are not approved by the board it would deny'us the right to use our property for building '. our::.: future home and render to property almost worthless. We respectfully request your approval and thank you for your interest in this matter. Georo P os a �' / BOARD OF HEALTH October 16, 1989 Attendees: Ray Jones, Dr. Doyle, Elizabeth Colhoun, Dr. Block, Dr. Schoolman, Dr. Lebwohl Absent: Dr. Casamassima, Lou Tartaro, Sara McGlinchy & Peter Alexanderson Health Department Attendees: John Karell, Jr.,.Dr. Kamin Board of Health meeting Started at 7:50 p.m. Variance: Cyprus - Putnam Lake, (T) Patterson `'_ Presentor: Mr. Ettari, P. E. Two (2) bedroom house, individual well, individual subsurface disposal system. Proposed well is 165 feet from an uphill sewage system and in the direct line of drainage. 200 feet is required. All other standards are met. After reviewing the plans and considering the discussions, Dr. Lebwohl made a.motion to approve the Variance as proposed. Elizabeth Colhoun seconded the motion. A vote was taken six members were in favor of the motion (Dr. Doyle, Dr. Schoolman, Ray Jones, Dr. Block, Dr. Lebwohl & Mrs. Colhoun) Tuliano - (T) Putnam Valley Presentor: Mr. Juliano Proposed 3 bedroom house will be on less than 1/2 acre utilizing leaching fields. Proposed well is located 100' from the sewage system which consists of galleys, therefore, a 150' separation distance is required. The septic system is also only 100' from a well on an ad Jac ent- property. °1-50 feet is-required. - After discussing the proposed variance Mr. Juliano was advised that before the matter will be considered for a variance by the Board of Health, the Department must be provided with documentation from the Town of Putnam Valley Building Department that this property is a legal building lot. Dr. Schoolman made a motion to postpone decision on this variance until Mr. Juliano received proper paperwork from the Town of Putnam Valley. Dr. Doyle seconded the motion. All members were in favor of this motion. . Michael Schoolman made a motion to require that no variance should be scheduled before the Board of Health until the Director is provided with proof from the local building inspector that the parcel in question is a legal building lot. Dr. Lebwohl seconded the motion. All members were in favor of this motion. BOARD OF HEALTH December 17, 1990 Attendees: Sara McGlinchy, President, Arthur McCormick, DVM, Donna Bernard, Gregory Quinn, Dr. Daniel Doyle, Raymond Jones,_ Dr. Michael Schoolman Absent: Dr. Charles Block, Dr. Anthony Casamassima, Dr. Paul Lebwohl, Peter Alexanderson Health Department Attendees: John Karell, Jr., P.E., Public Health Director, Loretta Molinari, Dir. of Patient Services Meeting called to order at 7:40 P.M. Motion to accept minutes of November 19, 1990 made by Dan Doyle, seconded by Donna Bernard. Unanimous. Minutes accepted. NEW BUSINESS Variance: John Bozkurtian Lake Mahopac (T) Carmel Present: John.Bozkurtian " William-Besharat,'Architect Neighbors: John b Phyllis Bourges 521 South Lake Boulevard, Lot 3 ' Variance is for a reduction in the required 200' separation distance to Lake Mahopac from the proposed SSDS. A 3 bedroom home on public water supply is proposed. Mr. Bozkurtian states hardship in that the property is worthless if the variance is denied, since the entire lot is within the 200' required separation distance. Neighbors John & Phyllis Bourges were present and indicated that they own the adjacent property with an easement on Mr. Bozkurtian's lot. They have no objections to this house being built, but their chief concern is that no damage come to his septic system area. Mr. Besharat, the architect, stated that the construction will in no way interfere with this section of property. BOH MINUTES 2 - 12/17/90 Motion by Ray Jones to accept plan as presented. All opposed. Motion denied. It is suggested by the Board that the plans be changed to show a 2 bedroom dwelling and that the septic be located in the rear of the property, creating a wider separation distance from the lake. OLD BUSINESS Putnam County Landfill - Mr. Karell, Mr. Alexanderson, Hr. Spain and the Putnam County Legislature attended a Federal Court hearing on Monday, December 10, 1990. The judge suggested that the landfill issue be settled out of court. A survey will be prepared to show the location of the waste. A pre -trial conference is set for January, 14, 1991. Loving Care Dry Cleaners - The Health Department has completed their review of the plastic enclosure proposal, along with DEC and the State Health Department. A letter has been sent to Loving Care Dry Cleaners with comments and concerns. It is expected that test sampling be conducted in January or February, 1991. Graymoor - The Health Department is still in the process of trying to contact John Tartaro to bring him in for a hearing. ---- - - - - -- - - - - - -- Nursing report dispensed by Loretta Molinari (attached). Loretta requested that she have time at the January, 1991 Board of Health meeting to review the bulk of this report, which is a recap of 1990. Motion made by Ray Jones to sign and approve the summary report for the Annual Agency Evaluation previously presented to the Board by Loretta. Seconded by Dan Doyle. All in favor. Unanimous. Communicable Disease - An investigation is being conducted regarding a possible outbreak of pertussis at a local welfare motel. There are several children living at the motel. Surveillance nurse is contacting area physicians regarding influenza cases. She will continue this special flu surveillance over the next several months. Hepatitis B and measles titers have been drawn from nursing staff members. Immunizations will be provided as needed per results. Immunizations - The HIB immunization is now being offered at Health Department clinics at 2, 4, 6 and 15 months per State recommendations (previously only one dose required). STD's - Jack Karell met with Dr.Kamin and an STD state representative regarding the need for syphilis screening and treatment at high risk facilities, including the County Jail. Jack has written a letter to Sheriff Thoubboron regarding this issue. BOARD OF HEALTH December 18, 1989 Attendees: Ray Jones, Lou Tartaro, Elizabeth Colhoun, Sara McGlinchy, Dr. Block, Peter Alexanderson, County Executive Health Department Attendees: John Karell, Environmental Health Loretta Molinari, Nursing Services Dr. Kamin Variance: Juliano, Maple Avenue (T) Putnam Valley Mr. Juliano, his wife and father attended as well as neighbors, Mr. & Mrs. Thorton, Mr. & Mrs. Lucas and Mr. Frank Gaglione, This variance had been first reviewed by the Board on October 16, 1989. The applicant had been requested to submit proof that the property is a building lot under Town Zoning. This documentation was provided by Marvin O'Dell and the Town Attorney. yµWAfter further review and discussion Sara McGlinchy made a motion to grant the variance. Lou Tartaro seconded the motion. Five (5) Board members denied the motion (Dr. Block, Betsy Colhoun, Lou Tartaro, Sara McGlinchy, Ray Jones) Peter Alexanderson.abstained. The motion was denied. 1. The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal systems in, effect this day, specifically: The proposed well and two wells on adjacent properties are located 100 .feet fr6m-the proposed subsurface sewage disposal system consisting of gallies. 150 feet is required. 2. It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design,standards would constitute.a potential public health hazard. 3. A hardship has not been demonstrated. Smoking Code: Sara McGlinchy made a motion to adopt the State Smoking Code as Article VII of the County Code. Betsy Colhoun seconded the motion. All members were in favor of the motion. Food Code: It was proposed to adopt Part 14'of the NY State Code as Article II of the Putnam County Sanitary Code. This would update County Code to NY .,State Codes. Betsy Colhoun made a motion to adopt Part 14. Dr. Block seconded the motion. All members were in favor of this motion. Article XII: Public Health Nuisance. Mr. Spain, County Attorney will be reviewing this Article upon adoption by the Board. Sara McGlinchy made a motion to table this Article until all members could review same. Betsy Colhoun seconded the motion. All members were in favor of this motion. ovr+nu Ur nCML i n FEBRUARY 27, 1995 Board of Health Attendees: Doyle, Weber, Block, Weber, Hay, Ciaiola, Schoolman arriving late Heal.th Dept, Attendees: Bruce Foley, Acting Public Health Director Loretta Molinari, Director Nursing Services Robert Morris, P. E., representing Environmental Health Services Meeting called to Order at 7:07 p.m. Minutes of January 23, 1995 were reviewed. In regard to the letter to Mr. Bondi from Dr. Schoolman and also letter from Mr. Bondi to Dr. Schoolman in reference to the Nursing Services computer system should be attached to Minutes. Dr. Block made a motion to approve the minutes as amended, Ms. Weber seconded motion. All were in favor of accepting the meeting with the exception of Mr. Ciaiola who abstained. Loretta Molinari presented her report. Loretta gave a brief statement for each category. i Bruce Foley presented his report. The Board was also given copies of the Environmental Health Services Highlights for 1994. Dr. Schoolman requested that Mr. Baksa be invited to the March Board of Health meeting to present an update report from BRC in reference to Nursing Services program being installed. Dr. Schoolman to draft a tentative letter to Bruce for review. Dr. Schoolman read a letter that he drafted to Mr. Bondi and legislature. See attached. Hay recommended the letter be sent to the Legislature. Workshop _ ... Tucker' Ontario Road (T) Kent 1. Separation distance between well and septic is approximately 80 feet, 100 feet is required by todays standards. 2. Expansion area for the existing septic system, 100 feet from the existing well is not available. Mr. Tucker to resubmit a new proposal to decrease size of the addition requested.. Rules and Regulations of The Health Department versus Hardship requests discussed Grimm -Judy 226 East Mountain Rd. So. (T) Philipstown Discussion of installing ROB in expansion area Hearing set for March Board of Health Meeting Variance Hearing Nelson Legislator Hay made a motion to grant variance with the following stipulation. 1. Double casing 2. Ultra violet filtration on well. Ciaiola seconded motion. All in favor Weber made a motion to adjourn Block seconded motion. All in favor Meeting adjourned at 8:38 pm. X BOARD OF HEALTH July 24, 1989 Attendees: Ray Jones, Dr. Doyle, Dr. Casamassima, Dr. Seldin, Lou Tartaro, Elizabeth Colhoun, Sara McGlinchy, Dr. Lebwohl, Peter Alexanderson, arriving late Dr. Block. ' Absent: Dr. Schoolman Health Department Attendees: John Karell, Jr. Loretta Molinari Dr. Kamin, Medical Consultant Variance: Schultz - Lake Valhalla (T) Philipstown Presentors: Mr. Schultz, Fred Zenz, P. E. This variance was turned down in 1988. Schultz filed an Article 78 against Putnam County: The Article 78 decision by Judge Dickihbon remanded the application .back to the Board for a rehearing because the Board of Health Minutes did not reflect the reasons for denying the Variance. Mr. Karell, Mr. Schultz and Mr. Zenz presented information to the Board. After reviewing the plans and considering the discussions, Dr. Lebwohl made a motion to approve the Variance as proposed. Dr. 'Casamassima seconded the motion. A vote was taken six members were against the notion (Dr. Lebwold, Dr. Doyle, Dr. Casamassima, Dr. Seldin 8 Lou Tar taro, Mrs.. Calhoun) two members abstained (Dr. Seldin b Sara McGlinchy) The Board denied the variance because: :.._ _ .. i :_. The prroposel _does not' meet the standards. for . design and .construction of sewage disposal systems in effect this day, specifically the requirements to: a) maintain a 150 foot separation distance between the proposed sewage disposal system consisting of tri- gallies and two wells,.the proposed well and the well on the adjacent property to the east, lots 85 and 80. A 100 foot separation distance is provided. b) Install the sewage disposal system in an area where slopes do not exceed 15%. Slopes in the sewage disposal areh range from 25% to 36% and 3 feet of fill is proposed to provide addition depth of soil over shallow ledge rock. 2. It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. 3. A hardship has not been demonstrated. BOARD OF HEALTH July 24, 1989 Attendees: Ray Jones, Dr. Doyle, Dr. Casamassima, Dr. Seldin, Lou Tartaro, Elizabeth Colhoun, Sara McGl:inchy, Dr. Lebwohl, Peter Alexanderson, arriving late Dr. Block. Absent: Dr. Schoolman Health Department Attendees: John Karell, Jr. Loretta Molinari Dr. Kazin, Medical Consultant Variance: Schultz - Lake Valhalla (T) Philipstown Presentors: Mr. Schultz, Fred Zenz, P. E. This variance was turned down in 1988. Schultz filed an Article 78 against Putnam County. The Article 78 decision by Judge Dickiriion remanded the application back to the Board for a rehearing because the Board of Health Minutes did not reflect the reasons for denying the Variance. Mr. Karell, Mr. Schultz and Mr. Zenz presented information to the Board. After reviewing the plans and considering the discussions, Dr. Lebwohl made a motion to approve the Variance as proposed. Dr. 'Casamassima seconded the motion. A vote was taken six members were against the motion (Dr. Lebwold, Dr. Doyle, Dr. Casamassima, Dr. Seldin 8 Lou Tartaro, Mrs. Colhoun) two members abstained (Dr. Seldin b Sara McGlinchy) The Board denied the variance because: 1. The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal systems in effect this day, specifically the requirements to: a) maintain a 150 foot separation distance between the proposed sewage disposal system consisting of tri- gallies and two wells, the proposed well and the well on the adjacent property to the east, lots 85 and 80. A.100 foot separation distance is provided. b) Install the sewage disposal system in an area where slopes do not exceed 15%. Slopes in the sewage disposal areh range from 25% to 36% and 3 feet of fill is proposed to provide addition depth of soil over shallow ledge rock. 2. It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. 3. A hardship has not been demonstrated. BOARD OF HEALTH May 15, 1989 Attendees: Ray Jones, Dr. Doyle, Sara McGlinchy, Dr. Casamassima, Dr. Seldin, Dr. Schoolman, arriving late Dr. Leibwold and Dr. Block. Absent: Lou Tartaro & Peter Alexanderson Health Department Attendees: Enid Carruth, Rita Brown, representing John Karell, Jr., Michael J. Budzinski, Sr. Public Health Engineer, Environmental Health Services. Regular meeting of the Board of Health was called to order at 7:50 p.m. Minutes of April 17th, 1989 were discussed. Dr. Schoolman made .a motion to accept the Minutes, Dr. Doyle seconded the motion. Five members were in favor of approving the Minutes, one abstention. Variances: _ Terry Hil-i Road-,-* (TYAKent, _............ _._ _....... . Review of plans submitted showed the well is less than 100 feet from the septic system. The plans showed no expansion area. Dr. Schoolman made a motion to accept the variance, Sara McGlinchy seconded the motion. A vote was taken, five members were against the motion (Dr. Doyle, Dr. Seldin, Dr. Schoolman, Sara McGlinchy & Ray Jones, three members abstained (Dr. Liebwold, Dr. Block & Dr. Casamassima. The Board denied the variance because: The Board denied the variance because: 1. The existing well is located 84 feet from the existing subsurface sewage disposal system, 100 feet is required. 2. Based upon the "As- Built" plans submitted, sufficient sewage disposal area does not exist to serve a 4 bedroom house. 3. Expansion area cannot'be provided on the lot 100 feet from the well. 4. It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. 5. A hardship has not been demonstrated. 0 ,cone Variance Muscoot West & Gleneida Blvd. (T) Carmel ,epresented by John McNamara of Bibbo Associates and Mr. Noviello. Proposed sewage system is designed for a two bedroom house, the sewage system is less than 70 feet from the well, 90 feet to another offsite septic area. No expansion area has been provided. Michael Budzinski read a letter from Mr. Young, a neighbor. Dr. Liebwold made a motion to accept the motion, Dr. Schoolman seconded the motion. Seven members were against the variance (Dr. Doyle, Sara McGlinchy, Dr. Schoolman, Dr. Seldin, Dr. Casamassima, Dr. Block & Ray Jones. One abstension - Dr. Liebwold. The Board denied the variance because: 1. Maintain the minimum 100 foot separation distance between the well and sewage disposal system on this property. 2. Maintain the minimum 100 foot separation distance between the well on this property and sewage disposal system on two adjacent properties. 3. Provide a 50% expansion area. 4. It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. S. A hardship has not been demonstrated.' Old Business Tire Removal: Inspected on May 8, 1989 Approximately 100,000 tires removed to date. Berns Status: Examination before trial has been postponed to July 7, 1989 Cost of Services Analysis: attached Drought Status - as of Friday May 12, 1989 total reservoir storage in NYC system at 86 %. Expect to top 90% over weekend. Normal at this time 100 %. Westchester and NYC to make decision shortly to revise restrictions on drought status. Polito - Putterman Article 78 Re: Katz property Suit cited Health Department and Town Zoning Board Approvals. Health Department Approval left standing by Dickinson. town Approval remanded back to Zoning Board for rehearing. r, r ,cone Variance Muscoot West & Gleneida Blvd. (T) Carmel ,epresented by John McNamara of Bibbo Associates and Mr. Noviello. Proposed sewage system is designed for a two bedroom house, the sewage system is less than 70 feet from the well, 90 feet to another offsite septic area. No expansion area has been provided. Michael Budzinski read a letter from Mr. Young, a neighbor. Dr. Liebwold made a motion to accept the motion, Dr. Schoolman seconded the motion. Seven members were against the variance (Dr. Doyle, Sara McGlinchy, Dr. Schoolman, Dr. Seldin, Dr. Casamassima, Dr. Block & Ray Jones. One abstension - Dr. Liebwold. The Board denied the variance because: 1. Maintain the minimum 100 foot separation distance between the well and sewage disposal system on this property. 2. Maintain the minimum 100 foot separation distance between the well on this property and sewage disposal system on two adjacent properties. 