NOTICE OF PETITION 2019-67317 10l02f2019 02:22:02 PM Reoeipt$2019505588 0 Pages STATE OF NEW YORK Pm"? Wm" SUPREME COURT COUNTY OF WARREN In the Matter of the Petition of MMSI PROPERTIES, LLC, NOTICE OF PETITION Petitioner, -against? REESWARREN-WASHINGTON ASSOCIATION FOR MENTAL HEALTH, IN C., THE CITY OF GLENS FALLS, THE CITY OF GLENS FALLS PLANNING BOARD, Respondents. For an Order and Judgment Pursuant to CPLR Article 78 Vacating and Reversing the Granting of Site Plan Approval to Respondent Warren-Washington Association for Mental Health, Inc. by the City of Glens ails/City of Glens Falls Planning Board on the Basis That the Approval was Contrary to the Intent and Clear Meaning of the City Zoning Ordinance, Violated the Express Language of the City Zoning Ordinance, and was Otherwise Arbitrary, Capricious and Unlaw?ll. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the petitioner, MM-SI Properties, LLC, will move this Court at a Special Term thereof to be held in and for the County of Warren at the Supreme Court, Warren County Municipal Center, 1340 State Route 9, Lake George, New York on the 251th day of October, 2019 at 9:30 AM. or as soon therea?er as can be heard, for an Order and Judgment pursuant to CPLR Article 78 vacating and reversing the granting of site plan approval to Respondent Warren-Washington Association for Mental Health, Inc. by the City of Glens Falls Planning Board which decision was arbitrary, capricious and unlawful. AND TAKE FURTHER NOTICE, that answering af?davits, if any, must be served at least seven (7) days before the return date of this proceeding, pursuant to CPLR ?2214(b) and CPLR ?7804. AND TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that demand is hereby made pursuant to CPLR ?7804 that the respondent City and Planning Board submit a certi?ed record to the Court with a copy to all parties prior to the return date of this proceeding. Dated: October 1, 2019 Lake George, New York Stafford?all, Esd. 175 Ottawa Street Lake George, New York 12845 (Phone): (518) 668-5412 (Fax): (518) 668-3629 (E?Mail): nathan.hall@scmattornevs.eom 2019-67317 1DIO2IZU19 02:22:02 PM 0 Pages pame a J, Vogel, Warren Co Clerk FILED STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT COUNTY OF WARREN In the Matter of the Petition of MMSI PROPERTIES, LLC, VERIFIED PETITION Petitioner, 1 Index No.: air? -against- Date Filed ASSOCIATION FOR MENTAL HEALTH, INC. THE CITY OF GLENS FALLS, THE CITY OF GLENS FALLS PLANNING BOARD, Respondents. For an Order and Judgment Pursuant to CPLR Article ?78 Vacating and Reversing the Granting of Site Plan Approval to Respondent Warren-Washington Association for Mental Health, Inc. by the City of Glens alls/City of Glens Falls Planning Board on the Basis That the Approval was Contrary to the Intent and Clear Meaning of the City Zoning Ordinance, Violated the Express Language of the City Zoning Ordinance, and was Otherwise Arbitrary, Capricious and Unlawful. The petition of Elizabeth Miller, Member of MMSI Properties, LLC (hereinafter by its attorneys, Stafford, Carr McNally, P.C., respectfully allege as follows: 1. That at all times relevant, the petitioner, MMSI is a domestic Limited Liability Company organized and existing under the State of New York with a principal place of business at 51 Walnut Street, Glens Falls, New York. 2. That at all times relevant, the petition was and is the owner of a certain piece of real property located at 51-5 7 Walnut Street, located in the City of Glens Falls, State of New York. The petitioner?s real property is designated on the map marked Exhibit which is annexed to the petition and made a part hereof. 3. That upon information and belief, respondent the CITY OF GLENS FALLS, is a municipal corporation in the County of Warren, State of New York. 4. That upon information and belief, respondent the CITY OF GLENS FALLS PLANNING BOARD, is a duly constituted body of the City of Glens Falls charged with, inter alia, granting site plan approval of certain uses and projects in the City of Glens Falls as provided for in the City Zoning Code. 5. That upon information and belief and at all times relevant, the respondent, WARREN-WASHINGTON ASSOCIATION FOR MENTAL HEALTH, INC. (hereinafter is a domestic not-for?pro?t corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York with a principal place of business at 3043 State Route 4, Hudson Falls, New York. 6. That upon information and belief WWAMH is the owner or otherwise has an interest in the following two parcels of land (the ?Subject Property?): (1) 47 Cooper Street, located in the City of Glens Falls, County of Warren, State of New York and bearing the tax mad number: 303.13-19-17. This parcel is designated as on the map marked Exhibit (2) 50 Cooper Street, located in the City of Glens Falls, County of Warren, State of New York and bearing the tax map number: 303.13-19-16. This parcel is designated as on the map marked Exhibit 7. That in or about May, 2019, therespondent WWAMH ?led an application for site plan review and approval with the City of Glens Falls and the City of Glens Falls Planning Board, in which they sought site plan approval to develop the Subject Property with a 29 unit facility for adults with Serious Mental Illness, homeless young adults, domestic violence survivors and the chronically homeless. (the ?Project?). 8. That on or about September 2, 2019, the City of Glens Falls Planning Board (the ?Board?) granted Respondent WWAMH site plan approval for the proposed development sought. 9. That the Petitioner, by its counsel, along with other members of the community at large, raised a number of objections to the project as proposed at the June 2019, July 2019, August 2019, and September 2019 meetings, which concerns were not addressed by the Respondent WWAMH nor adequately considered by ResPondent Board. 10. That the Petitioner has been aggrieved by the decision of the Board granting site plan approval for the Project. 11. That for the reasons that follow the Planning Board failed to properly apply the Zoning Code to this application for site plan approval, and, as a result, its approval was contrary to the intent and clear meaning of the City Zoning Ordinance, violated the express language of the City Zoning Ordinance, and was otherwise arbitrary, capricious and unlawful. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Code Provisions Discouraging Residential Use) 12. That the petitioner repeats and realleges the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 11 as though set forth herein. 13. That the project is located in the Light Industrial District pursuant to the City Zoning Map and the determination of the City of Glens Falls Zoning Board of Appeals at its July 15, 2019 meeting. 14. That {5220-20 of the City of Glens Falls Zoning Code governs speci?c provisions relating to properties located in the Light Industrial District. 15. That the purpose of the City of Glens Falls Zoning Code as a whole is ?to minimize con?icts among uses of land and buildings, and to bring about the gradual conformity of uses of land and buildings throughout the City to the well-considered plan herein set forth.? Glens Falls Zoning Code ?220-2. 16. That consistent with this purpose, provides: ?The general purpose and intent of this district is to identify areas that are appropriate for a wide range of commercial and industrial uses.? 17. That provides: ?While there are some residential uses in the district, ??rrther expansion of those uses through construction of new residential structures should be discouraged in order to provide space for the commercial/industrial uses and to avoid con?icts in land use.? 18. That provides: ?In promoting the general purpose of this district, ?re speci?c intent of the district includes . . . to discourage new residential uses in those areas.? 19. That the language of the Glens Falls Zoning Code clearly indicates that the Board shall have the right to exercise its discretion in deciding whether any residential use, let alone a major residential project, is advisable at this site and that, barring some special circumstances, such residential use is unadvisable. 20. That it is Petitioner?s positibn that this codi?ed language discouraging residential use puts the burden on any applicant seeking residential development in the light industrial district to convince the Board why this default language should be disregarded in a particular instance. 21. However, at the September 2019 meeting of the Board, the Planning Board improperly reversed the burden of persuasion and counsel to the Planning Board provided the Board with legal counsel that, to wit, this cautionary language notwithstanding, the Planning Board needed an independent basis apart from this caution against residential use in the light industrial district if a Board Member was to vote against the Project. 22. That it is submitted that this position is clearly in error and not in accordance with the codi?ed language discouraging residential use. The position taken by the Board cOmpletely nulli?es the code language discouraging residential use if the Board is not allowed to take it into consideration in making its decision outside of a separate de?ciency in the application. 23. Based upon the foregoing, it is respectfully submitted that the position taken by Re3pondent Board that the Board could not legally exercise its discretion to disapprove the project in spite of the clear direction of the Zoning Code discouraging and cautioning further residential use in the light industrial district was contrary to the intent and clear meaning of the City Zoning Ordinance, violated the express language of the City Zoning Ordinance, and was otherwise arbitrary, capricious and unlaw?il, SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (Change in Community Services Rendered) 24. The Petitioner repeats and realleges the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 through 23 as though fully set forth herein. 25. That the Respondent WWAMH represented to the Board that no services would be provided to its residents at the facility, but that it would act as a ?concierge? of sorts to connect its residents with the mental health or other behavioral professionals in the community. 26. That it is respectfully submitted that this was an important aspect of the discussion surrounding this project. Petitioner was unsuccessful in arguing before the City of Glens Falls and its various boards that this project was not a residential use and was akin to an institutional care facility in large part because Respondent WWAMH was adamant that all necessary services to its residents would come from facilities in the community. 27. That prior to the Board?s approval of this project, it was announced that after four decades of helping the Warren and Washington Counties meet state-mandated requirements for outpatient mental health services, Glens Falls Hospital could not meet the demand for outpatient behavioral health services and substance abuse in the community and was looking to engage other behavioral health providers in the region. Glens Falls Hospital Press Release, ?Glens Falls Hospital, Washington and Warren Counties Working to Increase Access to Outpatient Behavioral Health and Substance Use Services,? dated August 30, 2019 (available at sfallshospital.org/abo A copy of the article referenced herein is annexed hereto and labeled as Exhibit 28. That it is respect?illy submitted that, given the Applicant?s reliance on service providers in the community for treatment of its vulnerable residents, this is a material change to the circumstances surrounding this application. 