HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-01-31Town of Dryden
Conservation Board Meeting Minutes
,lanuary 31,1012
Members Present: Craig S., Stan M., Bard P., Bob B., Nancy tM., Milo R., Rick R., Charlie S,
Staff Present: Jane Nicholson
Absent: Steve B.
Agenda:
l.New Business
2, Critical Environmental Areas (CEA) updates
3. Agricultural Committee
4. Peruville Road Mine Application
Call to order: Nancy M., 7:40pm
New Business:
-- Voting for Chair- Jane to lead discussion
-- Nominations for Charlie and Nancy
-- Discussion of candidates
-- Results- Charlie Smith to be new chair
- -Vice Chair Discussion — delayed until February meeting at request of Charlie Smith
Critical Environmental Areas (CEA) updates:
-- Discussion of CEA's with regard to the comment period — should the CB get to review them again?
• - -The CB should be able to review comments if there is significant concern; can the Town Board act
on these without input? It is the Town Board's choice if they want to send them back to the CB.
-- Nancy: Motion that the board request the Town Board at their pleasure to send the comments
and the CEA as well as Dan Kwasnowski's summary back to the CB for discussion at the
February meeting, and provide the opportunity for CB response if they have revisions —Craig S.
second; Milo R. second
- -Vote: All in favor
-- Letter to come from Nancy to the Town Board with this request
-- Concerns about fertilizer and pesticides; relation to hydrofracking? golf courses?
- -CEA's are only local regulation that DEC reviews; question of the language.
- -Under the category of threats, excessive pesticide or fertilizer — left question of what this
meant; narrow- excessive not defined
- -Thc inclusion of the phrase excessive fertilizer use is of concern
-- Proposing 30 CEA's, the only other county is Suffolk— others have smaller area. So why 30 It
seems like a lot
- -A town that has access to a lot of information to be able to propose that many
--The Town has access to a Conservation Board which was able to undertake this process
unlike many communities that don't have a Board, staff, etc.; critical to identify these
resources now
- -One unit of law that is recognized at this level; not an automatic no, and means a closer
look- doesn't determine the outcome.
-- Response from fartners is that if they are so critical, but don't apply, then why not take them
out?
® -- Resident comment —Not adequate discussion with fartners.
-- Farmers are concerned that if they change uses then it becomes a type I in that they
are otherwise unlisted, so they do become subject to DEC law. They would be
required to come through this without having say. This is with regards to the
I ormation of the CEA. The governing board should be critical in establishing the
boundary of the CEA so it doesn't create hardship in the land owner —what does this
mean? There have been problems, so how does this came about?
- -Board Response: outline of designating CFA's by the DEC have been read;
generally vague so this specific hasn't been read; information on the DEC website,
not the legal language.
Resident comment- -CEA's also reach out beyond the buffer; subject to more than
63% of the town.
- -If the town wants to be agricultural friendly and keep farms working, then they
wouldn't want the conversion —this is zoning issue.
- -DEC has to consider a lot ofwater, floodplain, etc. as pennitting agency
-- Fanners asked about this and it was dismissed; went back to Dan suggesting it
doesn't impact under SEQR as exempt; hasn't been explained to the individual land
owners. Each one should be reached out to.
-- Difficult to reach out to each one; staff /man hours
- -Until the board passes, it may not be too late.
- -Dan spoke entirely of GETS and did not clarify wherci how it's prepared.
- -Town Board is decision- making and decides how this moves forward; would be
important to go to that Board with specific recommendations of this discussion.
-- important to understand where we are now for future considerations; requires a
careful approach to keep our town in a healthy state.
Discussion ofestablishingan Agricultural Committee
-- Comments; regurgitate Dan K. email's with regards to this application
- -Urge Town Board to appoint a liaison —is this Linda Levine'?
-- Motion —Town Board needs to explicitly slate who the liaison with this body is, and they be present at
the February meeting.
- -Need a liaison that stands separate and can report to both the boards; critical for the A5 Plan and Open Space
Plan.
--in the creation of this agricultural committee, it would be the 'town Board that moves on this. Nancy and
Craig to help set up, Craig Anderson (Planning Board) to assist.
-- Vacaney of Stan's position; could be someone from that committee?
--This would be the representation that is needed to complete future plans.
Peruville Road 'Mine Annlication
-- Proposed gravel mine which is 7.9 acres is immediately adjacent and upslope to the UNA's with wetlands,
upslope to CEA -09, and also overlapping the UNA's and LEA's near the ivlallory Nature Conservancy
Preserve. This board should be aware of it because of its location; the DEC is reviewing and the CB shouldn't
be for or against it. '
- -It was decided that it was grandfathered; it will not be reviewed by the Town because it's a nonconforming
pre-existing use.
-- Propose that the CB looks at the property and plans; contact Clifford Norte to see the site
-- Concern about hydrology on the site; proposal is small scale and wetland is not as varied, smaller fen (other
end is much more varied); piece to mine extends towards the preserve
—MS4, stormwater permit not required? Town is in charge of these now. Is this serving as sionnwater
retention? Assuming that it is serving as overflow, but there is usually a primary and secondary overflow
downstream. What happens if it overflows?
Adjourn: Nancy N1. at 9:15Pivq