3. Provide a 50% expansion area. 4. It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. S. A hardship has not been demonstrated.' Old Business Tire Removal: Inspected on May 8, 1989 Approximately 100,000 tires removed to date. Berns Status: Examination before trial has been postponed to July 7, 1989 Cost of Services Analysis: attached Drought Status - as of Friday May 12, 1989 total reservoir storage in NYC system at 86 %. Expect to top 90% over weekend. Normal at this time 100 %. Westchester and NYC to make decision shortly to revise restrictions on drought status. Polito - Putterman Article 78 Re: Katz property Suit cited Health Department and Town Zoning Board Approvals. Health Department Approval left standing by Dickinson. town Approval remanded back to Zoning Board for rehearing. BOARD OF HEALTH APRIL 17, 1989 Attendees: Ray Jones, Dr. Casamassima, Dr. Doyle, Elizabeth Colhoun, Dr. Seldin, Dr. Schoolman, Lou Tartaro, arriving late, Dr. Block and Dr: Leibwold. Absent: Sara.McGlinchy and Peter Alexanderson, County Executive. Health Department Staff Members Present: Enid Carruth, John Karell, Jr., and Rita Brown. Regular meeting of the Board of Health was called to order at 7:30 p.m. Minutes of the March 20; 1989 were discussed. Dr. Casamassima made a motion to'accept the minutes as written, Dr. Doyle seconded the motion. The minutes were unanimously approved. Variances Cavalino, Terry Hill Road, Town of Kent Accessory apartment Mr. Cavalino reviewed his variance with the Board. A preliminary discussion followed. The Cavalino variance was scheduled for the May Board of Health meeting. Barone Variance, Valhalla Road (T) Kent Mr. Barone stated that the septic system on an adjacent property is 100 feet from his well, but cannot maintain the 200 feet required due to direct line of drainage. In addition, steep slopes in the sewage area were discussed.. Dr. Boyle made a motion to approve the variance as proposed, Dr. Casamassima seconded the motion. A vote was taken, seven members were against the motion (Dr. Casamassima, Dr. Dole, Dr. Schoolman, Lou Tartaro, Dr. Seldin, Mrs. Colhoun and Ray Jones). The Board denied the variance because: 1. The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal systems in effect this day, specifically the requirement to: "Provide a 200 foot separation distance between a well and a subsurface sewage disposal which is in direct line of drainage to the well, 100 feet are provided. 2. The proposal does not provide a sewage distance area in which ground slope does not exceed 15 -20 %; 25% slope is provided. 3. It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. 4. A hardship has not been demonstrated. BOARD OF HEALTH FEBRUARY 27, 1989 Attendees: Ray Jones, Louis Tartaro, Dr. Anthony Casamassima, Dr. Dan Doyle, Elizabeth Colhoun, Dr. Paul Lebwohl, Dr. Michael Schoolman, & Sara McGlinchy. Absentees: Dr. Seldin, Dr. Charles Block, Peter Alexanderson, County Exec. Health Dept. Attendees: John Karell, Jr., Enid L. Carruth & Rita Brown Regular meeting of the Board of Health Called to Order at 7:30 p.m. Minutes of January 30, 1989 were reviewed. Dr. Doyle made a motion to accept the Minutes, Louis Tartaro seconded the motion. January Minutes were unanimously approved. Variances: Spain, Siemunds Place, Mahopac, NY (T) Carmel Mr. Spain wishes to construct a house on an existing lot which is next to his present residence. The system was designed by Cashin Associates.. The system meets today's standards except that it can -- not-meet the 200 foot res- tri -ctive d- istan .ce.- .to ... Lake.- Mahopac -o-r_ the.:_. 100% expansion area. It can provide the 50q expansion area and' the 100 foot distance to Lake Mahopac that was the standard prior to October 1987. Dr. Schoolman asked what the actual distance from the border line was. The primary system is 118 feet and to the expansion area is 100 feet. The Director of Environmental Health Services, John Karell,Jr., indicated that in his opinion as public health hazard would not be created by installation of a subsurface sewage disposal system of this size and in the area shown on the plan. Dr. Casamassima asked what created a hardship. Discussion followed and Mr. Spain referred to his letter to the Board which discussed the hardship. Sara McGlinchy made a motion to approve the motion. Dr. Lebwohl seconded the motion.' Sara McGlinchy spoke against her motion. Ray Jones spoke for the motion. The vote was taken five; (5) were in favor, Lou Tartaro, Dr. Casamassima, Mrs. Colhaun, Dr. Lebwohl and Ray Jones. Three (3) were against, Dr. Doyle, Sara McGlinchy and Dr. Schoolman. Cam,. w r 2 The Director of Health stated for the record that the separation distance between a lake /well and subsurface sewage disposal system in the State regulations call for 100 feet. The reason why the Board had imposed a 200 foot regulation to lakes and water sources for extra protection, and to decrease the possibility of environmental degradation. Preliminary-Review-of-Variances 1) Hill Street Associates: No preliminary review, a representative of the Department went out to witness perc test holes and the holes were filled with water. This project will not be placed on next month's agenda. 2. Barone (T) Kent -Perc rates were high. Poor soil conditions, steep slopes. The proposed well is located below a septic area, although there is a 100 foot separation. A septic is in the direct line of drainage to the proposed well, 200 feet is required. This.matter will be placed on the March agenda. 3. Connor, South Lake (T) Kent Applicant submitted an application for an addition to their house. The distance between the septic to the lake is less than 100 feet and to an adjacent community water supply well less than 2b0 feet. The Board feels no more time should be spent on, this application. This matter will be heard ..n March. 4. Mautone, (T) Carmel The size of the lot is 100 x 100. Two bedroom house on 1/4 acre. The applicant would like approval of well to septic distance of 70 feet and a well to property line distance of 5 feet. This variance will be put.on the Agenda for March. 5. Fred DiAguardi.(T) Kent, 7 Hills Lake Mr. DiAguardi spoke of his concerns in regard to a permit issued to Thomas Cavanaugh. Mr. Karell will meet with the DiAguardi's and discuss their concerns. Old Business "No Smoking Regulations" - Mrs. Carruth has not been able to meet with County Executive. Mrs. Carruth suggested Mr. Jones, on behalf of the Board of Health write a letter to the County Executive asking for this code to be enforced after a press release from his office. Sara McGlinchy made a motion that Ray Jones, on behalf of the Board, write a letter to Peter Alexanderson asking when the Code will be implemented. Dr. Doyle seconded the motion. All were in favor of this motion. Putnam County.Board of Health Minutes February 22, 1988 The Putnam County Board of Health meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. Members attending were: Ray Jones, President, Michael Schoolman, Louis Tartaro, Dr. Seldin, Arlene Rice, representing Peter Alexanderson. Absent: Sara McGlinchy Department of Health attendees: John Karell, Jr., Dr. John Simmons. Absent: Mrs. Elaine Krueger Two variances were requested: 1. McCormack: Town of Kent, Stanwick Road. Proposed well within 100 feet of sewage systems. Dr. Schoolman made motion to deny variance, Dr. Seldin seconded motion. Motion was unanimously denied. 2. Freeman: Town of Kent, Dingley Road. proposed septic 90 feet from well. No other encroachments. variance was tabled until John Karell could get legal advise from County Attorney as to what courses of action the Board has for the variance in respect to the situation as it exists now with illegal subdivision. Minutes of February 1, 1988 were reviewed. Arlene Rice made a' motion to approve minutes, Louis'Tataro seconded motion. Dr. Simmons noted the minutes do not reflect the enormous problem of Aids which he discussed at the last meeting and presented a written report. Motion to approve February 1., 1988 minutes were unani:mouq.ly. approved. Arlene Rice advised Board that Monday night at County Building, Solid Waste holds its meeting. Louis Tataro said he thought Solid Waste changed nights. Arlene Rice to investigate. Ray Jones read Elaine Krueger's report in her absence. Report is attached. Dr. Simmons gave his report. 1. Many citizens have approached him on the landfill in Patterson, that is an illegal dump. Apparently hospital waste, DEC is taking care of problem with input from our Department of Environmental Health Services. 2. 5 cases of lyme disease 2 cases of Salmonella 2 Meningitis No significant trend from usual pattern. Many changes in treatment of sexually transmitted disease other than AIDS, Significant problem with syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia and a variety of other sexually transmitted illnesses. - 2 - A. Variances 1. Viola request: West Lake Blvd. Town of Carmel, bordering on Lake Mahopac. Existing house adjacent to viola property has two wells, Mr�. Viola proposes a septic system which will be 100 feet from each neighboring well, 200 ft. is required between the septic system and one well which is in the direct line of drainage to the well. There is no other place on the lot to put the septic because of the Lake, the distance between the well in question and the septic is just over 100 ft. Sara McGlinchy made a motion to accept the variance, Arlene Rice seconded the motion. All in favor of the motion, none, all those in opposition, 5 votes against motion. The Board voted to deny this variance because: a) The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal systems in effect this day, specifically the requirement to: "Maintain a 200 foot separation distance between the proposed sewage disposal system and a well on an adjacent property, that well being below and in direct line of drainage from the proposed sewage disposal system." b) It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would c.o_nsti.tut.e... .a potent-ial. public 'health 'hazar-d ` 2. Fulton Variance: The Fultons propose to increase the living space in their house by adding an upstairs, thereby increasing their living space by 77 %. It is necessary to show the septic expansion area that is available to accommodate the proposed addition. The site plan indicates the septic area is limited by the house location and the well location on this lot, therefore area to expanded the septic area is not available. The well is presently located approximately 40 feet from the septic system. Michael Schoolman made a motion to accept the variance. Sara McGlinchy seconded motion. All in favor —none - all in opposition five The Board voted to deny the variance because: a) The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal systems in effect this day, specifically the requirement to: "Maintain a 200-foot separation distance between the proposed sewage disposal system and a well on an adjacent. property, that well being below and in direct line of b) r E - 3 - drainage from the proposed sewage disposal system." It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. 3.. Rosenbaum variance Proposing septic system within 200 feet of Lake Sagamore and there is not 100% expansion area. This is the first variance that the Board has received under the new regulations. The Board did not act on the variance, since the Rosenblums were not present. Mr. Harris gave his opinions as to why the variance should not be granted. The Rosenbaums and Mr. Harris will be notified when the Board has its next meeting. 4. Bellamy variance Muscoot Road West, Town of Carmel proposed 2 bedroom house on 100' x 1001lot. This original request for a 60 foot separating distance 60 feet to gallies, has been revised to 80 feet. Representing Mr..Bellamy for his variance request was Mr. Boniello, Joe Bellamy, Tony Piasani. they are requesting variance for their own well. They propose.to double case the well. Sara McGlinchy -made a motion to accept. variance,,. Arlene Rice _ .1 s'e*c'onded motion. All in favor, none, all in opposition 6. The Board voted to deny the variance because: a) The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal systems in effect this day, specifically the requirement to: "Maintain a 200 foot separation distance between the proposed sewage disposal system and a well on an adjacent property, that well being below and in direct line of drainage from the proposed sewage disposal system." b) It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. S. Freeman Variance Freeman: Subdivided in 1983 or 1984, originally. The Board asked the Putnam County Attorney what the legality were surrounding the issuance of this variance. We were advised to request that the Town of Kent submit their views on the matter. We received a letter from Mr. Landwaard, Chairman of ,.._......... ._.,_.:..., .....: ........ 'UctOber .1U.,,. iyu6' _..... . The Putnam County Board of Health meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m. on October 20, 1986. Members attending were: Raymond S. Jones, President; Sara McGlinchy, Gregory Quinn, and Michael Schoolman, M.D. A quorum was not present. Department of Health attendees were: Dr.'John Simmons and John Karell. The minutes of the September 15, 1986 meeting were corrected to reflect that Michael Schoolman seconded the officer nominations, not Elaine Krueger (next to the last paragraph). Gregory, Quinn then made a motion to approve the minutes of September 15, 1986; Michael Schoolman seconded this and it carried. A variance was requested by Mr, and Mrs. Virgilio who own property at Caryl and Lake Shore Roads in Lake Carmel. Mr. Carter of Joel Greenburg's office presented the variance request for this property which had previous BOH approval,in August, 1986 based on information that a neighbor's septic system was 25 feet from the property line. Recent information and in- spection confirmed that the neighbor's septic system is only 15 feet from the Virgilio propertly line,not 25 feet, which provides only 95 feet separation distance between the proposed Virgilio well and two neighbors' septic systems. 100 feet is the minimum well to sewage system separation distance allowed for approval. After d is -- cussion, the variance was unanimously approved by the Board of . Health. A variance request by Golub was postponed indefinitely at Mr. Golub's request. A letter was received from Charles Bronfman, Esq. representing Mr. Auer requesting a re- hearing. A.response will be sent to him stating that there is no additional information to approve the variance request. Dr. Simmons.gave his report: 1. State Office of Health Systems Management held a meeting in Putnam County last week asking questions about how the public health system delivers services and what are current and future issues regarding public health in Putnam County. Low -key interviews with concerned citizens were conducted. Additionally, problems with the system, especially DEC, were discussed with State officials and it was also stated that surveys studying cost containment or quality control are not always accurate. The State may help in applying for grants. Gregory Ouinn . expressed his appreciation for the state's communication with local people and Mr. Jones is looking forward to hearing feed - back from other County Boards of Health. 2. Flu vaccine clinics - -over 600 senior citizens have been vaccinated. MINUTES OF MEETING BOARD OF HEALTH NOVEMBER 21, 1988 ATTENDEES: Ray Jones, President, Dr. Schooiman, Sara McGlinchy, Louis Tartaro, Dr. Block and Dr. Leibwold Health Department Attendees: Enid Carruth, John Karell,.Jr., and Rita Brown Absent: Dr. Chang, Dr. Selden and Peter Alexanderson Regular meeting of the Board of Health was called to order at 8:10p.m. Interviews for the Board of Health Membership were. conducted. Interviewed were; Mr. Cassidy, Ms. Brophy & Dr. Casamassima. Three other applicants were interviewed at the October meeting, namely; Dr. Doyle, Mrs. Utter & Mr. Riordan. After discussion, Dr. Liebwold made a motion to accept Dr. Doyle and Mrs. Utter to the Board of Health, pending Legislature approval. Sara McGlinchy seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved. r. Liebwold made a motion to accept September Board of Health minutes, the motion was seconded by Lou Tartaro. September minutes were unanimously approved. October Board of Health minutes were discussed. Lou Tartaro made a motion to accept ....October, Board of Health Minutes, Sara McGlinchy seconded. the motion.. ; October...B_oa.rd. o.f Health Minutes wer6u'nanimously approved. Ray Jones informed the Board that Dr. Chang had resigned. Dr. Liebwold made a motion to accept Dr. Chang's resignation. Dr. Schooiman seconded the motion. All members were in favor of the motion. Dr. Schoolman made a motion to accept Dr. Casamassima to the Board of Health. Dr. Liebwold seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved. Ray Jones will write a letter thanking Dr. Chang for his services on the Board of Health. Variances: Spain Variance William Spain, Siemunds Place, Town of Carmel, Mr. Spain has a piece of property on Lake Mahopac which is adjacent to his existing residence. The proposal to develop this property was rejected by the Department of Health as the proposed SSDS could not meet the 200 foot set back from Lake Mahopac. Under the ^ld regulations the proposal would have met Health Department standards. Spain was advised to: 1. Consider resubmission of the proposal for a two bedroom house, 2. Show 100 expansion area if possible. 3. Move the sewage system as far from the lake as possible. A financial hardship would exist if Mr. Spain is unable to use this piece of property since he has paid taxes on this piece for many years. Also this lot is Part of a Town of Carmel approved subdivision. 2 aceda Variance North Brewster Road, Town of Southeast Mr. Neceda's proposal was rejected in 1986 based on the weil being 77 feet and 78 feet from adjacent sewage disposal area. Mr. Neceda having submitted to the Board the wrong set of plans was asked to resubmit plans as a two bedroom dwelling with appropriately revised SSDS area. LaRussell Variance Route 52, Town of Kent Mr. LaRussell owns a dry cleaning business on Route 52, he now has one apartment over the store. Mr. LaRussell wishes to build a second apartment above the building. With today's standards, his system.does not meet the regulations. Mr. LaRussell would like to place this apartment on the existing system. Dr. Schoolman made a motion to accept the variance, Sara McGlinchy seconded the motion. variance was unanimously denied. The Board voted to deny this variance because: a).The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal systems in effect this day, specifically the requirement to: "Maintain a 150 foot separation distance between the proposed sewage disposal system consisting of leaching pits and the well on this property" and provisions of a sewage disposal area of sufficient size to accommodate the proposal. o) It is'the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. c) A hardship has not been demonstrated. Knot - Hole Site Plan Variance' �\ Route 22, Patterson, NY, formerly J.J. Restaurant Existing well is less than 100 feet from the septic. T. Charles Henke (Baldwin & Cornelius) represented the applicant. Applicant intends to convert this building, formerly a restaurant, to a wholesale wood working business with two employees. The separation of the well from septic is 60 feet. The applicant contends there will only be two.people working in the store and that there is no need to move the well as the restaurant had been allowed to operate with these conditions existing. Dr. Schoolman made a motion to accept the proposed variance, Dr. Liebwold seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously denied. The Board denied the variance because: a) The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal systems in effect this day, specifically the requirement to: "Maintain a 100 foot separation distance between the proposed sewage disposal system and the well on this property ". b) It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of, the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. c) A hardship has not been demonstrated. 