Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCB 2024-05-28CB 2024-05-28 Final Page 1 of 8 CONSERVATION BOARD May 28, 2024 Hybrid Approved July 30, 2024 In Memoriam of Bob Beck Present: Bob Beck (acting chair), *Steve Bissen, *Anne Clark, Jeanne Grace, Nancy Munkenbeck (arrived 7:38 p.m.), Craig Schutt Absent: Gian Dodici (chair), Kate McKee (alternate), Andrew Miller, Tim Woods Liaisons: *Spring Buck (Town Board) Staff: Loren Sparling (Deputy Town Clerk) “*” designates attendance via Zoom The meeting was called to order at 7:18 p.m. G Dodici was unable to attend tonight’s meeting, and so asked B Beck to chair it in his stead. Review and Approval of Minutes from March 26, 2024 and April 30, 2024 On motion made by C Schutt, seconded by S Bissen, the minutes of March 26, 2024, were unanimously approved as written. Regarding the minutes of April 30, B Beck asked that the last few sentences of the Rail Trail Task Force report be revised as follows: “He mentioned that funding for this came from Dryden’s second Tompkins County Parks and Trails grant in the amount of $5,000 and from our third Triad Foundation grant of $10,000.” On motion made by A Clark, seconded by C Schutt, the minutes of April 30, 2024, were unanimously approved with B Beck’s edits. Reports: Agriculture Advisory Committee C Schutt reported that the Agriculture Advisory Committee (AAC) last met in May. One of the major discussions revolved around the two new solar projects proposed for Caswell Rd and Morris Rd. Regarding the Morris Rd site, everything is supposed to be underground. (When this was initially presented to the Planning Board, some Board members were skeptical that everything would indeed be underground, based on the outcome of other solar projects in the Town.) L Sparling added that Graham Savio of Cornell Cooperative Extension also gave a presentation to AAC members on available funding opportunities for agricultural assistance. Reports: EMC S Bissen reported that the EMC had their get-together where attendees got to hear what the many different conservation-minded groups of the County have been doing. B Beck, A Clark, and J Grace were among those in attendance, and thought it useful and fun. B Beck hopes that the EMC will continue to do this on a regular basis. Board members speculated about what municipalities had Conservation Boards and asked S Bissen to compile a definitive list for their next meeting. CB 2024-05-28 Final Page 2 of 8 Reports: Climate Smart Task Force A Clark reported that she unfortunately missed the last meeting of the Climate Smart Task Force. She knows, however, that they have been trying to finalize some work that Cornell Cooperative Extension has been helping them out with. Reports: Owasco Lake Watershed Management Council A Clark reported that she also missed this meeting. C Schutt noted that the 2023 Annual Report of the Owasco Lake Watershed Inspection and Protection Division has been published. L Sparling hopes to soon provide Board members with a digital copy of the publication. Reports: Town Board S Buck reported that she has no update on the post-fire status of the Plantations. She next disclosed that INHS is considering undertaking a housing development in Varna, at the corner of Freese Rd and Rte 366. Regarding the RFP for the development of lands north of Town Hall, S Buck spoke with Leonardo Vargas-Mendez (Town Councilperson and Affordable and Workforce Housing Committee chair) about his push to add housing to the mix. She had stated many times at past Conservation Board meetings that the Town Board had no intent to add housing to the RFP, yet accepted this amendment, not having the chance to broach this with Conservation Board members ahead of her decision. As efforts for the zoning update have ramped up, S Buck briefly met with the consultant via Zoom to talk about priorities that she felt were important. Such priorities include the inclusion of pollinator-friendly language, dark skies certification for lighting levels, wetland and watershed protection, and nodal densification (vs urban sprawl), among other things. S Buck also communicated that there is growing concern among the fire departments about how to take care of the proposed solar installations and their infrastructure, given that a “battery bank” is being considered as an option. Town Board members had the opportunity to ask questions about the short- and long-term risks to water and land, as well as firefighter response. She felt heartened by what she heard. S Bissen inquired as to the type of battery that would be used in the “battery bank” (e.g., lithium-ion, lead acid). S Buck clarified that developers are actually looking for a site for this in Tompkins County, but not necessarily in Dryden. The use of lithium-ion batteries is being proposed, but very different from those that we use in our day-to-day experiences. The concern among firefighters stems from the fact that, should a fire ignite