Lake George Park Commission

Meeting #353

20 February 2007

Fort William Henry Conference Center

Lake George, NY


                           Presiding:                         Bruce E. Young, Chair


                         Commission Members Present:   Thomas K. Conerty
                        John A. Pettica
                        Thomas J. Morhouse
                        James T. Kneeshaw
                        Kenneth W. Parker
                        Thomas W. Hall


                              Commission Members Absent:    John McDonald, Jr.
                        Roger H. Phinney
                        Shauna M. DeSantis
                       

                              Commission Staff Present:     Michael P. White, Executive Director
                        Joseph Schneider, Law Enforcement Director
                        Roger Smith, Conservation Operations Supervisor II
                        Molly Gallagher, Environmental Analyst II
                        Michelle Way, Keyboard Specialist 1
                        Keith Fish, Director of Operations
                                                            Andrea L. Maranville, Director of Governmental &
                              Community Affairs


                              Commission Counsel Present:   Karla Williams Buettner


Others Present:

                                                                 J. George Russo          Holly Chacon        Eric Schaffer       Steven Chen
                                                                 John Caffry              Carole Wentz        Thomas Roach        Chris Girard
                                                                 Doug Kirkpatrick         Irene O’Connor      Jeffrey Meyer       John Wells
                                                                 Janet Wells              Kathy Bozony        Tony Hall           John Boltz
                                             Chris Ballantyne         Carol Collins       
          



Item #1 - Introductions, Roll Call, Minutes of Previous Meeting:  Bruce E. Young

The 353rd meeting of the Lake George Park Commission was called to order by Chairman Young at
10:10 a.m. and the roll was taken.

Chairman Young addressed the public in attendance to let them know that he would be skipping
around the agenda because the meeting was most likely going to be lengthy.

Chairman Young said that the minutes of the previous meeting were distributed in advance of this
meeting to Commission members for their review.  He asked if there were any corrections or
submissions.

Thomas Hall said that one correction needed to be made.  He said that at the previous Commission
meeting they discussed the Hart family application and they spoke about what was written in the deed.
Mr. Hall asked that the word presently be changed to previously in the meeting minutes of January 24,
2007.

On the motion of Thomas Morhouse, seconded by John Pettica, all Commission members present
voted affirmatively to approve the minutes of the previous meeting with the noted correction.

Item #2 — Fiscal Actions Report:  Peggy Stevens

Chairman Young said that the January Fiscal Actions Report was distributed with the meeting package
along with a correction from the December Fiscal Actions Report to all of the Commission members for
their review.  He asked if there were any questions on the reports.  There were none.

On the motion of Thomas Morhouse, seconded by John Pettica, all members present voting
affirmatively, the January Fiscal Actions Report was approved as submitted.

On the motion of John Pettica, seconded by Thomas Morhouse, all members present voting
affirmatively, the December Fiscal Actions Report was approved.

Resolution 2007-08 — Purchase of Benthic Barrier Panel for Eurasian Watermilfoil Control
Program

Thomas Conerty read and moved to approve Resolution 2007-08 which was seconded by Kenneth
Parker and all Commission members present voted affirmatively to approve the resolution.

          WHEREAS   the Lake George Park Commission is established by Article 43 of the Environmental Conservation
          Law to provide a means for people who visit and reside at Lake George to preserve, protect and
          enhance the unique natural and scenic resources of the Lake George Park, and

          WHEREAS   the Commission has entered into a memorandum of understanding with the New York State
          Department of Environmental Conservation (1986) to convey to the Commission, specific authority
          for the management of nuisance aquatic plants including Eurasian Watermilfoil, and

          WHEREAS   the Commission has entered into a contract for the management of Eurasian Watermilfoil with
          Lycott Environmental, Inc. ending October 31, 2007 which requires that the Commission provide an
          adequate supply of benthic barrier panel which are installed over milfoil beds in the lake, and

          WHEREAS   the previous years Eurasian Watermilfoil control program depleted the Commission’s supply of
          benthic barrier panels, requiring the purchase of additional material so that work may continue
          throughout the upcoming season.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Lake George Park Commission is hereby authorized to allocate funds
not exceeding thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) in total for the purchase of up to three acres of benthic barrier
material, and

FURTHER RESOLVED that the Executive Director is authorized to execute a purchase order  for benthic barrier
mats consistent with the findings and requirements of the State Finance Law and Office of Standards and Purchase
of the Office of General Services procurement guidelines.

Item #3 — Law Enforcement Committee Report:  Thomas K. Conerty  

Thomas K. Conerty reported that there was an enforcement meeting and called upon Lieutenant
Schneider to give his report.

Lieutenant Schneider said that he and the Committee members discussed several events that will be
occurring over the summer.  He said that a discussion regarding the Lake George Open Water Swim
for 2007 had taken place and also a discussion about the Queens Boat Race.  Lieutenant Schneider
said that among other things; safety, security and planning were discussed.  

Lieutenant Schneider said that active enforcement cases were discussed.

Resolution 2007- 16 — Law Enforcement Report

Thomas K. Conerty read and moved to approve Resolution 2007-16 which was seconded by Thomas
Hall and all Commission members present voted affirmatively to approve the resolution.

          WHEREAS   the Law Enforcement Committee met February 20, 2007 to review matters pertaining to the Lake
          George Park Commission’s Marine Patrol and the Commission's Law Enforcement Program, and

          WHEREAS   active Law Enforcement cases and their status were reviewed in Executive Session, and

          WHEREAS   the Law Enforcement Committee has reported on the results of that committee meeting at this full
          Commission meeting, and

          WHEREAS   the Law Enforcement Committee recommends acceptance of this month's Law Enforcement Report.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Commission accepts the report of the Law Enforcement Committee.

Item #4 — Invasive Species Prevention Program Report:  Andrea L. Maranville  

Andrea Maranville addressed the Commission members and asked that a resolution that is being held
before them today be considered.  She said that this resolution would more formalize the
Commission’s role in the Adirondack Park Aquatic Nuisance Species Management Committee.