67 John Karel! gave his report. Viola Variance, septic system located above and in direct line of drainage to two (2) wells, no proof has been submitted that the well was drilled, without a permit and after our regulations were in effect. The applicant's attorney has requested that the Board take steps to obtain the well log from Torlish. It was the opinion of the Board that it was not the responsibility of the Department to obtain the documents of proof, but that of the applicant. Mr. Karell did send a letter to Mr. Torlish requesting a copy of the well log. A response has not been received to date. Lance Freeman, Variance was denied by the Board twice, and overturned by a Judge in an Article 78. When the Board denied Freeman a variance, the Health Department placed Mr. Freeman on the agenda with our Hearing Officer, for an administrative hearing for an illegal subdivision; inlight of the Article 78 action, the Administrative Hearing was adjourned, pending resolution of the Article 78 and any appeal. The Board is making a recommendation to the County Attorney to file an appeal in the Freeman matter. Sara McGlinchy made a motion to send a letter to Mr. Spain. Dr. Schoolman seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved. Marathon Battery: EPA doing remedial action, EPA has circulated an draft record of decision, which among other items includes: 1) leave the vault and it's contents in place. EPA is reconsidering removing the contents of the vault based. upon public outcry. including Putnam County Department of-Health and NYS Dept. of Health. - _ _.._...... . 2) EPA in 1986 took soil samples, from backyards in the area of the plant. The samples contained elevated cadmium levels. DEC conducted more extensive sampling, approximately 40 backyards early in September 1988, and found more backyards with elevated cadmium levels. The Department is awaiting health advisory from the State Health Department before releasing results. e`ETER C. ALEXANDERSON County Executive November 29, 1988 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 110 Old Route Six Center, Carmel, New York 10512 (914) 225 -0310 Mr. Chad Henke c/o Baldwin & Cornelius Rt. 6, Route 22 Brewster, New York 10509 Re: Variance Request Knot Hold Site Plan (T) Patterson Dear Mr. Henke: ENID L. CARRUTH, M.P.H. Public Health Director JOHN KARELL Jr., P.E. Director You are hereby advised that your request for a variance from the provisions of Article III of the Putnam County Sanitary Code and the standards of the Putnam County Health Department relative to the design of a subsurface sewage disposal system and /or well has been considered by the Putnam County Board of Health on November 21, 1988.and denied for the following reasons: 1. The proposal does not meet the standards for design and construction of sewage disposal systems in effect this day, specifically the requirement to: "Provide a 100 foot separation distance between a well and subsurface sewage disposal area." 2. It is the opinion of the Board that the approval of the requested variance from design standards would constitute a potential public health hazard. 3. A hardship has not been demonstrated. Ver); j,pri4ly j }lours, Kapmonqnt nes Presid Putnammy Board of Health RJ /pt cc: Local Building Inspector William Spain, County Attorney RJ,JK, EC, File Ronald Gainer. Slayton Engineering Denver & Brian Creekmore 12 Paradise Court, New Fairfield, Ct. 06812 Board of Health October 19, 1987 The Putnam County Board of Health Meeting was called to order at Members attending were: Raymond S. Jones, President, Sara McGlinchy, Gregory Quinn,.Dr. Paul Chang, Dr. J. Zamoyski, Peter Alexanderson, County Executive. Z' . Absent: Dr. James Benner, Dr. K. Schwartz, Dr. Schoolman, Dr. S. Selden Department of Health Attendees: John Karell, Jr. Absentees: Dr. J..Simwns, Mrs.Elaine Krueger Public attendees: /Three variances were requested: 1. Taylor Harper, Route 52 and 311, Lake Carmel. Mr. Karell advised as follows relative to the history of this matter. A representative of the Putnam County Health Department originally approved for construction the Subsurface Sewage Disposal System and well serving this property in 1985. In 1986 the permit was approved as a renewal,. Review of the approved plans indicated that the layout of the SSDS and well was in compliance with-all applicable policies and regulations in effect at that time. The house -was under construction in 1987. It was brought to the attention of the Department that the house had been moved forward on the lot, closer to Route 52, and therefore not in accordance with the approved plans. This was confirmed by` a'"reptesentat-ive--of- -the Departn-i�-nt. in 'a 'field_inspection. A stop work order was issued to the developer since the Department was concernedthat-'the'-SSDS area was affected by the relocation of the house. Additional deep holes, soil percolation tests, and revised plans showing the relocated house and SSDS were required by the Department. Such revisions were received and reviewed. Based upon such review the application for a construction permit for the SSDS as relocated was denied due to the failure to maintain the minimum distance between the house and the SSDS of 20 feet (17 feet as provided) The top of the SSDS is proposed to be located approximately 3 1/2 feet below the basement floor slab. 77 757 n ,y .,, ... Meeting March 30, 1987 The Putnam County Board of Health Meeting was called to 010erooat 7:40 p.m. on March 30, 1987. The meeting was held at the Conference Room, BOCES Building #3 in Carmel. A quorum was present. Members attending were: Raymond S. Jones, President,, Sara McGlinchy, Gregory Quinn, Dr. Michael Schoolman, Dr. Geraldine Zamoyski, and Arlene Rice (representing County Executive, Peter C. Alexanderson) . Health Department attendees were Dr. John Simmons, John Karell and' Elaine Krueger. A variance was requested by Mr. Kenneth DeFreitas of Lakeport Drive in Putnam Lake who proposed a sewage disposal system 82 feet from his own well water supply when 100 feet is required. Tom Daly, O.E. presented the case stating that adjacent lots are vacant and they were prepared to double case the well, install a disinfectant system in the well pump, and include a hold harmless clause in the deed to protect the County from being included in future lawsuits due to this variance. After discussion, the Board disapproved this variance request. A variance was requested by Mr. Puccini of Lake Mahopac who proposed a well which is 115 feet from a neighbor's sewage system when 150 feet is required. One issue was whether the neighbor (Mr. Cohen) has a cesspool or a septic system. Mr. Puccini claimed. -that. another neigh -bor -- -(-Mr.- -Sillen's)* `on the - �other side.of Mr. Puccini, recently installed a well closer than 150 feet to Mr. Cohen's sewage system and questioned the accuracy and consistency of the distances involved. The Health Department had suggested that Mr. Puccini install the well across the street on his own property. After discussion, Gregory Quinn made a motion to approve the variance with a double -cased well. Sara McGlinchy seconded this. Sara suggested that this be tabled until next month in order to validate the kind of sewage system that Mr. Cohen has. A variance was also requested by Parkwest Properties who had been issued a permit to build a well in April, 1985. This permit expired and Parkwest then reapplied. However, in the meantime, a neighbor built a well. The proposed sewage system is 63 feet from the proposed well, in order to maintain 100 feet from this adjacent well. Mr. Tom'Daly, P.E. again presented the variance request stating that the well would be double- cased, an ultraviolet disinfection system would be installed and a "hold harmless" clause would be added to the deed. Sara McGlinchy made a motion to approve the variance. Dr. Schoolman seconded this and the motion was denied. The Board discussed the process of pending well permits for adjacent properties. 1 ti The only .restrictive distance which is not met is the 20 foot distance to the house. , The well to SSDS and SSDS to lake distance of 100 feet is provided. ��--- Mr. Jones asked Mr. Karell what is the reason for the 20 foot setback from the SSDS to the house. Mr. Karell indicated to reduce the possibility of sewage entering the basement. Discussion followed frcm several residents of the Town of Kent who stated that f they were opposed to the granting of the variance, including Ray Singer, Jean Noel, Arthur Singer, Ethel Perrin, Jim Baker, Mike Consentine and William-Noel. Sara McGlinchy made a motion to approve the variance, seconded by Dr. Zamoyski. Ray Jones and Sara McGlinchy voted in favor of the motion; Peter Alexanderson, Gregory Quinn, Dr. Zamoyski, Dr. Chang voted against. The variance was denied. 2. Haldak variance: Lake Peekskill, house is supplied with summer water. Proposed well is.located 45' from existing sewage disposal system 90' away from `- 2 adjacent wells. Gregory Quinn made .motion to approve - Sara McGlinchy j seconded motion. The motion was unanimously denied. 3. Gulgeon Variance: Wildwood Knolls, Lake Oscawanna - summer water - proposed well is located 601.fran existing sewage disposal system - 80' from sewage disposal system to,adjacent lots. Sara McGlinchy made motion to approve variance. Ray Jones seconded motion. Motion was unanimously denied. Minutes of September 21, 1987 were reviewed - Greg Quinn made motion to approve Dr. Zamoyski seconded motion. Minutes were unanimouslyapproved. John Karell gave his report: 1. Revised Septic•regul4ions: The recommendations as set forth on the attached memorandum ,sere- approved ........ „• unanimously.. The Director was requested to consider expanding the restrictive distance from a SSDS to a stream to'200 feet and report back to the board. 2.' C & D Landfills - John Karell will talk to Richard Gardineer to develop regulations to control the import of C & D waste into Putnam County landfills. 3. Tires :' Peter Alexanderson would like an emergency meeting of the Board of Health as soon as Judge Zaidens' report cones in. .4. Hazardous Waste: Pesticide Clean Up Day - 30 different people deposited Approximately 1700 pounds of waste. Budgeted $10,000.00 final total approximately $12,000.00. Based upon the amount of material collected the ..Cleanup ,Day was considered a success. 5 Lake Secor: As the result of the snow storm on Sunday October 4, 1987 pacer } was,,out :in the Water Treatment Plant & Sewage Treatment Plant. The emergency 'generator` failed to operate at the STP on Sunday. The Putnam County Health, i BOARD OF HEALTH NOVEMBER 30, 1987 The Putnam County Board of Health Meeting was called to order at 7:50 p.m. Members attending were: Ray Jones, President, Arlene Rice, Michael Schoolman, Sara McGlinchy, and Gregory Quinn. Department of Health Attendees: John Karell, Jr., Dr.-John Simmons. Absent: Mrs. Elaine Krueger Five variances were requested: 1. Temple Israel Well Permit, Lake Peekskill. Temple Israel has-Lake Peekskill water supply. Would like own well proposed well is 70' from existing septic system. Joel Greenberg, R.A. had an enlarged scale to show he was able to get well 75 feet from septic system. Ray Jones made a motion to approve, Sara McGlinchy seconded motion. Motion was denied. 2. Labracio• Application for Septic System & well. Septic System is within 200' and in line of drainage to a well across the street. Distance is 100' and in direct line of drainage. Gregory Quinn made a motion to approve, Sara McGlinchy seconded motion. Motion was denied 3. Cooper Variance: Mr. Zieler, P.E. submitted preliminary layout. John Karell, Jr. sent correspondence to.Mr. Zeiler - application did not have 100' from well.. Sewage system is 100' from adjacent lot. :.,Proposed well-701 from own septic and two other septics, 90' from third system. , Gregory Quinn made a motion to approve, Ray Jones seconded motion. Motion was denied. 4. Jones Variance Existing situation - shares well with Mr. & Mrs. Burkhardt. Mrs. Jones proposes to drill her own well. Proposed well location is 65' from existing SSDS. Mrs. Jones is a summer resident. Gregory Quinn made motion to approve. Sara McGlinchy seconded motion. Motion was denied. 5. Taylor Harper Variance Engineer redesigned layout which showed foundation moved back 2 feet which should accomodate provisions of septic fields 20 feet from house. - plans were approved by John Karell, Jr. last week, plan meet the standards. Taylor Harper would like a variance as it is an unnecessary hardship on him due to the fact he is not accomplishing anything by moving foundation. Ray Jones - applicant is asking if he has to move foundation or will Board readdress variance. Michael Schoolman made motion to reconsider - Sara McGlinchy seconded motion. Motion was unanimously denied.- Meeting March 30, 1987 The Putnam County Board of Health Meeting was,called to order at 7:40 p.m. on March 30, 1987. The meeting was held at owe the Conference Room, BOCES Building #3 in Carmel. A quorum was present. Members attending were: Raymond S. Jones, President, Sara McGlinchy, Gregory Quinn, Dr. Michael Schoolman, Dr. Geraldine Zamoyski, and Arlene Rice (representing County Executive, Peter C. Alexanderson). Health Department attendees were Dr. John Simmons, John Karell and:' Elaine Krueger. A variance was requested by Mr. Kenneth DeFreitas of Lakeport Drive in Putnam Lake who proposed a sewage disposal system 82 feet from his own well water supply when 100 feet is required. =- Tom Daly, O.E. presented the case stating that adjacent lots are vacant and they were prepared to double case the well, install a disinfectant system in the well pump, and include a hold harmless clause in the deed to protect the County from being included in future lawsuits due to this variance. After discussion, the Board disapproved this variance request. A variance was requested by Mr. Puccini of Lake Mahopac who proposed a well which is 115 feet from a neighbor's sewage system when 1050'feet is required. One issue was whether the neighbor (Mr. Cohen) has a cesspool or a septic system. ;Mr. Puccini claimed that another neighbor (Mr. Sillens) on the other side of Mr..Pu.ccini, recently installed a well closer than 1-50 feet to Mr. Cohen's sewage "`system aiid questioned the • accuracy and consistency of the distances in The Health Department had suggested that Mr. Puccini install the well across the street on his own property. After discussion, Gregory Quinn made a motion to approve the variance with a double -cased well. Sara McGlinchy seconded this. Sara suggested that this be tabled until next month in order to validate the kind of sewage system that Mr. Cohen has. A variance was also requested by Parkwest Properties who had been issued a permit to build a well in April, 1985. This permit expired and Parkwest then reapplied. However, in the meantime, a neighbor built a well. The proposed sewage system is 63 feet from the proposed well, in order to maintain 100 feet from this adjacent well. Mr. Tom•Daly, P.E. again presented the variance request stating that the well would be double- cased, an ultraviolet disinfection system would be installed and a "hold harmless" clause would be added to the deed. Sara McGlinchy made a motion to approve the variance. Dr. Schoolman seconded this and the motion was denied. The Board discussed the process of pending well permits for adjacent properties. i L.. i� �f �i l',Il" ill, r��r�f3iijiu,iY 0 ;i i� �i i r 7 i • _. .. ,_s.+. You::: 4c +;::a4.:aa,.arte'aau.ti'ee.=r... ..:c.a- :..',,.+'w. a:s - ::i .n:,.. •..:, :_. .. September 21., 1987 The Putnam County Board of Health Meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m Members attending were: Raymond S. Jones, President, Sara McClinchy, Gregory Quinn, Michael Schoolman, S. Daniel Selde n Arlene Rice, representing Peter Alexanderson Absent: called in: Dr. Zamoyski, Dr. Kenneth Schwartz Department of Health attendees were: Dr. John Simmons, John Karell, Jr., and Mrs. Elaine Krueger. Two variances were requested (1) Mr. & Mrs. Calderone, Hawthorne Road, Town of Kent, presently sharing a well - their new well would be 75' from Sewage „• Disposal System and 110' from adjacent property (direct line of drainage to the well.) The Board voted unanimously to grant Mr. &Mrs. Calderon their variance. (2) Mr. & Mrs. Frehm would like to convert their summer home to an all year, round home. Sara McClinchy made a motion to approve their application, Ray Jones seconded motion. The Board unanimously opposed the application. Dr. Simmons gave his report: - one (1) case of measles at Camp Cummings handi- capped children's Camp. - discussed Board of Health Plan and Board of Health Public Health Director - Lyme disease - significant cases in Putnam County - Shigellosis - one camp had over 150 cases. State will be looking for better regulations. ((Same camp as measles case). - One (1) case of rabies., first case since 1939,- fox John Karell gave his report.: Budget - upgrade two clerical positions. Placed back in budget - will go to legislature. Lake Baldwin Water System:' The Lake Baldwin Water District installed above ground piping to provide adequate pressure to the upper area of the distribution system in June 1987. The district has approved funding to install below ground piping prior to the winter of 1987. Plans are expected to be filed shortly for our Lake Secor: The emergency filter provided additional water to meet the needs of the District during the peak summer months. The Town has been asked to look into a long term solution to the problem of meeting the peak needs of the District. Relative to the gas chlorination facility which was previously indicated to be inadequate, the Town has corrected the inadequacies. Tires: A hearing was conducted with Judge Zaidens - hearing was completed and Judge Zaidens' report is expected shortly. Graymoor: Samples collected by the County Health Department and Graymoor indicated no major contravention of standards. D.E.C. notified Graymoor of certain conditions that have to be met prior to continuation of any landfill operations. November 5 is the date after which a permit will be required for the C & D Landfill operation. C & D Landfill: John Karell, Jr. was asked to look into any existing local regulations regarding C & D landfills. Radon: $1200 was proposed in the 1988 Radon testing. The Director of Environmental Health recommended certain revisions to the present policies and regulations for construction of subsurface sewage disposal systems. The County Executive had asked the Director to review all regulations. The proposal were discussed and the Board wished to spend the next month to consider the revisions and will take action at the next meeting. Pesticide Cleanup date is scheduled for October 17, 1987. ( ) I WILL HAND DELIVER MYSELF J (� ) PLEASE SUBMIT TO THE SPECIFIED DEPARTMENT FOR ME SIGNATURE APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO RECORDS TO: RECORDS ACCESS OFFICER Name of Agency Address DATE: JOSEPH L. PELOSO, JR., PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER I HEREBY APPLY TO INSPECT THE FOLLOWING RECORD: (B &c.. Sitj "re " �(f VtA, `I61,—� Representing Mailing Address FOR AGENCY USE ONLY APPROVED DENIED 2 hr Date Record of which this agency is Legal Custodian cannot be found. o is not maintained by this y (� Signature Title Date NOTICE: YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO APPEAL A DENIAL OF THIS APPLICATION TO THE PUTNAM COUNTY EXECUTIVE. Name Business Address WHO MUST FULLY EXPLAIN HIS REASONS FOR, SUCH DENIAL IN WRITING SEVEN DAYS OF RECEIPT OF AN APPEAL. I HEREBY APPEAL: Signature Date 0 R -5- h. The issuance of any approval or certification pursuant to the provisions of this Code shall not be construed as a guarantee by the Director or the Department or any employee or agent that the system has been properly constructed or will function satisfactorily, nor shall it in any way restrict the actions or powers of the Director in the enforcement of any law or regulation. Section 3. Design and Construction of Sewage Treatment Systems a) No system for the subsurface treatment of sewage shall hereafter be approved unless it is designed and constructed in accordance with the following: 1. 