in this “battery bank,” they should just stand there and not take action to put it out. The “banks” have built-in triggers that shuts a system down when overheated; if a fire does break out, the trigger disconnects the “battery box” from the overall system, initiates a fire retardant system inside the box, and you are supposed to let it just burn out. She confesses that this isn’t ideal, but she wants to see solar technology expand. She was glad to hear (from what they told her) that the water systems and the land that these “banks” sit on would be very much protected. B Beck surmised that the battery system would be as (or more) expensive than a solar farm. CB 2024-05-28 Final Page 3 of 8 S Bissen wished that someone would initiate a project to put solar panels over parking lots simply because it would be a better use of space. S Buck added that solar-powered roadways and parking lots are being utilized in both Britain and certain areas of continental Europe. A Clark put in that people always want to park under things that provide shade. Reports: Rail Trail Task Force B Beck reported that, regarding the section of trail between Hallwoods and Pinckney Rds, Rick Young and his crew did a fabulous job following the plan that T G Miller produced for us, based on the Army Corps of Engineers wetland permit that we received late last year. They cut into the base of the embankment behind Nick Bellisario’s buildings on Hall Rd. Two guide wires from a NYSEG power line had to be removed, which allowed them to cut into the bank even more than what the T G Miller plan called for; this was good in that it further reduced the trail’s impact on the adjacent wetland. They also put in a retaining wall with giant concrete blocks to buttress the vertical cut into the embankment. They then hydroseeded the ground above the retaining wall, and the grass there is growing very quickly. Lastly, they put stone dust down along the entirety of this section of trail. He related that, just over a week ago, the Town Attorney received the last of the signed papers needed to send to the DOT in Syracuse, so that the DOT could grant approval for the Rte 13 bridge to go out to bid for construction. When this happens, the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) grant that we got through DOT will kick in and pay for stone dust surfacing from Monkey Run Rd to Rte 13 and from Rte 13 to Hall Rd, parallelling Hallwoods Rd. R Young cannot move forward with the surfacing until the DOT grants approval for the Rte 13 project; any work completed before this approval is not reimbursable. B Beck went on to say that, in addition to the new Tompkins County Parks and Trails grant, the Town has received a $5,000 grant from the Tompkins County Planning Department, which will go towards stone dust surfacing for the section of trail between the F H Fox bridge and Monkey Run Rd. This can start right away. With this, we will have a completed, smooth stone dust surface on the trail from Game Farm Rd all the way to Pinckney Rd, so that whole stretch will pretty much be complete by next year, with the bridge in place. New Business: Review of the Zoning and Subdivision Laws to Evaluate Their Consistency with the Town’s Comprehensive and Other Plans Ray Burger had asked G Dodici and B Beck (as representatives of the Conservation Board and Rail Trail Task Force) to virtually meet with Nan Stolzenburg, the consultant selected to review the zoning and subdivision laws in order to evaluate their consistency with the Town’s Comprehensive and other plans. This meeting is planned for June 3. In preparation for this meeting, G Dodici provided Board members via email four (4) questions regarding the zoning and subdivision laws evaluation to consider tonight to ensure that all of their concerns are addressed at the consultant meeting, as transcribed below: 1. Is there an area in Town you are most concerned about? Are there particular locations or types of growth taking place (or not taking place) in Town that you are concerned about? 2. Are there aspects of the zoning or subdivision laws that you feel do not work for the Town? What and why? 3. What challenges and issues do you have in working with the zoning and subdivision laws (process and policy)? What is difficult or frustrates you? 4. Do you have any “wish list” items you would like to see in the zoning/subdivision laws? N Munkenbeck opened the discussions by venturing that it would be nice to have a center turn lane on the Rte 13 corridor, although the State does not seem to hold the same CB 2024-05-28 Final Page 4 of 8 opinion. Alternatively, if development continues along Rte 13 (from the NYSEG node to Dryden Village), the State might want to consider the installation of a service road. Where exactly, she does not know, as it would be up to the planners to determine the placement of commercial operations. N Munkenbeck added that there also needs to be fewer curb cuts onto