29. That the Board, through its interpretation and enforcement of the Zoning Code, is tasked with accomplishing the purpose set forth therein, inter alia, to ?promote the public health, safety and general welfare [of the community] . . . with reasonable consideration, among other things, to the character of the district, its particular suitability for particular uses.? 30. That the Board has neglected its duty by failing to consider the recently disclosed facts that: (1) Glens Falls Hospital declared ?the need that exists today for outpatient behavioral health services is far greater than what Glens Falls Hospital can meet on their own;? and (2) Glens Falls Hospital only intends to discontinue services to such vulnerable populations once another provider has been improved (se_egg,, ?Behavioral Health Providers look North as Glens Falls Hospital Announces Service Reduction,? Times Union, September 6, 2019 (available at 14420353.php); Hoping for Growth in Mental Health Services,? Post Star, September 27, 2019 (available at Copies of the articles referenced herein are annexed hereto and labeled as Exhibit 31. Based upon the foregoing, it is respectfully submitted that the Planning Board?s failure to consider the impact this project would have on the City?s overburdened health care industry, as well as the announced change in circumstances regarding Glens Falls Hospital?s withdrawal from the community?s behavioral/substance abuse services industry was contrary to the intent of the City Zoning Ordinance, violated the express language of the City Zoning Ordinance, and was otherwise arbitrary, capricious and unlaw?Jl. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION (Stormwater) 32. That Petitioner repeats and realleges the allegations stated and contained in Paragraphs 1 through 31 as though fully set forth herein. 33. That ?220?50, et seq. provides the City of Glens Falls? stormwater standards and regulations relating to land development activities. 34. That provides: ?For the purpose of this article, the following documents shall serve as the of?cial guides and speci?cations for stormwater management. Stormwater management practices that are designed and constructed in accordance with these technical documents shall be presumed to meet the standards imposed by this article: (1) The New York State Stormwater Design Manual (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, most current version or its successor, herea?er referred to as the ?Design Manual?; (2) New York Standards and Speci?cations for Erosion and Sediment Control, (Empire State Chapter of the Soil and Water Conservation Society, 2004, most current version or its successor, hereafter referred to as the ?Erosion Control Manual?). 35. That NYS Stormwater Design Manual prohibits in?ltration practices, including rain gardens, in ?ll soils, except the top quarter of an in?ltration trench or dry well. 84%, NYS Stormwater Design Manual, p. 214. 36. That Petitioner submitted the Report of her engineer, Daniel R. Hershberg, P.E. of Hershberg Hershberg to the Board which raised this exact issue. ?Rain gardens are an in?ltration practice. In?ltration practices are not permitted on ?ll sites.? A copy of the Report of Daniel R. Hershberg, P.E. submitted to the Board at its July, 2019 meeting is annexed hereto and labeled as Exhibit 37. That it is respectfully submitted that the entire Subject Property is a ?ll site. A soil sampling of Barton Logudice as part of a Phase I at the property in 2013 states that ?the eastern portion of the site consists predominantly of apparently undisturbed ?ll and soil material, with the exception of one area in the southeast corner of the property that appears to be covered with gravel/cobble ?ll. The northern portion of the site is largely covered by similar apparent gravel/cobble ?ll . - . . Historic ?ll was noted in several areas of the site including the western and north-central portion and was generally comprised of black or grey stained soil containing slag material. Where encountered, the depth of historical ?ll ranged from 0.5 feet to at least 2-feet.? A copy of the Barton Loguidice Report dated October 8, 2013 is annexed hereto and labeled as Exhibit 38. That additionally, to address concerns about prior site contamination raised in prior Phase I and Phase II Reports, the Respondent WWAMH has stated it will cover remaining undeveloped areas of native soil with a layer of imported, clean soil. The letter of H. Thomas Jarrett, Engineer for Respondent WWAMH, dated July 17, 2019 explicitly states that any new gardens at the site will be constructed of imported soils. A copy of the letter to the Board of H. Thomas Jarrett is annexed hereto and labeled as Exhibit 39. That rain gardens appear to be the primary method of stormwater management at the Subject Property, as it has pr0posed to eight (8) raingardens in all as part of its stormwater design. Petitioner?s Exhibit 40. That this proposal is in direct con?ict with the NYS Stormwater Design Manual and, consequently, the Glens alIsZoning Code. 41. Based upon the foregoing, it is respect?illy submitted that the Project?s stormwater design, as proposed, is not designed in accordance with the required design criteria for the City of Glens Falls and the State of New York and the Board?s failure to require compliance with these Standards is contrary to the express language of the City Zoning Ordinance, and was otherwise arbitrary, capricious and unlawful. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Stay Pursuant to CPLR ?7805) 42. Petitioner repeats and realleges the allegations stated and contained in Paragraphs 1 through 41 as though fully set forth herein. 43. That based upon the issues raised by the Petitioner regarding the decision by the City of Glens Falls to grant the Respondent WWAMH site plan approval for its proposed development of the Subject Property, it is requested that the Respondent WWAMI-I be stayed ?'om further approvals, permits, or development of this parcel until such time as this Article 78 is decided. WHEREFORE, Petitioner accordingly demands judgment Order and Judgment Pursuant to CPLR Article 78 vacating and reversing the granting of site plan approval to Respondent Warren-Washington Association for Mental Health, Inc. by the City of Glens Falls/City of Glens Falls Planning Board on the basis that the approval was contrary to the intent and clear meaning of the City Zoning Code, violated the express language of the City Zoning Code, and was otherwise arbitrary, capricious and unlawful and further demands judgment staying any ?irther approvals, permits or development relating to the Subject Property while this Article 78 is pending; and for such other and further relief as the Court shall deem just and proper. Dated: October 2, 2019 Lake George, New York STA 0RD, CARR MCNALLY, P.C. By: Nathan Hall, Esq. 175 Ottawa Street Lake George, New York 12845 Phone: (518) 668-5412 VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK ss.: COUNTY OF WARREN ELIZABETH MILLER, being sworn says: I am the Member of MMSI Properties, LLC, the petitioner herein; I have read the annexed Veri?ed Petition, know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. My belief, as to those matters therein not stated upon knowledge, is based upon the following: discussions with counsel and review of records relating to this project. Swlorn to before me this 2.1 day of October, 2019 NATHAN P. HALL NOTARY PUBLIC .ST ATE OF NEW YORK Registration No. 02HA6279545 Quali?ed in- Warren County Commission Expires April 22. 2021. EXHIBIT EXHIBIT 10i1!2019 Glens Falls Hospital Glens Falls Hospital, Washington and Warren Counties Working to Increase Access to Outpatient Behavioral Healt. Careers Contact My Login Spital Make A Gift 518.926.1000 0 9 Home About Services Patients Visitors innovation Healthy Living Events 8; Classes About I About Us What's New at GFH Glens Falls Hospital, Washington and Warren Counties Working to Increase Access to Ifnal 1 10f1i2019 Glens Falls Hospital Glens Falls HOSpital, Washington and Warren Counties Working to Increase Access to Outpatient Behavioral Outpatient Behavioral Health and Substance Use Services Glens Falls Hospital, Washington and Warren Counties Working to Increase Access to Outpatient Behavioral Health and Substance Use Services 08/3011 9 GLENS FALLS, NY Glens Falls Hospital shared today that they are working with county government to engage other behavioral health providers in a conversation about the future of care in the region. For nearly 50 years, Glens Falls Hospital has been the contracted provider of outpatient behavioral health services in Warren and Washington counties. In that time the community and the needs of the patients Glens Falls Hospital serves has changed tremendously. The need that exists today for outpatient behavioral health services is far greater than what Glens Falls Hospital can meet on their own. The hospital is committed to being part of the long-term solution to the growing need for behavioral health services and engaging with the Of?ce of Community Services for Warren and Washington Counties in a thoughtful and deliberate partnership exploration process to increase access to outpatient behavioral health and substance use services in Warren and Washington counties. ?Glens Falls Hospital has been a committed partner to the county for nearly 50 years, and we appreciate their willingness to help ?nd the best solution to increase access to much needed behavioral health services in our community," said Robert York, Director of Community Services for Warren and Washington Counties. The hospital is helping the county to identify specialized organizations that have advanced skills and expertise and who share their commitment to those in need as a mission?centered, not-for-pro?t organization. Through the partnership exploration process, the county is looking for a provider to manage existing addiction services as well as child, adolescent and adult behavioral health services, with speci?c focus on those with serious and persistent mental illness (SPMI). "In collaboration with the counties, we are exploring a variety of types of partnerships with local and regional providers, and our shared goal is to expand access to much needed behavioral health services in our community. We are taking the time to do this right, and we are engaging in conversations with a variety of non-pro?t organizations who share our same commitment to caring for this vulnerable population," said Dianne Shugrue, CEO of Glens Falls Hospital. As Glens Falls Hospital works with the counties to identify potential partners, their outpatient behavioral health operations will continue and patients will continue to receive the same high-quality, compassionate care as they always have. Shugrue emphasized that Glens Falls Hospital is committed to working with the counties and potential partners in the best interest of the patients they serve and will provide updates to mm on 1OI1I2019 Glens Falls Hospital Glens Falls Hospital. Washington and Warren Counties Working to Increase Access to Outpatient Behavioral Healt.. employees, patients and the community as appropriate. ##it About Glens Falls Hospital: Glens Falls Hospital (GFH) maintains a service area that spans 6,000 square miles across 5 diverse counties. Founded in 1897, GFH today operates an advanced health care delivery system featuring more than 20 regional facilities.A vast array of specialized medical and surgical services are provided in addition to coronary care, behavioral health care, rehabilitation and wellness and others.The main hospital campus is home to the CR. Wood Cancer Center, the Joyce Stock Snuggery birthing center, the Breast Center and a chronic wound healing center. GFH is a not-for? pro?t organization and the largest employer in New York?s Adirondack region, with over 2,500 employees and a medical staff of over 575 providers. For more information visit Abgut Warmn and Washington qunties: The Of?ce of Community Services for Warren and Washington Counties is a shared county administrative of?ce with responsibility under NYS Mental Hygiene Law for planning, oversight and coordination of mental health, substance use and intellectual/developmental disability services and supports for individuals in Warren and Washington Counties. Tags: What's New at GFH Search I Archive 2019 September August 30 - Glens Falls Hospital. Washington and Warren Counties Working to Increase Access to Outpatient Behavioral Health and Substance Use Services July February 2018 2017 . . EXHIBIT 10I112019 Behavioral health providers look north as Glens Falls Hospital announces service reduction - Times Union ?an-amnion Behavioral health providers look north as Glens Falls Hospital announces service reduction Hospital says it can no longer keep up with demand for mental health, addiction services VISITGE: IMAGE 1 OF 4 Buy Photo Glens Falls Hospital on Wednesday Dec. 14. 