Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2020-09-29 09/29/2020 Dryden Conservation Board September 29, 2020 Members Present: Gian Dodici (Chair), Bob Beck, Anne Clark, David Wilson, Peter Davies, Jeanne Grace, Nancy Munkenbeck, Craig Schutt, Tim Woods Absent: Liaisons: David Weinstein (Planning Board) Guest(s): Joe Osmeloski, Noah Siegel (True Green project manager) The meeting was called to order at 7:15 PM. Review and approval of minutes dated July 28th 2020 On motion made by B. Beck, seconded by A. Clark, minutes were unanimously approved as written. Rail Trail: B Beck- We’re having more virtual meetings with DOT regional office in Syracuse concerning a pedestrian bridge. We had another virtual meeting with Erdmann Anthony, the engineers for the bridge, this morning. It went on for two hours and they are in the mitts of planning the bridge to crossing there and it is going well. If anyone is interested in walking a little bit of cleared trail by Etna, west of 366, you can go alongside the west side of the road and walk into hundreds of feet of cleared trail. Across the road on the east side we have plans to clear the trail over to connect with the Etna nature preserve. Local people like to use the preserve and they will be able to walk the short section crossing the road and over to the west. It’ll be awhile before it opens further, but we have volunteers working on it and we are working on an agreement with the land trust for the trail into the edge/backside of the preserve. David W: The main thing is the Maifly development that the board is getting closer to approval of the preliminary. There have been a lot of objections made but many board members want to move further with this. One of the issues that have been debated is open space. An issue that is of great concern with this group. This is the latest in a whole bunch of proposals that have provided a minimum amount of open space for residents to use for recreation. The problem is that when these developments in the Varna area have been in the mixed used zone. It was thought of to get commercial apartments and residential apartment above the commercials. The problem is we didn’t exclude people coming in with totally residential proposals. As consequent we are getting the proposals with only 40% green space so there isn’t room for kids to play. The idea that Joe Wilson has come up with is if we’re going to approve these kinds of proposals maybe we should have developers pay into a find that can be used to expand a green space somewhere near by that can be used. I think the notion is that it was great if you guys think about it and talk about it and hopefully you think it’s a good idea as well. 09/29/2020 There was also a little artist studio that we approved with certain conditions. G Dodici: Would you be able to send us something about the Maifly development? I don’t know what else we could do about the greenspace other than encourage the town to add green space to part of the planning process. D Weinstein: The proposal is that the town would be encouraged to create a fund that developers would have to pay into if they have limited amounts of green space on the parcel that they are developing. That fund would then create greenspace or purchasing green space to put a park or something into. So its an idea that the board might want to discuss this o make sure there is more green space in a place like Varna it is going to densify greatly along these lines where there isn’t much green space being created in these developments. We will put on one the agenda for next month, so we have more time to talk about that next meeting. Blue Bird Development: There is a resolution. The people that own lots in the bluebird development joined together and agreed upon some restitution plan that would allow the owner who built over the conservation zone. And they could move forward with getting a mortgage. They are giving up space on both sides and part of the agreement is to not build anything within a 350-foot distance on the sides of the lot. They would have a 50-foot setback for 350 feet from Lake Road. They are also talking about doing palantings. Hopefully that will be good enough for the folks on the other side of the road. But I don’t know about that. All in all, there is an agreement that has been reached. Deer Management Plan: T Woods Is there any other property that anyone wants to recommend for sites for the hunters to set up on? If you would like a hunt on any of your own private property, I need to know that too. If you want to have a hunt, I need to get it to the planners at DEC and Cornell. G Dodici: Do they have criteria on an estimate of deer density to issue those permits? No, it’s pretty subjective so if you recommend that you want to have a hunt at a specific location because you think you have a significate amount of deer damage Joe Guernsey goes out there and looks at the site to see if it’s worth hunting on. He looks at water, food supply, etc. G Dodici: It seems odd though because of how stringent they are with depredation permits and having to document loss to just go out there and issue them without any real criteria, but I guess it’s a good thing. Joe wanted to set up a site behind the archery range, across from the Dryden Middle/High School and he has plenty of evidence of deer on the property. It’s all on site. He has it documented for DEC with his information. Same thing with the site that is in the residential area on a vacant lot in Dryden up the road from the library and the evidence is there that the shrubbery is being mauled by the deer in town. G Dodici: So they haven’t set up in the town yet right? No. 09/29/2020 G Dodici: When can this happen? As soon as we can get the information from Cornell but my biggest problem is getting in touch with the right people at Cornell. Ditch Management: G Dodici We still haven’t met with the town highway folks. But on Hunt Hill where they dug the ditches a little excessively earlier in the summer, they came back in and put in structures with rip rap and hydro seeded it right after they dug it. It didn’t take