Andrea Maranville said that she has been attending this informal committee for a year which is made
up of State agencies, not for profit groups, private sector groups as well as local municipalities.  She
said that this committee is a group of people that have been very active in formalizing a plan towards
combating aquatic nuisance species in the Park and this resolution would more formalize the
Commission’s role to continue efforts with the group as it becomes a formal committee structure.

Chairman Young thanked Andrea Maranville for her efforts and asked if anyone had any questions or
comments.  There being none, Thomas Conerty read and moved to approve Resolution 2007-17 which
was seconded by Thomas Hall and all Commission members present voted affirmatively to approve
the resolution.

          WHEREAS   the Commission is engaged in activities to manage and prevent the introduction of nuisance,
          invasive aquatic species, and

          WHEREAS   the effectiveness of anti-invasive programs is dependent on strong partnerships among government
          and non-governmental organizations, and

          WHEREAS   the Adirondack Park Nuisance Species Committee is a consortium of organizations working
          together toward the prevention, control and eradication of non-native species in the Adirondack
          park, and

          WHEREAS   the Commission desires to participate in various cooperative efforts for developing and
          implementing strategies for protection against invasive aquatic species, and

          WHEREAS   a Cooperative Agreement has been reviewed by the Commission and Commission Counsel
          (attached).

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Commission authorizes the Chair to execute the attached Cooperative
Agreement regarding the development and implementation of strategies for the prevention and control of non-
native aquatic species of plants and other organisms and to do all things necessary to implement the agreement,
and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that nothing in this approval or in the agreement should be construed as committing
the Commission to undertake any action or to expend funds except as may be incidental to being a participant on
the Committee.   

Item #5 — Stormwater Management Report:  Michael P. White  

Michael White said that a list of stormwater actions was sent to the members for their review and that at
least 7 or 8 stormwater related cases were discussed in executive session.

Mr. White also discussed a resolution that is being held before the Commission.  He said that this
resolution would authorize the Commission to continue to retain and pay for services rendered by CT
Male Associates and Environmental Design Partnership.  He said that this allocation would be effective
from service dates of March 2007 through August 2007.  

Mr. White asked if there were any questions.  There were none.

Thomas Conerty read and moved to approve resolution 2007-15 which was seconded by Thomas
Morhouse and all Commission members present voted affirmatively to approve the resolution.

          WHEREAS   the Commission has a staff vacancy in Environmental Engineer II that is expected to continue for the
          immediate future, and

          WHEREAS   the Commission desires to obtain the services of a professional engineer on a temporary basis to
          review stormwater project plans and otherwise assist in the stormwater program.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Commission authorizes the Executive Director to issue a purchase
order for consulting professional engineers, as follows:

CT Male Associates, P.C. — $15,000 from March 2007 — August 2007
Environmental Design Partnership — $5,000 from March 2007 — August 2007

Lake Level

Michael White reported that the lake level today is 3.02

Item #6 — Report of Ad Hoc Committee on Aquatic Plant Management:  Michael P. White

Michael White said that the Commission has an approach where several members of the Commission
are part of an Ad Hoc Committee.  He said that the Ad Hoc Committee members review competitive
proposals and make a recommendation to the full commission.

Michael White said that the Ad Hoc Committee meetings are open to the public but since they deal with
competitive proposals most of the meeting is held in executive session.  Mr. White said that the Ad Hoc
Committee meeting scheduled for February 15, 2007 was canceled due to the recent snow storm and
that the meeting would be held now.

Michael White said that the Commission proposes to expand the Commission’s Aquatic Plant
Management Program for 2007.  He said that there is a current contract in place throughout the 2007
season and the Commission received grant funding through the State so there is opportunity to expand
the Aquatic Plant Management Program.

Michael White said that historically the Park Commission’s level of plant management has been based
more on the funds available rather than on need.

Michael White said that a Request for Proposals was issued in accordance with LGPC procedures,
internal controls and the State Finance Law.  Mr. White said that notice of the RFP was mailed to 14
providers that were identified over the years as someone who is capable of doing the job.  He said that
notice was also published in the New York State Contract Reporter.

Mr. White spoke about the methodology of evaluating the proposals.  He said that the methodology is
based on technical competencies and quality of the firm as well as their past experience and their
proposal.  Mr. White said that the cost is also a factor that must be considered.

Mr. White said that there is a formula for evaluating the proposals.  He said that each Ad Hoc Committee
member fills out their worksheet after reviewing the proposals and the numbers are plugged into a
formula and this is how a score is obtained for each proposal.  He said that each committee member,
Bruce Young, Tom Conerty, John Pettica, Tom Morhouse and himself had discussed the proposals and
completed a worksheet.  These have been entered into a spreadsheet which calculates the results.  The
spreadsheet also tabulates the financial score and combines the technical and financial components to
reach a final score.

Michael White asked if anyone was interested in seeing the scores.  He said that he had the numbers on
the screen if anyone was interested.

Chairman Young asked Mr. White to read the scores aloud for everyone to hear.

Michael White said that a total of three proposals were received and the firms received the following
scores:

     •    Lycott Environmental, Inc. received a score of 95.94
     •    The Dock Doctors received a score of 52.91
     •    Fathom Solutions received a score of 77.71    
     
Mr. White said that Lycott Environmental, Inc. Is the highest scored provider.  He asked that the
members of the Ad Hoc Committee make a recommendation to the full Commission that Lycott be
selected as the provider for the additional services.

Chairman Young asked if anyone on the Ad Hoc Committee had any questions or concerns with rating.
No concerns were raised or discussed.

Thomas Conerty read and moved to approve resolution 2007-18 which was seconded by Thomas
Morhouse and all Commission members present voted affirmatively to approve the resolution.

