|
Councilman Lou Campisi brought to the board's attention the need to regulate or ban outdoor stoves and boilers. There appear to be two such units in Yorktown, one on a 45 acre parcel on Locke Lane that has not generated any complaints and one on Cordial Rd that has resulted in many complaints by residents and smoke in the area that has resulted in three calls to the fire department. Currently, there are no town or NYS regulations governing their use; the only regulations appear to be limited NYS DEC regulations dealing with smoke. Several residents affected by the Cordial Rd unit attended the meeting. The unit on Cordial, which is classified as “appliance” by the state, is apparently being used year round and at all hours. Area residents, concerned about the smoke and smell, have complained to the user but to no avail. Mr. Campisi noted that the units are typically used in rural areas where there are no surrounding homes. He said he had been in touch with County Legislator Michael Kaplowitz about a possible county-wide ban on the units. Based on his research, Mr. Campisi was suggesting that the town consider a ban with a clause that would grandfather in the two existing units for a limited number of years as long as they met certain conditions. Some of the possible conditions could be: the size of the lot, proximity to the property line, the height of the stack, the installation of scrubbers in the stack, the hours and time of year that it could be used, and the type of wood that could be burned. The town attorney will draft legislation for the board's review. October 14, 2008, work session Following up on an earlier discussion, the board reviewed the first draft of a proposed local law that would ban outdoor boilers/furnaces after December 31, 2010 and place a series of restrictions on the two appliances currently being used in town. The restrictions would include: a. they must have a 15 ft smoke stack b. the owner must get a permit from the building department c. they could only be operated between October 15-March 15 d. they could not burn certain types of fuels e. they must be located at least 50 feet from the property line The law will be fine tuned by Town Attorney John Buckley and advertised at the next regular board meeting for a public hearing on November 18th. The two owners of these furnaces will be notified of the hearing date.
November 18, 2008 Public Hearing Several homeowners in the Cordial Road neighborhood spoke about the problems they have been experiencing from one such stove that was being used year round. They told the board about the heavy smoke, the unpleasant odor that at times smelled like burning rubber, their diminished quality of life and their concern for the health of their children. Two homeowners spoke in support of wood fired furnaces but agreed that their use should be regulated and that the one on Cordial Road was probably being used incorrectly. Michael Cesario, a homeowner who recently purchased a wood fired furnace but had not installed it yet, told the board that his EPA approved unit would generate less smoke than a fireplace if used properly. That point was reiterated by Beriah Burkehart who has been using one of the furnaces for about five years. Earlier in the month he invited Supervisor Peters and Environmental Inspector Michaal Dubovsky to visit his property and observe the furnace in operation. Mr. Peters confirmed that he saw no smoke. Two other speakers addressed the science of wood burning furnaces and supported statements made by Messrs. Cesario and Burkehart. There appeared to be general consensus that the problem on Cordial Rd was that the stove was not being used properly, i.e., the homeowner was burning the wrong materials, and that a regulatory approach might be an alternative to the outright ban that was included in the proposed legislation. Areas of possible regulation include what can be burned in the furnaces, the time of the year the furnace can be used, the proximity to a neighboring house, the size of the lot, prevailing winds, maintenance requirements, use of EPA approved furnaces and the height of smoke stacks. The hearing was adjourned. The board will review the comments at its December 9th work session. In response to questions from board members, both Messrs. Cesario oand Burkehart indicated that they would attend the work session. December 9, 2008, work session Although not on the agenda, the board continued the discussion with three homeowners participating. Mr. Campisi read some of the emails he had received since the public hearing expressing concern about allowing the furnaces. One, from the neighbor of Mr. Burkehart who was at the meeting, complained about the smoke from his neighbor's furnace. In response, Mr. Burkehart reminded the board that when Supervisor Peters and Michael Dubovsky, the town's environmental code officer visited his home, there was no smoke coming from the furnace. He added that the complaining neighbor was a difficult person to deal with and that another neighbor of his had no problem with the furnace but was unable to attend the meeting to support him. Mr. Campisi also read off a list of other municipalities and counties that had enacted bans on the furnaces, noting that some of them were in very rural parts of the state. He also told the board that he had checked out some of the web sites given to him by Mr. Cesario, the other homeowner who spoke in support of the furnaces at the public hearing. These sites, he said, turned out to be from manufacturers of the stoves. In response to a question from Supervisor Peters as to whether the