Rte 13. S Buck thought this important. Road design would go into a master plan, but she is uncertain whether this falls under the consultant’s purview. In her conversation with N Stolzenburg, S Buck suggested the possibility of establishing further setbacks along the Rte 13 corridor so that future developments there would not be impacted if the State decided to widen the road in the next 10-20 years. S Bissen agreed, stating you want development to occur in that quarter. If we plan for more development along Rte 13, then we should have more setbacks. S Buck also conveyed her concern regarding industry. There is currently not a lot of industry in Dryden, but she does not want the Town to be just reactive and not have legal backup to protect our land and residents should industrial activity ramp up. It is important to consider what industrial protections we would want to have in place. Our area has been designated a tech development area by the federal government; she does not want to discourage this development, yet she wants to ensure that the land and its residents are protected. J Grace clarified that we should be intentional about where we place development and how it is done. N Munkenbeck expressed her unease about the toxic materials used in and created by the manufacture of technological products. S Bissen advised that the Town think about locations of environmental concern, such as where the major corridors of the Town (e.g., Rtes 13, 38, and 366) cross or abut major waterways. Rte 366 follows along Fall Creek, and to him, that would be a much more worrisome place for development to be situated than, say, along Rte 13. The Town should be mindful of where development will be allowed and whether there needs to be more zoning in place to prevent development from occurring in locations of environmental concern, such as along Rte 366. S Buck also broached the topic of housing with N Stolzenburg. The housing crisis is very real, but there are ways to mitigate setting up unhealthy situations. When huge apartment complexes are proposed, why not require that a certain percentage of those apartments be made available for lower income residents? N Munkenbeck built on this by stating that large subdivisions should be bus accessible. A Clark raised the matter of climate disaster preparedness. Rte 38 will not be a good road in a disaster. How will residents get to key locations like hospitals when roadways are flooded? Having the zoning be consistent with climate disaster preparedness plans will be really critical. S Buck built on this by affirming that zoning determines how we can mitigate the future impacts of new development. Do we require that utilities be buried, so that there will be less of a chance they are knocked down in a tornado? Do we have other kinds of building requirements if the houses are built in a flood-prone area? And how do we do all this without making things so expensive that developers can’t do anything? Reflecting on money spent on natural disaster (flood, fire, storm) insurance, A Clark affixed that the kind of long-term planning for how expensive something is going to depend on how safe its location is. S Buck turned to mitigation strategies against the drain on natural resources, knowing that the Town has some dry fire hydrants. If you are a large developer investing X million dollars into a development, shouldn’t you be responsible for putting in hydrants and Knox CB 2024-05-28 Final Page 5 of 8 Boxes that fire companies can access? This would alleviate the burden on taxpayers. S Bissen wondered what Ezra Village has planned in terms of water. C Schutt replied that its water system will tie into the Village system. S Buck felt it important that more independent systems not be added, that they in fact be consolidated so as to make them easier to manage and maintain. Whereas the Village’s water delivery system is pretty good, the concern here pertains more to the long-term needs of the wastewater treatment plant and some of the areas inherited by the Town (e.g., Yellow Barn). With the current presence of the Freeville and Dryden Farmers Markets, A Clark wondered how accessible local farmers and their products will be for people in the future to interact with. We are also going to need community gardens. If developments with 30-50 additional families are sited, they will need access to larger units that produce food and that can get food into community agriculture, as well as to their own gardens. Could developers be incentivized through zoning considerations to build in a certain way? N Munkenbeck related how some garden plots in London come part and parcel with the purchase of a house; other plots may be obtained through a waiting list. However a plot was obtained, if it wasn’t properly maintained or utilized, garden rights would be lost, and the plot would go to the next person on the waiting list. A Clark expanded the discussion by stating that access