10 NYCRR Part 75 and Appendix 75 -A 2. "Program Review and Policies for Subsurface Sewage Treatment and 'Water Supply Facilities for Single Family Residences" as published by the Director. b) Any application for a permit to construct an individual sewage treatment system which is denied by the Department because it cannot meet the requirements, may be reviewed by the Putnam County Board of Health, who upon written application may issue a specific waiver from a provision of this Article, in accordance with Section 75.6 of 10 NYCRR Part 75, where such waiver is consistent with the general purpose and intent of this Article, upon proof of hardship and with the concurrence of the Director, if it is his, opinion that .a health hazard will not be created by issuance of such specific waiver. 9 BOARD OF HEALTH JUNE 19, 1995 Board of Health Attendees:- Bernard, Hay, Doyle, Lebwohl, Schoolman, Block, Ciaiola,. Weber Health Dept. Attendees:- Foley, Hedges Non - Voting Attendee representing Bob Bondi:- Velardi Meeting called to order at 7:00 P.M. Subject to correction sixth paragraph, second page of May 15, 1995 Minutes, to show Ciaiola not Doyle, read letter he drafted to obtain legal opinion relevant to the County Sanitary Code. In addition, Weber, incorrectly listed as Health Dept. Attendee. Motion was made and carried to accept Minutes with above changes. Molinari, not being present, Schooman asked. Foley about what is happening with BRC in the Nursing Dept. Foley replied, the matter still has not been resolved. Velardi stated she knew Bondi had a meeting with BRC and gave them a time frame in which to come up with a- program. However, she did not know what the time.frame was. Variance Workshop Bracke Mairitou Station Rd. (T) Philipstown Hedges presented floor plan and map of Bracke's variance request to add a second floor to the existing dwelling. Variance is required because it exceeds .15%. Schoolman inquired how far the house is from the river and Ciaiola asked distance from flood plains. Hearing is scheduled for July 17, 1995. Foley distributed departmental report highlighting coordiration.of 1995 Tobacco - Free Awareness Project; -Bicycle .Helmet Distribution Program, 3 ATUPA violations; concluded field testing of interactive Radon Preventative Education Computer at Mahopac Library and,conducted Lyme Disease Awareness Week activities. Molinari will either mail her report to Members or distribute at next meeting. Schoolman inquired about the appointment of 'another Environmentalist to the Board. - Ciaiola is to find someone that he can work with. Schoolman asked Foley to give up -date on Cutillo's Restaurant. Foley said the well was drilled, down 600', waiting for lab results before he attempts to hydro -frac well. Variance Hearing Jones, William Ravina Road (T) Patterson Applicant is requesting variance to construct a well 85' from septic system. Original permit was suspended due to the fact that the SDS on the 1987 survey was incorrect. Attorney Velardi is representing the applicant for variance. 6 -i 4 -2- Hearing — Jones (continued) After a lengthy discussion, a motion was made and carried to table the application until legal interpretation is obtained from the County Attorney. Foley should have the information by July 10th and will be sent out to the Members. Ciaiola stated he will be starting up the retesting program at local beaches. Has people lined up. Motion -made and carried to adjourn. Meeting adjourned 8:35 P.M. 0 BOARD OF HEALTH AUGUST 21, 1995 Board -of HealthAttendees:= Hay,' Bernard, Block Schoolman, Kamin, Ciaiola, Lebwohl Health Dept. Attendees:" Foley, Molinari Non - Voting Attendees:- Velardi (representing Bondi), Purcell, County Attorney Schoolman called meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Executive session to follow. Schoolman asked if there were any additions, subtractions, or amendments to July 17th Minutes. Bernard made motion to accept Minutes as written, seconded by Block. Motion-carried. Schoolman read memorandum he had received from Lodes, County Attorney, in reply to letter written relative-to proposed modifications of the Putnam County Sanitary Code. In essence, the Putnam County Board of Health's proposed modification are permissible and in accordance with the State Constitution and the relevant statutory'and. case law. Copies to be-distributed to Board Members. Molinari presented Nursing Division report and inquired if there were any questions regarding the department report she had mailed to. members. Concerned about annual agency evaluation which should be looked at, reviewed by the Board, voted upon and sent with any recommendations the Board may have. Should be done as soon as possible as we are half way into 1995. Had hoped with everyone receiving it in the mail, it could-be signed this evening. Schoolman will sign if'no one has any problem with it-. Bernard moved to accept the annual agency evaluation and concede it, seconded by Hay. Molinari, on the recommendation from the Board in terms of any-other statement the Board would wish to put on the form. Schoolman, does. Is increasingly concerned by three. groups • of -health .care providers that are• not. working in harmony -which,- - are, the Health Department, the hospital as a ,provider of not only nursing services, but other health-related services and the Physicians in the community. To make sure there is an optimization and naturalization of money, resources' and effort, that every effort be made to get the three groups or their representatives together to develop what. should be a comprehensive plan to the County. Molinari replied, Municipal Health Services plans addressing collaboration of-providers in community. Is in process of being revised,due October lst. Molinari states that issues not appropriate in relation-to annual agency evaluation. Schoolman, Board is not making any statements' on report at this time. Molinari, they should at least say, reviewed by Board. Schoolman agreed, but said it is not an action. Bernard, looking over pages 4 and 5,.where her general concerns were, statistical data, should add comment, reviewed by Board and concerned about lack of appropriate data correction ystem and monitoring the acceptability of the BRC contract. Foley distributed his Advisory report. Inquired if there were any questions on Revised Addition and Well Guidelines, self - explanatory Health Education Report and a letter which is going out to Physicians requiring the report of human granulocytic ehrlichiosis (HGE). Lebwohl, correction on House Additions Approval Guidelines, paragraph B, #2, word should read partitions instead of petition. Foley, correction will be made, letters have not yet been sent out. 0 -2- Kamin commented on correction to Molinari's report. She will set it up. Schoolman, will do Variance Hearing on Jones before going into Executive Session. County Attorney is present. Foley announced that Bracke has withdrawn Variance application. They may resubmit. Schoolman welcomed everyone back on Jones' Hearing. Health Department will review issues that necessitated variance request after which everyone will be entitled to speak. Foley stated, in 1987, Jones' lot was.approved showing reported location by Engineer, John Prentis of the Sanitary.System, 100 feet to the proposed well. In 1994, the Health Department became aware the sanitary system was riot as reported on the original approval, but in fact, in front of the house:which. measured 85 feet. Lot approval in 1987 with misinformation, misrepresentation, whatever case may-be, would not have been approved in 1987. Department of. Health suspended permit and is requesting the Board of Health to confirm that the permit be revoked. Board Members asked various questions which were answered by applicant, Jones and his Attorney,'Velardi. Adjoining property owners, also present, voiced. their concerns. After much discussion, Foley made recommendation to revoke permit. Question arose, if Foley has authority to revoke permit, why are the Board Members involved? Foley replied,. it had been presented to the Board as a variance.. The Department has done studies through the County Attorney's office and, State Department of Health and found out the Director does have authority to revoke the 'permit, not the Board. Schoolman asked Foley to spell it out for the Board as to what his functions are. Foley read letter from State Health Department, dated July 5th from James D. Decker, P.E. Chief, Residential Sanitation Sect., Bureau of Community Sanitation and Food Protection, wherein it is recommended that Section 3, Article-3 of the proposed Putnam County Sanitary Code be. .._.revised..to be, ore.consistent with Section 75., 6b, etc., for Individual. Water' Supply and Individual Treatment.Systems. The County Health Department official designated to consider and grant /deny written applications for specific waivers should be the County Commissioner of Health, the County Public Health Director, the County Environmental Services, etc.,'rather than the County Board of Health with the concurrence of the Director. The County Board of Health may consider appeals to decisions rendered by the designated official regarding granting/ denying applications for specific waivers. Questions and discussion followed from Board Members as to the purpose,they serve. Schoolman made motion, since Foley is not granting. a variance in this case and is not going to entertain any arguments to grant the variance, that the Board of Health no longer decide this issue and let all the parties meet with Foley at their own time and place, seconded by Bernard and Block. Motion carried. After dismissal of Jones' delegation, deliberation followed .on authority of Board Members and the Department of Health. Purcell spoke on interpretation of legality /procedures. Kamin requested Director's report, briefly, as to what he has done, to keep abreast of what has transpired. It Meeting adjourned 9:00 P.M. -BOARD OF HEALTH May 15, 1995 Board of Health Attendees:- Doyle, Block, Ciaiola, Schoolman, Hay, Bernard — k-J 2,6) -k.f Health Dept. Attendees:- Foley, Molinari, Wckm*r, Morris Non - Voting Attendee representing Bob Bondi:- Velardi Meeting called to order at 7:00 P.M. Correction noted on Adrienne Velardi's first name. Schoolman suggested use of either first or last names only in Minutes. Motion made to accept Minutes with above changes, seconded by Block, motion carried. Bernard was welcomed back as member. Schoolman stated he would like to hear from Molinari, Nursing Dept., with special attention as to what is happening with BRC and what else they need to do. Molinari got Minutes from Legislative meeting. Schoolman reiterated of Minutes by the Legislative Health Sub - Committee. The consensus being there is a problem which will slowly be getting resolved and Molinari will be getting what she needs. Since that meeting, Molinari had a message from Hay inquiring as to what was going on. Molinari said, in 'conversation with BRC, they requested for ninth time, to explain her needs. Molinari requested, they look at the demos and have them do their home work. She has described on numerous times as to what she.needs. Foley .said, they had a meeting with the County... •- ..Ei :ecutive,.Baska and prioritized Molinari's needs. Discussion ensued about BRC contract and at next meeting, Schoolman would like a report /opinion from County Attorney. Hay has opinion and will send him a copy. Variance Hearing Ciccolella, Michael, J. Mt. Hope Road '(T) Kent Variance request - pits are less than 50 feet to well. Confirmation. wanted from Morris that septic in ground was adequate. Inspection was made of property and Morris was satisfied that the system was functioning properly and adequate for 5 bedrooms. Questions gone over on environmental assessment. There being no environmental impacts, motion was made and carried for variance. Variance Hearing Brichta Roseale Drive (T) Kent Has not satisfied requirements, deleted from the Agenda. ,.tem "of membership reviewed. Ciaiola moved that the By —Laws be changed to ,relfect an expanded membership of 11 members. There will be a minimum of 7 and a maximum of 11 members. Motion was made and carried. County Legislature has to appoint Bernard..as,.._a member who has to be sworn in. Term is for 6 years. Hay is to contact Bernard as to time and place. Appointment of an additional Environmentalist to be discussed at a future meeting. Schoolman. and other members of the board received telephone calls from the owner of Cutillo's Restaurant, Town of.Kent and asked Foley to make presentation on what has transpired. Foley explained the business has an unsafe water supply. The Health Dept. allowed him to open the restaurant on a spring surface water supply with certain conditions, a month later, they.found contaminants exceeding guidelines. He had to sample and if he exceeded certain parameters, he had to drill a well. Has drilled well and is down 675 feet with 2 gallons per minute. May have to fracture his well and may get 5 gallons and may not. He wants to use spring again and Foley told.him absolutely not. He will not sign a permit to operate a food service establishment with that supply. If he wants to pursue it,. he must be in complete compliance with surface water rules of Part 5, requiring Engineer report, disinfection, filtration, etc., which would cost more than a new well. Variance Workshop Jones, William Ravina Road (T) Patterson Variance requesting permission to construct a water well that will be less than the required 100 foot separation from septic system on the adjoining property to the North. Has submitted required documentation.. In 1987, the Jones' purchased the property with Health'Dept. approval. It was not until 1994 when the property was surveyed and the well sited that the Health Dept. approval was suspended. This was due to the fact that the SDS on the 1987 survey was incorrect. Septic was shown to rear of house and after the Jones' purchased the house, they found it to be in the front of the house. Need variance to put well at 85 feet. Adjoining property owner, Pat Vozzella believes.he is coming to close to her septic system and the Lake. Original Health Dept. approval-in 1987 had been..given.on. misinformation 'as1o'_l6cation of septic. Engineer to document % slope, direct line of drainage, septic to new well and if less than 20%, new holes and peres. Foley gave environmental report. County has declared this as Lyme Disease Awareness week and they have set up a series of presentations,, public service address, press releases in conjunction with both the County Executive and the Legislature. There is a Lyme computer at Butterfield Hospital on loan from S ate Health Dept. Die read letter he drafted to get legal opinion. If members approve, he would like to send to whatever legal counsel would be appropriate courisel to review it in exploring modifications relevant to the County Sanitary Code. Need advice on the extent of the BOH authority to make such changes. Hay said to send to Carl Loden, Putnam County Attorney. Schoolman to edit the letter, have it put out over his letterhead and have Health Dept. type it up. Ciaiola spoke on monies County has put aside for testing at beaches: The object. to see if there is any correlation between storm events and higher bacteria, etc., at local beaches. If so, they may wish to consider a rain standard so the public can be advised to stay out of the water at certain beaches for 24 hours after a certain type of rain storm. Letter outlines the time of testing when it should be done after storms of 1/2 inch. Needs Health Dept. assistance in obtaining data on what beaches would,be affected. Details to be worked out on collecting samples. Would like committee set up, along with Doyle and himself. Motion made to adjourn. Meeting adjourned 8:55 P.M. I At an IAS Term of .the Supreme _ ._..... ... _ ._. _._ ...._ _ .