1

Village of Fleischmanns
Board Meeting
May 9, 2016
The Village of Fleischmanns Board of Trustees held their regular Village Board
meeting on Monday, May 9, 2016 at the Skene Memorial Library. Present
were: Mayor Donald E. Kearney, Deputy Mayor Harriet L. Grossman, Ben
Fenton, and Fred Woller. Village Trustee David Yates was absent.
WAYNE RENOLDS, COMMISSIONER
DELAWARE COUNTY DPW/BRIDGE ST. &
LAKE STREET BRIDGE UPDATE
Wayne Reynolds, Commissioner of Public Works for Delaware County gave a
PowerPoint presentation to the Village Board on the status of the two FEMA
funded bridges in the Village. Those projects include Bridge Street over the
Bush Kill and Old Halcott Road over Vly Creek.
Wayne started with the Old Halcott Road crossing. He gave some
background information. He noted that the original Project Worksheet (PW)
was not sufficient to replace the bridge to current standards. The value and
the scope of the PW were just not acceptable. The project is not just a
pedestrian bridge. It is a complicated location that is extremely difficult to
access. The County had to appeal to FEMA twice which took a significant
amount of time. The appeals were made because the responsible
engineering solution to the replacement required it to be ADA compliant and
longer. It had to be longer to prevent hydraulic constrictions that would have
been created if the structure was returned to its pre-event length of 60 feet.
ADA compliance was important because the bridge will have to be raised at
some cost to make it compliant. With the accepted appeal, the current PW
scope calls for a 90 foot span and the bridge will be ADA compliant. FEMA
granted the appeal in July of 2015 but the County did not receive the revised
PW until 11/23/15. The Countys engineering consultant is currently working
on the design of the bridge. In order to avoid any delays as a result of
cutting trees that may be bat habitat, the County cut all the trees that will be
impacted by the construction in March of this year.
He explained that the width of bridge (for the pedestrians) will be 5 feet
between the railings which meets ADA and is also the same as the pre-event
structure was. It will have larger beams than the original bridge because the
span has been increased. The beams will be under the bridge as opposed to
a through truss. That is acceptable because of the height above the
stream. There will be plenty of freeboard to pass debris. The beams will be
galvanized, not painted for low maintenance and longer durability. We have
found that galvanizing is the best way to go for our bridges. The deck will be
pressure treated timber very similar to the original. The railings will also be
pressure treated wood.
He explained that the profile of the bridge will be raised in order to be ADA
compliant. Since there is more room on the west end to build an ADA
compliant ramp and there is no room on the east end, we are raising the
bridge to be more compatible with Lake Street on the east end and that
means a higher west abutment. The raised bridge is also better for flood
debris clearance.
He then discussed the plan view of the bridge. The plan shows minimal
impact on the east end because the bridge is raised to the elevation of Lake
Street. Pedestrians will walk off the bridge and be at Lake Street. On the
west end, there will be an earthen ramp built to get up to the bridge. The
ramp will actually curve around and come back to the bridge. There will be
stairs too for those that would rather climb stairs as opposed to walking