Thomas Morhouse said that his reason for selecting Lycott Environmental, Inc. As the highest rated firm
is not only because they are the least expensive but also because they have the most experience in
Lake George.

Chairman Young said that the Commission may use all three of the companies depending on the
amount of funding available.  He said that there is no limit on what needs to be done.

          WHEREAS   the Commission desires to procure additional aquatic plant management services to expand the
          program in addition to the previously approved 2007 contract amount of $79,014, and

          WHEREAS   on December 13, 2006 the Commission issued a request for proposals, mailed notice to 14 previously
          identified potential providers and published notice of the RFP in the Contract Reporter on December
          18, 2006, and

          WHEREAS   the Commission’s Ad Hoc Committee met on February 20, 2007 and reviewed and evaluated the three
          proposals received in accordance with the methodology in the RFP, and

          WHEREAS   the Ad Hoc Committee determined the highest rated firm to be    

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Commission hereby accepts the proposal of Lycott Environmental, Inc.
as the firm best able to provide additional aquatic plant management services to the Commission, cost and other
essential factors considered, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman is authorized to enter into an agreement with Lycott Environmental,
Inc. in accordance with the terms specified in the request for proposals for a period of two years for an amount not to
exceed $48,000 annually or $96,000 for two years, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chair is authorized to revise the current agreement with Lycott Environmental,
Inc. to extend the term of the agreement on similar terms and conditions for 2007 for a period of one year to cover
similar plant management activities for 2008.

Item #7 — Project Review Committee Report:  Thomas J. Morhouse

Thomas Morhouse read and moved to approve Resolution 2007-09 which was seconded by Kenneth
Parker and all Commission members present voted affirmatively to approve the resolution.

          WHEREAS   the Commission has received and reviewed the Project Review Actions Report prepared by staff and
          dated February 5, 2007, and;

          WHEREAS   the Project Review Committee recommends acceptance of the Project Review Actions Report.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Commission directs that the Project Review Actions Report be
incorporated in the minutes of the full Commission meeting.

Molly Gallagher read from a prepared statement explaining the role of the Project Review Committee.

Chairman Young said that the Commission would normally go through each project and gather
information, deliberate and make a determination in two different sessions but today each project will be
deliberated and a decision made after the information is gathered in one session.  He said this is being
done because of the controversy of some of the projects.

Wharf Modification submitted by Rees Pritchett, Town of Hague, County of Warren

Molly Gallagher introduced this project.  She said that this project was submitted by Dr. Rees Pritchett.
She said that Dr. Pritchett has 80 feet of lake frontage located in the Town of Hague.

Molly Gallagher said that Dr. Pritchett is looking to replace an existing dock with a 31 ft. long, 20.5 feet
wide dock and open sided boat cover/sundeck.

Molly Gallagher said that this project has been before the Commission two times in the past, both times
requiring a variance.  Molly said that this time they have modified their plans to avoid a variance.  She
said that the project has been brought before the Commission once again because of visual impacts.

Chairman Young asked if anyone was present to speak for or against the project.  There was no
response.  He asked if the Project Review Committee had any comments.

Thomas Morhouse said that he went to the site and thought that the project should be approved as is.
He added that Dr. Pritchett has complied with everything asked of him.

Chairman Young asked if the neighbors have any concerns with visual impacts.

Thomas Hall asked if there is absolutely no variance needed.  Molly Gallagher responded and said that
there is absolutely no need for a variance.

A discussion continued regarding the setback line.

Thomas Morhouse read and moved to approve Resolution 2007-10 which was seconded by Kenneth
Parker and all Commission members present voted affirmatively to approve the resolution.

          WHEREAS   the applicant has applied for a permit for wharf modification to modify an existing dock to result in a
          31' long, 20'6" wide, U-shaped crib wharf with an open-sided boatcover/sundeck; and

          WHEREAS   the Lake George Park Commission has reviewed the application, supporting documents, comments
          received and other information which appears in the record; and

          WHEREAS   the Commission has made a determination pursuant to 6NYCRR 645-3.6 and the State Environmental
          Quality Review Act 6NYCRR 617.5 that the project is a Type II action and does not require further
          review of potential environmental impacts pursuant to this act; and

          WHEREAS   the action is considered to be a Minor project pursuant to 6NYCRR 645-5.3 and public notice has been
          published and distributed; and
                    
          WHEREAS   the Commission finds that the application complies with regulatory limits and requirements; and

          WHEREAS   the Commission finds that the proposed project is reasonable and necessary and will not cause
          unreasonable, uncontrolled, or unnecessary damage to the natural resources of the state, including
          soils, forests, water, fish, shellfish, crustaceans and aquatic and land-related environment; and

          WHEREAS   the Commission finds that the project will have no adverse impact on the health, safety or welfare of
          the public, the environment or the resources of the Park; will not alter the essential character of the
          area in which it is proposed; will not lead to congestion in the Park and will not have an undue visual,
          cultural or audible impact on the neighborhood or the Park.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
                    The Lake George Park Commission hereby approves the above application as proposed.
    
Operation of a Class A Marina submitted by James & Elizabeth O’Connor, Town of Bolton,
County of Warren

Molly Gallagher introduced this project.  She said that James & Elizabeth O’Connor have submitted an
application to operate a Class A Marina offering the rental of three vessels to resort guests only.

Chairman Young asked if there was anyone present to speak on behalf of the applicants.

Jeffrey Meyer introduced himself to the Commission.  He said that he is representing James and
Elizabeth O’Connor.

Jeffrey Meyer said that this is a new application to operate a Class A Marina.  He said that the resort
cottages had been operating on a legally existing dock which was the subject of a December
Commission meeting due to issues raised by their neighbors.

Mr. Meyer said that during this December 2006 meeting it was discovered that the rental of boats to
clients of the resort would draw this dock into a Class A Marina category.  He said that they are here
requesting that a Class A Marina permit be granted to James and Elizabeth O’Connor (O’Connor’s
Cottages).