- Court. -of the State of :New- York, held in the County of Putnam, at .the Courthouse (County Office Building). -located at 40 Gleneida,Avenue, Carmel, NY on I,I ,QQ December Z$ 1995. PRESENT: HON. 4U l t( .. U�, dt/cng -tZ AcjsC. ----------------------------=------ - - - - -X BARBARA JONES and WILLIAM JONES 'J q, Petitioners INDEX NO.' /12� ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE against - BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S., as Acting Public Health Director of the 'Putnam County Department of Health, Respondent ----------------------------------- - - - - -X On reading the petition of William Jones, verified the. day.of. December 1995, his affidavit in support sworn to the 2iay of December 1995, the Memorandum of Law and the Exhibits :,annexed hereto and upon all proceedings heretofore had herein, LET', the respondent show cause at an IAS Term of this Court to be held in and for the County of Putnam at the County Courthouse, (County Office. Building)., located at 40 Gleneida Avenue, Carmel; New York on the 2 day of January 1996 at X9:30 o'clock in the forenoon of that day or as soon thereafter as counsel can be heard, why an Order should not be made herein pursuant to Article 78 of the CPLR, reviewing the decision of the respondent and annulling the denial of the specific waiver and the revocation of the construction permit and remanding this matter back to the respondent and its Board of Health for a special waiver hearing pursuant to 10 NYCRR 4 wo �It -r"e,( V� 1 are hereby stayed from taking any other rther steps concerning. the. real propert ating to- this action until after the he and determination of the petition brought 'on ORDERED, that a copy of this Order to.Show Cause and the papers upon which it is based shall be .served personally upon the respondent ,er* at his offi a on or before the 2 day of 199��whicli shall be deemed good and sufficient servic_e:'and that answering papers and affidavits, if any, shall. be served, no later thani ✓r-/S)days before the (/ return 'date ofsttiis application. ENTER, 2 r 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE .STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF PUTNAM -- - ---------------------------- - - - - -X :BARBARA'JONES and WILLIAM JONES INDEX NO . �3 QS Petitioners VERIFIED PETITION,. -. against - BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S., as Acting Public Health Director of the Putnam County Department of Health, Respondent ------------ .----------------------- - - - - -X To The Supreme Court of the State of New York: The petitioners, by and through their attorneys, Velardi & Velardi, Esqs., for their petition in this proceeding under Article 78 of the CPLR, to review the determination of the respondent herein, respectfully show to this Court: I. That all the times hereinafter mentioned the petitioners,-:Barbara Jones and William Jones were,.and still are residents of the Town of Patterson, County of Putnam and State of New York and are owners in fee of premises at Lakeshore Drive West and Ravina Road in said Town of Patterson, consisting of a residential vacant lot of .251 acres in size. 2. At all the times hereinafter mentioned the respondent, Bruce R. Foley, R.S. was and still is the Acting Public Health Director of the Putnam County Department of Health, an office of the County of Putnam, a municipal corporation existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York. 3. Pursuant to law the Putnam County Department of 1 F i ®1 Health granted - a construction permit for a well and .sewage disposal system located on said property -noted above on April 6, 1987. Thereafter, said permit was extended at different times and was in place under the name of the petitioners on or about September 2, 1994. Thereafter; the Putnam County Department of Health 'suspended the construction permit. 4. Pursuant to law, 10 NYCRR Part 75, the Putnam County Department of Health requires 100 foot distances between proposed wells and.existing sewage disposal systems. The original suspension' of the permit stated that, the proposed well location was approximately 45 feet from the existing .sewage disposal system to the north. This determination was later revised to be 85 feet. 5. Thereafter,. the petitioners applied to the Putnam County Board.of Health,, pursuant to Article III of the Putnam County Sanitary Code for a specific waiver of the 100 foot requirement as applied to their particular property. One workshop and two meetings were held before the Board of Health. At the last meeting, on or about August 21, 1995 the respondent denied the specific waiver and revoked the construction permit. By his action he rendered any determination of the Putnam County Board of Health moot and therefore did not allow a hearing on the merits to take place. The respondent's decision was memorialized in a letter dated August 29, 1995 and was addressed to the petitioners. 6. In addition to denying the petitioners a fair hearing 2 .o created by the issuance of the specific waiver. His adherence without justification to the 100 foot'. provision of both. the New York State Rules and Regulations and the Putnam County Sanitary Code was without. rational basis and was arbitrary and capricious. 7. The said determination' of the respondent is a final decision from which no appeal lies to any administrative body.. and in respect of which the petitioners have no right to a rehearing. 8: No previous application for this. or any similar relief lias. been made by or on behalf of . the petitioners to' this or. ;'any .othe'r Court. .WHEREFORE, the petitioners pray that an order be granted .in'accordance with the Order to Show Cause together with -uch other and further relief as to' the Court may seem just and proper. Dated: December �, 1995 Brewster., New-York VELARDI & VELARDI, ESQS. Attorneys for Petitioners Brewster - Carmel Prof. Bldg. Route 6 Brewster, NY 10509 (914) 279 -4000 l� WILLIAM JONES, PETITIONER 3 SSi COUNTY OF PUTNAM ) William Jones being, duly sworn, deposes and says: I am `the . petitioner. .: in the . within action; I , have read the foregoing. Verified Petition -and know. the contents thereof; the same is, true to my own knowledge,. except. as to ' _the matters therein stated. to be.alleged on information and belief, and as. to those matters I believe it to'be true. WILLIAM JONES Sworn to before me this 2 /day of December 1995. PAUL J. VELARDI Notary Public, State of New York No. 40- 4829864 Qualified in Putnam County Commission Expires May 31, 19 i i SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF'PUTNAM -----=------------=---------------- - - - - -X BARBARA JONES and WILLIAM JONES INDEX NO . Z3A(' Petitioners AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT - against - BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S., as Acting Public Health'Director of the Putnam County Department of Health, Respondent -------------------=--------------- - - - - -X STATE OF NEW YORK ). )SS: COUNTY OF PUTNAM ) William Jones, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. At the outset the Court should be aware that my wife, Barbara, and I are completely innocent participants in the factual pattern which is about to unfold. This is a case in "whichs_error.upon error has been made .and we beseech this Court to stop, this process of error and'put this matter back on the correct path towards a- proper determination.. 2. On and before April 6, 1987 one, Diane Wiseman, owned the subject premises which is a lakeshore lot in the Putnam Lake subdivision in Patterson, New York. The property is approximately one - quarter acre as are many of the lots along Ravina Road. Upon information and belief Diane Wiseman applied for a Putnam County Department of Health permit for the construction of a well and sewage disposal system. 3. On or about February 17, 1987 the Department of Health notified the engineer for the project, John Prentiss, as to the deficiencies in the application and requested 1 f R further submissions. (See letter dated February 17,. 1987 attached hereto and expressly made a part hereof as .Exhibit A.) Of note is paragraph one of the letter which.stresses the importance of the location of the well and the SSDS area on the lot to the north. This issue will surface again later. 4. Subsequently, new submissions were filed which included the location of the well on the southern most part of the subject premises which was furthest away from the sewage disposal. system on the property to the north. (See drawing.of engineer attached hereto and expressly made a part hereof as Exhibit B.) 5. Thereafter, the Putnam County. Department of Health issued the construction permit to Diane Wiseman, a copy of which is. attached. hereto and expressly made a part hereof as .Exhibit-C, on or about April 6, 1987. After this, the subject premises were purchased by my son, Robert W. Jones, and the construction permits were reneged on a periodic basis on or about September 19, 1988, April 17, 1991 and finally December 71 1992, (copies of these extensions are attached hereto and expressly made a part hereof as Exhibit D -1, D -2, and D -3 respectively). 6. The Court will note that in the last renewal my wife's and my name appear as the owners of the property. This was after my son was unable to financially manage the property for the construction of a single family residence and my wife and I decided to assist him in this matter and N 0 f, V. therefore took title to the property. 7. In late 1994, my wife and I were in the process of applying for what we hoped would be the last renewal, of the construction permit and accordingly had survey documents drawn. Unfortunately, the survey documents noted the well on our property to the northern most side of our property instead of at the southern side which was shown on the original drawings submitted to the Department of Health. This flagged the Department of Health (there had been three previous renewals without incident) and brought about the suspension of the construction permit by the letter dated September 2, 1994 which is attached hereto and expressly.made a part hereof as Exhibit. E. It is here that the Department of Health notes that -the proposed location is' approximately 45. feet. away from the existing sewage disposal system to the north. 8. At this point there have been two errors. The first was that the engineer; 'John Prentiss, incorrectly 'labeled the initial submission (Exhibit B) as having at least a 100 foot separation. between the existing sewage disposal system on the property to the north and the proposed location of the well on my property. Instead, the actual distance was later found to be approximately no more than 85 feet but less than 100 feet. The second error was that of my surveyor in placing the proposed well in a different location thus alerting the Department of Health to a problem. 9. What apparently happened in 1987 is that the. 3 application should.have_.noted , the_.85.foot separation between the proposed well and existing sewage disposal system and the Department of Health should have denied the application at that time. The specific waiver process could have been held to see whether or not it .would have been granted. When my..son purchased the property from Diane Wiseman it was contingent upon Health Department approval. The same was produced to my son and was renewed upon a number. of occasions thereafter without incident. It is only because of the mistake of my surveyor that this issue was even brought to the attention 'of .the Department of Health. 10. in this regard the Putnam County Department of Health.* is not without blame... -Although the engineer, John Prentiss, incorrectly certified the distance between the proposed well' and- the - sewage disposal system, it does not take more than a cursory review to realize that there could not have been 100 feet of separation.. Both the. property -to the north and my property have 60 feet of. frontage on Ravina Road. That totals 120 feet. A standard sewage disposal system has a width of more than 20 feet so that even if it is located to the extreme northern most portion of the property to the north of my property, its southern most point would, by. necessity, be less than 100 feet from the southern most portion of my property where the proposed well was situated. A careful scrutiny of the original submission to the Department of Health would have found this error by John Prentiss. This 4 seems..es.pecially true- since the original. correspondence from the Department of Health noted the particular concern of the location of the well and the sewage disposal system on the lot to the 'north. (See Exhibit.A, paragraph 1.) 11. Nevertheless, the facts being as they were, I had no other choice but to apply to the Putnam County Board of Health for a specific waiver and so my engineer, John Prentiss, sent a letter requesting the same on or about April 11, 1995 (see Exhibit F): My attorneys advise me that the rules which .'govern the specific waiver are contained in 10 NYCRR Part 75 and specifically sections 75.3(d) and 75.6(b). The standards ;for: individual water supply systems are to be designed, constructed and maintained in accordance with appendix 5 -B. of the State Commissioner of Health (See Section 75.4(a)). 12' . There'After I went to the. work session .with. the Board of Health on May 15, 1995, a copy of the approved . minutes are attaAe' d_hereto and expressly made a part hereof as Exhibit G. In these minutes the third error in this matter is noted. The minutes state that the "septic was shown to rear of house and after Jones purchased the house, they found it to be in the front of the house." As the arrow clearly shows on Exhibit B the original application showed the *sewage disposal system to be directly to the north via the front of , the house and not to the'rear of the house. The only error on that document was that the distance was not 100 feet but instead.was 85 feet. 13. It was at this meeting that I met the Vozzellas. 5 i i. a E They. are. .the . owners of the property to the north ' who purchased the property after the original construction permit in 1987 had been granted. Interestingly enough, their well is. located within the confines of their septic system in the front of their property. 14. After that meeting I was advised to come back with more information and to pursue the application at the next date of the Board of Health at which a hearing was to. be conducted. Thereafter, on June 19, 1995 I went to the Board of Health meeting with my attorney, Paul Velardi. There was much discussion about the facts of the incident. (See a copy of the approved minutes of said meeting attached hereto and ;:expresslv . made a part hereof as Exhibit H:) In addition,, an 'mportan.t is was .raised as to what Department. of Health 'Rules and.Regulations.would be applied. 15. As I understand it there were certain rules and regulations in place in 1987. Those rules and regulations have been revised as of the present. My attorney was asked to send correspondence to .the County attorney in order to address the issue of whether the pre 1987 rules would apply or the post 1987 rules would govern. We were advised that once that issue had been determined we could proceed with the hearing process. 16. Thereafter., on or about June 26, 1995 my attorney sent a letter to the Putnam 'County attorney concerning the standards that should apply. The issue centered around the A I i f a � 1, P. word "suspended ". The Court will note that in its letter to me declining to renew the construction permit the Department of Health specifically used the word suspended (see Exhibit E). My attorneys' letter argued that since the construction permit was suspended and not revoked that therefore the 1987 standard should apply. If the construction permit had been revoked then It would have been made void and the, specific waiver process would have been to start the process. anew. By suspending the permit the Department of Health did not.sever the rights under the permit but instead stayed them. Those .rights were based upon 1987 standards. 17. 'I believe I should be judged on the 1987 standards -since-that-is when the errors were made by both John Prentiss as: the..engineer for the then applicant, Diane, Wiseman, as well a §:: the",., Putnam County Department of Health in not noting the obvious, 'error on the submissions. Moreover,. none* of the other properties oh''Ravina Road. meet -the present - Putnam County- Department of Health standards. My property is the last vacant lot on the road. (The correspondence from my attorney to the County Attorney noted herein is attached hereto and expressly made a part hereof 'as Exhibit I.) 18. While a decision was being made by the County Attorney's office a two month time lapse took place. As the memo from Thomas F. Purcell, Deputy County Attorney, to Bruce R. Foley as the Acting Public Health Director dated July 14, 1995 shows (see Exhibit J attached hereto and expressly made 7 a part hereof) the issue..of..,a suspension _as_,well as_ "several issues" needed to be. resolved. Here is where another significant twist takes place in this process. Just prior to the August 21, 1995 meeting of the Board of Health, myself and my attorney were notified by Thomas F. Purcell that Bruce R. Foley, had.been advised by the County Attorney's office that he had the right under the existing Putnam County Sanitary Code to make a decision on this matter without the participation of the Putnam County Board of Health. We were further advised that this provision had never been utilized-by the Health Department Director and that Bruce R. Foley had been asked not to use it in this particular case but to use it in the future. 19. At the. August 21', 1995 meeting of the Board' of, Health (a,aopy of the approved minutes is attached hereto and expressly made a part hereof as Exhibit K) Acting Public Health. Director, Bruce R.. Foley announced that he would be denying the specific waiver regardless of the actions of the Board of Health. A motion was made by the members of the Board of Health that since the Acting Director was not granting the specific waiver and is not going to entertain any arguments to grant it that the Board of Health no longer decide this issue. The motion was carried and after we left the room we went and talked to Acting Health Director, Bruce R. Foley. 20. Before that occurred however, the presentation of 8 m o Acting Director,. Bruce R. Foley_ is instructive. .. It is attached hereto and expressly made a part hereof as Exhibit L. It is a two page document. On the first page it notes that the original application from 1987 reported the sewage disposal system behind the house on the property to the north. The documentation before this Court as Exhibit B shows otherwise. It is my belief that this was clearly done to take any blame away from the Putnam County Health Department since they clearly had some obligation to review the application. They should have known that the configuration, as presented, could not have had a 100 foot separation between the proposed well and existing sewage disposal system. The other significant factor is that the second page of the report shows the findings of the site inspection of the two properties and fixes the distance between the proposed well and the existing sewage disposal system at 85 feet. 21. At the meeting amongst myself, my attorney, Mr. Foley and Mr. Purcell which was held after the aborted hearing we were handed Article III Section 3 of the Putnam County Sanitary Code. In it, subparagraph (b) notes the applicable procedure. (A copy of the same is attached hereto and expressly made a part hereof as Exhibit M). Mr. Foley cited this as authority for the fact'that he could deny the specific waiver. In fact, he explicitly stated that the reason for the denial was simply because it was less than 100 feet and for no other reason whatsoever. He was asked if there was any health E R f r i hazard that he thought would be created by the issuance of the specific waiver. His response was that the health hazard existed, simply because there was not the 100 foot separation as required. His letter to me. of August 29, 1995, attached hereto and expressly made a part hereof as Exhibit N, confirms this meeting.. 