to a garden plot is not just access to cultivated vegetables and herbs, but also access to green space in which to walk. You do not want a situation to manifest whereby residents must drive across town to walk among the trees. S Buck agreed, averring the delicate balance between growing development and maintaining green space and dark skies. B Beck brought up the topic of wetland protection and riparian setbacks. S Buck communicated that she had already informed the consultant that this was a high priority but recommended that the same message be delivered by other people. A Clark petitioned to extend the setbacks a little further (50 feet on either side); not only will the banks be protected, but trails could be placed on these setback extensions for residents to enjoy as greenspace. This riparian greenspace could offset the need to search for square plots of land elsewhere in town to serve the same function. This increased greenspace will create a situation whereby tree height will diminish upon approach to the water’s edge, which is maximal for wildlife. S Buck posited that an animal corridor would be produced, and the impacts of drought or flooding reduced. N Munkenbeck expressed concern about increased runoff into the waterways. J Grace tied this into the bigger issue of people ignoring stormwater regulations. S Buck was unable to mention the topic of stormwater capture via swales and swale gardens to the consultant. N Munkenbeck thought that this might be a great opportunity to teach people about the beneficial purpose of swales, so they are not filled in. J Grace related that many projects have been undertaken in the City where parking lots are bordered all around by beautiful native plant gardens; within two years, though, these gardens are either dead or torn out due to landscapers’ lack of understanding that the gardens serve a practical, as well as a decorative, purpose. You can have the best designed bioswale, but if you are not paying someone knowledgeable to maintain it, it will be all for naught. Along that same line, J Grace wondered if zoning could help protect riparian areas from such human activities as clear-cutting and mowing all the way to the bank edge. There are regulations against building within 10 feet of a riparian area, but she is unsure if the zoning law could manage activities undertaken for aesthetic purposes. S Buck responded that this could be done as long as it is specific, has a purpose, and has buy-in. CB 2024-05-28 Final Page 6 of 8 J Grace is also distressed about the expansion of mowed lawns. What was once a fallow field that provided some amount of habitat gets divided up into lots, upon which people start building houses, each with three acres of mowed lawn. She is uncertain whether others feel the same way and if zoning could address this as well. S Buck connected the lessening of grass fields with the reduction in butterfly numbers but felt that outlawing mowing would not gain any traction among Dryden residents. A Clark suggested that outlawing tiny pocket lawns could be achievable. The idea of building homes that have a consolidated, shared space has been given a high priority and is so much better. N Munkenbeck cautioned that insurance inspectors and underwriters might not be happy with the sight of unmowed lawns. A Clark recounted that it is not only mowed lawns that are multiplying, but single driveways too. Where do we require permeable surfaces to drive and park our cars on? Where is it alright to have impermeable surfaces, and if this is the case, what is going to happen to the water runoff? The Town should require plans that are commensurate with proximity to wetlands and agricultural fields. S Buck recalled mentioning to the consultant her concern about the field application of biosolids. Though this is not currently a pressing issue in Dryden, should we begin to consider establishing parameters around chemical applications? B Beck relayed the thoughts of Andy Zepp, director of the Finger Lakes Land Trust, that the Town of Dryden undertake more conservation easements. The Land Trust has been enormously successful in establishing preserves and taking on the responsibility of managing or overseeing easements that are still in private ownership. The number of easements they have is huge. It’s a permanent obligation to monitor these easements and make sure that the missions are met, that any new owners understand the details of the original easement agreement. A Zepp made it clear that there are many easements that people would like to donate or that should be set aside as conservation easements, yet the Land Trust is unable to accept. But the Town could. The Town has two (2) conservation easements but is terrible at dealing with them. B Beck advocated for the development of a plan and for staff to follow through with that plan, and only then could the Town acquire protected spaces (conservation easements) as parts of development