2016 in Glens Falls. N.Y. (Michael P. Farrellfl'imes Union) GLENS FALLS An Albany area human services agency says it wants to open a mental health clinic in Glens Falls capable of serving 1,000 people, and it wants to do it fast. Northern Rivers Family of Services CEO William Gettman said Thursday that the agency hopes to obtain local and state 4420353.oho 1 16 1021(2019 Behavioral health providers look north as Glens Falls Hospital announces service reduction - Times Union approvals to open the clinic by January 2020 an accelerated timeline that seeks to accommodate unmet need and ease a much larger concern regarding the future of behavioral health services in the region. That concern is rooted in last month's announcement that Glens Falls Hospital, the largest provider of behavioral health services in the Warren and Washington county region. plans to discontinue its outpatient mental health and addiction services. Nearly 2,000 people currently receive these services. Tap to explore Hyde 8: in 360? POWERED BY CONCERT FEEDBACK ?We've got to get this clinic standing up because there are clients who need this service.? Gettman said. Northern Rivers is currently in lease negotiations for a 6,000-square-foot space less than a mile from the hospital. It would serve roughly 500 adults and 500 children. and provide a range of mental health services including therapy. social work, medication management, group sessions, assessments and diagnoses. "It's on a bus line, it's confidential. it?s modern, it's safe and secure,? Gettman said. "it's a really good location." 9m 10l1l2019 Behavioral health providers look north as Glens Falls Hospital announces service reduction - Times Union The nonpro?t already has a presence in the region through its school-based mental health clinics, and a handful of other programs. In the Capital Region, it operates four outpatient clinics in addition to its school-based clinics. All told, it serves some 16,000 children, adults and families across 36 counties. Transitioning providers Glens Falls Hospital CEO Dianne Shugrue said the hospital intends to continue services until a new provider, or several providers, are approved to take them over. Those providers must be approved by the Office of Community Services for Warren and Washington Counties and, depending on the service line, the state Office of Mental Health or the state Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services. Robert York, director of the Of?ce of Community Services for the counties, said Friday said he estimate the transition could take four to six months and he has been approached by several agencies interested in taking over the hospital's services. He confirmed that Northern Rivers has approached the hospital and office about its plans, but said the clinic Northern Rivers is interested in opening would ideally serve new patients. Unmet need is so high, he explained, that ideally the counties will be able to find one provider (or providers) to take over the hospital's existing services, and another to take on the unmet need. ?We want to make it as smooth a transition as possible so that there's no disruption to service," he said. "At the same time, we want to expand services." York declined to say what other agencies his office has spoken to, but con?rmed that they are from the region. He said his office is looking for providers with a proven track record in addiction and/or mental health services. The Community Services Board, the office's governing body, will meet later this month and may discuss potential replacements then, he said. Rising demand 4420353.nhn *3 in 10i1l2019 Behavioral health providers look north as Glens Falls Heapital announces service reduction - Times Union Demand for behavioral health services is rising everywhere. The opioid epidemic continues to fuel record overdose deaths nationwide, and rising suicide rates have helped to bring American life expectancy down for the third consecutive year in a row - the longest sustained decline since World War I and the Spanish Flu. Guyger sentencing begins after guilty verdict II IB GET As a result, communities are under pressure to expand access to both addiction and 'mental health services. This has proven difficult in rural areas, where providers are few and far between and travel to services can be burdensome. Some providers are getting around this by expanding into telepractice, where therapy and other medical services are provided virtually. "Our community has been struggling with access to clinic services for some time." York said. "Even before this occurred we had discussed whether there was a way we could expand services." Glens Falls Hospital has been providing outpatient behavioral health services in the region for "probably 50 years.? Shugrue said. But between growing demand and ongoing difficulties in finding and keeping behavioral health providers, she said the hospital is no longer able to serve the 4420353.nhn A 10I1f2019 Behavioral health providers look north as Glens Falls Hospital announces service reduction - Times Union community in the way it needs. "We are long term not able to even continue at the level we are providing," she said. "It is our organizations that specialize in behavioral health services have better ability to recruit and retain staff, and to expand services," she added. More Information A 'tough' business model But the hospital's decision to discontinue services has taken those who work in the field by surprise, given its long history in the field and its own admission that need is high. Finding other providers to take on those services when demand is high everywhere may be difficult, Gettman said. "It's going to be a challenge because running a clinic is a very tough business model," he said. "It's driven by how many insurance companies pay you, what they pay you, what your rate of attendance is because if you have no?shows, your employees are still getting paid but you're not earning revenue. So I don't think people are knocking down the door to get into the clinic business." Gettman said Northern Rivers balances these difficulties with a fee-for?service pay structure at its mental health clinics. "We pay you when you provide services and treat somebody," he said. "When you're not doing that we pay you a lower. what we call administrative, rate. So you're still getting paid. but there's an incentive for you to actually see and treat clients." Shugrue declined to say how much it cost the hospital to run its outpatient behavioral health services, or how much it will save by dropping the Service line. "This isn't about cost," she said. "This is about our ability to provide behavioral health services." 4420353.ohn 5! 1011;2019 Behavioral health providers look north as Glens Falls Hospital announces service reduction - Times Union According to the Post-Star, the hospital lost $38 million in 2017 after transitioning to a new billing system that led to service claims not being submitted until months after procedures had been completed. in many cases, insurers will refuse to pay claims that are submitted after a certain period of time has passed. In response, the hospital reduced operating costs. and laid off employees, including a significant number of primary care providers, the newspaper reported. 6? 2019 Hearst Communications, Inc. hl-lne- limp-e: Ininn Did!) 10i1l'2019 EDITORIAL: Hoping for growth in mental health services Editorial poststamom Editorial EDITORIAL: Hoping for growth in mental health services Post-Star editorial board Sep 27, 2019 JOIN FOR ONLY 99? 368037f3-b54d-59cf-801 2?c3febfb29eed .html 1! 10l1l2019 EDITORIAL: Hoping for growth in mental health services Editorial poststarcom With Glens Falls Hospital planning to close its outpatient mental health services, plans are being made for new providers to take over. Post-Star ?le photo A meeting with local leaders in the mental health ?eld has given us hope that Glens Falls Hospital?s decision to discontinue its outpatient mental health services won?t lead to a drop in the availability or quality of these services. It?s even possible the changes that are coming will lead to a needed increase in these services, and make them more accessible. That would be excellent news for the community. Rob York, director of Community Services of Warren and Washington Counties, told us that other providers are interested in taking over programs the hospital has been running, and that transition should take place within the next six months. on: 10i1f2019 EDITORIAL: Hoping for growth in mental health services Editorial poststamom York came in with Carrie Wright, program analyst with Community Services, and Dan Durkee, the emergency preparedness coordinator for Warren County Department of Public Health, to talk about the community?s mental health care needs. They emphasized the importance of these services, saying this transition could be an opportunity to recruit providers who will ?ll some of the unmet need locally. ?Open access? is the treatment philosophy they are looking for they want mental health care patients to have ?rapid access to treatment,? in the same way that people with other pressing medical needs can ?nd help quickly at an urgent care center. You have 3 free articles remaining. Become a Member GEL WAVES am 10f1l2019 EDITORIAL: Hoping for growth in mental health services Editorial 1 poststamom The Post-Star has previously reported that Northern Rivers, which runs several mental health clinics in the Albany area, has taken steps toward opening a clinic in the Glens Falls region that could serve 1,000 patients. York said that clinic would be ?added capacity,? over and above the hospital?s services, which will be taken over by other providers. Now, the hospital runs an adult outpatient clinic; a children?s counseling center, the Center for Children and Families; and two substance abuse recovery centers. These are critical services, and hundreds of people rely on them. The clinic alone has about 1,200 10/1}2019 EDITORIAL: Hoping for growth in mental health services Editorial poststar.com current upheaval in the local mental health ?eld leads to something the area badly needs an expansion of services. Local editorials represent the Opinion of the Post-Star editorial board, which consists of Editor Ken Tingley, Projects Editor Will Doolittle, Director Brian Corcoran and citizen representatives Connie Bosse, Barb Sealy and Alan Whitcomb. Retired doctor urges letter-writing campaign to save Glens Falls Hospital ananqwohlua some can 10l112019 EDITORIAL: Hoping for growth in mental health services i Editorial poststar.com OUR VIEW Glens Falls Hospital's plan to close its outpatient mental health services could be an opportunity to re? evaluate the community's needs and expand those services. om EXHIBIT 'mrmilirri: I -'rr_r1Jl firm-r i .umi .?im'i 1? irrml' Plumlw'i. 15 I.1II. Il-If 1Till ?L'mt. IEIIH- I2a lb] 1.4-1" I. moan Ben is. Harshberg. 9.5.. L5, (1901-32002) PARTNERS Dmlel R. Hershberg Pf" LS. Abraham. . ESofer?A Francis G. McCloskey; Le BY EMAIL to Nathan;.Hall cmattorne seen-1 July 2019 Nathan Hall, Esq. Stafford, Carr 8: MeNa?lly 175 Ottawa Street Lake George, New York 12845 Re: 50 Cooper Stmet City of Glens Falls, NY Document R?eView Dear Mr. Hall: Based on your request, I ?have reviewed the following d'OGuments presented to the City of Glens Falls: 1. Set of Plans eor?nplete in 14 sheets entitled Ill/amen Washington Association forMental Health, Coop-er Street Apartments, 50 :Cooper Street, City at Glens Falls, New York by Engineers, PLLC last revised 05-14-19. Letter dated October 8, 2013 with regard to Surface Soil Sampling and Analysis, Fen-Her Mullen Iron works Sit-e, 47-50 Cooper Street, Cityef?Glens-Falls, New York from Barton LoGuidice Three (3) EXecutive Summaries (excerpts of. some) of Environmental Site Assessments Fonner Mullen Iron Works Site prepared by Barton 8., LeGuidice, For identi?cation these are: a. Phase 1 ESA based upon investigation dated June 24, 2011, Executive Summary Pages through . b. Phase -1 ESA based upon investigation dated August 7. 