22. Aside from the absurdity of the Acting Health Director's action and reasoning, it seems to me that there may be situations where the 100 foot requirement is not necessary. As part of the Health Department regulations and pursuant to the State Code, the Department of Health is supposed to be guided by appendix 5 -B of the regulations. The same is attached hereto and expressly made a part hereof as Exhibit O. 23. In the first paragraph of page 23 of said appendix it., is noted '.'Table 3 gives suggested minimum distances between water and sewerage units, although under certain circumstances the Health Department may require or permit variations. Table 3 on page 26 requires the 100 foot separation that has been noted by Mr. Foley. However, it is clear that this is a suggested distance and not an iron clad mandate. In fact, the second paragraph of the section which starts at page 24 notes the .various possible factors involved in making this determination. None of those factors were cited by the Acting Director in making his determination. Indeed, I did .not even have the opportunity to present that information at a hearing in order to justify my specific waiver request. My 10 I' r � n r w right to a hearing - before the Board of Health was taken away. _ from me by the action of the Acting Director. 24, The Court is respectfully referred to page 27 of said appendix and the last paragraph where it is entitled "Judgment is Needed ". Specifically, Table 3 (100 foot distance) should be used as a guide. Put another way, no decision should be made upon a, blind adherence to the 100 foot space, requirement but instead' many factors need to be looked at before a determination of adverse health consequences can be made. 25. There is one more issue which the Court needs to be made aware of in this application. The property to the north .which`is. owned by the Vozzellas, as. stated earlier,. contains a`.well which is within the existing septic .system: The ..Vozzellas. at the various meetings noted herein mentioned that they may wish to expand their house and therefore expand their septic and well capacity. 'If 'they'did so'during the pendency of this application it could render moot my ability to utilize my property in any manner whatsoever.' 26. The placement of a new well or expanded septic on their property could eliminate any possibility I might have to obtain the specific waiver. It is therefore requested that a stay on any Putnam County Department of Health actions be in place during the pendency of this proceeding so that any action by them concerning the Vozzellas' property .to the north would not render any decision of this Court without effect and 11 ► - * leave me without proper remedy. 27. My wife and I are only asking for what is right. We only wish to have the Board of Health hear this application in its proper context under the proper rules and with the proper information. We do not wish to see their role usurped, nor do we wish to see the actions of the Acting Director be guided by an arbitrary adherence to a suggested space requirement. 28. Accordingly,. the annexed petition requests that the decision of the Acting Public Health Director of Putnam County, Bruce R.. Foley, be reversed, that the 1987 regulations apply to the specific waiver application and that a hearing be permitted to be held before the Putnam County Board of Health in order to determine the merits of our application for a :specific waive r WHEREFORE,`it is, respectfully .requested that. the relief noted in.the Order to Show Cause be granted in all respects: together with such other and further relief as to the. Court may seem just and proper. Swor to before me this day of December 1995. PAUL J. VELARDI Notary Public, State of New York No. 40- 4829864 Qualified in Putnam CountyJj Commission Expires May 31, 194---/ 12 - WILLiAm JONES P. i SUPREME COURT OF- THE. - STATE. OF -NEW .YORK - -- COUNTY OF PUTNAM --------------------------------- - - - - -X BARBARA JONES and WILLIAM JONES . INDEX N0. Petitioners MEMORANDUM OF LAW - against - BRUCE R. FOLEY, R.S., as Acting Public Health Director of the Putnam County Department of Health, Respondent ----------------------------------- - - - - -X STAY Obtaining a stay of Putnam County Department of Health actions with respect to the''subject premises or any adjoining property which might impact upon it is necessary in this particular appeal to the Court through `the Article 78 :..proceeding. Spec ifically,`CPLR Section 7805 permits this .;procedural device. It has apt application here because of.the. specific statements made by the adjoining property .owners during the pendency of the hearings and now that the Department of Health has revoked the construction permit of the petitioners. There is additional authority to grant a stay during an appeal type process. Cf. Edelstein v Oxman, 171 Misc. 552, 13 NYS 2d 95 (1939). ARTICLE 78 PROCEEDING The actions of an officer have been determined to be held to the standard of whether or not they are arbitrary and capricious in an Article 78 proceeding. Cf. Colton v Berman, 21 NY 2d 322, 287 NYS 2d 647 (1967). The real measure, 1 n n . r - whatever --the- wording, is whether the determination. strikes the Court as rational on the record. Pell v Board of Education, 34 NY 2d 222, 356 NYS 2d 833 (1974). It is clear from the record before the Court that Acting Public Health Director, Bruce R. Foley, had no rational basis for his decision. He did not follow the requirements of his own regulations in either allowing a hearing before the Board of.Health or giving an opinion as to. the health hazard created by the specific waiver requested (see Exhibit M). Moreover, he treated the 100 foot guideline as a requirement instead of a means of beginning the area of inquiry. He permitted no further evidence before him concerning the issues =raised in appendix 5. -B of the Health Code (see Exhibit O). HEARING REQUIREMENT The Putnam County Sanitary Code (Exhibit M) contemplates, a hearing before the Board of Health. So do the rights to due process. It is held that no one may be legally divested of his life, liberty or property unless he is allowed a hearing where he can contest the claim and be allowed to meet it on the law and the facts. Cf. Schafran & Finkel, Inc. v. M._ Lowenstein & Sons, Inc., 280 NY 164 (1939), Central Say. Bank v. New York, 279 NY 266 (1938) , Geary v. Geary, 272 NY 390 (1936), and In Re Elimination of Highway - Railroad Crossing, 234 AD 129; 254 NYS 578 (1931). The petitioners have had the value of their property taken from them by the arbitrary and capricious action of the Acting Director Foley. They have not 2 c .• had the opportunity for a full hearing based upon concrete data in accordance with Health Department Rules and Regulations. APPLICABLE RULES In reviewing the Public .Health Law Section 3450 of said law uses both words "suspension" and "revocation" concerning Health Department matters. The section does not directly concern Health Department approval but it is. the only section in the Health law which noted a distinction between the two words. There is no definition of suspension and /or revocation in the Public Health Law and therefore their normal meaning would apply. .Black's Law Dictionary, 5th Edition, states that revocation means "the recall of some power, authority, or thing granted, or a destroying or making void-of some deed that had existence until the act of revocation made it void ". Therefore,, revocation is a final act making some prior right or power void. Suspension of a right, on the other hand, is defined by "the act by which a party is deprived of the exercise of his right for a time. A temporary stop *of a right, a partial extinguishment for a time, as contrasted with a complete extinguishment, where the. right is absolutely dead. Suspension of a right in an estate is a temporary or partial withholding of it from use or exercise. It differs from extinguishment, because a suspended right is susceptible of 3 . r ' being_ revived, -. -which is not . -the_ _ case where the right was extinguished." Therefore, a' suspension of a right is merely a temporary act which does not extinguish that right. If the suspension is lifted, the right remains. It is, the position of the petitioners that their original Health Department approval was suspended and not revoked. That is the lanuage from the Department itself. Therefore, if the reason-for the suspension can be addressed through the specific waiver process and if the suspension is lifted the ` right to that Health Department approval remains. In sum, the 1987 Health Department standards should apply in this particular case because the approval was suspended and not revoked. The reason for the. suspension is rooted in error dating back to 1987.. The petitioners operated under an approval granted' in 1987 based upon 1987 standards. Its suspension in 1994 was based upon circumstnces of which they are not culpable. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above and in the annexed petition and affidavit in support, it is respectfully submitted that the relief requested in the. Order to Show Cause should be granted in all respects together with such other and further relief as to the Court may seem just and proper. Dated: December ? 1995 . Brewster, N kw, York 4 Respectfully submitted, VELARDI & VELARDI, ESQS. Attorneys for Petitioners Brewster- Carmel Prof. Bldg. Route 6 Brewster, NY 10509 (914) 279 -4000 5 PETER C.'..ALEXANDERSON .Couniy'ixic*utive- DEPARTMENT *OF si U, W JOHN SIMMONS.". M.D.% D ep-6!Y, COmmissidner.....:: tz. HEALTH'!:, Division Of Environmental Health Service` s" February 17, 1987 - M -John Prentiss, P.E. RD -Street #9,,.Fair Camel,, New York 10512 RE:, Proposg�;_$ La Diane' is Lakeshore Drive & Ravine. Putnam Lake.... Pat.t.erson,-.t-TM#46-13-1'2.�.. . .... �z ,,Pear.Mr. Prentiss: Review of plans and other supporting documents submitted at this time relative to the above-captioned project has been completed. Comments are offeredias follows: Please show locations of all s urrounding'wells and SSDS areas as they relate to the proposed' well and SSDS.' lbe'location of the well and SSDS-.*� area on the:lot to the north is of particular concern. 2- Please state house set backs clearly on the plans. Up6n receipt of a submission revised to reflect the above comments, .this application will be considered further. Very truly yours,.. William Hedges, Jr. ......... Public Health'Technician.:: WH:mk . WA T� % . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 OLD ROUTE SIX CENTER - CARMEL, N.Y. 10512 (914) 225-364l.. Exhibit B 4"Wv"Ve . PUTNAM COUNTY DEPARTmp IN wu...gr:- village Subillyfalloi Name ubd. t a-1 —A A— T # Blod t ,0- enewal Revision! Ct. 77="'Date of • Town ';- D - ZIP" . L Z-1- j.. Lot Area EM Section Only Nuntbei of Bedrooms Design Flow d/p/D Vol, PCHD N611fication Is Required.When Fill Is compiew . ....... ......................... S4"Zte Sewerage System � ..... . to Of - Galion Septk Tmkl.&n V� r _4L__Tj 7_r� I - - ..; - ... - �., '' .. .. d_- !j To be,00ustlrrt� FIT Address -Z supply: Ad rrt water uPP 3': "Public Supply Frout Ad&osj Or'-----_Z_PrIvxte Supply Drilled by Address A P. I Other Rociahvinents- ropre;nt that) am wholly and completely responsible for the design and locatidn of boYA'described will be constructed as shown on the Proposed SYStsm(s)l 1) the' separate sewago�dispc;' k 71;`."*--ii�':COUnti Department the approved amendment there to and In accorda' Sal Of Health, and that on completion . thereof a !'Certificate. ' . nee with the standards, rules an rogue ons.o.... to 'the of Construction CompllOcel? 0 Ospartment.-and a written guarantee will be furnished the Ownei,'his jKjCc#sW$. heirs or�,ass;q Place -In', good. operating condition any *part Of mid Wwag* disposal. ysa�slm ns,bythatiullder tp�t'' t two (2) rhodlat�ly,folioiwl ."Id. bull he approval Of. the Certificate Of -Construction C siitom.dur' ng the-porlod'of., '0 MPlia6cs of the Original sys em " " ' ' '' ng thiclati:61'Ah's"' a "I w, t or any, repairs t6oretbi 2) that3he drilled located as shown.on the approved plan and th I d MI will be in d CountY:.D.6part Mont of Health.-.. I Ccor ancel.with't.hi .d 1_U ra V —on a Date/ Signed V 4 PE �C�Y RA7 >rr, :' s � tr:... APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION: Ea ; (-, &Pq, -This approval expires 0 is -S E IZT I XT" CONSTRUCT14DN NOTI Basi%*. Required Notes it 44 11. All trees within 10 fei t SSUS shalt be removed. '5SDS to be Inspected by til, :architect and the Putnam Department after,conatrruct to backfill. -t 1� t5L No trucks, machinery, bull ti- t V -nor excavated earth shall l I V in the sewage disposal l* art of SSDS to be in accordant 'Plans, any revisions them rules and regulations of I 'issuing governmental agent 4% well yield-of Rt A Yields less than 5 gpm.F,Vf, 4 i _reported to the Putnam Cot of Health. Notes Required when Fill Propi 1. Fill must be allowed to at 60 to 90 days following p. be inspected by the Puenat of Ilealth for acceptance, system. I , GoNI j.-A,01-, ation of sewage .must be reported to PuCnat t - of Ilealth. ":-2. 'tun .of,bank fill shall be sewage'*absorption, be Ere, or other uns4iiLabde mater have an in-plic --&b e per least equal to that in th 27 Mz required stabil after the Tequir The-engineer/architect 'Sh .7 f PV 4091rr etWI&VC4fC4WC;01 stab a final percolation test f 1'Ibyao.oylhsrpemprAmode j after stabilization. ca. I V '"Osix 3. -Imper*v�ious fill, clay bar , ;, .. X Se e. oelail A Ate L be a - dense clayey 'soil no sewage absorption caps screened utrl C41 or d"I C ,:IVTV W.% OWS • Abe- (25 min.. :LI ce.Eug f .10 0i a o Is no G CM eU e above f—; lira/ Paddlad ,�N-77777777 777�477 77 7 c/ay or I. I I e4mcl) _XX Putnan County Dnrartm'ont n:t 2Z j Divi'lon of..En,�ir--.*---I,-"--.':-*-:.,.�, 'I ;L:_,rVIce4 -42 ky. VI pirLES5 A )b . WY -D- 'AM ANOR IVAPTE cl th.'3,.I�ic ftp% Comity Beuii at Ono Ar3� l3 4. �eDartme jyPICAL ';,PUAIP ,C0AIAIE,CrI0M-. i W, M, Q� 7 M e " PUTNAM COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Dfvlislon of EnvIroomental Health Services- Carmel- N.Y. 10512 Enghaeer to Provide Permit N on CERMCATZ OF COMP Peemt -P-22-87':- CONSTRUCTION or FOR i-MAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM • T. Patterson Located it' Lakeshore Dr.- W. & Ravina Road Town. or — + -8 13 Putnam Lake Block. Lot' Subdivislot! Name —Subd. Lot 0 5806-7 & T. M,9 46 ... ..... 5887-8-9 eW.I Revision .0 S. Q.: 233.4:-. Ow,d,r/AppljCisntN&zue Robert W. Jones 6 April-1988 11 Holiday Street Pawling, 'NY 125 64 mawng Addre" Town oi 0.251 Acres 3' f B.Udwg Type Modular 111 Section Only L—Xi Depth 3 6 �Volum. 200"y _Ldt A,,. 10400 :E sq. t Number of Bedrooms Two Design Flow G P D 4O0 PCHD Nodficadon In Required Wben FW Is completed .. .... Separate Sewerage System to conslat of 1000 Gallon Sepd, Task and 96' TrigaPeries To be consbmcted by 7 Address Water Supply: Public Supply From Address; ? on X Private Supply Drtlled by Addre" Other Rog: ulmm.nts R-0-B Fill section: 19821 sq. ft. - see above I represent that I am wholly and completely responsible to( the design and location of trio proposed system(%); 1) that the separate sewage -4 Ispoll, "em above described will be constructed as shown on the approved amendment there to and in accordance with the standards, rules and regulations .7 TRW- F Garn County Department of Health, and that on completion thereof a **Certificate of Construction Compliance" satisfactory to the commissioner of Healthoilli be submitted to the Department, and a written guarantee will be furnished the owner, his successors, heirs or assigns by the builder, that said builder will Place in good operating condition any part of said sewage disposal system during the period of two (2) years Immediately follo*lng the date of the ;ssu• ante of the approval of the Certificate of Construction Compliance of t,'e o,.g;n4i system or any repairs theret6; 2) that the drilled well described above a Install in will be located as shown on the Approved plan and that said well will b ordain with e standards, rules and roguTiTrons of the Putnam County Department of Health. C-N J--- bate 5 May 1988 Signed C7,A11111 P. I-. X R. 'A. rd9-Fair St. Car 11 N1 105kP 29206 Address License No APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION: This approval expires two Years 6ra4 the date issued unless construction of the building has been undertaken and Is revocable for cause or may be amended of'modified when considered necessary by. the Commissioner of Health. Any Change Or alteration of construction requires a now permit. Approved for disposal of domestic unitary sewage, and/or . ; .! _pz4vate water SuPo only. date 55 By • a 7:1 % A. 4. z �Q�/a{{�WVfAaa��Ya'O�OWWaY -- 3i'•�c wCMA U O O6YSIJAIICi QpIOISO�.Z�1 lO�RT fS1/Ai8 OWN" IT$= ffanaaM � 10 �K, n( K "M a lelii�Mw Lbedetf •� .. _ .. _ r� �• 1 ,r... VA5.tiI-1- : Ct/ ' / -04 hsil�f- -ask - u_ /=.a - - 7. / Dole of v Anmvd Maus A. 1't�7 i �! `�1". TWO L" C Sub jyigion Approved Fee Enclosed ❑ Amrm"#- M Tyra.. A �� �. S� �..,. Let Am �; , } �C� �7 g� Sectim prey vammc;,00 K.i.e r iatll -�-• �`'� ?.— Doerr nm Q t D d ecYr NatWbth� to win m )a emalmed c To w..atiaw by A" , * het x Saltif Devi i!t r ( '.i�.Lj !7 .> t N G' / 1 represent that 1 am wholly and completely naponsible for the design and 10c84n of the proposed fyltem(Ol 1) that the »pasta sm dl sal system above described will be constructed as shown on the approved anwodment there to and in aCcW&nq with the standardf. ruler amain fe*ttLiTOn!'o County Deportment of /kelth. and that on Completk►n thereof a `Certificate of Construction Compliance" satbtactory to the Commilalm es of Health will be svbmnod to the D"artl mi , and a written guarantee sulk be furnished the owner. his successors, nabs or assigns by the bulkler. test old bulldor will . . in good eperatkng Condition any pert of sold sewage disposal system during the period of two 12) yews knmediatey following the "to Of the Ism&- an" Of taw approval of the CartNkato of Construction Compliance of the original system of any faqirs thWetoi t) that the drlikd wN! doso►a" above wall be located as allow" on the sg'/roved plan and that said "I will be installed in accordance with the standards6 rubs and refuu of 6 Hof the PsAna s County Opartm M of H aRK Wefi 9' C / Signed t.E.��P.A. + A C i t iLi. t_kenM Nol� AMROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION, This swovel expires two years tr the date Issued unless Construction of the bulkiMg has been undertaken and Is revocable for caves or may be amernded or modified when Considered necessary by ten Commissioner of Heotth. Any Change of alteratWin of construd*n mulres a new permit. Approved. for 41 yowl Of domestic: sanitary sewage, and /or private water supply only. :'rev . oats __ •v Title . . i,.'