Jeffrey Meyer said that the O’Connor’s would offer boat rentals to guests of the cottages only.  He said
that they would offer 3 boats for rental, two (2) 16 ft. boats and one (1) 14 foot boat.  Mr. Meyer said that
Mr. and Mrs. O’Connor have very strict hours of operation from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

Molly Gallagher asked Irene O’Connor, daughter of Mr. and Mrs. James O’Connor, where they stand
with the Town regarding the approval of the marina.

Irene O’Connor said that the Town is waiting for the decision of the Lake George Park Commission.

Thomas Morhouse asked if the Town has indicated the direction in which they plan to go.

No indication was received or implied.

Thomas Morhouse asked if there is any safety protection for the swimmers of the cottages.

Mr. Meyer responded and said that the swim area is completely roped off and clearly marked.  He said
that at the December Commission meeting precautions were discussed and will be taken to protect the
neighbor on the south side to make sure that the boats stay clear of their property.

Thomas Hall asked about the swim platform that is located in front of the beach area.  He asked Mr.
Meyer to explain the swim float in terms of navigation.

Mr. Meyer turned the question over to Irene O’Connor to answer.  Ms. O’Connor said that the swim float
is not a navigational issue.  She said that boaters can back up directly with no problem.

Thomas Hall said that the float is not shown on the diagram and asked if he is correct in saying that the
float is in front of the beach area.  Ms. Irene O’Connor said that the swim float is located in front of the
beach area.

Chairman Young asked if there were any further questions.

Kenneth Parker asked if the previously discussed dock that sits on the southern property line has any
impact on this application.

Molly Gallagher said that the dock does not impact this application.  She said that she has received
plans in accordance with the decision made at the December Commission meeting to put up a barrier on
the south side of the dock to prevent boat berthing.  Molly added that the rental boats are proposed to
be on the north side of that dock.

Chairman Young asked Mr. Meyer if his clients were aware of this and if they were okay with the barrier.
Mr. Meyer said that his clients are both aware and okay with it.  He said that his clients are the ones who
submitted the plans.
 
Chairman Young asked if anyone else was present to speak on behalf of this project.

John Wells spoke against the project.  He said that he is here representing his wife and their 4 children
as well as guests of the home.  Mr. Wells said that his property is located to the south of the O’Connor’s.

Mr. Wells said that he attended the December Commission meeting and objected to the dock that the
Lake George Park Commission approved to be built on his property.  He said that the marina that is in
discussion today is operated off of that dock complex.  Mr. Wells continued by saying that he sent a
letter to the Commission explaining his families objections.

Mr. Wells said that while it is true that the swim platform is protecting the O’Connor’s guests it is doing
the opposite for his family and their guests.  Mr. Wells said that because of that protection it forces the
marina and all of their boats to come in front of his property on a daily basis.

Mr. Wells said that he and his family do object to the Class A Marina operating off of that dock complex.

Thomas Morhouse said to Mr. Wells that he does not believe that the Lake George Park Commission
approved a dock to be built on his property.  Commissioner Morhouse continued by saying that he
wanted to make that distinction clear.  He said that the Lake George Park Commission approved the
dock that was already on his property not the construction of the dock.

Mr. Wells responded by saying that the application for the dock was for a four dock complex with the
closest dock being six feet away from his property line.  He said “subsequently, there was an illegal dock
built on our property that the Commission approved to remain when we objected to it.  The Commission
didn’t permit it but they permitted it to exist on our property that had been illegally built.”

Mr. Wells said that there is no safety mechanism in effect to protect his family and his guests.  He said
that the systems they put in place forces all of the boat traffic in front of his property.

Mr. Wells said that if the dock complex was moved further away it would certainly help.  He said “the fact
that those docks are on our property is a problem.”

Chairman Young asked if there were any further questions.

Thomas Hall asked Mr. Wells if he has been pursuing this issue in any other way.  Mr. Wells responded
by saying that he has gone to the Town but the Town said that it is in the jurisdiction of the Lake George
Park Commission.

A discussion continued regarding the legalization of docks in 1981, setback requirements, dock sizes
and all other regulations that went into effect.  Mr. Wells said that his remedy was to come before the
Park Commission and he did that but was denied his remedy.

A discussion continued regarding a railing being placed on the dock and discussion of a buoy at property
line to prevent boats from crossing that line.

Thomas Morhouse said to the O’Connor’s that it looks to him as if they (the O’Connor’s) are trying to
comply with something that has always been done.

Mr. Meyer said that apparently there was a misunderstanding when reading the LGPC regulations.  He
said that there is an exemption in the regulations for cottages as long as they can provide slips for their
tenants but once dock slips are rented you leave that exemption and become a Class A marina.

Thomas Morhouse asked if there was any restrictions that can be placed on the O’Connor’s permit so
that the boats don’t become larger.

Thomas Morhouse continued and said that it sounds as if the boats are small outboards and asked if
they will remain that way.

Mr. Meyer responded and said that it his understanding that this would not change.  He added that his
clients have done everything to the best of their abilities to preserve and protect the lake.  He said that
they are trying to be good stewards.

Chairman Young asked if there were any further questions.  Mr. Wells asked if he could say one more
thing.

Mr. Wells said that the railing was placed on the O’Connor’s dock because the O’Connor’s were using
the dock space in front of his property.  He said that it has nothing to do with the movement of boats in
and out of the dock complex.  He added that when you are moving a boat you are in the water not on the
dock itself.

Thomas Morhouse asked if there was a determination to place a buoy at the property line.

The Commission members answered and said that no determination was made.  They said that it was
just conversation.

Mr. Meyer said that the O’Connor’s are required to post a sign on the dock.

Chairman Young asked Ms. O’Connor if she would like to speak.

Ms. Irene O’Connor said that her family has owned the property for twenty years before the Wells family
moved in.  She said that the Wells family knew that they were purchasing property next to a resort and
they also know that there are two more resorts located next to our resort.