furnaces could be allowed by special permit, Building Inspector Bill Gregory said that the issue would be one of enforcement. For example, how could/would the town enforce the condition that only seasoned wood be used. An outright ban, he said would be easier to enforce. He noted that some of the same problems associated with the outdoor furnace, could also occur with indoor fireplaces. Mr. Burkehart asked the board to consider legislation that would be equitable to everyone and would not punish those who were using their stoves properly. Councilman Martorano also expressed concern over protecting homeowners who had already made an investment in such furnaces. He did not see that other indoor wood burning stoves, such as pellet stoves, presented a similar set of problems that required regulation. The board will reopen the public hearing on January 6th. January 6, 2009 The board reconvened the public hearing. Michael Cesario, the owner of one of the furnaces who had spoken at an earlier meeting again talked about how little smoke his unit generated. A heating and ventilator contractor who installed his unit also spoke and explained the differences between older and newer models. The newer models, he said, were gasified, which meant that they basically burned off any smoke. Councilman Metz noted the amount of smoke from a wood fired furnace couldn't be compared to a pellet stove as the former was used many more hours a day. Councilman Martorano asked questions about the height of the stock and also how any regulations governing the use of the furnaces could be enforced as the town did not have people who could enforce any new regulations. John Adorno, the Cordial Rd resident who has the wood fired furnace that brought the issue to the board's attention, defended his use of the equipment which he bought in 2007 for $17,000. The unit serves 3 houses with a total of 14,000 square feet. He said that when he purchased the unit, he asked the town if he needed a permit or if there were any regulations governing the unit's use. He was told that no permit was needed and there were no regulations. Over time he has tried different woods but he said that that didn't make a difference in terms of smoke. He disputed comments made by the installer regarding the merits of gasification units (his is not a gasification unit) saying that the units generate smoke when they start up and are banked down, but not when they burn at their high temperatures. In response to neighborhood complaints and his own experience, he decided he would not use the units during the summer when the units do not burn hot enough to burn off the smoke. He also said that only one neighbor had initially complained to him. He recently spent $3,000 to build a 25 ft stack but only put up a portion of the stack when he was told by Councilman Campisi that the stack was an eyesore. Councilman Bianco asked one Cordial Rd resident if the problem has gotten any better since the height of the stack had been extended and the homeowner said that during this time of year, the windows were closed and he was inside more so he couldn't say. He added that he didn't want to be placed in the position of being a policeman. Board members were sympathetic to the concerns of homeowners to lower their heating costs but saw their responsibility as providing a safe environment for town residents. Serafina Mastro suggested to the board that it was losing sight of the issue of a homeowner's property rights and that perhaps the town should grant the existing units (there are four in town) a permit and have them inspected. When Councilman Campisi asked her if she'd like to see a 25ft stack from her deck, she replied that there was a fine line between a homeowner's right and what she as a neighbor might not like. After more back and forth, it was clear that the board had no problem with banning future units; and that the thorny issue that remained was whether to grandfather the existing four units subject to some new regulations, or require the units to discontinue use after a few years. Also at issue was whether the town would be able to impose regulations that could adequately monitor the use of the four units. Councilman Metz said that some of the information he had heard during the hearing gave him “pause to consider” whether there was a way to make the four units comply with appropriate regulations. He said he didn't know the answer. An initial vote to close the public hearing was defeated 3-2 with Councilmen Campisi and Bianco voting for closure. Councilman Bianco expressed concern that the issue not be allowed to drag on. He saw a sense of urgency and said no one should have to live that way. Then, the board voted unanimously to adjourn the hearing and invite a representative of EPA to the next work session for more technical input. January 20, 2009 The board reconvened the public hearing and voted 4-0 to approve the proposed local law with some minor modifications. The law will continue to ban any NEW outdoor wood-fired furnaces and boilers but will regulate existing ones and permit then to continue functioning. The board dropped the sunset provision that would have required the existing units to cease operation by December 31, 2010. The existing units will have to get a permit from the town and the units will have to be either 100 ft from the property line or 250 feet from the closest structure not being surfaced by the unit. The units will only be permitted to be used between October 15th thru March 31st. The law also imposed other requirements that will have to be met before obtaining a permit. |