., �� Sri ��• � i "' }ri.�i.,i�•' . < < •. ' ill cf {irk f�`,�� ` �+�;iy! r../ �y. ;:, }r:•:- .ir$.rc_: .,•���.,' -._�. 'r'- Tai... 5;i _u; •: 4e •. :.�.� .: ;gahn9 ;:- `'„4y` 'C }[ � 'It i.15, v el dur��'r , li 'w :1. +r !'' •. .. i -::_: ... .at' `�'I +�S `'Are !. s ! r aL : :.L• •} rl.f • ":: a 'r " 111710 YOOUMRDEPAn=fl'OFMUM .: - s � 't, ,::�:, ...•.., ?,�:. .:':.r. ,� r „r, s a DNlals� sti Eltt��wl�l l �2 .� �oe/.iPoaw. v ILT._1161? w R w FiritiItd'Elm" 8 C� � CO WIT P.S. Fwat:� :. P- 22= 87•::.aNeV Owner`Bhips "'#�: PSI=FOR S6WAON DISPOSAL STn= //nn '' j ���r�� T.:Patters 1, gtigi 7ir��i� . .. .•, /.` � � on•. Lso.M� akeshore Drive W. & Ravina Road 5.56 1: rw� lrs Putnam. Lake cry- irat f 5806 -8 2 & . Ttu:.'' « 40 5887 -9. Incl. ewer'shi ".:..• :_ :,; ;s *'��,`?j Barbara & William ( ones --rl� R!'^'�— "1i O -� Date of Ftaksrs Appeevel 6/3/91 ►:;r <,; RD4 -Box 113 Sunset Drive Patterson N:Y 1Srat AJit+M r Town; , ZIP' nArp Subdivision Approved Fee Enclosed ❑ Amr,,,nr Modular Ar<ew 0.251 Acres Dittlts !YP! F®Seetiw X' 36" veistaae '200 y g'.,3.. Only .,:..:,�;,i�: • '' Depth .,;�;i�r „•. �•, PC® NaNbestlw V Whw FM Is r litaifelNeie�wa Two' Dovp Flow (i'P.D 400 :'': � �. lt«I�+d t>t.plabd .•.:,:;,��;�Iya. _r,' 96 . .trigalleri�es Sepenita Seweaep eSyckes to Consist of GaBw Septic Taatt To be ounbuded by Addteea Weser Seipp¢: Frsll,llc Supply Fseul, Addn a ai X,es �bY':F. Beal &Sons A� P.O. Box "B ", Brewster, N.Y.'.::.�•'10,509 Oth.c>I.gf<+.e.a R -O -B Fi118Section: 1982'• sq. ft..= .see above �lQps P r1� I repneer,t that 1 am wholly and completiiy responsible for the design and location of the, proposed system(s)d 1) that the w rata sew disposal ston( I above described will be constructed as shown on the approved amendment there to and In acordance with the standards, rulss,a regu ns O County, Deportment of Health, and that on completion thereof a "Certificate of Construction Compliance" fatisfactory to the Commissioner of Healthwill be submitted to the Department, and a. written guarshtee will be furnished the owner, his successors, heirs or as"s by the builder, that old builder will'; .lace M food, operating condition any part of said sewage disposal system during the period of two (2) yews Immediately following the"te•of the laatr`3; awee of the approval of the Certificate 'of Construction Compliance of the original system or any repairs theretol2) that the drilled welt'descril” a6owe,.r ",be located as shown on the approved plan and that said well will be Installed in ccordanco with the andards,: rules and rNu ns •. Of 'the';yPut County Depertment of Health. r:;' . .,.. gore. 6 November. 1992 signed i.E:� R.n: RD9 -Fair Street, Ca 1, N.Y.. 10512 29206',:.:'::: %� Addraw LIanM No_.; n APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION, This approval expires two years from the data Issued unless caistruction' of.ithe building has be.en undertakan and Is `, rev"Is for Cause of may be amended or modified when considered necessary by the Commissioner of Health... Any Change of alteration; o("nstructbn requires a new permit.. Approved for disposal of domestic. sanitary sewage, and /or rIV e water ly. ,: " ;;i•;; "1 ; ^;': Oates BY t r; ' grit 3�;�:.f'f•''.'�. (,t r '•r. I JOHN KARELL % Jr., P.E. M.S. Public Health Director DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division Of Environmental Health Services 4 Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 September 2, 1994 Barbara & William'Jones RD #4 Box 113 Sunset Drive Patterson, NY 12563 Re: Construction permit 0-22 -87 Jones, Lakeshore Drive W & Revina Road Putnam Lake (T) Patterson Lots 5806 -5808 and 5887 -5889 TM #25.56 -1 -40. Dear Mr. & Mrs. Jones: The above mentioned parcel was inspected by this Department. on September 1, 1994. At that time, the north east property corner and a stake indicating a proposed well location were noted. Based on information received by this Department, the proposed well location is approximately- 45'feet.from the existing sewage disposal system to the north.. The location of the existing sewage disposal system directly across Revina to.the west, southwest of the proposed well location is also reported. to be less than'` the required 100' minimum. Based on the above information and the field inspection.of September 1, 1994 the construction permit, P =22 -87 is hereby suspended. Please contact your engineer, John Prentiss, P. E. to revise the proposed well. location and possibly the house and sewage disposal system location to meet all present code requirements. If you have any questions please contact this office at your earliest convenience. Very truly yours, William Hedges Sr. Public Health Sanitarian WH /] P i Exhibit '; -Board of Health Attendees:- Doyle, Block, Ciaiola, Schoolman,-Hay, Bernard. �J2i� 'Q•; Health Dept. Attendees:- Foley, Molinari, W4baar, Morris Non - Voting Attendee representing Bob Bondi:- Velardi Meeting called to order at 7:00 P.M. Correction noted on Adrienne Velardi's - first name. Schoolman suggested use of either first or last names only in Minutes. Motion made to accept Minutes with above changes, seconded by Block, motion carried. Bernard was welcomed. back -as member. Schoolman stated he would.-like to hear from Molinari, Nursing Dept., with special attention as to what is happening with BRC and what else they need to do. Molinari. got Minutes from Legislative meeting. Schoolman reiterated of Minutes by the Legislative Health Sub - Committee. The consensus being there is a problem which will. slowly, be getting•resolved.and Molinari will be getting .what she needs. Since that meeting, Molinari had a message.from Hay inquiring as. 'to what was going.,On. Molinari said, in conversation with BRC, they requested for ninth time, `to explain. her needs. Molinari requested, they look at the demos and have them do their home work. She has described -on numerous times as to what she .needs. Foley said, 'they had a meeting with the County Executive,- Baska and prioritized Molinari&'s needs,-.-- Discuss ion ensued about " BRC.contract and at next meeting, Schoolman would like a report /opinion from County Attorney. Hay has opinion and will send him a copy. Variance Hearing Ciccolella, Michael, J. Mt. Hope Road •(T) Kent Variance request - pits are less than 50 feet to well. Confirmation wanted from Morris that septic in ground -was adequate. Inspection was made of property and Morris was satisfied that the system was functioning properly . and adequate for 5 bedrooms. Questions 'gone over on environmental assessment. There being no environmental impacts, motion was made and carried for variance. Variance Hearing Brichta Roseale Drive (T) Kent Has not satisfied requirements, deleted from the Agenda. ,_tem of membership reviewed. Ciaiola moved that the By -Laws be changed to relfect an expanded membership of 11 members. There will be a minimum of 7 and a maximum of 11 members., Motion was made and carried. County Legislature. has to appoint Bernard as a member who has to be sworn in. Term is for 6 years. Hay"' is --to.-contact Bernard as to time and place. .Appointment of an additional Environmentalist to be discussed at a future meeting. Sctioolman. and other members of the board received telephone calls from the owner of Cutillo's Restaurant, Town of ,Kent and asked Foley to make presentation on what has transpired. Foley..explained the business has an unsafe water supply. The Health Dept. allowed .him to open the restaurant on a spring surface water supply with certain conditions, a month later, they,found contaminants exceeding guidelines. He had to sample and if.he exceeded certain parameters, he had to drill a well. Has drilled well and is down 675 feet with 2 gallons per minute. May have to fracture his well and may get 5-gallons and may not. He wants to use spring again and Foley told.him, absolutely not. He will not sign a permit to operate a food service' establishment with.that supply. If he wants to pursue it,., he must be in complete compliance with surface water rules of Part 5, requiring Engineer report, disinfection, filtration, etc., which would cost more than a new well. Variance Workshop Jones, William RavinaRoad (T) Patterson Variance requesting permission to construct a water well that will be less than the required 100 foot separation from septic system on the adjoining property to the North. Has submitted .required documentation. In 1987, the Jones' purchased the property. with Health Dept. approval. It was not until 1994 when the property was surveyed and the well sited that the Health Dept. approval was suspended. This. was due to the fact that.the SDS on the 1987 survey was incorrect.' Septic was shown to rear of house and after the Jones' purchased the house, they found it to be in the front of the house. Need variance to put well at 85 feet. Adjoining property owner, Pat.Vozzella believes he is coming to close to her septic system and the Lake. Original Health Dept. approval in.1987 had been given on - misinformation as to- location -of septic. - Engineer- to- document- %--slope; direct line- of drainage, septic to new well and if less than 207, new holes and peres. Foley gave environmental report. County has declared this as Lyme Disease Awareness week and they have set up a series of presentations.,.public service address, press releases in conjunction with both the County Executive and the Legislature. There is a Lyme computer at Butterfield Hospital on loan from State Health Dept. Die read letter he drafted to get legal opinion. If members approve, he would like to send to whatever legal counsel would be appropriate counsel'to review it in exploring modifications relevant to the County Sanitary Code. Need advice on the extent of the BOH authority to make such changes.* Hay said to send to Carl Lode3, Putnam County Attorney. Schoolman to edit the letter, have it put out over his letterhead and have Health Dept. type it up. Ciaiola spoke on monies County has put aside for testing at beaches: The object. to see if there is any correlation between storm events and higher bacteria, etc., at local beaches. If so,-they may wish to consider a rain standard so the public can be advised to stay out of the water at certain beaches for 24 hours after a certain type of rain storm. Letter outlines the time of testing when it should be done after storms of l/2 inch. Needs Health Dept. assistance in obtaining. data on what beaches would be affected. Details.to be worked out on collecting' samples. Would like committee set up, along with Doyle and•himself. Motion made to adjourn. Meeting adjourned 8:55 P.M. 1 e Exhibit H 1 BOARD OF HEALTH JUNE 19, 1995 Board. of Health Attendees:- Bernard, Hay; Doyle, Lebwohl, Schoolman, Block, Ciaiola, Weber Health Dept. Attendees:- Foley, Hedges Non - Voting Attendee representing Bob Bondi:- Velardi Meeting called to order at 7:00 P.M. Subject to correction sixth paragraph, second page of May 15, 1995 Minutes', to show Ciaiola not Doyle, read letter he drafted to obtain legal opinion relevant to the County Sanitary Code. In addition, Weber, incorrectly.listed as Health Dept. Attendee. Motion was made and carried to accept Minutes with above changes.. Molinari, not being present, Schooman asked Foley about what is happening with BRC in the Nursing Dept. Foley replied, the matter still has not been resolved. Velardi stated she knew.Bondi had a meeting with BRC and gave them a time frame in which to come up with 'a program. However, she did.not know what the time.frame was. Variance Workshop Bracke Mainitou Station Rd.. (T) Philipstown Hedges presented floor plan and map of Bracke's variance request to add a second floor to the existing dwelling. Variance is required because it exceeds 15%. Schoolman inquired how far the house'is from the river and Ciaiola asked distance from flood plains. Hearing is.scheduled for July 17, 1995. Foley distributed departmental report highlighting coordination of 1995 Tobacco- Free Awareness Project; -Bicycle .Helmet Distribution Program, 3 ATUPA violations;. concluded field testing. of interactive.Rado'n Preventative Education Computer at. Mahopac Library and conducted Lyme Disease Awareness Week. activities. Molinari will either mail her report to Members or distribute at next meeting. Schoolman inquired about the appointment of another Environmentalist to. the Board. Ciaiola is to find someone that he can work with. Schoolman asked Foley to give up -date on Cutillo's. Restaurant. Foley said the well was drilled, down 600', waiting for lab results before he attempts to hydro -frac well. Variance Hearing Jones, William Ravina Road (T) Patterson „ Applicant is requesting variance to construct a well 85' from septic system. Original permit was suspended due to the fact that the SDS on the 1987 survey was incorrect. Attorney Velardi is representing the applicant for variance. -^- Hearing. — Jones (continued) After`a lengthy discussion, a motion was made and carried to table the application until legal interpretation is obtained from the County Attorney. Foley should have the information by July 10th and will be sent out to the Members. Ciaiola stated he will be starting up the retesting program at local beaches. Has people lined up. Motion made and carried to adjourn. Meeting adjourned 8:35 P.M. TEL, ( 914 ) 279 -4000 FAX (914) 279 -4236• VELARDI & VELARDI ATTORNEYS AT LAW BREWSTER- CARMEL PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ROUTE 6. BREWSTER. NEW YORK 10509 PAUL J. VELARDI June 26, 1995 Carl F. Lodes, Esq. Putnam County Attorney 2 County Center Carmel, NY 10512 RE: JONES WITH PUTNAM COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT Dear Mr. Lodes: CHARLES H. VELARDI OF COUNSEL Please be advised that I represent William and Barbara Jones in connection with the vacant parcel which they own on Revina Road in the Town of Patterson. This parcel received full Board of Health approval for a well and septic system in 1987. Said approval was renewed periodically until September 2 1994 when it was "suspended" by the Department of Health. A copy of the suspension letter is enclosed for your review. Although that letter notes the proposed well location as approximately 45 feet from and existing sewage disposal system'on adjacent property to the north, the distance was in error because the surveyor marked the wrong location for the well. Per the original plans before the Board of Health 'in 1987, the location of the well on my client's property and the distance from that proposed location to the existing septic system on the adjoining parcel is 87 feet. Health Department regulations require 100 feet. Although my clients previously received full Board of Health approval, they are now before the Board seeking a specific waiver pursuant to 10 NYCRR Section 75.3.(d) on the basis of hardship and impracticality. In sum, it is my clients' position that all they need to seek is a 13 foot waiver and /or variance. Critical to this inquiry is the definition of the word "suspended". At a hearing on the waiver request on June 19, 1995 it was my clients' position that suspension meant that the previous Board of Health approval would be intact once the suspension was lifted and therefore the code requirements of 1987 still applied to this property in the review by the Board of Health. The.position of William Hedges was that the suspension was tantamount to an extinquishment of Board of Health approval and therefore any new *Inclusion herein of this number does. not constitute consent to service pursuant to CPLR 2103. approvals sought Health standards meeting in order requested that participate in tt on the property we apply.. The waiver to determine the [ write to you is decision. Ad require that 1995 Board of request was tabled at the June "suspended" issue. The Board n order for your office to In reviewing the Public Health Law I noticed that Section 3450 of said law uses both words "suspension" and "revocation" concerning Health Department matters. The section does not directly concern Board of Health approval but it is the only section that I could find in the Health law which noted a distinction between the two words. I could not find any definition of suspension and /or revocation in the Public Health Law and therefore their normal meaning would apply. In order to ascertain this I reviewed Black's Law Dictionary, 5th Edition, and found the following in connection with .both words. Revocation means "the. recall of some power, authority, or thing granted, or a destroying or. making void of some deed that had existence until the act of revocation made it void ". Therefore, revocation is a final act making some prior right or power void.. Suspension of a right, on the other hand, is defined by "the act by :,which a party is deprived of the exercise of his right for a time. ':temporary stop of a right, a partial extinquishment for a time, as contrasted with a complete extinguishment; where the right is :absolutely dead: Suspension of a right in an estate is a temporary or partial withholding of it from use or exercise. It differs from extinquishment,.because a suspended right is susceptible of being revived, which is not the case where the right was extinguished.." Therefore, a suspension of a right is merely a'temporary act which does not extinguish that right. If the suspension is lifted, the right remains. It is the position of my clients that their original Board of Health approval was suspended and not revoked. Therefore, if they can clear up the reason for the suspension which they are presently seeking to do .through the waiver process then once the reason for the suspension is lifted the right to that Board.of Health approval remains. In sum, the 1987 Board of Health Department standards should apply in this particular case because their approval was suspended and not revoked.. Kindly advise this office as to your thoughts with respect to this matter. The next-Board of Health meeting is scheduled for July 17 1995. I i i i Thank you for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, VELARDI & VELARDI, ESQS.. By: Paul J. Velardi PJV /tm cc: William and Barbara Jones - 3 - CARL F. LODES County Attorney PHILIP M. CAMPBELL Risk Manager M E M O R A N D U M DEPARTMENT OF LAW TO: Bruce R. Foley Acting Public Health Director FROM: Thomas F. Purcell Deputy County Attorney DATE: July 14, 1995 RE: Suspension of Construction Permit - Jones DANIEL F. LEARY First Deputy County Attorney THOMAS F. PURCELL Deputy County Attorney LILLIAN DiLORENZO . Deputy County Attorney KATHLEEN KING Sr. Legal Assistant C! 251 pa 51�� I ' apt, - JU( 17 139$ � LARDI In response to your memo dated June 26, 1995 regarding the above.matter, please be advised as.follows:. Although. your memo focuses in on the question regarding. the significance of A suspension, in my review of the materials in connection with this matter, it is clear that there are several issues to.'be. resolved herein. I attempted to call you this week but was unable to-reach you since you were on vacation. I would like, to. discuss--all of the issues 'involved before - rendering an opinion and have indicated this to Mr.. Velardi and Tony Hay. Accordingly, I have informed Mr. Velardi and Tony Hay that I will not be responding to the substantive issues before Monday, July 17th. Please adjourn. this matter to the next meeting date so that we will have an opportunity to meet and discuss all of the issues herein in depth. I am notifying Tony Hay and Paul Velardi of my request that the meeting be scheduled in August by copy of this memo. cc: Tony Hay, Legislator V/1aul Velardi, Esq. 40 GLENEIDA AVENUE - CARMEL, NEW YORK 10512 (914) 225 3641 Ext. 260 BOARD OF HEALTH AUGUST 21, 1995 Board of Health Attendees:- Hay, Bernard, Block, Schoolman, Kamin, Ciaiola, Lebwohl Health Dept. Attendees:- Foley,.Molinari Non- Voting Attendees:- Velardi (representing Bondi), Purcell, County Attorney Schoolman called meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Executive session to follow. Schoolman asked if there were any, additions, subtractions, or amendments to July 17th Minutes. Bernard made motion to accept Minutes as written, seconded by Block. Motion carried. Schoolman read memorandum he had received from Lodes, County Attorney, in reply to letter written relative -to proposed modifications of the Putnam County Sanitary Code. In essence, the Putnam County Board of Health's proposed modificatior are permissible and in. accordance with the State Constitution and the relevant statutory and case law. Copies to be distributed to Board Members. Molinari presented Nursing. Division report and inquired if there were any questions regarding the department report she had-mailed to members. Concerned .about annual agency evaluation which should be looked at, reviewed by the Board, voted upon and sent with any recommendations the Board may have. Should be done as soon as possible as-we are half way into 1995. Had hoped with everyone receiving it in the mail, it could•be signed this evening. Schoolman will sign if no one has any problem.witki it-. Bernard moved to accept the annual agency evaluation and concede it, seconded by Hay. Molinari, on the recommendation from th'e Board in terms of any other statement the Board would .wish to put on_ the form....