Ms. O’Connor also spoke about the boat rentals.  She said that meticulous records are kept and that
they offer these rentals as an amenity to their guest to give them something more to do.

Janet Wells said that yes, they were well aware that they bought property located next to a resort but
what they were not aware of was the encroachments and abuses of their property.  She added that it
doesn’t matter what the size of the boats, they are motor boats and are still dangerous.  She said that
they have 4 small children and family members who use their home.

Ms. Wells said that she agrees that the O’Connor’s run an immaculate resort but you cannot control the
wind and the waves.  She said that her family is just asking for help because the O’Connor’s have such
a large piece of property but have to use their property to run the marina.

Chairman Young asked if there were any further comments.  There was no response.

Chairman Young said that this is the part where the Commission members will discuss the project
among themselves and will come to a resolution.  He said that someone is bound to be unhappy with the
decision and quite possibly both parties may be unhappy with the decision.

Chairman Young asked Thomas Morhouse to start their discussion.

Thomas Morhouse said that he wonders if a buoy should be placed into the water to let people who are
unfamiliar with the area and with the problems know that this is an area that they should stay away from.

Molly Gallagher said that if the Commission was to advise either party to place a buoy into the water
then they would need to obtain a permit from the Department of Environmental Conservation.

Kenneth Parker said that he voted for approval at the December meeting but said that he wonders if we
are entering a dangerous area approving a marina permit on a non-conforming dock.  He mentioned the
possibility of the O’Connor’s building a new dock complex that complies with the regulations.

Kenneth Parker said, “why should they have a commercial operation sitting on the property line which if
they started from zero today they couldn’t do.”

John Pettica said that having missed the December Commission meeting he feels a little out of step with
this discussion.

Chairman Young clarified the situation for Mr. Pettica and the discussion continued.

Thomas Conerty said that he does think that there is a safety concern present and that a buoy could
help with the situation.  He also spoke about putting further restrictions on the dock.

Thomas Hall asked if our marina permit would extend to the entire dock structure or just the slips being
used along with garbage removal, restrooms, etc.

Chairman Young asked Karla Buettner if limits could be placed on only a portion of the existing dock
structure.  Karla Buettner then asked Molly Gallagher is this has ever happened in the past.

Molly Gallagher said that generally when issuing a marina permit further conditions can be placed on a
facility which speak directly to the concerns or issues that are being raised, with respect to the operation
of a marina.

A discussion continued regarding the limiting of the three rental vessels to be used in the most northerly
dock slips and that all rental boats be designated as being owned by O’Connor’s Cottages.

Thomas Hall said that if a buoy would assist or make navigation safer in that area than he would
recommend it but at this time he is not convinced that it would make much of a difference.

                    Secretary’s Note:   Chairman Young asked that it be noted that James Kneeshaw arrived at 10:29 a.m.

A discussion followed.  

James Kneeshaw said that he was present at the December Commission meeting and said that he
would vote for approval as is.  He said that to place a buoy in the water is a great idea but not a good
solution.

Thomas Morhouse read and moved to approve Resolution 2007-14 which was seconded by James
Kneeshaw.  The resolution was approved with the following modifications:

    1. The rental boats shall be limited in size as described in the application materials.
    2. The rental boats shall be berthed in the slips designated in the application materials.
    3. The rental boats shall be labeled with the words “O’Connor’s Cottages.”

          WHEREAS   the applicant has applied for a permit to operate a Class A Marina offering three rental vessels to
          guests of the facility only; and

          WHEREAS   the Lake George Park Commission has reviewed the application, supporting documents, comments
          received and other information which appears in the record; and

          WHEREAS   the Commission has made a determination that the project is an Unlisted action pursuant to the State
          Environmental Quality Review Act 6NYCRR 617.5 and, as Lead Agency for the purposes of the State
          Environmental Quality Review Act, has made a determination that the project will have no significant
          impact on the environment; and
                           
          WHEREAS   the action is considered to be a Major project pursuant to 6 NYCRR 645-5.3 and public notice has been
          published and distributed as required; and

          WHEREAS   the applicant has demonstrated that the facility complies with the Class A Marina requirements of 6
          NYCRR 646-1.2; and

          WHEREAS   the Commission finds that the project will have no adverse impact on the health, safety or welfare of
          the public, the environment or the resources of the Park; will not alter the essential character of the
          area in which it is proposed; will not lead to congestion in the Park and will not have an undue visual,
          cultural or audible impact on the neighborhood or the Park.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
                    The Lake George Park Commission hereby resolves to approve the above application, with the
          following conditions:

                    1.  The rental boats shall be limited in size as described in the application materials.

                    2.  The rental boats shall be berthed in the slips designated in the application materials.

        3.  The rental boats shall be labeled with the words “O’Connor’s Cottages.”

Ayes: T. Morhouse, J. Kneeshaw, T. Conerty, T. Hall, J. Pettica, B. Young
Nays: K. Parker
Abstentions: None

Modification of Class A Marina submitted by Thomas Roach, Town of Lake George, County of
Warren

Molly Gallagher introduced the Thomas Roach project.  She said that he is before the Commission to
expand a currently permitted Class A Marina.  She said that he would like to add a new showroom and a
boat inventory building on an upland parcel on Route 9.


Mr. Roach said that he removed the 28 unit motel on Route 9 that he purchased last year and would like
to replace this with a storage building.  Mr. Roach said that this is a very low volume business and will
make for more green space.

Mr. Roach said that this area would now house a 54 ft. x 100 ft. inventory building in the back of the lot
and a boat show room.  He said that both buildings would be tan and green in color which would match
the tan and green facility he already owns.

Mr. Roach said that plans went before the planning board and stormwater runoff controls were looked at
and approved.  He added that these buildings would give him a facility where he can show his product
year round.

