HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-01-31Dryden Conservation Board
January 31, 2017
Page 1 of 5
Dryden Conservation Board
January 31, 2017
Members Present: Peter Davies (excused), Bob Beck (acting chair), Charlie Smith,
Craig Schutt, Milo Richmond, Gian Dodici, Joe Osmeloski, Nancy Munkenbeck and
Steve Bissen
Liaisons: David Weinstein (Planning Board) and Jason Leifer (Town Board)
Guests: Jeanne Grace, City Forester, Town of Ithaca
Review and approval of minutes dated December 27, 2016:
C. Schutt moved to approve the minutes with spelling changes and C. Smith seconded
the motion. The minutes were unanimously approved.
New and Continuing business:
- Conservation Board membership and alternate members:
- C. Smith has gathered the two local laws and the Rules and Procedures that form
and direct the Board
- There are no provisions for alternate members but the Board has had an alternate
member for over a year now.
- C. Smith has created “A Local Law to amend Section 3 of Local Law No.4 of the
year 2000, as amended by Local Law 1 of the year 2004, to Provide for the Ap-
pointment of Two Alternate Members of the Conservation Board.” See attached.
- the alternate members will be present the same as the regular members and
meet the same attendance requirements
- By having alternates that are in attendance the same as regular members, the
business of the Conservation Board should be able to continue despite the pos-
sibility of absent regular members.
- B. Beck suggested adding 1st and 2nd alternates to determine which alternate
should vote if required.
J. Leifer shared that he has filed the easement documents for the Rail to Trail project.
- Bridge Grant: D. Weinstein
- The Town has received a grant of 3.8 million to rehab/replace two town bridges.
One of the bridges is on George Road and one is on Freese Road. The Conserva-
tion Board passed a resolution in 2015 requesting the bridge remain a single lane
bridge.
- D. Weinstein is concerned that J. Leifer is interested in replacing the bridge with a
two lane bridge.
- C. Smith indicated that the American Rubyspot (a damselfly species) has been
spotted up-stream from the bridge.
- D. Weinstein indicated he doesn’t believe this project will have much public input
because it is not required. J. Leifer, as the Town Supervisor, will have input with
the County regarding the final design.
L. Lavine arrived at the meeting at 7:35PM to indicate that she would not be attending
this month but she will be attending in the future.
C. Smith attended a Preserve Management Committee meeting of the Finger Lakes
Land Trust and received a copy of a pamphlet regarding future conservation. The
Dryden Conservation Board
January 31, 2017
Page 2 of 5
pamphlet is called “Lakes, Farms and Forests Forever” and can be found at
http://www.fllt.org/lakes-farms-and-forests-forever/
- Conservation Easements: D. Weinstein
- The Planning Board has reviewed two applications for Conservation Subdivisions.
- One is on Ellis Hollow Road and the other is on the former RPM property (Route
13 and George Road)
- The problem is that there is no organization locally that will take on a small con-
servation easement such as the one on Ellis Hollow.
- D. Weinstein is hoping that the Town of Dryden may be able to accept and man-
age the easements. He has written a resolution encouraging the Town Board to
create a vehicle for accepting conservation easements.
- Members pointed out that accepting the easements will be a time commitment but
the Town already has a responsibility to monitor agricultural easements.
- C. Smith pointed out that there are federal and state guidelines that direct the
maintenance of the property but D. Weinstein indicated that the town can deter-
mine the level of monitoring. He also cautioned the Board about over-blowing the
amount of time that will go into monitoring the easements. We already monitor
stormwater facilities, etc and there are people on staff that are ready to do the
monitoring. The expense won’t be that great for the town.
- G. Dodici added that the cost would probably be in the case of a violation of the
easement. Simply monitoring the project shouldn’t be costly.
- C. Smith suggested adding a piece to the NRCP to address conservation ease-
ments.
- D. Weinstein has prepared a resolution which was not voted on at this meeting. It
is attached.
G. Dodici left the meeting at 8PM.
- Planning Board: D. Weinstein
- See attached report.
- Ag Committee: C. Schutt
- See attached report.
- EMC Report: S. Bissen
- See attached report.
- Modern technology permits the UNA designations to be more clearly identified,
thus the new maps.
- Cornell University has expressed their disagreement with UNA 106 however, they
have not given any reason for their not wanting that area labeled as a UNA.
- Fit Trail: E. Bieber
- The Recreation Department has a grant but still needs to raise about half of the
funds needed to purchase the equipment. The Highway Department will install
the stations. Donations from the various board members and the Town Hall staff
has been suggested by E. Bieber.
NRCP:
- The plan needs more maps, figures, pictures, etc.
- P. Davies is still looking for more reference information.
Dryden Conservation Board
January 31, 2017
Page 3 of 5
- N. Munkenbeck asked if the Board is going to review the sections as a group or is
the review the comments that are being emailed back and forth.
- C. Smith indicated that a group line by line edit is not necessary since the sections
have all been emailed and comments returned; everyone has had a chance to review
the documents and add their input.
- B. Beck suggested moving the preserves and trails to the recreation section and
leave the UNA information as a stand-alone section and include the scenic resources
and view sheds.
- Last month the question was raised as to whether the NRCP should have a section
on energy. The Board agreed and D. Weinstein indicated he would contact a former
Town employee (Nick Goldsmith) who had worked on energy use/production in Dry-
den.
- C. Smith pointed to the Ag section written by C. Schutt and the goals that he listed.
C. Smith feels that is a good method and encouraged other members to replicate
that method. He also encouraged the other Board members to review all of the doc-
uments and provide feed-back.
- D. Weinstein recommended the Board members create a list of information that they
question and then conduct a meeting to address those issues – it would not be a
line by line discussion but rather a meeting of the minds on the important infor-
mation.