__Schoolman, does.. Ls increasingly tonce r.r_.ed..by... _....._._. :. three groups of health care providers that are not working in harmony which are, the Health Department, the hospital as a provider of not only nursing services, but other health related services and the Physicians in the community. To make sure there is an optimization and naturalization of money, resources' and. effort, that every effort be made to get the three groups or their representatives together to develop what. should be a comprehensive plan to the. County. Molinari replied, 1�unicipal Health Services plans addressing collaboration of 'providers in community. Is in process of being revised,due October 1st. Molinari states that issues not appropriate in relation. to annual agency evaluation. Schoolman, Board is not making any statements, on report at this time. Molinari, . they should at least say, reviewed by Board. Schoolman agreed, but said it is not an action. Bernard, looking over pages 4 and 5,. where her general concerns were, statistical data, should add comment, reviewed by Board and concerned about lack of appropriate-data correction ystem and monitoring the acceptability of the BRC contract. Foley distributed his Advisory report. Inquired if there were any questions on Revised Addition and Well Guidelines, self - explanatory Health Education Report and a letter which is going out to Physicians requiring the report of human granulocytic ehrlichiosis (HGE).. Lebwohl, correction on House Additions Approval Guidelines, paragraph B, X12, word should read partitions instead of petition. Foley, correction will-be made, letters have not yet been sent out. C i -2- Kamin commented on correction to Molinari's report. She will set. it up'. Schoolman, will do Variance Hearing on Jones before going into Executive Session. County Attorney is. present. Foley announced that Bracke has withdrawn Variance application. They' may resubmit. Schoolman welcomed everyone back on Jones' Hearing. Health Department will review issues that necessitated variance request after which everyone will be entitled to speak. Foley stated, in 1987, Jones' lot was,approved showing reported location by Engineer, John Prentis of the Sanitary.System, 100 feet to the proposed well. In 1994, the Health Department became aware the sanitary system was riot as reported on the original approval, but in fact, in, front of the house-which measured 85 feet. Lot approval in 1987 with.misinformation, misrepresentation, whatever case may be, would not have been approved in 1987. Department of. Health suspended permit and is requesting the Board of Health to confirm that the permit be revoked. Board Members asked various questions which were answered by applicant, Jones and his Attorney,'Velardi. Adjoining property owners, also present, voiced. their concerns. After much discussion, Foley made recommendation to revoke permit. Question arose, if Foley has authority to revoke permit, why are the Board Members involved? ,Foley replied,. it had been presented to the Board as a variance.. The Department has done studies through the County Attorney's office and,State Department .of. Health and found out the Director does have authority to revoke the 'Permit, not the Board. Schoolman asked Foley to spell it'out for the Board as *to ' what his functions are. Foley read letter from State Health Department, dated July 5th from James D. Decker, P.E. Chief, Residential Sanitation Sect., .Bureau of Community Sanitation and Food Protection, wherein it is recommended that Section 3, Article-3 of the proposed Putnam County. Sanitary Code be revised to be more consistent with Section 75, 6b, etc., for Individual .Wa.ter " Supply and Individual Treatment. Systems. The County Health Department official designated to consider and grant /deny written applications for specific waivers should be the County Commissioner of Health, the County Public Health Director', the County Environmental Services, etc.,'rather than the County Board of Health with the concurrence of the Director. The County Board of Health may consider appeals to decisions rendered by the designated 'official_ regarding granting /denying applications for specific waivers. Questions and discussion followed from Board Members as to 'the purpose. they serve. Schoolman made motion, since Foley is not granting- a variance in this case and is not going to entertain any arguments to grant the variance, that the Board of Health no longer decide this issue and let all the parties meet with Foley at their own time and place, seconded by Bernard and Block. Motion carried. After dismissal of Jones' delegation, deliberation followed .on authority of Board Members and the Department .of Health. Purcell spoke'on interpretation of legality /procedures. Kamin requested Director's report, briefly, as to what he has done, to keep abreast of what has transpired. Meeting adjourned 9:00 P.M. 1 Exhibit l lICFL/i�A l�(� r PUTNAM COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES John M.. Simmons, M.D. .Deputy Canmi.ssioner of Health - FIELD ACTIVITY REPORT - Sheet of INSPDCTION NAME. Orig. Routine ADDRESS %� �--7� mac- l �/Z/j Sp,� /4:54/ Orig. 'Ccmplain Orig. Request No. Street Town TM No. Compliance Complaint Camp MAILING ADDRESS Final P.O. Box Post ffice Zip Code Group Illness s- Construction TELEPHONE �!/1'7 -4 -S• PERSON IN CHARGE- OR INTERVIEWED Reinspection Field, Sampling Only Field Conference Name and Title. Other DATE� C TYPE FACILITY TIME TIME LEFT Explain FINDINGS: �� .5 G --�i ply / �J �6"�• G.� C/ Y� lj c� A2 C-11,10-4 7 z -J, INSPECTOR: TELEPHONE: Signature and Title PERSON IN CHARGE OR INTERVIEWED: I acknowledge this Field Activity Report. SIGNATURE: TITLE: Exhibit M . .. .. Section J. vesign and Construction of Sewage Treatment. Systems a),No system- f or: the.. subsurface treatment.of.sewage. shall hereafter be approved. unless it. is.designed.'and constructed in accordance with.the following: 1. 10 NYCRR.Part.75 and Appendix 75 -A 2. "Program.Review and Policies for Subsurface Sewage Treatment and Water Supply Facilities for Single Family Residences ". as published by the Director. b) Any application for a permit to 'construct an individual sewage treatment system which is denied by the Department because it cannot meet the requirements, may be reviewed by the Pufnam County Board of Health, who upon written application may issue a specific waiver from a provision of this Article, in accordance'.with Section 75.6 of 10 NYCRR Part 75, where such waiver is consistent with.the general purpose and intent of this Article, upon :proof;,of hardship and with the concurrence of the Director,.if'it is his opinion that a heilth: hazard will not be created by issuance of such specific waiver. _ ---- .._ --- - Exhibit N f uivision ur tnvironmencai rleaicn )erv�ces 4-'Geneva Road, Brewster, New York 10509 (914) 278 -6130 August 29,. .19.9.5. Barbara & Wi11igm Jones. RD #4 Box 13 Sunset Drive Patterson,- NY.12563 Re: .Construction:Permit P -22 -87 Jones, Lake Shore Dr. West ano Revina.Road .(T) Patterson Lot 5806 7550875887 -5889. ' Dear_ Mr. &...Mrs. Jones: : This.- has completed the raview.of:your, request for a specific wd�ver to construct'awell at..the. above location: : decis, i.on`by.°:th_i's..'Depar,.tment :was based on thd'fol.lowing ;information. : 1 On Apri 1 6, ,:1987-,` after a: review of al l requi.'red appl ications, 'soi 1 • analysis' and other,information : required : by•this Department.tne; construction permit:. for a;:two 6edroflm resi dence :on the . above mentioned . parceT :.was approved- by :. this Department .for the .applicant Diane Wiseman: 2. `, :The:,permi.t.was transferred. tio' Robert' Jones in "1:98 °8.' :3 On September 2,':1994 the.construction.permit` for this. parcel was suspended by : .....this Department.,.,The reason for,�the. suspension was'.the discrepancy of: :the, location�of the. sewage disposal system. directly to:tfle north. The.approved plans ,indicate a separation distance of.100'feet. The. owner of the property to. the north .reported"thei r existing. sewage disposal-.system'.was not properly. located:. on :the approved plans: and was considerably less than 100: feet to . the, proposed:.Jones.well. Our Department has confirmed.this: Based on the.,above mentioned review and supporting information, the p.lans as. submitted are.not.in compliance. with Part 75 of Chapter.II Administrative Rules and Regulations and Article III of the Putnam County.Sariitary. Code. Your.request..for'a specific waiver is denied and the construction permit:is:' hereby revoked. :.Should you.have any questions concerning this..matter please contact the.. wr.i ter.' Very truly yours, ruce.R. F ey, R. S. Acting Public Health Director. ` BRF/jp cc: Paul Velardi, Esq. .Tom Purcell, Deputy County Attorney ; y 4 1 Exhibit 0 o � to rn cr► x .P w - 0 is N One cannot generalize and say with' certainty how .far away a . : sewage disposal system must .be, or through _what depth of soil:. or distance sewage must pass to be purified. Organic pollution tprels "distance'ihrough &'short fine sand, silt or clay;"•but :will " tnvel indefinite distances through coarse gravel,. fissured. rock,•Aried6out... cracked clay, or solution channels in limestone.. .The safe:distance between a well -and a sewage disposal "stem is . dependent upon many' vuriables, including the - hydrology and 2' - geology'of the area and chemical, physical and biological processes. ` In. general, wells _(and springs) should not be in an area subject to LOCATING A .WELL. flooding. They should be uphill from any privy, barnyard, ow•. , pool, tile field, leaching pit or other sewage disposal system and - Figure ti shu+rs a typical lot "leyoul for a well and septic ".tank located with consideration to the factors noted below. .system. Table 3 gives suggested minimum distances between water'..... Overburden and source of water. The type, amount and char. > and sewerage ui►its, although ut +der.certain circumstances t}�e health 'variations. acteristics of the overburden above the water - bearing formation b department may require or. permit largely determine the ability to remove the bacterial pollution intro - 1:11 duced in the soil. The smaller the effective size, and uniformity d coefficient of the soil_ particles, the greater the removal of organic:. H PRIVATE WATER SUPPLY 8, SEWAGE DISPOSAL LAYOt.7. pollution. "(Chemical pollution, on the other hand, can travel great X - distances without change.) Hence a sewage disposal system in a Ln tK sandy clay or silty lnam could be located closer to a well than a I �., .sewage disposal system in coarse gravel.'. ......A sewage disposal system in a soil layer about r � feet deep over .. . creviced or' fractured rock should be 1t n greater distance from • c.w.ac well, than one.in a soil layer 20 feet deep over rock. The slope of .. visible rock outcrops will also indicate the direction of flow of soil ;;, :; ::.� water and hence pollution with respect to the well location. If rock ' or clay lies: at a shallow depth between the earth overburden 'and i� ° waterbearing furmatioii, . then sealing 'of the well. casing with i MUM i t cement grout becomes more important than the separating d'uts:nce from sources of pollution. ". Well construction and well location. Generally.speakifig, the i _•, _ deeper a well and coxing the less likely will be pollution of the well. 'provided the annular "space around thp well casing is sealed "." i .with cement grout If the depth of the casing and ,amount of cement grouting is reduced, then the. well, had better be located further >> away from sewage disposal systems. Where rock is close to the. i TM w w�w+ - WM& twos +:,..... a++a..+...� a b o, r..: surface, very careful well construction, including proper depth of r•^�• �-L6. w- ^--• casing and cement grouting, will provide the best protection-. 4.0.wnr..no...r&AdC."DM A.WF }!�w Aw..as•.tl against pollution in addition to maximum separation from sewage Figure a ..disposal systems. 23 24 - _ i t �o W; b a 1 A r TABLE 3 Suggeated Minimum Distance+ Betweten' Water and Sewerage Units (In ' feet) ° To —11 or To pall or .uttlon I:.e• V-6— li..• Vr.r V .rp13t tarok. miler- ' tl[bl .................. 23 it cart iron pipe: Cklriwe t.wt.clti+.eptt- ork., " 30 ti.w I.wk .......:..:.... 30 S.gtie 1.nk .............. 30 Dry. .0 (Ior red r tootan[ dn•i.-V or A- -1.r only) ............. 30 Use. to 1616b.,6.n b.r . ..A d:pa.I .yrtt...,.. . 30 Pricey. pit. 100 Unlribution boe......... 100. Pri.y. . at,";,tht —It... 30 Sul. Haas di.ps.l. field... 100• a.rnyvd, rJ., b.rw g t. . t.m .win.l pcwr........ 100 n.'rnwu.n: .. .. S.nd filter ................ . SO iN.in+ —loa in[, pnnp Ague. fiv.r•..... ... .... 'i iwA:n[ r .eepalp ►il or rr- .po-i ................. 130• r.ort •n co [r.trol • 11'.Irr w••r .,l rr r li.r -r m.y la in d•r ru..r 1--h it rut vw .cw ilA h.1.�u1L.1 _ tw.wt• .. k+J n1 nll p.e u I;r W.- ..tor -.more pier: w ww tr .n.y be a Irop(se! e1+Y at c..r —I. at tut 1! Ir4... ../...c...n• 1••w. Mo.'rla.l —d •.c— pipe :. "I b.4— frrt .ith tW%t orl ro"-p —d l . t. —I G .cal —bl-t to vttl...e. .prri.npo.ol lo.da w ribr.ti.w. War" write ti.....nulrr pres..re •A.11 not P.- r1—, tha.. 10iw•t d . septic t.nQ tote Wd. 6-4—u . 1.n. 'y K .n oU.rr part -A ..e..ae .I. P—1 . '. ll'dlr lea.ltd ul rnwty .Ion n [crook .-I m Ur w—ral p.th from, a ".W dip:rl •etlern .h .dd be tp.eetl Vu tart w .— ..ny. uny .1—di ." be .. —t xro .," u N.tr.l 6- r 1)niw.p ditehw .I..nrl.l Le Irre-fiw. int ..•d we/ Iw fl., ::!Z (eel Irs... sell : .. • .<.e lave 13 "I.ou4n[ Souraft of.pcilluuon and won location. The type and number of sewage disposal systems or other pollution in the vicinity of a well will be an indication of sewage saturation of the soil around the well -Ground slope will suggest the probable direction of sewage wage and ground water Bow And the best location for a well to avoid this pollution. The volume of water pumped and the well draw•aowfi are also extremely important, as they determine the distance and speed wfth which pollution may travel., Usually pollution in the ground will be minimized with increased distances and time of When pumping from well, the di rection of ground W& er Bow around the well will be tow" It Since - the puiuping' level 'of, bie 50"t� iWjec�t r .::::.Water in the well will probably rhoie, o lesi, below 'ground surface, it will, exert in attractive influence,o . n ground water perhaps as far as 500 t6 1000 feet away. from "the web, r egardlen of the elevation of the-top f n 'of the well.... other i ot words distances and elevations of'sewage'disposal systems must be 'Y Sid ered relative to ih ..con e* of th elevation' e water * level in the well: 'away w I e while it is being. pumped.'. - A se% 1 66 feet -&6 disposal system I on ground_ evel 'or down'.grade. from 'a' we 'U may - itill, be 56 feet high'ir than the water level in the ;veil. - Judgment is needed. It is'apparent that considerable judgment is needed to ielect a proper location fora well. Thi limiting dig- n ances given i Table 3 should therefore be'used as a guide.' Experi• ence has' so shown them. to be'rea 'nable''and effective in "'most instances when coupled with in U roreatii o'n of available'hydoh , ic ' • and geologic data and good well construction, location and pptee. NOTICE . C OF ENTRY Index No. Year.. 19 ;ir:-Please take notice that the within is a (certified) rue copy of a SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK luly entered in the office of the clerk of the within COUNTY OF-PUTNAM tamed court -on- 19 BARBARA JONES and -.WILLIA1,4- JONES :)ated. Yours, etc.,. Petitioners. VELARDI AND VELARDI Ittorne•s.for against Office and Post Office Address - : 'A 'cting Public BRUCE R . FLEY, R. as . Brewster Carmel Professional Bldg. ' Health Director of the Putnam County ROUIE 6 BREWSTEF, N.Y. 10509 Department of Hei lth; Respondent 0 kttorney(s) for ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE, VERIFIED -I PETITION, AFFIDAVIT N SUPPORT NOnCK OF SETTLEMENT AND ME14ORAIN DUM OF LAW .ir:-Please take notice that an order f which the within is a true copy will be presented )r settlement to the Hon. VELARDI AND VELARDI A,,orneysfor Petitioners ne of the judges of the within named Court, at Office and Post Office Address, Telephone Brewster Carmel Professional Bldg'. n 19 t M. * ROUTE 6 BREWSTER, N.Y. 10509 )ated, Tel. 914-279-4000.. Yours, etc., VELARDI AND VELARDI To iyorneYsfor Office and Post Office Address Attorney(s). for Brewster Carmel Professional Bldg. ROUTE BREWSTER, N.Y. 10509 Service of a copy of the within is hereby admitted. Dated, 0 ................................................................... ttorney(s) for Attorney(s) for