Mr. Roach said that he has spoken to many of his neighbors and no one has any objections to the
project.  Mr. Roach then proceeded to show and explain diagrams to the Commission members.

Chairman Young asked if there were any questions for Mr. Roach.  There were none.

Bruce Young asked Michael White to speak about the stormwater runoff plan.

Michael White spoke about the stormwater issues related to this property.  He said that the Park
Commission is happy with the stormwater plans for the project and said that while reviewing this project
it came to light that even though the amount of disturbance was over 15,000 square feet, which is the
threshold for major projects the Town determined the project to be a minor project and accepted the
design and implementation of stormwater management plans consistent with minor projects and that this
was practice they had with applying the regulations that has occurred as a matter of routine where major
projects are determined to be minor and minor project standards are applied.  Mr. White said that this
practice is well documented in planning board minutes.

Mr. White said that the minor project standards basically require that you deal with a certain volume of
water based on a simple calculation such as 1½ gallons per square ft. of impervious surface.  Mr. White
said that generally, if you were building a new project you are dealing with a lesser amount of water than
would be for a major project.  He said that in addition you avoid having to have plans designed by an
engineer and to have mathematical models run to calculate the amount of runoff.  

Mr. White said that when you are retrofitting a project when you are removing a substantial amount of
impervious surface and replacing it or redeveloping it, those models may develop an amount of water
that is lesser than the amount that is managed from minor projects so it may even be to your benefit in
certain situations in terms of sizing of your controls to be a major project and have an engineering design
but in this case those numbers were not run so we do not know as a matter of a fact whether or not had
it been considered a major project that the size of the facilities are enough.  

Mr. White added that this is a good stormwater approach.  He said that the Commission is not objecting
but just did not want to let the circumstances of the relationship with the Town review pass without
explaining it to the members.

Thomas Morhouse asked if there will be more impervious surface when this project is completed.

Michael White said that by the Town’s calculations there will be less impervious surface and there are
now stormwater controls where there were virtually none before.  He said that the question is, “is it as
good as what would have been if it was treated as a major?  We don’t know that.”

Chairman Young said that for his own opinion he does buy the argument that there is less impervious
surface.  He said that he would like to put the Town of Lake George and any other Town who varies from
the actual regulations on notice that to arbitrarily decide to go the 15,000 feet without justification doesn’t
seem to be keeping with the intent of the law.  He said that in this case he can see why it was done but
there should always be a reason for doing so.

Carol Collins said that there has been a long standing concern that the Town of Lake George has not
been reviewing and has not engaged an engineer to review many of the projects that are going on.  She
said that this is another significant area and for the first time it is really coming to the attention of the
Park Commission and this would be a good time to really take a look at what Lake George is really
doing.

Ms. Collins said that she has spoken with Michael White in length about this very issue.  She said that in
the past the Park Commission would not get involved and review many of these proposals.  Ms. Collins
also said that the Park Commission would not intervene and review these applications unless they knew
that there were problems.  She said that you have to monitor all of these projects to know if there is a
problem.

Chairman Young asked if there were any further comments or questions from the members.  There were
none.

Thomas Morhouse read and moved to approve Resolution 2007-12 which was seconded by James
Kneeshaw and all Commission members present voted affirmatively to approve the resolution.

          WHEREAS   the applicant has applied for a permit to modify a Class A Marina to add a new showroom and boat
          inventory building on an upland parcel at 2776 Rt 9; and

          WHEREAS   the Lake George Park Commission has reviewed the application, supporting documents, comments
          received and other information which appears in the record; and

          WHEREAS   the Commission has made a determination that the project is an Unlisted action pursuant to the State
          Environmental Quality Review Act 6NYCRR 617.5 and, as Lead Agency for the purposes of the State
          Environmental Quality Review Act, has made a determination that the project will have no significant
          impact on the environment; and
                           
          WHEREAS   the action is considered to be a Major project pursuant to 6 NYCRR 645-5.3 and public notice has been
          published and distributed as required; and

          WHEREAS   the applicant has demonstrated that the facility complies with the Class A Marina requirements of 6
          NYCRR 646-1.2; and

          WHEREAS   the Commission finds that the project will have no adverse impact on the health, safety or welfare of
          the public, the environment or the resources of the Park; will not alter the essential character of the
          area in which it is proposed; will not lead to congestion in the Park and will not have an undue visual,
          cultural or audible impact on the neighborhood or the Park.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
                    The Lake George Park Commission hereby resolves to approve the above application as proposed.

Wharf Construction submitted by DJMD, Bolton, NY, LLC, Town of Bolton, County of Warren

Molly Gallagher introduced the project.  She said that the project is basically to put in a large dock
complex.  She said that the dock complex is proposed to be 98 ft. wide and 50 ft. long and is located in
the Town of Bolton in Northwest Bay.

Molly Gallagher said that there are representatives present to speak on behalf of the project.

Holly Chacon of Peter L. Gluck and Partners explained the project to the Commission members.  She
said that she and her team brought in a model to help the board members understand the project
because the shape is so unusual.

Holly Chacon said that the boathouse is part of a larger project they are working on which includes a
single family residence.  Holly Chacon explained the proximity of the boathouse in relation to the
neighbors.  She said that the boathouse is 100 feet away from the neighbor to the north and 280 feet
from the neighbor to the south and said that the application also involves demolition of an existing non-
conforming concrete boathouse that is cut into the shoreline.

Thomas Conerty asked Ms. Chacon to indicate on the model and in the diagrams where the concrete
boathouse is currently sitting.

Holly Chacon spoke about the shape of the docks and spoke about what they are entitled to based on
the amount of lake frontage owned and also spoke about the dock shapes they are proposing.  Ms.
Chacon said that this would be a wooden boat house on a steel pile structure and inside the boathouse
would be a slip that holds approximately 10 inflatable, 25 horsepower boats.  She added that this is a
very steep site so an upper walkway is also being proposed.  She said that the height of the walkway is
11 ft. from the mean high watermark and is 14 ft. from the hand rail.