2013, Executive Summary Pages E-1 through E-4. Phase 2 ESA undated, Pages 1 '30 Letter dated" October 28., 2015 with regard to Phase 2 Site Investigation, Fonner Mullen Iron Works Site, 4 7-50 Cooper Street, Glens Falls, NY from Barton 8: LoGuidioe Letter ?dated June 7, 2018 with regard to Phase 2 Site Investigatim, Former Malian Iron Works Site, 47 and 50 Cooper Street, Glens Falls, New York from Sterling Environmental: Engineering, P.C. Cover Sheet for June 17. 2019 transmittal from Harris A. Sanders, Architects, RC. . A Building Permit Application dated 6/1 7719-. Nathan Hall, Esq. July 1,2019 Stafford. Carr 8.: Page 2 (blank) 3 (blank), complete in 6 sheets 9. A list of Exterior Material selections dated Jane 17, 2019' from Harris A. Sanders, Architects, PC. 10. Building Elevations, Sheet A3 from Harris A, Sanders, Architects, RC. 11. Building Floor Plan's,Sheet A1 from HarrisA. Sandets?rohiteoto, RC. 12. Grading 8: Stormwater Plan, Sheet SW1, by Jan'rett Engineers, PLLC test revised 06-18-19. 13. Set of Plans complete in 14 sheets entitled Warren Washington Association for Mental Health, Cooper Street Aparhnents, 50 Cooper Street, City of Glens Falls, New York by Engineer's, .PLLC last revised 06-18-19. 14. Letter dated June 18,. 2019 With regard to WWAMH ?CooperStreet Apartments?, 47-50 Cooper Street: Glens Falls,- from. Engineers, PLLC 15. Letter dated June 18, 2919 with regard to AMH Resources, loo, 47? 50 Cooper Street Tax Map Parcels: Response to Appeal Presented by Properties, LLC (Elizabeth Miller) from Bartlett, Pontiti, Stewart 81' Rhodes, RC. 16. Letter dated \June 19, 20-19 with regard to AMH Resources, the, 47- 50 Cooper Street, Tax Map Percets: from Bartlett, Pontifi. Stewart 8: Rhodes..- PC 117. Erosion 8: Sediment Control, Portion of the NYSDEC, "Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan" the Development of. a new Warren-washington Association for Mental Health Residential Apartments, LoCate?d at 477-50 COope?r Street, City of Glens Falls, New York, April 20195 A Short Environmental Assessment Form, Parts 1 (completed), 2 Based. upon my review, I have identi?ed. significant missing or incorrectly stated information making the; comprehensive reVi?ew required by the Glens Falls Planning Board and the Glens Falls Zoning Board of Appeals impossible to complete. I have identi?ed areas of concern and referred to documents governing activities where appropriate. I have also attached Exhibits where required Wetland The S-EAF (Item 8 above) says: National Wetland Inventory identi?ed potential wetiands at the rear of the site. Our subsequent review on. 5/14/2019 indicated that a small area of wetlands exists at the extreme northeast oomer of the site, and another area at the southeast corner or the site may be starting to exhibit wetland conditions. Both areas were likely not wetlands during the industrial period, however, subsequent excavations especially during site remediation e-??olts which included the removal of shallow soils may be causing the. development of wetland conditions.- Further assessment later in the growing season would be required to make a better do tannin ation. Nathan Hall, Esq. July 2019 ?Stafford, Carr MoNa-lly Page 3 In the June 18. 2019 letter (Item 14 a1bove) under the heading 2. Wetland the following statement is made: Our initial observations of the site were during the past winter and although no vegetation was available to confirm wetland conditions, we observed standing water (and ice) along portions of the eastern section of the site, and especially in the northeast comer. That coupled with the SEQR EAF automated response from the NYSDEC documenting pctential wetlands identi?ed by the "National Wetlands Inventory" led us to revisit the site following frost leaving the ground. During the subsequent visit our wetlands biologist observed conditions along the eastern section of the site that led her to believe that there are US Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) jurisdictional wetlands present in the northeast corner of the site. She also documented that due to the recent excavation of the site. wetland conditions may form in the southeast comer .of the site over time. As a result of these observations, we modi?ed the site design to move the proposed landscaped berm (butter) away from? the wetland observed in the northeast corner of the site (see attached plan. Sheet 3 of 14 identified as ?Permitting Plan? in Set of drawings identi?ed in this report as item 13 shows- a small wetland area as Jurisdi'ct'ional Wetland". This is signi?cantly smaller than the area shown on the National W?tlal-?Id Inventory Mapper. See Exhibit A. .In order to. detemine whether the indicated wetland is accurate, the City of Glens Falls.- Planning Board should insist on a. Jurisdictional Determination by USACOE. a. Com" lete- Glens Fall-s is a M34 comrnUnity. As a M84: community it must prepare an M84 Annual Rep-art. On the report ?led March 9-. 201-9 page 4 page '3 of 3 includes the" following: A. Briefly summarize the Measurable Goal identi?ed in the in this reporting period. Review for land use, incorporate stormwater reduction into new developments. train City staff in green infrastructure and stormwater reduction, allow only knowledgeable contractors to work 'in the city, compliance activities recorded, approve construction resolve complaints. keep City and construction within the City in compliance with DEC regulations. 8. Brie?y summarize the observations that indicated the overall effectiveness of this "Measurable Goal. are reviewed, stormWater reduction and green infrastructure incorporated in new developments, regularly inspect construction sites to enable DEC compliance, address complaints immediately. Nathan Hall, Esq. July 1, 2019 Stafford, Carr McNalI?y Page .4 The Erosion Sediment Control Port-ion of the YSDEC "Stonnwater Pollution Prevention Plan Item 17 above. lacks information suitable to perform a "Review?. The only pages connected to the subject site are pages 1-5. The balance of the Appendices are standard materials some of which belong in a complete The text of SPDES the NOI (completed), the NOT and the proper Construction Maintenance Inspection Checklists and Construction Stormwater Inspection Reports. The Construction Maintenance Inspection Checklists and Construction Stormwater Inspection Reports incorporated were for StormwaterNVetlan-d Ponds, In?ltration Trench, In?ltration Basin,- Filter. B'Ioretention and Open Channel. These checklists belong in the. Post-construction stem-water management practice component. None of these. methods "are proposed. The plans show rain gardens. Post-construction stormwater mans? eme?nt .?rac-ti-Le com onent In ordier- to evaluate the stormwater management as required by the M84 coordinator, the following would be required none of which is ascerta?inable from the documents reviewed: A Stonnwater Modeling and Analysis Report that inclucles; . Tributary Mame) showing ore-development conditions, including watershedisubcatchments boundaries. flow and design points. .- Tributary showing post-develooment; conditions, including watershed/subcatchments boundaries, flow pathsirouting, design points and post-construction stonnwater management practices. a Results of stormwater modeling hydrology and hydraulic analysis.) for the required storm events. Include supporting calculations (model runs). methodology. "and a summary table that compares pre and post- development runoff rates and volumes for the different storm events. - Summary table, with supporting calculations. which demonstrates that each post-construction stormwater management practice has been designed in conformance with the sizing criteria included in the Design Manual. . Identi?cation of any sizing Criteria that is not required based on the requirements included in Part-LC. of 30-15-002. Nathan Hall, Esq. July 1, 20.19 Staffordi Carr McNally Page 5 Soil testing results and locations (test pits, borings) and in?ltratiOn tests based upon the design proposed. These should measure the in?ltration at the level of the bottom of the rain garden as detailed Landscape Details Sheet 03 in latest Plan Set (See Item 13 above). The base soil has been identi?ed in the Soil Survey (See Appendix 3) as Oak-ville loamy ?ne send, a Hydrologio Class A soil. This must" be veri?ed by in?ltration tests. Also the depth to groundwater should be determined. Without these items it is impossible to determine what storage is accommodated in the rain gardens, elevation of stermwater for various storms. Also, no documentation is provided that the RRV Overbank Flow Criteria or Extreme Flood Criteria" is met for the site. The Green Infrastructure Worksheets must be Completed. Because the site is identi?ed as being in an archeologically sensitive area (See SEAF Item 8' above) a letter of No Effect or No Adverse Effect Should be required from NY Slate Historic Preservation Of?ce Selected Treatme S- stem? Rain Gardens The Grading Stormwater Plan Sheet SW3 and Stormwater Details Sheet 01 in latest Plan Set (See Item 13 above) shows 7 rain gardens but the details only show 3' rain gardens. The plan does how contours but the details do not relate to actual ground or water levels. The depicted Water level is not tied to a storm of a certain frequency. Rain Gardens are an in?ltration practice. In?ltration practices are not permitted on ?ll The October 7, 2013 letter (See Item 13 above) notes that the. midepth of historical ?ll varied from 0.5 that to at least 2 feet?. The. October .28, 2015' letter (See Item 4 above) notes that ?the source of the apparent material used during site testeration would imply that additional ?ll was imported between" 2.013 and 2015. The details on Sheet D1 in latest Plan Set (See Item 13 above) show that the clearance from the bottom of the rain'g'arden of 2 feet from groundwater. Although a number of borings and test pits were. done on the site, none determined the stabilized groundwater level. The October 28, 2015 letter (See Item 4 above) includes in its recommendation that s?ould at least include the drilling of soil bodngs and installation. of groundwater monitoring is vets?. Nathan Hall, Esq. .July 1, 2019 Stafford, Carr 8: McNally Page 6 Finally, if the site retains the levels of Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds and Metals showed exceed (JP-.51 .So'il Cleanup Guidance levels. The site without full mitigation may qualify as a "Hotspots" which may not be used for in?ltration practices. In addition, the Letter dated June 7, 2018 (See. Item 5 above) rECOmmends that --"areas designated for vegetable gardens (if any). existing soil that may potentially be impacted should be removed to a depth of approximately two (2) to three (3) feet and replaced with clean soil from an otisite source The resident garden only shows 12" of loamy soil to be placed. Su ma .- Based upon the limited review have made of documents. it is my opinion that no approvals should be granted until a Post?construction stormwater management practice component has been submitted and reviewed by the M34 coordinator or static The issues. raiSed herein be addressed to properly oomply with 0-15-002. I enclose a copy of my C-urrieu?lum Vitae indicating my experience with stormwater design, If you have any questions, please contact me at your convenience. Sineerely Yours, HERSHBERG 8.- HERSHBERG CONSULTING ENGINEERS LAND suavevoRs Daniel R. Hershberg. P.E.. L..S. Attachments: Exhibit A through Enclosure: DRH CV DRHIdani5DCooperStreetGF Review.doc 3130:2019 Wetlands Mapper USFWS ?mmu NWI Mobile Website mmwgamm Wetlands Mapper BASEMAPS M'Al'l LAYERS 5. 8mm: CHI-0. 