|
April 1, 2008 Linda Miller and Susan Siegel of Citizens for an Informed Yorktown read statements during the Courtesy of the Floor portion of the agenda that raised both environmental and process questions about the proposed revitalization plans for Sparkle Lake that were featured in a recent issue of the North County News and in the Supervisor's Letter in the Parks & Recreation Department Summer Brochure that was mailed to all residents. Ms. Miller asked if the current measures were based on any recent studies of the lake's condition, and if so whether those studies had been made public. She also asked if the Conservation Board and ABACCA, the Advisory Board for Architecture and Community Appearance, for had been involved in the plans or had reviewed them. She also stated the many of the proposed actions, some of which had already taken place, required wetlands permits which had not been applied for. Ms. Siegel asked if the town board had been involved in the revitalization plans, or had reviewed them, and whether the board had a long range plan for the lake, and if so, how the proposed short term revitalization measures fit into that plan. (Mr. Bianco said later in the meeting that the first time he knew about the plans were when he read about them in the North County News.) Eric DiBartolo, Director of Labor Operations and the person in charge of the revitalization plans, explained what was being done to enhance the lake including: lowering the water level to kill weeds, the introduction of weed eating carp, the sharing of a weed cutting machine with the Mohegan Lake Park District, the installation of a fountain with a lighted 12 foot spray to aerate the lake, plus the installation of picnic benches and barbeque facilities). The improvements will cost approximately $12,000-$13,000. He said that the improvements had been developed with input from the supervisor and “some” councilmen. He said that he had also been in touch with members of the Sparkle Lake Association. In response to the concerns raised by the CIY, DiBartolo saw the need fir additional review by other town committees as "one step forward and 15 steps backwards." April 8, 2008 (work session) Mr. DiBartolo advised the board that he had obtained a wetland's permit to lower the level of the lake (which has already been done) although he said that town engineer Sharon Robinson said that one wasn't needed. He told the board that neither Mohegan Lake or Shrub Oak Lake get wetland's permits when they are lowered. He defended his plans for the revitalization of the lake in the face of being "beaten up on" and that one or two people didn't like the plans. He said that if the fish didn't like the blue fiber optic light on the fountain, he would shut off the light. He didn't think the light would alter the ecology of the lake. He also stated that the lake was looking "great" after having lowered the water level. He explained that the aerator/fountain would not involve any digging of trenches (the hose would drop into the water where the current cage is located) and that therefore no wetland's permit would be needed for that activity. He said that an aerator/fountain would be better than a simple aerator. Councilman Bianco stated that as long as the fountain didn't require any electric cable in the lake, no permit was needed. Councilman Metz said he had received inquires from homeowners in the Junior Lake area wanting to know if Mr. DiBartolo could initiate similar type improvements for Junior Lake. Councilman Bianco asked Mr. DiBartolo to copy the board on his projects as he does for highway department projects. Mr. DiBartolo said he appreciated the trust the board had in him. May 6, 2008 Mr. DiBartolo showed a series of pictures of 104 weed eating carp that had been placed in Sparkle Lake as part of the overall improvement plan. Anyone catching and keeping any of the fish will be subject to a fine. He noted that the lake was “doing very well.” July 1, 2008 During Courtesy of the Floor Howard Frank called the board's attention to the 1986 Draft Environmental Impact Study done for Sparkle Lake and suggested that as the town was spending money to revitalize the lake, that it look at the recommendations in the report. He also suggested that a fountain with multiple nozzles would provide better aeration than the single nozzle fountain that was currently installed. |