projects, including those situated adjacent to wetlands and flowing water. These special habitats would thus be protected. Towns and municipalities ought to be doing more. N Munkenbeck alerted Board members that conservation easements are contracts, as opposed to zoning. Would easement enforcement be done by paid officers of the municipality, or could it be done by volunteer officers? Enforcement, if it is needed, means going to court. In cases of zoning enforcement, judges often side with the landowner, but in cases of easement enforcement, judges often side with the holder of the easement instead of the landowner, as easements are considered contracts. When development projects in the Town go through site plan review, it is B Beck’s sense that developers set aside a certain amount of open space as part of their project, but then not follow through with that promise; and yet they are not in violation of any agreement. An easement is a legal document filed with the County Clerk that very clearly spells out what is understood and would be much easier to enforce than other development plans. However, it would be expensive for the Town to do lots of easements. It is extra work for the Planning Department, and monitoring and enforcement would be ongoing, but he feels it would be worth the added effort, provided a plan is in place. S Buck proposed that learning from the Land Trust’s successful methods could be beneficial, as they have experienced significant success in their work. When asked if A Zepp CB 2024-05-28 Final Page 7 of 8 could speak to a joint session of the Conservation Board and Town Board, B Beck would see what he could do. Past incarnations of the Conservation Board had noted easement deficiencies on certain properties, but the Town did nothing. To right this, the Planning Department must step up or be told by the Town Board that easements are important. This can work, but it has to be a priority. N Munkenbeck voiced that inducements for easements are often tax abatements. Cash offerings could also be utilized. She related that many years ago, the Conservation Board talked about having the Town create an account that allows residents to donate funds to be used for conservation purposes of any type, which could include easements. Board members were told at the time that the Town could not accept donations for conservation unless there was a stated account for it. The Town did create a Recreation Fund, though. So whatever they did to create the Recreation Fund, they would have to repeat the process to create a Conservation Fund. She believes that if such a fund did exist, people would put money into it. That money could go towards getting people to do easements or hiring an officer to undertake easement enforcement. B Beck agreed, stating that there are lots of citizens who want to do the right thing and would thus be willing to donate land that deserves protection. If the Land Trust is unable to accept the parcel yet the Town is willing, it can work, both for the Town and its citizenry. He holds it worthwhile to work hard to make this happen, and grants that a Conservation Fund would be a good starting point. S Buck will inquire about this. J Grace drew attention to dark skies, suggesting that the Town not allow light pollution and LED billboards. From this, A Clark recommended that lighting in developed areas be required to face downward. There are so many good options for efficient LED lighting that are downward-facing and light-sensitive; there are some that are motion-sensitive. C Schutt advised the Town not to create rules or laws that it cannot follow up on. Board members then returned to answering the four (4) questions provided by the consultant. 1. Is there an area in Town you are most concerned about? Are there particular locations or types of growth taking place (or not taking place) in Town that you are concerned about? Board members answered with Route 13 and the nodes (where there is water and sewer). 2. Are there aspects of the zoning or subdivision laws that you feel do not work for the Town? What and why? Board members answered that enforcement is difficult. N Munkenbeck added that accessory dwelling units are important and should be retained in the zoning. 3. What challenges and issues do you have in working with the zoning and subdivision laws (process and policy)? What is difficult or frustrates you? Board members answered with enforcement. 4. Do you have any “wish list” items you would like to see in the zoning/subdivision laws? CB 2024-05-28 Final Page 8 of 8 Board members referenced the majority of tonight’s discussion. Members will email any clarifying thoughts in answer to these questions to B Beck and G Dodici before their meeting with N Stolzenburg on June 3. There being no further business, on motion made by N Munkenbeck and seconded by J Grace, the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Loren Sparling Deputy Town Clerk