because of our dry summer but they did come back to hydro seed again. They are doing a site on Genung road, but I haven’t been over to see if they’ve implemented similar best management practices the same. I think it would still be useful to have training with the operators because if they put grate control structures in, they were not spaced right given the slopes, or put in the right location. But they are taking steps in the right direction and we appreciate that. T Woods: They just dug the ditches along Johnson road on the west side between Mix Truck and the Church. Compared to what they did on the other side of Freeville, they did a nice job. 2150 Dryden Road Solar: Noah Siegel Joe: We went through a lot to get the solar farms up and running there were many people for and against it. My main point now is that we approved these plans and to my knowledge, none of the plans shows the arrays. The evidence in the records shows that everything will be underground except for the crossing at Virgil Creek. Many of us did not like the solar farm but it held up too many court challenges and we accepted that it will move ahead with the plans that were set in place and approved by the Planning Board, Town Board, and the Court. There was a lot of talk about what the solar panels would do to the view scape, but we found ways to mitigate that. But then all these poles showed up and the poles look hideous. We had a plan in place then all of a sudden it changed. It’s not bad enough to get the poles arrays but where they are putting them is in a very sensitive environmental area. Its over Virgil creek which is a protected spawn and trout stream the riparian buffers will be affected. From my point of view, we have a plan in place, so I don’t understand why we can’t stick with that plan. If It is a matter of money that is no excuse. The company that took over the property knew exactly what the plan showed. If they can’t afford to do it the way the plans show, they should have stepped away from the project. But to just say they can’t afford it and change the plans and effect the whole Virgil Creek ecosystem to be it is a travesty. Questions: Noah Siegel What is the alternative to the poles? Interconnections would be underground all the way out to the road except for the crossing at Virgil creek would be above ground. What is the point of the crossing over Virgil creek? Along George road, Nyseg put in new poles that ties into route 38. If they’re putting a solar array across the street at Carpenters and they have to connect back to something, why are they connecting this to George road? 09/29/2020 This is going to go all the way to the substation in Peruville. The substation near Carpenters is not large enough to tale this other one. What’s going over Virgil Creek is they must transport all of the power generated on the south side and take the power across the creek to go towards George road. That’s the scheme? That they need 3 wires to do it? We had one of our members say that they do not need to do three wires. They are talking about cutting a 90-foot wide opening through the woods right up next to the creek. If they just use one wire, they wouldn’t need more than 10 feet on each side at most. It’s really important to protect Virgil Creek because it is a fragile eco system. Why don’t they need 3 wires? It was explained that with newer technology, which is a little more expensive, they can combine these 3 wires worth of electrical carrying capacity into the same bundle. If there’s a flood, and only one goes down taking one wire down. It seems it would stop things. So, what happens if the wires cross? Will there be a fire? N Seigel: No, there wouldn’t be fire. In terms of the crossing, there are three different wires because we are required to have 3 individual interconnections to the Nyseg utility grid. There is a state regulation system size that you can have for a single point of interconnection. It used to be 2 megawatts it has since increased, and you can combine systems. Originally there was five interconnections. Earlier this year we were able to consolidate two of those systems. So now we have three separate connections. That’s why we have 3 interconnections and three crossing of the creek. We did look into consolidating them to one or two poles but because they are separate circuits, the first thing we would need to do is increase the pole height so that could have at least 10 feet between the lines and still have clearance underneath. If we did consolidate those lines, we would have poles as high as 45 feet. It was done to minimize width and the visual impacts. What kind of guarantee do you have that you aren’t going to have to go in there with personnel and individually cut the material that exceeds the allowable height under those wires and not cut the remaining brush throughout the future use? We are not placing any equipment in that area, so we do not need frequent access to those midspan poles between the system itself on the south side of Virgil Creek and the actual electrical equipment on the north side. We placed the poles 59 and 62 feet away from the stream bank so were keeping as much distance as we can while not exceeding the distance that were allowed between the poles for the overhead wires. It is important that we are not bringing in bull dozers that is close to a stream or wet land. We keep close tabs on our contractor, and we have a storm water pollution prevention plan that outline this very clearly. We also have a swift inspector on site every week if not more. So you will have to bulldoze to get within the 50 foot site to put the pole up? Yes but we will not be de-stumping at all 20 years from now, what do you do with trees growing underneath the wires? Would you hire a contractor to clear it out? 09/29/2020 No. No one will be doing any clearing. Every few years we will get in there and make sure the wires still have adequate clearance. There is minimal maintenance every few years to make sure it is still a safe site. Why are you doing an above ground connection instead of underground that was originally approved? The