13'- D?paihn Source Type .0. Image Scale 0 Image-fur 1:1de 0 0 9 nummum oe? APPENDIX EXCERPT FROM GP #0-15-002? RELATING TO CONTENTS OF A STORM WATER POLLUTION PROTECTION PLAN Part STORM WA TER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN General Requirements 1. A shall be prepared and implemented by the owner or operatorof each construction activity covered by this permit. The must document the selection, design. installation. implementation and maintenance of the control measures and practices that will be used to meet the effluent limitations in Part LB. of this permit and where applicable. the post-construction stormwater management practice requirements in Part C. of this permit. The shall be prepared prior to the subrnittal of the NOI. The NOI shall be submitted to the Department prior ?to the commencement of construction activib/i A copy of the completed, final shall be included in the 2. The shall describe the erosion and sediment control practices and where. required. post-construction. .stonnwat'er management practices that will be used andlor' constructed to reduce the pollutants in? .stomwater discharges and to assure compliance with the terms and conditions .of this. permit. in addition, the shall identify potential sources of pollution which may reasonably be expected to affect the quality of'stormwater t?scharyes; 3. All that require the post~constructi0n stormwater management practice component shall be prepared by a qualified professional "that is knowledgeable in the principles and practices .of stonnwater management and treatment, 4r The owner or operator must keep the current so that it at all times accurately documents the erosion and sediment controls practices that are being used or will be used during construction, and all postaconstruction management practices that will be constructed on the site. At-a minimum-._ the owner or operatorshall amend the a. whenever the current provisions prove to be ineffective in minimizing pollutants in stormwater discharges from the site; b. whenever there is a change in design, construction, or Operation at the Construction site that has or 'could have an effect on the discharge. of pollutants; and c. to address issues or de?ciencies identified during an inspection by the quali?ed inepector; the Department or other regulath authorityt 5 .The Department may notify the owner or operator at any time that the does not meet one or more of the minimum requirements of this permit. The notification shall be in writing and identify the provisions of the that require modi?cation. Within fourteen (14) calendar days of such notification, or as othem/ise indicated by the Department, the owner or operator shall make the required changes to the and submit written netification to the Department that the changes have been made. If the owner or operator does not respond to the Department's comments in the speci?ed time frame, the Department may suspend the owner?s or operator?s coverage under this permit or require the owner or operatorto obtain coverage under an individual SPDES permit in accordance with Part of this permit". 6.Prior to the commencement of construction activihr, the owner or operator must identify the Contractor(s) and that will be responsible for installing. constructing, repairing. replacing. inspecting and maintaining the erosion and sediment control practices included in the .and the contractor(s) and subcontractor(s) that will be responsible for constructing the identify at least one person from their company that-Will be responsible for implementation of the his person shall beknown as the tit?lined contracton The owner or operator'shall ensure that at least one trained contractor is. on site on a daily basis when soil disturbance activities are being The owner or operator shall have each of the contractors and subcontractors identified aboVe sign a copy of the following certification statement below before they commence any construction activity: "l hereby certify under penalty of law that I understand and agree to comply with the terms and conditions .of the and agree. to implement any corrective actions identi?ed by the quali?ed inspector during a site inspection. I also understand that the owner or operator must comply with the terms and conditions of water quality Standards. Furthermore, lam aware that there are signi?cant penalties for submitting fates information, that I do not believe to be true, including the possibility of ?ne and imprisonment for knowing violations" In addition to providing the certification statement above, the certi?cation page must also identify the speci?c elements of the that each contractor and subcontractor will be responsible for and include the name and title of the person certi?cation statement(s) to the copy of the that is maintained at the construction site. If new or additional Contractors are hired to implement measures identi?ed in the after construction has commenced, they must also sign the certi?cation statement and provide the information listed above. 7. For projects where. the Department requests a cop-y of the or inspection reports. the owneror operatorshali submit the documents in both electronic (PDF only) and paper format within ?ve business days. unless otherwise noti?ed by the Department. Required Contents 1. Erosion and sediment control component - All prepared pursuant to this permit shall include erosion and sediment. control practices designed in conformance with the technical standard, New York State Standards and Specifications for Erosion and Sediment Control, dated August 2005. Where. erosion and sediment control practices are not designed in confonnance with the design criteria included in the. technical standard, the owner'oroperator must demonstrate equivatence to the technical standard. At a minimum, the: erosion and sediment control component of the SWPP-P shall include the following: a. Background information about the scope of the project, including the location. type and size of project;- b. A site maptconstructicn drawing(s) for the project, including a general location map. At a minimum, the site man shall show the. total site area; all improvements; areas of disturbance; areas that will not be disturbed; existing ?Vegetation;- on-site and adjacent off-site surface mtertS): floodplainf?owway bOU-ndaries; wetlands and drainage; patterns that could be affected by the construction activity; existing and final. ccntours locations of different soil types with boundaries; mate-rial, waste, borrow or equipment storage areas located on adjacent properties; and location(s) of the stonnwater discharge(s); c. A description of the soil(s) present atthe site. including an identi?cation of the Hydrologic Soil Group d. A construction phasing plan and "sequence of Operations describing the intended order of construction actn/ities. including clearing and grubbing, excavation and grading.- utility and infrastructure installation and any other activity at the site that results in soil disturbance; e. A desoription of the minimum erosion and sediment control practices to be Installed or implemented for each construction activity-that will result in soil disturbance. Include a schedule that identi?es the timing of initial placement or implementation of each erosion- and sediment control practice and the minim time frames that each practice should remain in place or be implemented; the requirements of this general permit and the technical standard, New 9. A site maplconstruction drawing(s.) showing the speci?c size(5), and of each. erosion and sediment control practice; h. The dimensions. materialspeoi?cations, installation details, on "and maintenance requirements for all erosion and sediment control practices. Include the location and sizing of any temporary from exposed soils; Erosion and Sediment Control, dated Aug List-2005.2; j. A pollution prevention measums that will be used to control litter. construction chemicals and construction debris from becoming a pollutant source in the. stormwater discharges; k. A description and location of any stonnwater discharges associated with industrial activity other than. construction at? the site, including, but not limited to, stormWater discharges from asphalt plants and concrete plants [coated on the construction site; and design and provider alternative design is equilialent to the technical .ndard. 2. Post-construction stormwater management practice Component The owner or operator of any construction project ide 'ti?'ed in Table 2 of Appendix as needing post-construction .stormwater management practices shall prepare a that includes practices designed in conformance with the applicable sizing criteria in Part c. or d, of this permit and the "criteria in the technical standard -, New York State Stormwater Management Design Manual dated January 201 5 Where post-construction stormwater management practices .are not designed in confonnance with the permanence ontena in the technical standard. the owner or operator must include in the the reasonis) for the deviation or alternative design and provide information which demonstrates that the deviation or alternative design is equivaient to the technical standard. The post-"construction storrnwater management practice component of the shall include theI following: a. Identi?cation ?of all post?construction stormwater management practices to be constructed as part of the project. Include the dimensions, material specifications- and installation details for each post-construction sto'rmwater management practice; b. A site .maprconstruction drawi?'gisl Sherri-"9 the smart" Iocation and size of each pod-Construction stormwater management practice;- A Stormwater Modeling and Analysis Report that includes: (1) showing preidevelopment conditions. including watershedisubcatchments boundaries, flow pathsirouting, and design mints: (it) Mapts) showing post-development conditions. including watershediisubcatohments boundaries, ?ow design points and stormwater management practices; Results of stormwater modeling (Le. hydrology and. hydraulic analysis) for the required storm events. Include supporting calculations (model runs), methodology. and a summary table that compares pre and post-development andff rates and volumes for the different storm events: (iv) Summary table, with suoporting calculations, which demonstrates that each post?construction stormwater management practice has been designed in confonnance- with the sizing criteria included in the Design Man u?al; Identi?cation of any sizing criteria that is not required (i based on the requirements included in Part LC. of this permit; and (vi) Identi?cation of'any elements of the design that are not in conformance with the performance criteria in the Design Manual. Include the reason(s) for the deviation or alternative design and provide information which demonstrates that the deviation or alternative design is equivalent to the Design Manual; . Soil testing results and locations (test pits, borings); e. In?ltration test results. when required; and f. An operations and maintenance plan that includes; inspection and maintenance schedules and actions to ensure continuous and effective operation of each post-construction.stormwater management practice. The plan shall identify the entity that will be responsible for the long term operation and maintenance of each practice. 3. Enhanced Phosphorus Removal" Standard-s - All construction projects identi?ed in Table '2 of Appendix Bthat are located in the watersheds identified in Appendix-G shall prepare a that includes posts construction stonnwater management practices designed in conformance with the applicable sizing criteria in Part l.C.2. of Appendix shall prepare a SWPP that also includes post~.construction stormwater management practices designed in conformance with Part l.ll.B.2 or 3 of this. permit. EXHIBIT SOIL SURVEY So'l ?ay?jinn? G-u'nlr. Nu. {an Begin! ?at ?nial. I M?IMWi-igha-pm mum =11. I a" mu. awa- ?man an cum-nation MEI await-up-m-s?i new rah-'1 an 'erru MAP LEGEND MP INFORMATION nun-Immune? spam mummy Slum moon. . . a men-Va? [j 39!"qu . Mahmud hym-mmum ?Uphill!? may El A mailman. Tamw?ub:u:uw:lmd - - Maw-h audit me 1mm . . a opal-Imam m. .- mu_m Imp; mm. at m. mw- Int-mum coca-mm usual-n 4? Iowa? WM Ilium-mi amamm?mswum 9 .. mm mam Hm A un?mama-tn j; in WW mm ?Wammat I ?lmy?: ?Gamma-m WW aim-9min:- mum-iman-Jmia Dunn-1M _m ?i - 1m mum?? 2'2. m_mu mum-yum nu a ?Imam-dud sum 1!!me 4 is Iii-cw a his!" . ., .. mama mu?ma mmam .Sall Map?Marran county, Maw Yuk an cqbp'er ma?a: Pals. Hy Map Unit Legend ?umtaymbol . 