HomeMy WebLinkAboutCB 2023-09-26CB 2023-09-26
Approved
Page 1 of 6
CONSERVATION BOARD
September 26, 2023
Hybrid
Approved October 24, 2023
Present: Gian Dodici (chair), Bob Beck, Steve Bissen, Anne Clark, Jeanne Grace, Kate
McKee (alternate), Andrew Miller, Nancy Munkenbeck, Craig Schutt
Absent: Tim Woods
Liaisons: *Spring Buck (Town Board)
Staff: Loren Sparling (Deputy Town Clerk)
“*” denotes attendance via Zoom
The meeting was called to order at 7.03 p.m.
G Dodici thanked J Grace for chairing July’s meeting in his absence.
Review and Approval of Minutes from July 25, 2023
G Dodici sought clarification with S Buck about the “DEC” collaboration at the “Monkey
Run” bridge. After a brief dialogue, G Dodici stated that this be changed to a US Fish and
Wildlife Service collaboration at the Pinckney Road bridge.
On motion made by A Clark, seconded by A Miller, the minutes of July 25, 2023, were
unanimously approved as written, with S Bissen and G Dodici abstaining due to their absence
on that day.
Announcements
G Dodici has a report from Tompkins County Soil and Water that he intends to email to
the Board, alongside a list of projects that they’ve worked on with the Town.
New Business: 2023 NYSACC Conference Recap (S Bissen)
Two awards were presented to individuals in the Town. Kate Lee and Mckenna Crocker,
youth participants and voting members of Dryden’s Climate Smart Communities Task Force,
were each the recipient of the Joy Squires Student Recognition Award. Bob Beck, Conservation
Board member and chair of the Rail Trail Task Force, was recognized with the Margery Sachs
Environmental Leadership Award. A third award, the Environmental Project Award, was jointly
shared by both Dryden’s Climate Smart Communities Task Force and the Dryden High School
Sustainability Club.
B Beck had been unable to attend the awards ceremony that night; S Bissen accepted
the award on his behalf. Just prior to tonight’s meeting, S Bissen presented B Beck with his
award. B Beck appreciated the recognition but added that all of the projects that he has been
involved with were successful on account of teamwork. It is very satisfying to work with
dedicated team members willing to stick with sometimes-challenging projects and see them
through to success. Those people deserve a major amount of credit as well. S Bissen qualified
this by saying that these projects do indeed take a good team, but they also need a great
leader. Congratulations were conveyed by the Board.
The Board then recognized Mckenna Crocker and Kate Lee for their hard work with
Dryden High School’s Sustainability Club, as well as the Club’s collaboration with the Town of
Dryden.
CB 2023-09-26
Approved
Page 2 of 6
A Clark had attended various sessions on solar and alternative energy, then passed
around a list of talks and their abstracts. They were very short talks that provided fun
overviews. She learned about various groups and people who were active and actually out there
getting things done.
N Munkenbeck was intrigued by Anna Kelles’ talk on the spreading of biosolids on
farmland. She advocated that the Town pass something that does not allow biosolids to be put
on farmland in Dryden. The biosolids are basically concentrated metals and plastics from
wastewater treatment. The state of Maine has apparently now outlawed this, in part because a
number of farms are no longer able to produce food. The plant growth there contains too much
toxin to actually be allowed into the food supply.
S Buck stated that she has been involved in discussions with Cornell faculty around
the challenges of how to handle food waste. There is debate over which option is best:
composting, or utilizing biosolids to generate energy (as is employed at the Ithaca Area
Wastewater Treatment Plant). She has heard solid feedback from faculty that both are valid
options, and wondered if only certain types of biosolids were considered bad or if this pertained
to all biosolids.
N Munkenbeck responded that only certain types are bad, those from sewage sludge.
Waste plants, such as Seneca Meadow, collect the leachate from the sludge, then sends it to
various sewage treatment plants, which can’t take any PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl
substances) out. It gets concentrated; after dispersal on farmland, the PFAS go through the soil
and plants take it up. The only way to clean up land like that is to plant plants, harvest them,
burn them down, and then sequester the remains somewhere.