- C. Smith indicated that he would like to see some feedback from the other volunteer
boards’ (ie – the Ag Committee) liaisons to ensure that the NRCP meshes with the
other Town plans that are being constructed.
- The Board members really need to provide more references for the Plan.
The Board diverted from their plan discussion to talk about the potential future solar
projects that are hoping to locate in Dryden. The Conservation Board expressed their
desire to review the Solar Law before a public hearing/approval of the law.
- B. Beck complimented C. Smith on his writing of the executive summary.
- D. Weinstein suggested the Board determine the procedure to finishing up the plan.
A timeline on getting comments, set a final meeting to finish discussion and then
pass a resolution sending the plan to the Town Board.
- The recommendation is to ensure comments on the entire document are sent to P.
Davies within two (2)weeks.
- C. Schutt asked if the Board was planning on holding their own public hearing sep-
arate from the public hearing that the Town Board will hold before passing the law.
- Perhaps a public information session instead of a “hearing”?
- C. Smith suggested the NRCP be circulated to the other committees before sending
it to the Town Board.
- The Board finished the discussion by noting the sources that needed to be men-
tioned in the plan including Ancram’s plan.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9PM.
Respectfully Submitted,
Erin A. Bieber
Dryden Conservation Board
January 31, 2017
Page 4 of 5
Deputy Town Clerk
Attachment #1
Local Law of 2016
Title: A Local Law to amend Section 3 of Local Law No.4 of the year 2000, as amended by Lo-
cal Law 1 of the year 2004, to Provide for the Appointment of Two Alternate Members of the Conserva-
tion Board.
Section 1. HISTORY. Local Law No. 4 of the year 2000 adopted by the Town Board of the
Town of Dryden created the Town of Dryden Conservation Advisory Council (CAC) with 9 voting mem-
bers. The Town Board has discussed the benefits of appointing alternate members to the Conservation
Board who can sit as voting members when a regular member is absent or unable to vote due to a conflict
of interest. The Town Board wishes to amend Local Law No. 4 of the year 2000, as further amended by
Local Law 1 of the year 2004, to provide for the appointment of two alternate members to the Conserva-
tion Board.
Section 2. Amend Section 3 of Local Law No. 4 of the year 2000, as amended by Local Law 1 of
the year 2004, to read as follows:
“Section 3. MEMBERSHIP: The CAC shall consist of nine (9) full members, appointed by the
Town Board, who shall serve for terms of three (3) years (four of the initial members shall be appointed
for two years and five of the initial members shall be appointed for three years). The Board may appoint
first and second alternate members to serve for terms of one year or part thereof ending on December 31st
of the year of appointment. One full member shall be the Town representative to the Tompkins County
Environmental Management Council. Any person residing within the Town of Dryden who is interested
in the improvement and preservation of environmental quality shall be eligible for appointment. Each
member shall be entitled to one vote. Alternate members shall be entitled to vote when they are sitting as
a member due to a member’s absence or recusal due to a conflict of interest. Alternate members are ex-
pected to follow the same attendance requirements at meeting as are full members. (Conservation Board
Rules and Procedures, Section 3G)”
Attachment #2
Suggestion for Resolution to Recommend that the Town of Dryden Accept and Hold Conserva-
tion Easements
Whereas there are many lands in Dryden that require protection for the benefit of the citizens of
Dryden,
Whereas among these benefits are the protection of water quality, wetlands, plant and animal
populations, and scenic beauty, and
Whereas following the creation of an option for Conservation Subdivisions in the revised Town
of Dryden Zoning and Subdivision laws a number of proposals are coming forward requesting
this type of subdivision, which include set-asides of a portion of the land for conservation,
Dryden Conservation Board
January 31, 2017
Page 5 of 5
Be it therefore resolved that the Conservation Board of the Town of Dryden recommend to the
Town Board that it implement a procedure for accepting and holding conservation easements,
should they be deemed worthy for this status by the Town Board following recommendation
from the Conservation Board.
Attachment #3
Report on the Town of Dryden Planning Board Meetings, Wednesday Jan 17th and Thursday, Jan-
uary 26, 2017 David Weinstein
1. The Planning Board finalized the language that it recommended to the Town Board for the
new law governing solar electricity installations.
2. The Planning Board conducted a Sketch Plan review for a 5-lot Conservation Subdivision lo-
cated at 1624 Ellis Hollow Road: proposed subdivision of a 17-acre parcel into four 1&1/4 acre
parcels with a 12-acre conservation area. This conservation area, most of which is a part of the
Ellis Hollow wetland, will hold a conservation easement restricting its future use to infrequent
wood management if the owner can find an organization willing to accept the easement.
3. The Planning Board conducted a Sketch Plan review for a 7-lot Conservation Subdivision lo-
cated at 430 Lake Road: proposed subdivision of a 57-acre parcel into 7 parcels. The developer
agreed to create a 200 foot buffer from the border of the Dryden Lake state holding that would
restrict any structural construction in the area, including any docks, and a 300 foot buffer from
Lake Road that would prevent any structures in the zone to preserve the views from Lake Road.
4. Sketch Plan review for a 6-lot subdivision located at 2150 Dryden Road: proposed subdivi-
sion of a 157-acre parcel into 6 lots to be used for community solar plant development. This solar
installation would reside in the area next to the Dryden Cemetery previously used by the tree
farm, and would extend out to George Road. The plan avoids any construction in the wetlands
on the site, and the developers agreed to avoid the floodplain of Virgil Creek.
5. The board formed a committee to finalize the Infrastructure Local Law, governing the rules
for developing or repairing infrastructure within the town road right-of-ways. A draft of this law
had been previously prepared.