Ms. Chacon said that they have spoken with the neighbor to the south who is quite happy that the
concrete boathouse will be removed.  She said that the boathouse will be positioned in such a way that
is not very visible to the neighbors.

A discussion continued regarding the visual impact of the dock complex, type and color of wood that will
be used.

Chairman Young asked if there were any further questions or comments.  There were none.

Chairman Young asked Molly Gallagher to explain some of the issues that staff has struggled with while
reviewing this application.

Molly Gallagher said that the two issues that staff has struggled with are how to fit this structure into our
regulatory limits as to the number of docks and how to calculate the square footage of the total dock.

Molly Gallagher said in general when you look at square footage you are looking at just the dock surface.
She said that you would pull the sundeck and boathouse right out of the picture and look at the foot print
of the dock and for each dock you are limited to 7000 square feet per dock.

Molly Gallagher said that with this project they would be limited to 2100 square feet and they are well
under that limit if you are just looking at the footprint.  Molly said that the part of the dock complex that
she isn’t sure about is the different levels.  She said that the Park Commission has never looked at
anything like this before.

Molly asked if the different levels count as a sundeck and can they be discarded as square footage.  A
discussion continued regarding the square footage of the dock and what is referred to as the optional
dock.

Commission members discussed the complete removal of the concrete boathouse and shoreline
stabilization before construction of the dock complex.

Thomas Morhouse read and moved to approve Resolution 2007-13 which was seconded by Kenneth
Parker and all Commission members present voted affirmatively to approve the resolution.

          WHEREAS   the applicant has applied for a permit to remove an existing dock and construct a steel pile supported,
          98' wide, 50' long, three dock complex with a closed-sided boatcover/sundeck; and

          WHEREAS   the Lake George Park Commission has reviewed the application, supporting documents, comments
          received and other information which appears in the record; and

          WHEREAS   the Commission has made a determination that the project is an Unlisted action pursuant to the State
          Environmental Quality Review Act 6NYCRR 617.5; and

          WHEREAS   the action is considered to be a Major project pursuant to 6NYCRR 645-5.3 and public notice has been
          published and distributed; and
                    
          WHEREAS   the Commission finds that the application complies with regulatory limits and requirements; and

          WHEREAS   the Commission finds that the proposed project is reasonable and necessary and will not cause
          unreasonable, uncontrolled, or unnecessary damage to the natural resources of the state, including
          soils, forests, water, fish, shellfish, crustaceans and aquatic and land-related environment; and

          WHEREAS   the Commission finds that the project will have no adverse impact on the health, safety or welfare of
          the public, the environment or the resources of the Park; will not alter the essential character of the
          area in which it is proposed; will not lead to congestion in the Park and will not have an undue visual,
          cultural or audible impact on the neighborhood or the Park.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
                    The Lake George Park Commission hereby instructs staff to prepare a negative declaration pursuant
          to the State Environmental Quality Review Act and approves the above application with the following
          condition:

                    The concrete boathouse shall be completely removed and the shoreline stabilized prior to the
          construction of the herein authorized wharf complex.

                    Secretary’s Note:   Chairman Young called for a five minute recess.  The meeting was reconvened at
                    11:53 a.m.

Renewal of Class A Marina submitted by Harold Kirkpatrick, Town of Queensbury, County of
Warren

Molly introduced this project and said that this is an application submitted by Dr. Kirkpatrick to renew an
existing Class A Marina for the East Lake George House.  She said that Dr. Kirkpatrick has had a long
history of non-compliance and a Consent Order was signed back in 2005.

Chairman Young asked if anyone was present to speak on behalf of the applicant.

Jeffrey Meyer, representing Dr. Kirkpatrick, said that Dr. Kirkpatrick’s marina has been permitted since
1991.  He said that the marina has 9 moorings and 15 dock spaces and that they are not asking for
anything additional - they would just like to renew the current marina permit as it stands.

Mr. Meyer said that the structure and the moorings have been there since 1991 and said that the
moorings were reduced in 1991 when a small portion of the lot was subdivided —  this is when the
permit changed to 9 moorings and 15 dock spaces.  He added that the dock itself has been around
since the late 1800's, in many different shapes and forms and the latest is about 50 years old.

Mr. Meyer spoke about an old permit that was found which seemed to have been missing.

Chairman Young asked if anyone had questions for the applicant.  There were none.

Mr. Meyer asked if he could add an additional comment.  He said that he wanted to address a comment
that Molly made regarding the violations, concerning the moorings migrating outside of the boundary
area.

Mr. Meyer said that he believes that this issue has been addressed and that the violator will no longer be
a client of Dr. Kirkpatrick.  He said that it came to light that the customer was raising the anchor and
moving it closer to the Thorn and Russo properties.

Chairman Young asked if anyone was present to speak against the marina renewal.

John Caffry spoke on behalf of Dr. Russo who is a property owner and who is present today and who will
speak about some of the personal effects this problem has on him and his property.  Mr. Caffry said that
Mr. Russo is not the adjoining neighbor but he is directly affected by this marina operation because of
the shape of the shoreline, the angle of the long dock and the mooring area.  He said that all of the
marina action is directly in his view and it is even worse when the boats are moored out of the prescribed
area.  “Which as Molly mentioned occurs frequently.”

Mr. Caffry said that an Order On Consent was entered into in 2006 and that Dr. Kirkpatrick was
supposed to be in compliance by May 31 of 2006 but that was not the case.  He said that Dr. Kirkpatrick
has showed that he is either unwilling or unable to comply.

Mc. Caffry added that the marina practices are affecting the property value of Mr. Thorn and Dr Russo.
He said that both Dr. Russo and Mr. Thorn have had to go to the Town of Queensbury to get their
assessments reduced because of the impact this marina operation has on their property.