S Buck has heard that the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Plant (IAWWTF) has a
very specific program around capturing food waste. It is not harmful material, but it does not
replenish the soil like compost does. Cornell ceased using compostable plastic a number of
years ago because people did not take the time to separate discarded food from compostable
cutlery, but also because Tompkins County’s composting program could not handle it either.
She wants to see if the IAWWTF ends up with PFAS-infused biosolids as well. S Bissen
wondered if Tompkins County keeps biosolids derived from human waste separate from
biosolids derived from compost and food waste.
To get energy out of the biosolid, N Munkenbeck continued, it will in essence need to be
fermented so that methane is produced. The methane that is captured will be burned, and the
heat energy will be used to produce electric energy. She knows of a cow farm that uses the
collected methane to run its dairy barn and uses any residual solids to make cow pots in which
to start seedling plants. They know that they do not have extra sources of material (human
waste, medical waste) going into their biosolids.
G Dodici then distributed a link to the DEC’s webpage on Biosolids Management
(dec.ny.gov/chemical/97463.html) but curtailed the discussion as this was not on the agenda
for tonight’s meeting. If there was interest among members, this could certainly be added to a
future agenda.
Sensing the Board’s concern over PFAS, S Bissen stated that when Anna Kelles finally
brings these bills to the floor of the NYS Assembly, the Board could support them. N
Munkenbeck reiterated that Kelles was appalled that NYS put out legislation promoting the
spreading of biosolids on farmland.
A Clark resumed the NYSACC Conference recap by stating that there was much
discussion about solar - how to integrate it, whether it was efficient in terms of land use, how
much land it would really take. One can do a lot with solar without huge amounts of land
CB 2023-09-26
Approved
Page 3 of 6
being devoted to it. There were also the usual discussions about what one could do under solar
panels, e.g., pollinator habitats, sheep, etc. Around here, solar has thus far been situated only
on marginal land, in terms of agricultural production.
Of the conference in general, S Bissen said that it was well-run and well-attended, and
covered a wide array of topics.
At this point, J Grace informed the Board that she had hybrid-bred chestnut trees
(Chinese chestnut-American chestnut crosses) to distribute to members. Some of these will be
resistant, some of them will not.
G Dodici wondered where along the Rail Trail the Board had decided to plant them. B
Beck stated that the von Engeln Preserve was still a possibility, though he was uncertain of
how to tube the trees. N Munkenbeck advised that if they are planted on the Trail, they should
be planted in clusters of three because they usually do not self-pollinate.
Updates: Rail Trail Task Force (B Beck)
B Beck showed the Board a proof of the new quarter-mile markers (made out of
DIBOND aluminum composite) that will line the Rail Trail. He reported that this comes after
the first batch of 130+ markers contained an error and had to be replaced. Last week, DPW
installed posts every quarter-mile along the Trail; each post stood 3 ft in the ground and 3 ft
above. B Beck plans to fasten the markers to these posts beginning tomorrow.
He explained that the Rail Trail Task Force decided some time ago to have two zero mile
markers. The far end of the Jim Schug Trail on E Lake Rd marks one zero point of the Trail;
from here, markers will be placed for roughly seven miles through Dryden Village to Freeville.
Game Farm Rd marks the other zero point of the Trail; markers will be placed for roughly a
mile-and-a-half to the F. H. Fox Bridge. Eventually, signs will be on both sides of the Trail;
signs on the right will increase every quarter-mile, whereas signs on the left will decrease every
quarter-mile.
A Miller observed that the Town did a good job of cleaning up the tornado damage on
the Jim Schug Trail, from Purvis Rd to E Lake Rd.
Updates: Agricultural Advisory Committee (C Schutt)
C Schutt reported that last month and earlier this month, the Agricultural Advisory
Committee reviewed the Ag Plan in order to correlate Ag and Markets definitions listed there
with current Zoning Law definitions. They came up with definitions for what they felt should be
changed in the Zoning Law.