'Pu'eantofAOl om sand. on: 2.: Mm apafn?nl's'lapa's . T?uls for Area o?nt'onsr EXHIBIT Engineers - Environmental Scientists - Planners - Landscape Architects 0/ was October 8, 2013 Elizabeth Miller, President Miller Mechanical Services, Inc. 51 Walnut Street Glens Falls, New York 12801 Re: Surface Soil Sampling and Analysis Former Mullen Iron Works Site, 47-50 Cooper Street City of Glens Falls, New York File: 1607 .001 .001 Dear Ms. Miller: This letter presents the results of the surface soil sampling activities conducted by Barton Loguidice, P.C. at the former Mullen Iron Works site on August 8, 2013 as part of a modi?ed Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (BSA). The purpose of this site assessment was to supplement the Phase I ESA by determining if historical operations at the site have detrimentally impacted the on-site surface soils to the extent that additional investigation andfor remediation activities are warranted prior to the future use and development of the property. As described in greater detail below, the sampling activities included the collection and analysis of seventeen (17) surface soil samples. Site Location and Description The former Mullen Iron Works site consists of a 2.5-acre parcel located on the east side of Cooper Street in the City of Glens Falls, as depicted in Figure 1. Two large historic structures and other smaller structures were recently demolished and removed from the site. The main site structure, formerly located at the southwest corner of the property, was used as a metal-working fabrication shop which consisted of a rectangular two-story building. The second? building, located to the northeast of the metal fabrication sh0p, was used as" a foundry. Throughout this report, the site is described with reference to the following three general areas based on the existing site conditions at the time of the sampling activities: the former foundry and metal fabrication area, the eastern portion, and the northern portion (Figure 2). The former foundry and metal fabrication area of the site appears to have been recently graded following the removal of soil and/or demolition debris from the former structures (Photo 1). The eastern portion of the site consists predominantly of apparently undisturbed ?ll and soil material, with the exception of one area in the southeast corner of the property that appears to be covered with gravel/cobble ?ll (Photo 2 3). The northern portion of the site is largely covered by similar apparent gravel/cobble ?ll forming an access road, and various debris piles/staging areas, including scrap metal, scrap wood, brick rubbles, and other miscellaneous debris (Photo 4). A pond exists in the northeastern corner of the site (Photo 5). A thorough account of the site description and history can be found in Modi?ed Phase I ESA 2013). 1 1607.00 [.001 Modi?ed Phase 1 BSA - Mullen iron Works - 10071 3 on 443240) The experience to ISte?. 10 Airline Drive - Suite 200 - Albany, New York 12205 80 re Telephone: 518-218-1801 Facsimile: 518-213-1805 - The . Elizabeth Miller, President Miller Mechanical Services, Inc. October 7, 2013 Page 2 Collection of Surface Soil Samples Based on the ?ndings of the modi?ed Phase I ESA historical document review and an August 7 site reconnaissance, 3851. selected seventeen (l 7) surface soil sample locations (designated as SS-OI through 38-1 7), which are shown on Figure 2. The surface soil samples were collected by hydrogeologists on August 8, 2013 using a decontaminated hand auger. Based on the physical characteristics noted during soil sample collection, the former foundry/metal fabrication area generally consists of an approximately 2-foot thick loose, reddish-brown sand with little silt and gravel, which is underlain by dense brown to grey clay with little silt. Historic ?ll was noted in several areas of the site including the western and north-central portion and was generally comprised of black or grey stained soil containing slag material. Where encountered (SS-5, 88-6, 88-7, SS-8, 83-9, and 88-12), the depth of historical ?ll ranged from 0.5-feet to at least 2-feet. Neither bedrock nor groundwater was encountered during the surface soil sampling event. Surface soil samples were examined in the ?eld for visual and/or olfactory evidence of contamination and ?eld screened with a photo'ionization detector (PID) for the presence of total volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Based on the ?eld observations, ten (10) of the surface soil samples were collected for laboratory analysis from a depth of 0 to 6 inches and seven (7) surface soil samples were collected for laboratory analysis from varying depths ranging ?'om 2 to 4 feet. A summary of soil sample depths, PID readings, and soil sample descriptions is provided in Table 1. All holes created during the collection of the soil samples were subsequently back?lled with the original soil. The surface soil samples collected for laboratory testing were placed in appropriate sample jars on ice and submitted to Alpha Analytical, Inc. of Westborough, Massachusetts for the analysis of VOCs by EPA Method 8260 plus methyl tert?butyl ether (MTBE), semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270 (Base/Neutrals), biphenyls (PCBs) by EPA Method 8082, and the Target Analyte List (T AL) of metals by EPA Method 6010B. Soil Quality Test Results The complete analytical sample results are found in the laboratory summary report included as Attachment B, and a data summary table is provided as Table 2, and an exceedance overview can be found in Figure 3. In both the laboratory summary report and the data summary table, the chemical concentrations of any parameters detected in the analysis are indicated. Parameters that were analyzed for but not detected are indicated as in the summary table or ND in the laboratory smnmary report. In Table 1, the detected concentrations are compared to standards (limits) set by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). The NYSDEC has multiple standards which are applied in different situations, dependent primarily on the anticipated ?iture site use. Because of the potential intended reuse of the subject preperty as a commercial site, compared the analytical data to the following two NYSDEC documents: 1? CP-51 Soil Cleanup Guidance soil cleanup levels (SCIs) I 6 Part 3 75 soil cleanup objectives (SCOs) for commercial use 1607.00 I .00l Modi?ed Phase IFSA - Mullen Iron Works - 100713 443240) Elizabeth Miller, President Miller Mechanical Services, Inc. October 7, 2013 Page 3 Instances where a detected chemical concentration exceeds one of the applicable standards (SCLs or SCOs) are highlighted in Table 2 and are shown on Figure 3 at the associated sample location. The analytical results are discussed by analysis below. Volatile Organic Compounds There were no VOC exceedances of the NYSDEC CP-S SCLs or Part 375 commercial SCOs. The analytical results indicated various, low-level detections (below the applicable standards), including methylene chloride, acetone, and toluene, all common laboratory contaminants, and bromomethane. Semi? Volatile Organic Compounds The analytical data from six (6) of the surface soil samples indicated that several SVOCs were detected above the applicable SCLs or Part 375 SCOs, including benZo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, Metals The analytical results indicate that metals were detected at all of the sample locations across the site; of the CP-S SCL. The Copper exceedances are found in the samples collected from the following locations, which were all taken ?om a depth of less than 1 foot: 83-05, 88-08, 88-09, 83-10, and 88-11 PCBs There were no PCBs exceedances of the NYSDEC Part 375 commercial SCOs (there are no PCB standards for the CP-S however, detectable ctmcentrations of the PCBs (below the applicable standards) known as Aroclor 1242 and Aroclor 1254 were reported in three (3) soil samples; 88-10, 88-1 1, and 38-16. These products were commonly used in manufacturing processes and equipment, such as cutting oils, resins, and hydraulic ?uids, and may be related to historical site use. Aroclors are also occasionally found in the urban environment and may be associated with historical ?ll. As shown on Figure 2, the 88-10 and SS-ll samples were collected from the sediment around the pond area 1601001001 Modi?ed Phase] BSA -Mullen Iron Works ~100713 (ID 443240) Elizabeth Miller, President Milla' Mechanical Services, Inc. October 7, 2013 Page 4 in the northeast corner of the site (adjacent to residential properties). The 38-] 6 sample was collected near the southern boundary of the former foundry building. Investigation Summary and Recommendations The intent of the modi?ed Phase I BSA was to assess and determine if historical operations at the site have impacted the on?site surface soil quality and whether remediation activities are warranted prior to the future redevelopment of the pr0perty. It is important to note that this investigation did not include an evaluation of subsurface soil or groundwater quality. As described herein, the surface soil sampling activities consisted of the collection and submittal of surface soil samples for the laboratory analysis of VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs, and metals. Based on the analytical data and observations made during the August 8 site visit, the investigation ?ndings are summarized as follows: a? The former site structures have recently been demolished and the rubble and debris has apparently been hauled off site; I At the time of the surface soil sampling activities, the site was partially graded. It is our understanding that the graded sandy soils in the vicinity of the former machine shop and foundry structures are native site soils, whereas the gravelly ?ll material observed on the then pertion and the southeast corner of the site was imported ?ll; 0 SVOC impacts in the form of PAHs we?e detected in six (6) surface soil samples collected from various areas of the site; 0 Metals impacts, including copper, lead, and arsenic exceedances of the Part 375 SCOs for commercial _site use, which are found on the eastern portion of the site; 0 Detectable concentrations of PCBs (below the Part 375 SCOs for commercial site use) we'e reported in one 1) surface soil sample near the former foundry building and in two (2) surface soil sample locations near the pond in the northeast corner of the site. Based on the above ?ndings, the following concerns remain: 0 Environmental impacts observed in samples collected from around the pond in the northeast portion of the site are not only an on-site area of concern, but may be indicative of contamination migrating on or off-site; - Limited surface soil impacts in the form of SVOCs and metals detected above the Part 375 SCOs for comma'cial site use may be indicative of subsurface soil contamination and/or groundwater contamination at the site; 0 The elevated concentrations of arsenic, lead, and copper that were detected at surface soil sample location SS-8, as well as the elevated copper concentrations diet were detected at surface soil sample locations 38-9, 88-10, and 83-1 1, represent areas of concern due to the pctential exposure risks associated with the toxic metals. Therefore, it is recommended that-the soils at these three sampling locations be remediated prior to the future use and development of the site. 1601001301 Modi?edPlIassIESA - Mullen Iron Works - 100?? (ID 443240) Elizabeth Miller, President Miller Mechanical Services, Inc. October 7, 2013 Page 5 The sample collected from the apparent mound of foundry waste along the eastern property boundary exhibits SVOCs and metals (speci?cally'copper) impacts, which should be delineated (on-site and potentially off-site) and addressed; 0 Based on discussions in the ?eld with Mr. Jay Mullen, it is unclear whether any soil generated during demolition and grading activities remains on-site or it was properly characterized and hauled off-site; The details regarding the source of apparent ?ll material used during subsequent site restoration activities are unknown, as are soil conditions below this material could not sample surface soil within these areas). It is our recommendation that additional site investigation be performed prior to Miller Mechanical Services, Inc. pursuing the purchase of the property. Additional site investigation should at a minimum include the drilling of soil borings and collection of groundwater samples, particularly in (but not limited to) the above described areas of concern, for the purpose of collecting subsurface soil and groundwater samples and in order to assess groundwater and surface water ?ow direction. The additional data collected can be used to reassess the above described enviromnental concerns (including potential impacts to adjacent residential properties) and determine what, if any, remediation activities are warranted prior to the purchase of property. Very truly yours, BARTON LOGUIDICE, RC. Stephen B. Le Fevre, P.G. Managing Hydrogeologist SBL/akg Attachments [601001.001 Modi?ed Phase! ESA - Mull-n Iron Works - 100713 (ID 443240) EXHIBIT RR lL'f'l an} Er: momenta] diatoms-1mg . We; ?Jilin: :54. li?u?l?rti July Daniel Bruno, Chairman, and Planning Board Members City of Glens Falls Ridge Street Glens Falls, NY 12801 Re: Re: WWAMH ?Cooper Street Apartments? 