2
around. The ramp will have level areas at the required frequency for people
in wheelchairs to rest. The ramp will be constructed over the existing Old
Halcott Road pavement but will be within the Villages right of way. The
approaches to the bridge will be paved.
He then covered the next steps. He explained that in the interest of saving
time, the engineer is designing the beams and all the structural framing for
the bridge. When that is done, the County is going to purchase the steel,
fabricate and send it away for galvanizing. That will address one of the
longest lead time items. When the substructure designs are completed, the
project plans will be submitted for all of the required DEC and Corps of
Engineer permits. Once the permits are in place, the project will be bid. The
bid documents will state that the steel superstructure is all fabricated and
will be supplied by the County. The construction window for the DEC permits
is June 15 to September 30th. Since there is very little work that is actually in
the water, construction can take place outside of that window. He stated
that the goal is to complete the bridge during this construction season so it
will be available for use in 2017.
He was asked about the abutments being on top of the rock on the east side.
He explained that the bridge will be founded on piles that are embedded in
the rock on the east end. There will also be piles supporting the west
abutment. The existing soil conditions in the area of the abutments were
evaluated by a geotechnical engineer who gave the geotechnical parameters
to the structural engineer to design the substructure units. Borings were
done at both abutment locations to determine the natural soil/rock
conditions and design parameters.
A member of the audience asked what the price of the project would be. Mr.
Reynolds responded that the PW value is $419,382.65. He went on to
explain that the project was considered a Large Project which means that
as long as the project is developed and constructed in accordance with the
approved scope of work, the County would be reimbursed the actual eligible
costs. That means if the project runs over budget, it will be covered. If the
project runs under budget, the County will only be reimbursed at actual
eligible costs, not the full value of the PW. The question was then asked how
much would be reimbursed. He explained that the reimbursement is 75%
Federal, 12.5% State and 12.5% local. However, for this event, the Governor
had committed to reimbursing the full local share so it will be fully
reimbursed.
He then moved on to Bridge Street over Bush Kill (Bridge 80). He started
with a review of the project development. On February 25, 2014 there was a
meeting with the Village Board where there were three alternatives
presented. The County requested that the Village select an alternative. The
Board asked the County to hold a meeting at the site to go over the three
alternatives with the impacted neighbors. That meeting was held on March
31, 2014. The County roughly staked out the limits of the alternatives.
These stakeouts were based on the preliminary plans developed at that
point. The Village put the County on notice with a letter dated June 23, 2014
that design activities should be suspended pending additional work on the
Local Flood Analysis. At the October 4, 2014 Village Board Meeting, the
Village Board selected Option C and a copy of the resolution was
subsequently provided to the County. With that selection, the County was
able to work with FEMA on the development of the required FEMA
Environmental Assessment. The Countys consultant provided all of the
background work for the Assessment. With that background information,
FEMA reached out to the Indian Tribes and other Federal Agencies for
comments on the proposed work. After the document met FEMAs
requirements, it was entitled DRAFT and published for public review and

3
comment on December 23, 2015. The two volume document was available
at the Village Offices, the County Office at 111 Main Street in Delhi and on
FEMAs website. The County published in the legal ads for the Catskill
Mountain News, the Deposit Courier and the Walton Reporter the fact that
the document was available in the three locations and that FEMA was
seeking public comments.
There was only one written comment. That was a concern that a property
was represented in a poor light from the standpoint of possible
contamination. The commenter provided other documentation indicating
that there was no contamination on the site. At the end of the comment
period, the additional information that was presented by the commenter was
added to appendix C.
A question from the audience wanted to know if there was still a possibility of
contamination on the property. Mr. Reynolds responded that because the
phase I environmental assessment indicated that there was a concern, the
County preceded with a phase II assessment. The phase II included actual
physical testing in the way of soil probes to determine if there is any
contamination there. The probes did not indicate any contamination so no
further action was required. At this time we have no reason to believe that
there is any contamination within the limits of what will have to be acquired
for the project. The work that we did satisfied FEMA representatives that we
had done our due diligence to ensure that they are not going to fund the
purchase of a contaminated property.
Based on the documents developed in the environmental assessment and
the public comment period, FEMA issued a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) dated January 25, 2016. In accordance with Federal rules, there is a
15 day period after the issuance of the FONSI before any work can be done
on the project. After the 15 days had passed, the County started to seek
permission to cut trees that would have to be removed prior to the project
being advanced. They did so because paragraph 6 of the FONSI indicated
In order to lessen the effect of tree removal on the Northern long-eared bat,
trees may only be removed between November 1st and March 31st. There
were trees on 3 of the affected properties. Two of the property owners
allowed the County to cut the trees but the third did not. All the trees have
been removed except for the trees on the last property. The question was
asked if this would hold up the project. He answered that it depends on how
the final design and land acquisition goes. If all the design work and
property acquisition go smoothly, the project will be delayed as a result of
not being able to cut the trees. If it does not go well, it might not actually
delay the project. He explained that at this point the structure will not be
able to be started until next year.
He then reviewed the plan. The original bridge had a span of 53 feet and the
girders were under the bridge limiting hydraulic capacity and freeboard for
passing debris. The new structure will be a through truss, steel bridge
founded on concrete abutments. The span length with be 84 feet. The
combination of the longer span and the additional vertical clearance will
provide much more hydraulic capacity and will meet the Countys current
design standards. The bridge will be 10 wide and the trusses will double as
the railing. There will be a bollard in front of the bridge on both ends to
prevent vehicles from crossing the bridge. The 10 feet is required to meet
the standards for pedestrians and bicycles. The truss will be galvanized for
reduced maintenance and it will have a pressure treated wooden deck. One
of the design goals was to have a bridge with minimal maintenance costs
and also one that had details that allowed the Village to do the maintenance
with its own forces. A question was asked about the need to cut additional
trees if the bridge was going back in the same location as the pre-existing
bridge. He replied that the bridge location is a nick point in the valley