Updates: EMC (S Bissen)
S Bissen reported that the EMC did not meet in August and the NYSACC Conference
occurred in September.
Updates: Town Board (S Buck)
S Buck reported that the Town Board passed a resolution to reappropriate $10,000 in
funds to hire an engineer to delineate the wetlands. There is concern that the DEC will take a
long time to do it themselves.
New Business: Planning Board Complaint against the Planning Department (C Schutt)
CB 2023-09-26
Approved
Page 4 of 6
C Schutt was contacted by a Planning Board member, who had expressed general
Board frustration with the Planning Department. They have been asking for updates and
actions, and have not been getting either. They are now at the point of potentially filing a
written complaint against the Department. This member was curious to see if the Conservation
Board was interested in joining in on one of the complaints, in which a cease-and-desist had
been ordered for one location near the outlet of Dryden Lake (at the intersection of West Lake
Rd and Chaffee Rd), and yet a whole bunch of fill was brought in this past summer by the State
from its ditch cleaning efforts on Rte 38. The owner had to have given the State permission for
the fill to be dumped on his property; the State would not have just gone in and started
dumping. Then the owner pushes this fill more and more towards (and into) the creek. (A Miller
stated that he had witnessed this firsthand while biking past the site this summer; he saw fill
being dumped and pushed as described by C Schutt.)
The property owner was told by the Town not to have any more fill deposited on his
property. The property owner should not have asked the State DOT to put fill on his property.
Yet once the fill was there, the property owner levelled it with a bulldozer and the only way for
the fill to go was down the hill into the outlet flow. The embankment is now massive, at roughly
12-15 feet.
The issue is really that the Planning Department is not enforcing the rules on the
books. At the very least, there is a SWPPP (Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan) violation, as
the owner is putting all that fill in there without silt fences or bank stabilization.
There is no floodplain associated with the stream anymore, as the owner filled it in. The
owner continues to push fill towards the creek.
G Dodici tied this in with past concerns about the Planning Department being
understaffed and was optimistic that situations such as this would be rectified with the hiring
of the new Planner. Sometimes it takes a new person some time to get up to speed.
N Munkenbeck inquired what the penalties were for a SWPPP violation and how they
would be applied. C Schutt answered that the Stormwater Law lists penalties and fines. To
collect these fines, the Town would have to take the owner to court, or the fines would be
simply added to the owner’s taxes.
B Beck wondered if there had been any cases in recent years of the Town actually
enforcing the existing rules, if any landowners had been taken to task, so that there was a
clear understanding that this is not acceptable and everybody should take notice.
C Schutt brought up the other fill site at issue with the Planning Board, near Elemental
Pet Vets. Bellisario is storing things at that location that he is not supposed to store there. The
Town made it very clear that he couldn’t store things there. But if there’s no enforcement, why
would he stop doing it after receiving a cease-and-desist letter?
It is the understanding of C Schutt that once the Planning Board files its complaint, the
Town is required by State law to look into or do something about the violation. So the Planning
Board is asking the Conservation Board if it would be interested in joining forces; or the Board
can just wait and see what comes of the Planning Board complaint regarding the Bellisario
property, which he thinks they will undertake first. There were mixed opinions among Planning
Board members about how to proceed; some wanted to issue both complaints simultaneously.
G Dodici offered that before he feels comfortable endorsing anything like this, he would
like to know what exactly the violation is. They are not supposed to be filling in floodplains, but
if the Town talked with DEC and they don’t have a problem with it, that if they are not violating
CB 2023-09-26
Approved
Page 5 of 6
any State law, he is unsure if it would be a violation of the Town’s Stormwater Law. Other
members rebutted that it certainly was a violation of the Town’s Stormwater Law.
G Dodici had hoped that someone from the Planning Department would come to a
Board meeting to lay out what laws were being broken and what possible enforcement actions
could result.
C Schutt advised that if the Town is not going to enforce its own Stormwater Law, they
should just get rid of it. What is the point of having it?
B Beck reasoned that if Planning Department staff are hired by the Town Board, the
Town Board needs to have firm rules about tough actions. They need to provide guidance in
cases where enforcement hasn’t been done for a long time. But how do you change the culture?
