Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-05-27 May 27, 2014 Page 1 of 17 Town of Dryden Conservation Board May 27, 2014 Members Present: Robert Beck (Chairman), Gian Dodici, Rick Ryan, Milo Richmond, Craig Schutt, Charlie Smith, Nancy Munkenbeck, Bard Prentiss Planning Board Liaison: Marty Hatch and David Weinstein Tompkins County EMC: absent Town Board Members: Mary Ann Sumner Guests: Absent: Jeremy Sherman Please note that this document includes two attachments. The meeting was opened at 7:04 PM by Robert Beck. Review and approval of minutes from 29 April 2014 meeting C. Schutt motioned to approve the minutes. Discussion and minor revisions to the minutes for clarification. C. Smith seconded the motion. All approved. Citizen’s privilege: no comments Additions to agenda: none Reports and Updates a. Town Board Supr. Sumner said that they have gotten through the purchase of the Semmler parcel, which was a tad controversial in the Town Board meetings. The controversy came from people in the audience who didn’t think the Town should spend the money. The concerns included the fact that the land is not developable and that, initially, the area was inaccessible to the public. She feels this was an opportunity to remind people that it is not all about people, some parcels are worth protecting for their own sakes. Supr. Sumner visited the Cornell Plantation's Semmler Tract at Ringwood Natural Area with a group of invited participants. M. Hatch pointed out that there is more acreage in Plantations areas in the Town of Dryden than any other Town in Tompkins County. Supr. Sumner said there are 3,400 acres in Cornell Natural Areas in Tompkins County and half are in Dryden. Supr. Sumner said that she was pleased with the Ringwood Natural Area. b. Town Planning Board M. Hatch reported that the Planning Board discussed the Ag Committee’s discussion of the Ag and Markets response to our Comprehensive Plan. There were several issues brought up by Ag and Markets that they (the Planning Board) wanted some clarification on. The main issues were agricultural rights and the definitions being fairly broad. The Board questioned the conflict between ag zones and the zoning laws that created discrepancies with the “right to farm” law. They have asked for more clarification to the “right to farm” law and how it impacts rural residential zones that happen to overlap with ag zones May 27, 2014 Page 2 of 17 in the Town. Questions about manure, agricultural implements, etc. were brought up and he believes there will be more discussion. The Deputy Clerk sent the Planning Board the Agriculture and Markets’ information package and a map showing the County Ag Districts within the Town. We will be talking about the potential conflicts between the zoning that we have in place and the agricultural districts and “right to farm” laws as they impact certain restrictions that we have in the zoning. The Planning Board is still working on the Comprehensive Plan update. D. Weinstein asked if the Board had made any progress on the Freese Road SPR. M. Hatch stated the applicants had not turned in all the required paperwork yet but the Planning Board did review the comments/questions that were presented at the Public Hearing. M. Richmond asked about the Freese Road site, if that was the site D. Weinstein was asking about. He is wondering what is going in that spot and what the status is of the project. M. Hatch responded that the sketch plan has been reviewed and a public hearing has been held on the site plan. It has been reviewed by the Town engineer. There have been several requests for revisions or elaborations to take place from the site plan that was proposed. Those changes are pending from the engineer. There were also landscaping changes that had to be made. M. Richmond rephrased his question to what is being built. M. Hatch said that there are four 2 unit town houses being built on the higher section. D. Weinstein added that the owners didn’t have any plans other than fill for the lower section. c. Tompkins County EMC Bissen was absent d. Agriculture Advisory Committee C. Schutt said the Committee met on the 14th of May. Most of the discussion was in regard to the Farmland Protection Plan grant application. The Committee was pleased that the Conservation Board accepted the Ag Committee’s suggested revisions to the definition of Open Space. e. Other Town Boards and Commissions J. Nicholson reported that the Town Board has considered the County’s Hazard Mitigation Plan which was updated in 2013 and is intended to be a multiple jurisdictional plan. It would replace whatever mitigation plan the Town has. There will be public hearing on the 19th at the Town Board meeting. J. Nicholson said she believes it is a great plan and said that Dave Sprout (Town of Dryden Code Enforcement Officer) was an active participant in its development. It is a FEMA approved plan which means that if adopted we become eligible for pre-disaster mitigation planning funds. Supr. Sumner added that around the year 2000, we had an emergency mitigation plan. The County plan is less Dryden specific but covers a multitude of disasters. Members of the Board suggested that the plan should include things like spills and aquifer pollution. J. Nicholson doesn’t believe that spills are part of the plan. http://www.tompkins-co.org/planning/haz_mit.htm May 27, 2014 Page 3 of 17 Supr. Sumner added that a new Recreation Director has been hired and gave a bit of her background. She added that the Town also has a new Justice (to replace Justice Valetinelli). B. Beck announced the Solar Tompkins now includes all of the Towns in Tompkins County rather than just the three (Dryden, Danby and Caroline) that were included last year. He said that over 100 homes had signed up for installing