original site plan did show the over across Virgil creek than 5 points of interconnections at the northeast corner of the private property right along the public right of way in front of the Rail Trail. The 5 interconnections that are shown there is a schematic of the 5 interconnections that need to interconnect to the existing utility grid. We are operating in the Nyseg utility and they have their own safely and reliability standards and they have their own equipment specifications. They can work with us sometimes but in this case the utility doesn’t require it or even provide it as an option. We had Jason and Ray join a phone call so they could hear Nyseg directly say this. Even before that call, we had our own communication with utility personnel, and it comes down to the safety and reliability standards that they have in house. They are serving a very wide territory by providing electricity to municipal buildings and homes. They cannot allow a unique installation somewhere that’s going to impact their ability to service their equipment. What they would do in this situation is have the actual connections on the private property rather than along the public right of way. In that initial site plan, you can see the schematic alongside the road which that mean that whatever the utility would require that would have to tap along the existing utility line. In this case they are agreeing to tap on the private property recessed from the road outside of the right of way. There is a single line that goes at an angle through the trees to the public right away along George road. What is actually happening on the private property is the three interconnection lines are interconnecting to a single pole. Tapping the pole, then tapping into the existing electric grid. Nyseg mandates above ground wires from where the solar panels are? In this case we are going over Virgil creek. There are ways go underneath the creek. It has always been contemplated that the crossing would be above ground so that is what we’ve designed. This is the most conservative approach to minimizing impact sub service and following the original schematic. We’ve designed it to cross the creek and we are pushing the limits in terms of having that 100 feet as tight as it can be. There is 30 feet between each pole line and 20 feet on each side. We looked at it after Craig and some other folks were on site and they asked how tight it can really get and we were able to shave off 15-25 feet it terms of the width of the clearing. Why wasn’t the company made aware of what Nysegs requirements were? In terms of sub surface when we’re talking about pole mounted or not, it’s really pad mounted equipment so there is a different approach. In terms of what was shown in 2017 we acquired the project from the original developers from Sun and ant speak to what was going through the minds but what I can speak it is the utility provide a layout at some point of the process. During this time, we were able to consolidate down from five systems to the three systems. If this were installed in 2017, I’m not sure it would look like it would today. There has been a lot more solar installed utilities regulations and safety standards. C Schutt: I talked to the project manager and asked him if it could be done underground and he said absolutely. It just comes down to the cost. 09/29/2020 J Osmeloski: If Bharath told Shirley Price who is right across from where the arrays are going to go. in a town board meeting that the only above ground wire will be above Virgil creek. Everything else would be underground. Is this a lie? I cannot answer that question. So Nyseg cannot do it underground? Either Bharath lied to us or you’re just changing things. No response. We have him saying that any control of vegetation under wires will not be done with mechanized equipment. Does the Planning Board have the ability to mandate how a property is maintained going forward? Yes, we can put conditions on it. D Weinstein: The planning board recommended that all mechanism to get these wires underground is the number one choice. Until that gets debunked that’s the still the number one choice. There’s another issue; in the event that can’t be put below ground there is still the issue about having these poles potentially making it difficult for farm machinery to use that field. It is good farmland and we want to be sure that it can be used as farmland. Noah said there is 30 feet between the poles and the edge of the forest but where the poles are being placed, if it is above ground, is still going to be problematic for farm machinery to use it. If it is underground can you plow over the wires? Yes, it is far enough underground. The Boards approved the original plan years ago but not it is a completely new project. The concern is that is far more detrimental to the environment along Virgil creek flood plain. If it does get to the point where it is 3 poles, we a going to encourage you to do your best management practice under that and minimize the use of machinery. You already said that you don’t plan on bulldozing and de-stumping which is good but I think trying to resolve this, what your approved to do initially vs what you’re going to do now which is going to have much more of an impact on the environment as well as a visual impact. C Schutt: We don’t even know what trees or vegetation is like back there because we have given no access to the south side. The project manager said there was white oak along the creek, and it seems like a crime to cut mature oaks out of there. J Osmeloski: Since that is in the conservation district by law in the town of Dryden, any tree greater than 12 inches in diameter, has to be protected. Do we know how many acres are going to be cleared? .85 acres J Osmeloski: My wife and I have watched the riparian buffer on willow glen creek get ruined. After the trees were cut, they went in and removed the roots and stump. I don’t trust this group to be a good manager of the environment. Is there anything we can get in writing from Nyseg saying they can’t do it any other way? If we can get that there’s no point in continuing this debate. 