S Buck will be taking this back to the Town Board and ensure that they are aware of what is
going on, so that they can talk to the Planning Department about how to handle it.
N Munkenbeck has heard of instances where a Town Board has required that illegal fill
be removed. Could our Town Board require the owner to remove the fill himself, or could the
Town itself remove it and charge the owner the cost of removal? This is a possible action that
could be taken that does not deal with fining.
G Dodici summarized that the majority of people follow the intent of the law and do the
right thing. The problem is the outliers, landowners who are willfully breaking Town law. Even
when told to stop, they will continue anyway because there are no repercussions. How do we
give the Planning Department some teeth to enforce the laws?
Old Business: Discuss Fate of Wetlands on Town-Owned Property in the Village of Dryden
S Buck related that the Town is reappropriating money for the wetland delineation.
There is also interest in establishing a task force comprised of people from different Town
committees so as to collaboratively determine how the space should be used, to approach
usage from the point of view of what is right and best for the community. We should not be
talking about land use in silos. She hopes that Conservation Board members will be a part of
this group.
B Beck was under the impression that the wetland delineation only includes Town land
but knows that the wetland occupies Village land as well. To think about what is best for the
whole space, we should know the extent of the entire wetland. S Buck will investigate the scope
of the delineation.
G Dodici proposed that another conversation that the Town Board should have is how
the Town Board is going to deal with wetlands as a whole (not just at the site behind Town
Hall). Most of us here would agree that development should not occur on wetlands. As a Town
Board, you need to decide whether you should be building on unregulated or regulated
wetlands. He recommended that the Town establish a policy of not developing anything on
wetlands, to protect those wetlands and their functions in water quality, flood control, and
wildlife habitat. Board members would be willing to work with the Town Board to develop such
a policy that protects the wetlands in the Town from at least Town development. The Town
could lead by example on this one.
N Munkenbeck wondered if Cornelius’ property is transferred to another party in the
future, does the Right-of-Way (originating at Neptune Dr) get transferred as well. S Buck will
seek clarity on the subject and report back to the Board.
Old Business: Discussion of Letter to Town Board Drafted by A Clark
CB 2023-09-26
Approved
Page 6 of 6
A Clark provided Board members with a draft of the letter she composed for the Town
Board, and edits were provided. On motion made by G Dodici and seconded by N Munkenbeck,
the edited letter was approved by a majority of Board members. C Schutt voted no, as he felt
the letter was too easy on the Town Board; he is still concerned that the Right-of-Way was put
in there.
The letter was distributed via email to Town Board members by G Dodici the following
morning, the text of which appears below:
Subject: DEC Regulated Wetland DR-1 / UNA-81
The Dryden Conservation Board wishes to extend our support and our commendation to the
Town Board of Dryden for taking the stance that the Wetland and Tompkins County Unique
Natural Area (DR-1 & UNA-81) off Neptune Drive will be preserved and protected from damage.
Prior to our 25 July 2023 meeting, the Conservation Board members had been most perturbed
to learn that a Right of Way stood approved and might be built between the end of Neptune
Drive to a property owned by Bernard Cornelius. During a lengthy discussion of this Wetland's
value at the July meeting, member S. Buck assured other members that the Town Board was
actually committed to the Wetland's preservation, that an alternative Right of Way that did not
infringe on the Wetland had been identified and would be used if property development called
for it. We were further encouraged that a wetland delineation is planned and we strongly urge
that the entire contiguous wetland area will be included in that process, not just the Town
holdings.
The Conservation Board thus applaud the protection of the Wetland and the delineation
project, and we stand ready to assist in any way we can. We would, of course, appreciate being
kept apprised of the delineation results and any other actions affecting the Wetland, which, we
agree, has important environmental and biological value for the Town and its residents.
Gian Dodici
Dryden Conservation Board, Chair
There being no further business, on motion made by N Munkenbeck and seconded by B
Beck, the meeting was adjourned at 8.47 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Loren Sparling
Deputy Town Clerk