47?50 Cooper St. Glens Falls NY IE 19?003 Dear Chairman Bruno and Planning Board Members, This letter is an amendment ofa letter dated 6/28i2019 by this of?ce that addressed comments in a June 24th memorandum from the City Engineer. This amendment addresses additional comments received from the City Engineer in a 6/27/20l9 memorandum (that was received too late to address in the 6/28 responses). (to clarify: this letter addresses 2 sets of comments received from the City Engineer, dated June 24?? and June City Engineer Comments (from both dates) Site Plan Drawings 1. Sheet 4 of? - Please spoof)? cast iron detectable warning strips (duo). Please add a detail to the plum spect?o?ng material, dimensions. manufacturer and other applicable information Keepense: A. note calling for a cast iron detectable warning plate was on the latest revised drawings, and that note has since been amended. (from 9 response). 2. Sheet 4 ofld The existing euro along the project?orita'ge is in very poor condition. Consider adding new concrete curb on Cooper St, to accompany the new concrete Sidmlk. This will improve pedestrian sof?gz, create aesthetic value and contain mommy drainage. Response: [t is evident that the existing curbing on Cooper Street has signi?cantly deteriorated, and is essentially buried due to numerous street repaving efforts. Replacing curbing new along only the WWAMH frontage could create a situation where that curbing would have to be replaced again, and lowered in elevation, when the remainder of the street is (presumably) milled down during the next repaving effort. We Feel that it best that the curbing along the entire street be replaced at the time of' repaving. 2o Consider extending new curb and sidewalk on additional 4 feet to meet the Warren County: Bike Iii-oil. Response: We have extended the new sidewalk to meet the bilte trail. East 'm we street" Glens Falls, NY 1280! it.? -- 1" .v i 'g-v -.- .m r? .t g?gw me; it silo n-?s .in net. a'iti?iimg mo were PM or Verifi- access .mrr? Eire dummies our recommended to have iroiieciion irm'ais' hac?fd?g 13': or a from-end insider tropic ii 5'3 rm! om! iirmug ii the parking [at Response: the design has been developed so that trucks would not have to back out of the site, ie: a front pickup unit would be able to access the dumpsters directly and then the truck would proceed to exit the site without backing up. (Note: the design has been modified for more ef?cient access; solid waste trucks wiil enter via the south driveway and exit via the north driveWsy) Sheet 7 of] 4 - Add proposed top ofcurb bottom of curb elevations. Respmse: sidewalk and parking area elevations were provided, however. in light of the question, we have added additional spot elevations. Sheet 7 of 14 Include test pf! test data and locations on the drawing. Response: The subsurface investigations performed as part of the Phase II ESA were contracted by, and should be on ?le with, the City. Those investigations documented existing soil conditions, by means of borings and in?ltration tests. An average of the infiltration test results was used For design of the rain gardens and in?ltration swales. Sheet 8 of 14 - Consult CCE or Penn State Extensionfbr .mitaoie vegetation for rain gardens and for insertion within min gardens. Response: The NYSDEC, EPA, and ?University of New Hampshire Storm water Center" literature was used to design the stonnwater systems on the property. The vegetation speci?ed was taken from those references, the Adirondack Park Agency recommendations for native vegetation, other horticultural organizations, and From our in house Landscape Architect. The vegetation was selected as suitable for rain gardens in this plant zone. The plant lists provided For the rain gardens call for trees, shrubs, and perennials that are listed on approved native plant listings developed for use in upstate NY. Further, the speci?cations call for native or namraiized plants that conform to ?American Standard Nursery Stock? standards from a certified nursery. (Amended 6/28/19 response) Sheet 9 of (4 Verg?/ oil elevations prior to construction. Response: A note to this effect was on the plans, however, it has now been reinforced. (Taken ?om 6/28/19 response) Sheer 1'0 of i4 Provide tracer wire and detectable- worm'ng tape with oil buried non-metaliic utilities. Provide a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 12? precast concrete grade rings at manholes and storm drains. Response: Provided. (Token?'om Mail! 9 response) Sheet [1 Review tree planting locations within siormworer measures . . -. . 2,5 15? p- 31, a 1 pronsc: A number :31" {recs more: invoked wim?n rain @411an and we! swalcs to max-mgr: drainage and stm?rrmatcr runoff". The. trees spcc?r?icd have been purposely to be suitabic for wet conditions, and Subsequcnl to our discumion with the. City the n?ccs have moved in the edge-.5 ofthe swaie 0. Sheet 12 offs! Use updated symbobfor handicap pot-king Response: Updated (Taken?om 6/28/79 restroom) H. Drawing :Area is not witftt'n Lake George Basin. Response: is a detail sheet that provides genera erosion and sediment controi guidelines for all projects, and the note referenced pertains only to projects located in the Lake George basin. (Token?om 6/28?? response). Subsequent to our discussions with the City Engineer, we've removed the notes that pertain to Lake George. I2. Sheet Z4 ofH Indicate on drawings where the Controls shown on this sheet are to be used. Response: The drawings have been clari?ed accordingly. (Taken from 6/23/19 response) Siormwater Repo? The ?ylfowtng elements (at ct minimum) are required to be to the City more a review ofth'e Stormwm?er and can be completed. Engmeer 's Reportfor Stormwater Management Pre and Post-deveiopment tb-ainoge maps .9th wing catchment areas, ponds or reaches. Soft mapping, descriptions and soft testing results. Hydrologfc and hyc??aulic amiysrivfor all Stormwater system componenm?tr of! app?cablc design storms tnctuding: Elm-ting and Proposed condition ona?zses?r ground cover. time of concentrations. @406 of?ow, mno?mtec volumes; velocities and swfoce water elevations including methodologies used and supporting calcutatt?ons. Fina! .rz'zing calculations for including, contributing drainage area, storage and outta! con?guration. 0 or omfct rating curves and in?ow/onow hydrogrophs ?ar qupitcoble .ttormwotcr components.. 0 Final ambm?s' of potential impact/weds of project. it. Applicable water quaitty. water quantity. channet protection, overhank protection and extreme storm catcwtatiom?. ix Letter quesotution with OPRHP on the genera! permit that .s?am?ea' obligatton under the NYS Historic Preservation Act, Section 14.09, 9 ?$33.4 for im?ementatton qflke genera! permit, y'applicaole. 4} Completed Notice rJ'Intent 0. M94 Acceptance Form 5?3 L'nzlsaFreon: or: Form '9 (Mach-"Operator certification Form Response: The submitted Includes detailed computations of pie-existing and project runoff rates/volumes, as well as routing diagrams and subcatchmentf?ow path mapping for each condition. (Note: From discussions with the City Engineer, apparently the calculations did not reach the City Engineer?s office, and a copy of the requested information has since been provided to that of?ce) A Sign off ??om the NYS OPRHP was included with the SEQR EAF provided with the Site Plan application. The Notice of Intent (NOD is normally completed following approval by the Planning Board, such that any design changes made as a result of the Board review are correctly re?ected on the NOL The Acceptance Form" will be executed once the City review is complete. Our of?ce is currently revising the preparer, owner. and contractor acknowledgments {certi?cation forms to re?ect recent discussions with the those updates will be provided with the ?nal when submitted following Planning Board review. Planning Board Comments 1. Comment: Rama ve perimeter privacy ?ance ?om wetland area Response: Acknowledged; fence new relocated. 2. Comment" Consider timer and/or motion sensors and/or dimers on site lighting; and will securing cameras be aired? Response: Site lighting will be designed will those potential controls available, and will manage site lighting to minimize light intensity and usage in accordance with required site security and WWAMH activities. Security cameras will be provided. 3. Comment: Please pro vide a concrete causeway apron in [ten ofthe asphalt shown. Response: Acknowledged; the asphalt apron has been removed in favor of concrete. Public Comments received during the July 2, 2019 Planning Board meeting (both oral and written comments included): 1. Comment: SEQR EAF contains several incorrect responses. Reaponse: The draft SEQR EAF has been modi?ed and can be reviewed by the Planning Board at the time of Formal SEQR review; the modi?ed EAF is attached. ll . I. .h lined-p l-Ji 9va;qu l' 'i "gm: Lit-11. 12,: .llL?llw?lS from Hershbo s: ?otsam: in atelier dated July i 20 l9 addressed to ?our. ~lt-f??FT .l skid: ?it. .. Written _1 . Wgtland Issues; 1. The SEAF (Item 8 above) says: National Wetland Inventory identi?ed potential wetlands at the rear of the site. Our subsequent review on 5/1 4/2019 indicated that a small area of wetlantb' exists at the ememe northeast corner of the site, and another area at the southeast corner of the site may be starting to exhibit wetland conditions. Both areas were likely not wetlands during the industrial period, however, subsequent excavations especially during site remediation e?brts which included the removal of shallow soils may be causing the development of wetland conditions. Further assessment later in the growing season would be required to make better determination. In the June 18, 20 (9 letter under the heading 2. Wetland thejollowlng statement is made: Our initial observations of the site were dieing the past winter and although no vegetation was available to con?rm wetland conditions, we observed standing water (and ice) along portions of the eastern section of the site, and especially in the northeast corner. That coupled with the SEQR EAF automated response ?lm: the YSDEC documenting potential wetlands identi?ed by the ?National Wetlands Inventory? led us to revisit the site ?allowing ?'ost leaving the ground. During the subsequent visit, our wetlands biologist observed conditions along the eastern section of the site that led her to believe that there are US Army Corps of Engineers farisdictional wetlands present in the northeast corner of the site. She also documented that due to the recent excavation of the site, wetland conditions may form in die southeast corner of the site over time. As a result of these observations, we modi?ed the site design to move the proposed landscaped berm (buyer) away ?at? the wetland observed in the northeast earner ofthe site (see attached plan). Response: Subsequent to the July Planning Board meeting, Deborah Roberts, a wetlands biologist, visited the site on July ll, 2019 to further examine the was noted during her initial site visit. Dr. Roberts concluded the following: ?As discussed in the ?eld during my site visit on July, I l, 2019, I delineated a small area of wetland at the northeastern corner and northern edge of the property. This area was ?agged in the ?eld with pink ?agging tape (A1 to Wetland A was dominated by entrails and willows and had standing water in as observed in May 20l9. Based on the review of mapping, this wetland might not be not connected to a Water of the US however, it is within 4,000 linear foot of the Hudson River, which is a traditional navigable water (TNW). Under the current USAGE regulations (Clean Water Rule of 20l5 or 2015 it should be assumed that this area would be regulated by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) and impact to Wetland A should be avoided during construction.? ?in addition, one small area of wetland vegetation was identi?ed near ?ag Bl, approximately 300 feet east of Cooper Street. This depression is about 15 20 ft in size and was noted by the surveyors as being wet. The area was dry on July 11, 2019. Based on methods in the current guidance under the 1987 (LS. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratories, 1987) and the Interim ExI?il rt Regional Supplement to the Corps ol' Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: and Northeast Region (USAGE, October 2009), this is a problem area. The soil is mapped as a well-drained Oakvillc series, however, previous site work has stripped the native surface soil, leaving only subsoil over much of the site, and the vegetation has been disturbed because it has been mowed. The elevated soil around the few remaining trees is evidence of the historic soil elevation. The depression in which some wetland vegetation has established is formed by the tracks of equipment working on the site on the relatively impermeable subsoil felt after construction. Based on the de?nitions in the 2015 CWR, it is my opinion this small area of wetland vegetation would not be considered as a WOTUS, even it? it met the de?nitions of a wetland or problem area, and therefore would not be regulated. The regulation (33 CFR Part 328) states: "Water-?lled depressions created in dry land incidental to mining or construction activity. including pits excavated for obtaining till, sand, or gravel that ?ll with water are excluded from regulation as a The wet area on the site in question is clearly a depression created by construction equipment on a portion of the property that is and was historically upland. Review ot'aerial photography from 2008, con?rms that this location was within the active site area, behind the building in what seems to be a parking area on the site. it appears the demolition of the former structures, removal of the topsoil and subsequent grading left a small depression that ponds water during the spring. This type of water-tilled depression is specifically excluded in Section 328.3 of the 2015 As a result of Dr. Roberts? recommendation, the site design was modi?ed to eliminate any development (is: any disturbance) of the wetland at the northeast corner of the site series wetland ?ags). (Reference photos attached) Sheet 3 of 14 identi?ed as "Permitting Plan in set of drawings identg'ied in this report as Item 13 shows a small wetland area as Jurisdictional Wetland?. This is signy?t?cum?hz smaller than the area shown on the National Wetland Inveruory Mapper. See Exhibit A. In under to determine whether the indicated wetland is accurate, the City of Glens Falls Planning Board should insist on Determination by USACOE. Response: The National Wetland Inventory is an inventory of wetland resources based on biological Features, and is generally categorized from a review oft-aerial photography. It does not identify regulated wetlands, but should be considered an indicator of the potential for jurisdictional (including USAGE regulade wetlands. The NW1 does not document specific wetland (if present) boundaries. Essentially, listing on the suggests that wetland conditions may be present and that any site so listed should be checked forjurisdictional wetlands. In the case of 4-7-50 Cooper Street, the site was used industrially For many years without evidence of wetlands, and subsequent to the termination oF the industrial use and the removal of buildings, the site was checked by an experienced wetland biologist. The only (likely) jurisdictional wetlands are as noted above. If ck i. Glens. Fol - 't ?eis'il? i.il.$ 9w :1 MM commonly. do it M34 community it must prepare on 11434 Annual Report. is is On the report?led March 9, 2019 page MGM 4 page 3 of} includes the following.- A. Brie?y summarize the Measurable Goal identified in the in this reporting period. Review 's for land use, incorporate stormwoter reduction into new developments. train City sto?? in green and siormwoter rednetion1 allow only knowledgeable contractors to work in the city. SWPP compliance activities recorded, approve ooneottiction resolve complaints. keep City and construction within the City in compliance with DEC regulations Brie?y .mmtnart?ze the observations that imlicoted the overall efectiveness of this Measurable Gaol. are reviewed, stormwoter reduction and green injiastrnoture incorporated in new developments, regularly inspect construction sites to ens-ore DEC compliance, address complaints imm etherely. The Erosion is: Sediment Control Portion of the "Stormwoter Pollution Prevention Plan - Item I 7 above looks suitable to perform a "Review The only pages connected to the subject site are pages 1-5. The balance of the Appendices are standard materials some of which belong in a complete The text 15-002. the {mmleted}, the NOT and the proper Construction Maintenance Inspection Checklists and Construction Stormwoier Inspection Reports. The Comtruetion d2 Maintenance Inspection Checklitts and Construction Stormwoter inspection Reports incorporated werefor Stormwoler/Wetlond Panel?s; In?ltration Trench In?ltration Basin, Sand/organic Filter, Bioretention and Open Channel. These checklist? belong in the Post-commotion stormwater management practice component. None of these method? are proposed. The plans show rain gardens. Reopense: A in accordance with NYSDEC requirements has been prepared for the proposed development, and the City of Glens Falls, as a NYSD EC M84, is reviewing the meg?: its emire by the M54 common 4 - . evoluot the eiormiv'ate? following would be required none of which is oscertoinoole?om the documents reviewed: A Stormwoter Modeling and Analysis Report that includes: Tributary Mop?v) ehowingpre-deveiopment conditionv. including woterehed?mbcotehmentzt boundaries. ?ow paths/routing and design points Tributary Mepfs) showing poet-development conditions, including boundaries, ?ow partner-outing: and design points and post? commotion stormwater management practices. Emails of etormwotei' nwdeling e. hydrology and moment analysis) for the required storm events. include mpporting calculations (model runs), methodologz. and summary table that compares pee and poet-development mno?'rotes and volumes for the dt?erent storm events. ?new: lino iv 2.3-3 iv: ?91 ?w gVHi 'l hula; snout Plum-in; limo-1: t. ?rs-a pg.) ?r Jaulx l' ill. Summon}: mole, with supporting Lotcutotfom; whtoh that each post-- cot-titrztotion stomwoter ,omertee has been ?maligned in conformance wr'tk the Sizing criteria thtz?t?attfed in the Design Moment. {dente?lcmr'oo of any dieing criteria that it not reqm?red om ec? on Me requirements included it? Part LC, oft}? 3t}- 1? 3?003 Response: A in accordance with requirements was prepared for the proposed development and the City of Glens Falls, as a M54, is reviewing the 2. Soft testing remote and locations (test pits, borings) one! in?ltration test based won the design proposed These should measure the at the (eve! of the bottom of the rain garden as detailed Landscape Details Sheet 03 in latest Plan Set (See Item 13 above). The base soil has been identy?ied in the Soil Some); (See Appendix 3) as toomy?ne send, a I?tdrotogtc Close A soil. This must be verg?ed by fo?ltrotton tests. Also the depth to groundwater shalt! be determined Without these items it Is to determine what storage is accommodated in the rain gardens, elevation ofstormmterfor various storms. AIM, no documentation is provided that the RV Overoonk Ftow Criteria or Extreme Flood Criteria is met for the site. The Green [n?astruoture Worksheet? must be completed. Response: Detailed site investigations completed for the City of Glens Falls several years ago were utiliaed for design oftho project?s stonnwator management system. 3. Because the site is as being in cm orcheotogtoa?y sensitive area (See SEAF - Item 8 above) a letter of No Eject or No Adverse E?ct should be required ?'om NY State Mirror-to Preservation Oj?oe (SHPO). Response: A sign off letter from NYS OPRI-IP was included with SEQR EAF. The Grading a6: Stormwoter Plan Sheet SW3 and b?tormwoter Details Sheet 0! in latest Plan Set See Item 13 above) shows 7 rain got-dens but the details out}; Show 3 rain gardens. The plan does show contours but the detotts do not relate to actual ground or water levels. The depicted water level to not tied to a storm of comin?'equemy. Respomtc: We do not understand the comment. A total of 8 rain gardens are provided on the design, and a detailed grading plan as well as construction details have been provided. [Note: water levels in the rain gardens will vary depending on the severity of the storm event and on the season, however the water level indicated on detail A on drawing Dl indicates the elevation of the rain garden over?ow to the City stomtsewerJ 2. Ram Gardens are an in?ltration practice. In?ltration practices are not permitted on?? sites. The October 7, 2013 letter ((932 Item t3 above) notes that the "depth of historical vmz?ed?'om 0.5 feet to at least 2 feet?. The October 28, 2015 letter {See Item 4 Above) note: that "the source of the apparent ?ll material used during site would Empty that additional ?ll was imported between 2013 and 2015. - Milk" "ni'g 33Ill? Response: Although "there are some areas of the site that were Ink-ale filled years ago, during industrial use, that ii]! has stabilized and should not disqualify the site for implementation of stormwatcr infiltration practices. lNotc: during removal of sur?oiai soils at. the time of building demolition some ol?thc lill was removed] The details or: Slieet DJ in latest Plan Set (See Item [3 above) show that the clearance ?ee: the bottom ofthe rm?ngarden of 2 feet??'om groundwater. Although a number ofborings' and test pits were done on the site, none determined the stabilized groundwater level. The October 28. 2015 letter {See Item 4 above) includes its recommendation that "(rvdditionol should at least include the drilling ofsotl boring: and installation ofgromo?voter monitoring levels- Response: Groundwater was documented during prior site investigations, and the level is likely parched and shallow during late spring; however. during remaining times ofthc year. groundwater is likely more than 5 below grade. Finally, gr the site retains the levels oj'Seml-Volutile Organic Compounds and Metals showed exceed Soil Cleanup Guidance levels. Ute site without ?ell mitigation may qunlz?i as ?Hotspotr which may not be usedfbr in?llrotitm practices. In addition, the Letter dated June 7, 20h? (See Item 5 above) recoeonends that "areas designated for vegetable gardens (if any), existing soil that may potentially be impacted should be removed to a depth of approximately two (2) to three ?eet and replaced with clean soil from on o?'ice The resident garden only shows 12 oj'loomy soil to be placed. Response: The proposed site use is not considered a NYSDEC ?hotspot?. Any new gardens at the site will be constructed of imported soil and in raised beds. If yogi have any. questions, do not hesitate to contact us at 518-792-2907 or via email at 1. Sincerely, 2019.07.17 14:04:05 -o4'oo' Jarrett, RE. Principal 533101.: SBQR (18) . Photos (18) IE drawings (H4) entitled: Cooper Street Apartments Woman Washington A5300. For Mental Health, inc. Revision dated 07? 1 7-19 Ecopies Steve Gurzler, GF City Engineer Andrea Deane; CEO, WWAMH Owen Ncitzcl. Project Architect i??laF'le?U?t 5} lit-Ml Ell" :?Jontli?ifU?S Pl! Eng ?ulah?lree Files? doc