4
created by the confluence of the Little Red Kill with the Bush Kill. It is an
alluvial fan that has forced the Bush Kill to the southern side of the valley
bottom and restricted flow. In order to gain the full value of the longer
bridge the Bush Kill floodplain has to be extended from where the Soil and
Waters EWP project left off upstream down through the proposed bridge.
He showed a couple of pictures of actual through truss pedestrian bridges
that are currently in use in the State of Vermont.
He then thanked the Village for having their sewer and water system
representative work with the Countys engineer to work out the necessary
relocations of the existing facilities. He explained that the next steps in the
development of the project will be to determine the final limits of the project
impacts. The bridge and stream limits are known now but explained that the
acquired right of way must be sufficient to allow all utility relocations to be
completed as well. Once the project limits are all known, right of way
acquisition maps will be developed. Title abstracts will be developed for all
the affected properties. A professional land surveyor will then prepare
acquisition maps. The maps will be used by a NYS certified appraiser to
appraise the value of the property to be acquired. Once the appraisals are
complete, purchase offers will be made. When the offers are accepted, the
County will proceed to closing on the property. Concurrently with the right of
way acquisition process, the design engineer will be completing the
construction plans. When the designs are complete, permits will be acquired
and the project can be bid.
The question was asked if the land could not be purchased on a voluntary
basis, what would happen. He responded that the project was being
developed at the request of the Village Board. The bridge was consistent
with master plans for the Village and was deemed necessary by the Village
Board to provide pedestrian access from the commercial area of the Village
to the Village Park. Therefore the public value of the project is well
established. DPW has attempted to keep the required right of way to a de
minims amount. If the property required to complete the project cannot be
obtained through willing sellers, the County will be forced to proceed with
eminent domain.
He said that the design and right of way acquisition will continue and the
plans will be advanced to completion. As soon as the right of way and the
plans have been completed, the project will be put out to bid. He indicated
that because of the trees, the project will not go this summer but he wants to
make sure everything is in order for the 2017 construction season.
PAUL GOSSEN, PE
NORTHLAND WATER TIE IN

Mr. Paul Gossen was present to give an update on the Northland water tie in. The
occupancy for the buildings (lodging) is defined as R2 residence. These require a
higher water demand through a mandatory sprinkler system as well as water for the
additional occupants. In addition a fire hydrant is planned within the border of the
Northland property. To satisfy this water demand, a new 6 water line needs to be
installed and tied into the 10 main across Main Street. Based on information from
James Buchan, the present 10 line has more than sufficient capacity to handle this
additional load without affecting the water supply of the residences that are served
by this main. However, in order to tie in the 6 line for the Northland, it must
cross Main Street, that means a partial shutdown of at least one side of the road. It
is estimated that this closure will last for 3 to 4 days. This construction should
occur within the next two months so that the buildings can receive a C of O.

The Northland Motel is expanding. The occupancy for the buildings lodging higher water
demand through a mandatory sprinkler system as well as water for the additional use is planned
within the border of the Northland property. To satisfy this water demand is needed to be tied
into the 10 main across Main Street. Based on information from Jim Buchan, the capacity to
handle this additional load without affecting the water supply of the residents and in order to tie
in the 6 line for the Northland, it must cross Main Street that means the road. It is estimated that
this closure will last for 3 to 4 days. This construction will enable the buildings to receive a
Certificate of Occupancy.
Vouchers/May 9, 2016
Motion made by Harriet L. Grossman to pay the following vouchers for the month of May 9,
2016: General Fund, Abstract # 16, vouchers # 284 through 30 totaling $8332.01; Water
Department Fund, Abstract # 12, Vouchers # 66 through 70, totaling $ 5440.90; Sewer
Department Fund, Abstract # 12, Vouchers # 103 through 114 totaling $34971.07 & the Tennis
Court Escrow Fund, Abstract # 1, Voucher # 1 totaling $4,478.54 Motion seconded by Fred
Woller. Harriet L. Grossman-Aye. Fred Woller-Aye. Donald E. Kearney-Aye. Ben Fenton-Aye.
David Yates-Absent. Motion so carried.
Adjourn
Motion made to adjourn by Donald E. Kearney. Motion seconded by Harriet L. Grossman.
Donald E. Kearney-Aye. Harriet L. Grossman-Aye. Ben Fenton-Aye. Fred Woller-Aye. David
Yates-Absent. Motion so carried.