solar panels which means that Solar Liberty was willing to pay back some of the funds (the overall cost was lower than expected). D. Weinstein asked about lawn signs and whether they should be removed for highway department mowing. He has a couple of signs regarding Solar Tompkins. M. Hatch said he usually mows around his signs so the highway mowers simply pick up the blades and go around. Old business a. Sign for Campbell Meadows Rain Garden No new information b. Dryden Trail and Preserve Guide R. Ryan said he has talked to Bard Prentiss over the weekend and most of the discussion was about the Jim Schug Trail and what can be done to continue the trail. He said that they are thinking about press releases to inform the public. A bird watching walk sponsored by the Town, a photo contest or a newspaper article explaining what is in bloom will help generate interest. D. Weinstein suggested that he talk with the DRYC (Dryden Recreation and Youth Commission) regarding what areas have trails, how frequently they are used and by whom. He has reached out to Tom Knipe in the County Planning Department regarding the County Plan for 2020. He also wants to talk to J. Nicholson to target areas that need to be discussed regarding where to extend the trail. Supr. Sumner said right now we are working on the Game Farm to Varna section and the Varna to NYSEG section should be relatively easy. M. Richmond asked if George Junior might be interested in working with the Town on the Trail construction in that area; Supr. Sumner said that the idea was suggested to some of the people there but they were not really excited. New Business a. Jim Schug Trail maintenance C. Smith asked about whether the Highway department is responsible for the trail maintenance. Supr. Sumner has received phone calls and heard other negative comments. B. Prentiss said that the trail doesn’t appear to be a trail but rather a thorough fare. C. Smith asked if there is any rational for the severe cutbacks. One of the reasons that J. Bush had for keeping the limbs and brush cut back was to maintain the ability of the emergency vehicles that may need to use the trail. M. Richmond said that there is a reason for it on the roads, it allows the sun to shine on the road to help melt the ice. Highway people know about highways and how to build and maintain them and that is where the thinking stops. May 27, 2014 Page 4 of 17 B. Prentiss was very upset by the clearing of the trail. When he joined the Dryden Lake Trail Committee, he joined for this particular issue. He has worked with other Highway Supervisors and feels like the Committee needs to work with Mr. Young. B. Beck took a walk along the trail last week and was very disturbed by the damage; even trees that were not cut were damaged. They ditched one side of the trail that he feels did not need to be, the chances of flooding there are very slim. It is very ugly. C. Smith said he believes public safety is the primary reason but he walked the trail from the Purvis Road to Dryden Lake and the opportunities that he would have used to teach people about trees are all gone. His concerns also extend to the fields north of Dryden Lake that had been mowed at the proper time late in the season after the birds are done nesting. M. Richmond believes this is a learning opportunity. Most of the Board agreed that the guys working for Highway simply don’t understand the value of the trail, it is not a highway but a trail. They also feel that the Highway guys were probably having too much fun with their new equipment. B. Beck pointed out that the Jim Schug trail is more of a park rather than a road. He hopes for an aesthetic appreciation of treating it like a park, treating it carefully. When you walked down there and see big dead trees, the trees all skinned up and twisted branches where the machines have just hacked away, it spoils the appeal of the place. But as M. Richmond has said, it is necessary to educate people and make it a learning experience for the people that are taking care of the place. M. Hatch stated that as Planning Board members, they have to go to planning training for credits. Might we suggest to Rick (Young) that we make some overtures to the Plantations or Sapsucker Woods, both of whom are real trail experts and ask them if they can create a course for him (R. Young). We can lay it out as one of the duties of the Highway superintendent. Supr. Sumner said that there is a fine line between Highway and DPW. The park is technically public works and there is a separate staff and assistant DPW superintendant. The highway superintendent is also the DPW superintendent. M. Hatch suggested that the Conservation Board give R. Young a gift of a couple sessions with a trail management person; it may not cost anything but it may be useful to say these are the standards that we want to bring to the trail. Supr. Sumner said that we have had some interesting conversations in the not so distant past about creating a Parks and Trails Department. There is an overlap between the DPW and recreation. J. Bush resisted the overlap strongly and preferred to work alone but he was doing a good job. Now may be the perfect time to start talking more seriously about a Parks and Trails Department. M. Hatch suggested that we might have nothing left by the time a new department is set up and then we will have to supply them with equipment. The cost could be detrimental. B. Prentiss said it occurred to him that we could make this into a real educational thing and have the Town Board and part of the Highway people take a walk with some of the people from the Conservation Board and show them what is there. It isn’t just a running or horse trail but a real natural area. He has talked to people from all over who have come here to experience and