Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-04-28Page 1 of 6 Town of Dryden Conservation Board April 28, 2014 Members Present: Robert Beck (Chairman), Gian Dodici, Rick Ryan, Jeremy Sherman, Craig Schutt, Charlie Smith, Mike Richmond, and Nancy Munkenbeck (at 7:30) Planning Board Liaison: David Weinstein Tomkins County EMC: Steve Bissen Town Board Members: Mary Ann Sumner (Supervisor) and Linda Lavine Guests: David Bravo-Cullen The Meeting was opened at 7:07 PM by Chairman Beck. 1. Review and approval of meeting minutes from March 25th. C. Schutt moved to approve the minutes, C. Smith seconded with changes as requested. All approved. 2. Citizen’s Privilege: Mr. Bravo-Cullen declined to comment at this time. 3. Additions to Agenda: 4. Reports and Updates: a. Town Board update: Supervisor Sumner did not have any material she felt relevant. b. Planning Board update: D. Weinstein shared that the Planning Board spent the last meeting preparing for the site plan review of 5 Freese Road. Concerns have surfaced regarding an incomplete storm water plan; the Board is requesting more information. The Board is also hoping to see a more detailed landscaping and lighting plan. A public hearing is scheduled for May 15th at 5PM. The site plan review is scheduled for the 22nd of May. B. Beck asked D. Weinstein to comment on SEQR segmentation in regard to the 5 Freese Road site. D. Weinstein stated that the owners of the property also own the adjacent lot and there was some question about whether that should come into play during the SEQR process. Atty. Perkins made it clear to prospective developers that the Planning Board needed to know what their plans were for the second lot. At this point the owners state they do not have any plans; currently they are using the second site as a fill site. If the owners were planning on putting in more development, then that would have become important in terms of SEQR but at this point as long as they have a SWPPP in place, the second site is not relevant to the 5 Freese Road project. Page 2 of 6 c. Tompkins County EMC: Steve Bissen said that in March the EMC took a field trip through the Ithaca Area Waste Water Treatment Plant. Bissen said they are engaged in about $8 million worth of upgrades including the addition of solar panels, replacing a hot water boiler and a truck waste building. D. Weinstein asked how much the IAWWTP has increased their capacity. S. Bissen said that right now they are able to produce 50 million cubic feet per year of produced gases. They are hoping to double that number but they haven’t set any goals yet. D. Weinstein asked where most of the waste comes from at this point. S. Bissen said it was mostly from home septic systems. Supervisor Sumner said that right now the biggest challenge is the remaining solid waste. They are working on a way to reuse the waste, possibly as fertilizer. Right now the IAWWTP is storing it. d. Agriculture Advisory Committee: Craig Schutt said the Ag Committee has finished their review of the Comprehensive Plan (Goals and Objectives). Then the Committee moved to the discussion on Open Space. It was pointed out that there is already a definition in the Zoning Law and in Subdivision Law. J. Liefer (Town Board member) has told N. Munkenbeck that a definition in a law applies only to that law and not other laws. Therefore the same term may be defined in more than one manner, it depends on the manner in which the term will be used. C. Smith commented that the two previously mentioned definitions were in relation to a law and collectively we are not looking at a law but a plan. He believes the definition the Conservation Board has offered includes the other two definitions. C. Schutt read the Ag Committee’s resolution: The Dryden Agricultural Advisory Committee has determined that they are unable to accurately determine a definition of “Open Space” without knowing the context in which the term will be used. They therefore request additional information regarding the goal or reason for the Town Board’s charge to define Open Space as given to the Conservation Board. Supervisor Sumner agreed with the Ag Committee’s resolution. D. Weinstein asked Supervisor Sumner what the context was that she was giving the Ag Committee to work with as they define “Open Space”. Supv. Sumner indicated she wants to work with the Open Space plan incorporating the ag, recreation and conservation concepts. This is a pretty narrowly limited area. Page 3 of 6 C. Schutt said the last thing the Ag Committee worked on were some proposed rewrites to the Zoning Law. Back in 2012, the zoning law was sent to Ag and Markets to be reviewed in the context of Ag and Markets laws for agriculture. They sent back a lette r with some definite concerns: definition problems, some things lacking that needed to be added and things that needed changing. The Ag Committee went through those comments and came up with a new use table for agriculture and farms because some of the things they put in there weren’t included before. J. Liefer was at that meeting and he suggested sending those changes off to Ag and Markets prior to having the Town Board review it because then we will know whether they are in compliance. Supv. Sumner asked if the Ag Committee had a copy of the Town’s response to the Ag and Markets comments. She is wondering if the Ag Committee had taken into consideration the Town’s response when they were discussing the zoning changes. C. Schutt indicated that they did not have the Town’s response. Supv. Sumner said that she and the Town Board knew about the Ag and Markets letter and Dan’s response. C. Schutt said they wanted to see what changes had to be made to get our laws to conform with state law because there were some real controversial things that didn’t add up. D. Weinstein said he hopes the Town Board will allow the Planning Board to look at the proposed changes and add their comments. e. Other Town Boards and Commissions: no reports Old Business: Open Space Plan – M. Richmond asked if it is a goal of the town to coalesce the different open space plans into one plan? To cross reference them and have everybody including zoning, planning, conservation and ag all agree on a definition of Open Space? Supr. Sumner said it would be wonderful if the Boards agreed and we could work with the possibility of each of those areas of interest having some variation in their definitions. But the Town’s goal is to take the areas that intersect between recreation, agriculture and conservation to apply to the Open Space plan. G. Dodici said that the Ag Committee has asked for context for the definition of Open Space but isn’t the Open Space plan the context for that definition? B. Beck indicated that in the black binders provided to the Board by the Planning Department contains the beginning of an Open Space plan. Page 4 of 6 N. Munkenbeck said that some of the nervousness comes from not knowing what the plan is going to be used for or how it will be applied. G. Dodici suggested that folks might be seeing it as the CEAs all over again. Supv. Sumner said the Town Board has sent page communication to each of the boards explaining the Open Space plan. She will rewrite those letters and share them with all the boards so everyone knows what the other groups are looking at. And it might be a good time to add whatever other versions of definition of Open Space N. Munkenbeck said she remembers J. Nicholson describe the Open Space plan to be used by the Planning Department. She asked if the Town Board might use it independently from how the Planning Department might use it and asked if that changes the use of the definition. Supv. Sumner said that she saw the Open Space plan as an expansion and application of the Open Space inventory that was done by the Conservation Council. They had some questions along the way such as when a person wants to donate some property to the Town, what are the guidelines for the Town accepting the property? C. Smith doesn’t think there would be any problem if the Town Board wanted to expand or elaborate on this directive. We (the boards) are all plowing new ground because there aren’t many folks around that contributed to the original Comprehensive Plan. C. Schutt said that the Ag Committee was ok with most of the Open Space definition. They only had a problem with the last couple sentences. They suggested keeping most of the definition but taking out the parts about the air above and the earth below. N. Munkenbeck mentioned the recharge areas but said they seem to be covered earlier in the definition. C. Schutt pointed out that recharge areas are not well defined yet. N. Munkenbeck suggested moving the “recharge areas” near the wetlands, lakes, etc. located earlier in the definition. C. Smith was agreedable to moving recharge areas but expressed his concern regarding cultural and historical resources. He feels they should still be part of the definition. B. Beck asked if cultural and historical resources are part of the State definition of Open Space. Yes, and since it is, B. Beck thinks it should be part of the local definition. New Business: Campbell Meadows: Gian Dodici said he has talked to Bard Prentiss about the Campbell Meadow sign. B. Prentiss mentioned the company that created the signs for Page 5 of 6 the Jim Schug Trail and G. Dodici knows another sign company (Voss Signs) in Syracuse so they can get more than one price. The big issue is whether they want a sign specific to the site or that is interpretive of rain gardens in general. He is thinking a combination of the two will be best. He has gotten in touch with Dan Segal who got him a copy of the plant list and is planning on coming out to assess how well the plants did. Supervisor Sumner said she would like some information on the benefits of rain gardens. N. Munkenbeck suggested that the sign include plant names. G. Dodici presented another issue. He is part of the Tompkins County Flood Hazard Mitigation Review Committee, and Campbell Meadows was one of the sites that they looked at last year. Mr. Bush (former Highway Supervisor) had submitted a bank stabilization plan to address the creek bank erosion. G. Dodici has proposed a strategy to address the erosion but has not heard back from Mr. Young (current Highway Supervisor). The question became whether the sign should have information pertinent to the bank stabilization or should there be a second sign. G. Dodici said he has done interpretive signs before and he is willing to work on it instead of hiring someone to do it. L. Lavine strongly encouraged the Board to have Todd Bittner come to the next meeting to get his thoughts on the trail plans. M. Richmond suggested that we shouldn’t invite Mr. Bittner if our only reason is to create a QR code. L. Lavine and R. Ryan agreed to meet with Mr. Bittner and report back to the Board. Trail and Preserve Guide: Rick Ryan R. Ryan has talked with J. Nicholson about working on this. At this point, J. Nicholson is focused on another project and not on the trail. R. Ryan started doing some research and has found that Tompkins County has a 2018 plan for their trails. One of their trails is the Ithaca-Dryden Trail and they clearly define the 5 sections of the trail, one of which is the Varna section. Supv. Sumner reminded the Board of her visit to the Game Farm in February where she met with representatives from the DEC and the farm manager. She is comfortable that they have now answered all the concerns expressed by the DEC and feels that we might be able to make the argument that having the trail will help preserve the Game Farm. L. Lavine asked about progress with the William George Agency and the section of trail on their property. Supv. Sumner said they are still working on that angle but haven’t reached an agreement or decision. Page 6 of 6 Open Space Plan: This discussion was postponed due to time limitation. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 PM. Respectfully Submitted, Erin A. Bieber Deputy Town Clerk