09/29/2020 Joe Wilson got an email stating that they don’t have the equipment to do it. This connection with Nyseg is happening at George road within private property right of way which is within 50 feet of George road. Your company is getting electricity from the solar panels to that connection with Nyseg. So what difference does it make to Nyseg how you get the electricity from the solar panels to George road? It’s not just one pole that connects our poles to the grid. There is protective devise and meters on each system. They have their own safety and reliably standards for each system. If we were able to combine all of the circuits like folks were talking about earlier, then we could combine all of them on the south side of Virgil creek but we’re not allowed to because these are three independent systems that have already reached the maximum system size at the state level. The email that Craig was referring to is an email that Nyseg sent to myself to share with the town after a call with the utility that Ray Burger and Jason Leifer joined months ago. That email is publicly available. That is one of the first three resources that has been on the town website. The utility did state that they don’t carry that kind of equipment but there is more detail on why that don’t. It’s not as simple as writing a check. They have their lineman to protect, the customers, and the community. The comments about farm equipment, I understand that this is concerning maintaining the field that’s why it is shifted to south east corner. The main entrance is about 20 feet, with the guardrails it is 17 feet. We do have a 30-foot access path, so I don’t completely see why this is concerning the field is not more limited in access that what it has been. I think we have a design that is preserving 5.6 acres that can be farmed and .7 acres that the utility area will take but we still have over 5.5 acres here that can be accessed and farmed. We set up a pervious road that the DEC has allowed on solar sites that we can use so we’re not creating any new impervious surfaces. We will accommodate to anyone that needs to use this site. We will be sure to have open communicate with the farmers. We have taken a comprehensive approach here and we are listening to questions and concerns. We should express what we’re thinking in writing. How does one get more leverage over Nyseg? It could be very beneficial to find leverage somehow to ensure that Nyseg gets the equipment. I think we should pull the permit because it is not meeting the original requirements. J Osmeloski: My leverage would be going forward, change the solar law that all interconnections need to be underground so that this never happens again. Resolution: “DRAFT” Resolution and recommendations to the Town Board of the Town of Dryden from the Conservation Board on the proposed SUP for the interconnections for the 2150 Dryden Road Solar Project WHEREAS: The proposed project is in the sensitive area of Virgil Creek (a DEC protected trout stream) and in the associated 100 year flood plain, and 09/29/2020 WHEREAS: The developer has provided documentation of NYS DEC approval for clear cutting areas along Virgil Creek and has provided an erosion or sediment control plan for the same area, assuring that the pole installation will meet DEC requirements including no removal of stumps including in the riparian buffer and WHEREAS: The Planning Board has reviewed the above referenced project with public input, and WHEREAS: The Planning Board has made seven specific recommendations to the Town Board, and WHEREAS: The Conservation Board agrees with those seven recommendations, putting special weight on number one, i.e.. “The Planning Board recommends the Town Board push back on the developer and require the NYSEG interconnect be accomplished with pad mounted equipment and underground lines”. Therefore be it resolved: The Conservation Board supports the seven recommendations made to the Town Board from the Planning Board and puts strong emphasis on the first point. Charging Station: The town added a charging station which I thought was very nice, but they charge double than what every other charging station in the county charge. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:15PM. Respectfully submitted, Emily Banwell Deputy Town Clerk PEPE PE PE PE PEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPE P E PE PE PEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPE50'SETBACKX X X X R/WR/WR/WR/W R/W R/WPLPLPLPLPLPLPLR/W R/W R/W R/W R/W R/W R/W R/W R/W R/W R/W R/W R/W R/WExExExExExExExExExEx PL PL PL PLPLPLPL PL PL PL PL PL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PLPL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLR/W R/W R/W R/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WR/WSSxSSxPLPL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PL PL PL PL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PL PL PL 30' 62' 59'100'23' 20 'DRAWING NAME:It is a violation of New York Education LawArticle 145 Sec.7209, for any person, unlessacting under the direction of a licensed architect,professional engineer, or land surveyor, to alteran item in any way. If an item bearing the seal ofan architect, engineer, or land surveyor isaltered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal andnotation "altered by" followed by their signatureand date of such alteration, and a specificdescription of the alteration.DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:2150 DRYDEN ROADPV PROJECTDRYDEN, NY 13068DRYDEN-TOMPKINSSOLAR II, LLC2190562SEPTEMBER 22, 2020TAPDW© 2020 LaBella AssociatesREVISIONSNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:Date & Time: 9/24/2020 12:39 PM By: Petranchuk, TimPath: I:\CS Energy Devco LLC\2201588 - 2150 Dryden Rd Solar Array\Drawings\Civil\Resources\X-Utility 2150.dwg 300 State Street, Suite 201Rochester, NY 14614585-454-6110labellapc.com1PROPOSED SITE PLANSCALE: 1" = 100'NOVERHEAD ELECTRICELEC. POLE (TYP.)GEORGE ROADCLEARING LIMITSEXHIBIT NO. 1PROPOSED SITE PLANCUSTOMERPOLESNYSEGPOLES35' HIGH43' HIGHGUY-WIRE (TYP.)