see the natural beauty. He thinks it will be less intimidating if the Conservation Board did it rather than someone at Cornell. May 27, 2014 Page 5 of 17 Supr. Sumner agreed that would an excellent approach if some of the Conservation Board and the Town Board are willing. C. Smith said that he has worked with both groups from Cornell and there isn’t a single expertise at either but they do what makes sense to do. They are working with trails rather than railroad beds that you can drive a car down. Supr. Sumner said that we are so familiar with the trail and what it should be like that it is a very genuine approach. M. Richmond said that he doesn’t think that Cornell could offer a better workshop than some of the Conservation Board taking a walk with people; there are many people on the board that could teach someone better than Cornell. He said that we are the ones with the real investment in the Trails and he believes that there are several people on the Board that would be willing to take a walk. And he believes that people can learn new things and realize the new values that we would point out. Supr. Sumner stated that “you guys” are Rick’s boss. (the public) M. Richmond went on to praise Mr. Bush for the good job at Campbell Meadows. Supr. Sumner pointed out that the DEC is involved in this as well, they emphasized the importance of wildlife habitat. B. Beck asked Supr. Sumner how the Conservation Board should approach this situation. Supr. Sumner suggested that they do it directly. She suggested that the y call or email Mr. Young and ask to meet with him. B. Beck asked Supr. Sumner to let him know when she takes the Town Board members to view the Trail. She and the Conservation Board suggested taking the walk down the trail as soon as possible so they can see the damage before it is hidden by the re-growth. B. Prentiss agreed and said that it won’t take long for things to grow back. b. Open Space directive B. Beck reminded everyone that at the last meeting they had tried to clarify the Open Space directive from the Town Board. J. Nicholson has sent him a copy of the Town Board minutes from 2007 which contained the first directive to the Conservation Board to create an open space plan, and the August 15, 2013 minutes with the Open Space Plan directive. See attached. B. Beck reminded the Board of the Ag Committee’s request for more explanation. J. Nicholson said they are hoping for clarification of the purpose and the big picture. Supr. Sumner said that the three boards (the Conservation board, the Planning Board and the Ag Committee) were all given a similar directive in August and now all three are coming around to ask questions in regard to the Open Space Plan. She will be going around to the other boards to try to clarify the directives. N. Munkenbeck asked how the Open Space Plan is going to be used. Who will use it? Supr. Sumner said that the Plan will be used by the Town Board and the Planning Board like they use the Comprehensive Plan. It would supplement or eventually be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan. N. Munkenbeck said that was different than what she recalls the use to be. Supr. Sumner said that she has been promoting this pretty heavily. They want to incorporate the Recreation Plan, the Ag Protection Plan and the Open Space Plan together into an Open Space Plan which then becomes a component of the May 27, 2014 Page 6 of 17 Comprehensive Plan. Considering our goal is to preserve the rural nature of the Town, open space should be part of the Comprehensive Plan. C. Smith does not believe that the Conservation Board needs to reply to the Ag Committees’ question but maybe the Town Board should remind the other boards of the purpose and goal of the Open Space Plan. Supr. Sumner read from the Open Space directive: The purpose of this plan is to further define a strategic path forward for the systematic protection and enhancement of open space resources including:  Conservation of Natural Areas,  Agricultural Land Protection and Improving Farm Viability,  Recreation Related Open Space Resources. Supr. Sumner feels this section of the directive explains the goal of the Open Space Plan. B. Prentiss asked if the conservation board was given a directive for the CEAs. He said the statement above sounds an awful lot like them and he knows what happened to them. He doesn’t know if he wants to launch into a project that is going to go the way the CEAs went. C. Smith interrupted and explained the history. He said the Conservation Board didn’t have anything that he is aware of in writing like this which was why he requested the Town Board provide them with a charge. He said it wasn’t a problem with the Conservation Board but some elements of the community. M. Richmond said they didn’t feel that they needed it, they thought they knew what they were doing at the time. N. Munkenbeck said that it might be worthwhile to let the public know early that this kind of thought process is going on. Supr. Sumner said that in August when this directive was adopted, there was a lot of comment from the public and some from the Town Board. J. Liefer has commented that he would like to be kept updated periodically on the Open Space Plan. N. Munkenbeck suggested that the chairs of the boards write a page or two report for the TB just giving them a quick overview of each board. Supr. Sumner thought that was a good idea. C. Smith suggested that perhaps the Town Board members might write down questions or thoughts to which the Boards can respond. M. Hatch said that while looking at the definition from the directive, it seems to him that there has to be a lot of discussion with the Ag Committee along the lines of the Right to Farm Law. The directive states that “For purposes of this Local Law natural resources