Mr. Caffry said that the renewal should be denied and the permit revoked due to the on-going repeated
history of violations going back to at least 1976 and perhaps farther which has been well documented.

A discussion continued regarding the size of the marina, discussion of the mooring area and violations
that have continually occurred.

Mr. Caffry continued by saying that the Park Commission has bent over backwards to accommodate Dr.
Kirkpatrick.

Dr. George Russo passed pictures around for the Commission members to view.  He said that he would
make a copy of these pictures and submit them to the Commission office.

Dr. George Russo spoke against the renewal of Dr. Kirkpatrick’s marina.  He said that he purchased his
home in 1960 when you could see down the lake.  He said that he has used his home on the lake almost
every month since he has owned it.  

Dr. Russo spoke about visual impacts, shortening of docks, length of boats that are permitted to be
berthed at the dock and the length of boats at each mooring.

Chairman Young asked if anyone else was present to speak on behalf of the project.

Dr. Douglas Kirkpatrick, son of Dr. Harold Kirkpatrick, spoke on behalf of the project.  He said that they
purchased their property in the 1970's but the property was built in the 1880's.

Douglas Kirkpatrick said that he believes that the current situation is workable because the problematic
customer is not coming back this year.  He said that he does not see any visual or navigational impacts
or issues.

Douglas Kirkpatrick continued to discuss the riparian water rights and property line issues.

A discussion continued further regarding riparian rights, historical issues, visual impacts and navigational
issues.

Lieutenant Schneider discussed some of the enforcement issues that have occurred at the East Lake
George House.  He said that the 2005 Consent Order was signed regarding violations with moorings
outside of the area.

Chairman Young asked Lt. Schneider if in his judgment he felt that the Order On consent had been
violated.

Lt. Schneider indicated that the Order On Consent had been violated.

Chairman Young asked if the boat in question was the problem.  Lt. Schneider said that there may have
been up to 3 boats in violation.  He said that he has discussed this with Dr. Harold Kirkpatrick and told
him that he needed either heavier moorings or they must be anchored in place.

Douglas Kirkpatrick said that his father, Harold Kirkpatrick does maintain the moorings himself and that
he has used double anchors on the moorings.

Chairman Young asked the Commission members to give their opinion of the situation.

Kenneth Parker said that he heard the discussion regarding the surveys and doesn’t know if we can put
restrictions on the size of boats that he can accommodate.

Thomas Morhouse said that the boats are not properly moored.  He said that there is a possibility that
they do not have the proper chain, size of boat or weight of boat.  He added that the Commission needs
some type of information depicting what size boats will be moored and their exact location.

John Pettica said that this marina has been mismanaged for a number of years and he agrees with Ken
Parker and Thomas Morhouse.  He added that the moorings should not be included with the permit at
this time.

Thomas Hall said that he agrees that 9 moorings is too many and that it should not be up to the
Commission to decide how to fit the boats in.

James Kneeshaw said that the evidence shows that they cannot keep the number of boats in the
prescribed area so the number of boats must be reduced.

Chairman Young said that nothing is wrong with the way the marina is run except for the fact that the
permit and Order on Consent continue to be violated.

Chairman Young said that a letter from the Park Commission needs to be sent to the Attorney General
regarding the violation of the Order On Consent which is a legal binding contract.

Chairman Young discussed with Karla Buettner that the Commission is issuing an intent to revoke and
that Dr. Kirkpatrick is entitled to a fair hearing if he is unhappy with the decision of the Commission.

Thomas Morhouse read and moved to approve Resolution 2007-11 which was seconded by Thomas
Conerty and a roll call vote was taken.

          WHEREAS   the applicant has applied to renew Class A Marina permit #5234-4-99; and

          WHEREAS   the Lake George Park Commission has reviewed the application, supporting documentation,
          comments received and other information that appears in the record; and

          WHEREAS   public notice has been distributed and comments received; and

          WHEREAS   the record contains documentation of constant and continued non-compliance with the marina permit
          in that the permittee has failed to maintain nine moored customer vessels within the area delineated in
          the permit;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Lake George Park Commission finds that the authorization to utilize
moorings at this site shall be revoked for the following reasons:
       
Non-compliance with marina permit conditions has continued despite repeated warnings and notices of violation
throughout a lengthy period; and

Non-compliance has continued following an enforcement action culminating in a Consent Order in 2005; and

A pattern of non-compliance exists which indicates that the permit authorizes more moorings than can physically be
maintained on the lakefront and within the confines of the permittee’s property; and

FURTHER RESOLVES to direct staff to issue a notice of intent to modify Class A Marina #5234-4-99 to eliminate
berthing of customer vessels on moorings and authorize only the offering of seasonal berthing for up to 15 vessels
on the existing dock; and

To inform the applicant that this represents partial denial of the renewal application for which a public hearing may
be requested; and

To authorize the chair to refer the enforcement matter to the Office of the Attorney General.

Ayes: K. Parker, T. Morhouse, J. Kneeshaw, T. Hall, B. Young, J. Pettica, T. Conerty
Nays: None
Abstentions: None

Item #10 — Public Comments

Lake George Association

Kathy Bozony said that she wanted to comment on what Carol Collins had to say about stormwater
management.  She said that the LGA would support the Park Commission in adding resources for
stormwater management in some of the Towns in the Lake George Basin.  She said that she has
discussed with some of the towns the need to hire an impartial engineer to review many of these plans.

Lake George Watershed Conference

Not present.

The FUND for Lake George, Inc.

Not Present.

Lake George Waterkeeper

Not Present.

Item #8 — Adjournment

There being no further business, on the motion of Kenneth Parker, seconded by Thomas Morhouse, all
Commission members present voting affirmatively, the meeting was adjourned.

                        Respectfully submitted,



                        Michelle D. Way
                        Keyboard Specialist


                    Secretary’s Note:   The next Commission meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, April 24, 2007, 10:00
                    a.m. at the Bolton Town Hall, Bolton Landing, NY.