shall include, but not be limited to, agricultural lands actually used in bona fide agricultural production…” but then Open Space is added on top of that and it has been our experience that there is a lot of potential conflict if there is not an active discussion about what the implication of Open Space will be for Ag and Markets. M. Richmond said that we need a good visual for this. When you draw the three circles and the overlapping open space area is what the boards need to agree on. He said we approach life from the standing point that you know. A farmer sees things through the perspective of a farmer versus a Conservation advisory person who sees things through the perspective of conservation and protection. C. Smith said that he thinks the region of overlap adds up to being the quality of life. He asked what body of legislation the phrase “right to farm” was taken. May 27, 2014 Page 7 of 17 M. Hatch said the phrase comes from the Right to Farm law. (A quick search showed that all 50 states have right to farm laws). He said he has been reading through the Town’s right to farm law and you can have trucks and vehicles and everything else anyplace as long as they are used in farming. You can have sales places for your goods. Supr. Sumner asked if the “right to farm” laws are strongest or only applicable in defined ag districts. M. Hatch said yes to both questions, and he presented a map showing the County Ag districts. B. Beck said the Ag Committee is working on their component of the Open Space Plan which together with the recreation component will be combined with the Conservation Board component. He believes the Open Space Plan will come to the Conservation Board to put it all together. He wants the Ag committee to make it clear in their component what is important to them in relation to open space and the future of agriculture. They are the ones that should be concerned and should be writing this up in a concrete form that we can all read and understand and argue with if we need to. C. Smith said that among the three plans, we can look for common denominators and hopefully alleviate any head butting. He believes that the Conservation Board’s definition of Open Space includes agriculture. N. Munkenbeck brought up the term “view sheds” and pointed out that most of them are due to Agricultural processes. If you don’t have farmed fields, you are looking out on something else. Trees don’t make good view sheds. She said that the variety of plants that are being grown (maybe not the plowed and hybrid seeded lands), including the pasture lands have enhanced the water quality in the Town. Supr. Sumner said she believes that all 4 boards that are involved in this plan need a clearer narrative about why we care about open space. It is about air quality, water quality, wildlife habitat, farming, recreation, etc. None of which is necessarily more important than the other. They are all a part of the same pie. She asked that maybe the Conservation Board could focus on the first paragraph, the reason why we are creating this plan. B. Prentiss pointed out that if the boards don’t work together and get on the same page, then creating an open space plan will be an effort in futility. He wants to ensure the public is brought in at the beginning. Supr. Sumner said that we can say “don’t worry, it is just a plan”, it doesn’t have the force of law that people interpreted the CEAs to have. N. Munkenbeck pointed out that once it is in the Comprehensive Plan, it will have immense power. Supr. Sumner agreed it will in terms of planning. You will then have to make laws based on the plan, but there are further discussions and hearings that take place based on actions taken based on the plan. (For example: Special Use permits and Site Plan reviews) C. Smith feels it would be beneficial for him if those people that have concerns, be very specific about what their concerns are. Personally, he has no patience with hidden agendas; let’s put the cards on the table. Supr. Sumner pointed out that the Conservation Board has been working together for almost 10 years but the Ag Committee is new and has a lot of feeling around to do. M. Hatch asked if forests are considered open space. Yes. He then asked what the overlap is between the idea of open space and conservation zone. Supr. Sumner said if you are using conservation zone in the sense of the zoning ordinance, there is no connection. No direct connection. May 27, 2014 Page 8 of 17 M. Hatch said that it would make sense for the Conservation Board to make some kind of connection in the sense that we have these big green areas that are called conservation zones. It would make sense to think about what in those areas do we consider to be open space and what do we consider conserved for other reasons. C. Smith said those conservation zones were drawn without input from the Conservation Board. M. Hatch’s concern was that when the Conservation Board comes out with an Open space plan, and there is all this land that is already conservation, there might be questions. Supr. Sumner recommended that the Board not use that as a starting point for what this Board is talking about in Open Space planning. Those are land use regulations that are defined very strictly and with a different purpose. There is a lot of Open Space in there and there is a lot of open space that is not in those conservation zones as well. D. Weinstein asked the Board to remember that the concept behind conservation zones as zoning was an attempt to focus development in smaller areas to keep the character of open space throughout the Town. The intention wasn’t to say these are conservation areas therefore these are areas that must be conserved in their present state. It was the idea of where we want to focus development. B. Beck believes that it will be helpful to have more specific concerns or issues from other groups that we should all be thinking about and how we can interact, clarify and agree or disagree on these things and putting it into a plan that we can all be reasonable comfortable with. Supr. Sumner asked if the Board or a subset of the group could write a page or less of a narrative of what you think is important in an open space plan that can be shared with the other boards to see if it peaks any questions. c. Open Space Plan- Goals and Objectives review of the Glenville plan (the Board is using that plan as a start to their own plan) See attachment #2 C. Smith commented that he would use the word conservation instead of preservation in the first paragraph. He feels that “preservation” might be stricter than what the Board has in mind. He said it appears that there are responsibilities they imagine doing that looked like they would be the responsibility of the Planning Board in Dryden . C. Smith said that he would also substitute land for “natural resources” in goal 2. He asked the rest of the Board about the first bullet under Objectives, Goal 2. He and D. Weinstein indicated that objective falls within the Planning Boards purview. N. Munkenbeck stated that since many of the objectives appear to be the responsibility of the Planning Board, would we be better served to just go over the goals and come back to the objective later. C. Smith suggested that when they come to things related to the Planning Board, they can preface it with “work with the Planning Board.” D. Weinstein asked if it would be worth it have the Planning Board look at these objectives and get their take is on how they feel they fit into an Open Space Plan. N. Munkenbeck suggested that since all of the Boards are just starting to work on it, if the Conservation Board worked on the goals (unless they find something that looks objectionable to us) and then send it to all the committees and let them comment. The Conservation Board could then review the plan with all the other boards’ comments. C. Smith said he prefers the idea of going through the plan goal by goal. May 27, 2014 Page 9 of 17 Milo Richmond said that he made an argument for historic preservation and cultural features. He went back and forth on the issue but he has come back with the belief that this should be part of the plan. Supr. Sumner suggested that we should talk with someone familiar with the Town history to create an inventory of historical sites. Supr. Sumner said that she would not make goal 1 the primary goal for the Town. The Board agreed on changing Goal 1 to natural, agricultural and recreational features. Goal 2 sounds good; as stated above, C. Smith suggested changing natural resources to land. Goal 3 was changed to conserve and/or enhance the quality and quantity of the Town of Dryden’s water resources. Goal 4 Protect and promote agriculture and forestry now and for future generations. Goal 5 Preserve the rural character of the Town of Dryden Goal 6 Goal 7 Continue to provide protection for environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands, flood plains, steep slopes, wildlife habitat areas and corridors, and unique geological formations. B. Prentiss motioned to adjourn the meeting. C. Smith seconded the motion. All in favor. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 PM. Respectfully Submitted, Anna Belcher, Planning Department Intern Erin A. Bieber, Deputy Town Clerk May 27, 2014 Page 10 of 17 Attachment #1 RESOLUTION #99 (2013) – CONSERVATION BOARD OPEN SPACE PLAN DIRECTIVE Supv Sumner offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: Whereas, the Conservation Advisory Council (CAC) was formed in 2000 by local ordinance under New York State General Municipal Law Section 239-y to assist the Town Board, and Town staff in the creation, improvement and implementation of plans and policies related to environmental protection and management, open space, natural areas and features, and agriculture, and Whereas, the Open Space Inventory (OSI) was completed in 2003 by the Town of Dryden Conservation Advisory Council as a means of providing data for developing sound open space planning and protecting natural and scenic resources of the Town of Dryden, and Whereas, the CAC becomes the Conservation Board (CB) in 2004 through a local law amendment to assist the town in the development of sound open area planning and assurance of preservation of natural and scenic resources at the local level, and Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan 2005 recommends integrating the Conservation Board into the town’s decision-making process and by incorporating the Open Space Inventory into resource management and land use planning efforts to further open space protection, and Whereas, open space is defined by the Zoning Ordinance as, “Any space or area characterized by (1) natural scenic beauty or, (2) whose existing openness, natural condition, or present state of use enhances the present or potential value of abutting or surrounding property, or maintains or enhances the conservation of natural or scenic resources. For purposes of this Local Law natural resources shall include, but not be limited to, agricultural lands actually used in bona fide agricultural production,” and Whereas, open space provides economic, environmental, recreational, social and cultural benefits to the Dryden community that includes, but is not limited to, the protection and conservation of natural resources, protection of productive agricultural lands, provision of recreational facilities and opportunities, scenic and aesthetic quality, economic viability and contributes to the overall quality of life, and Whereas, the Town of Dryden is committed to preserving the rural character of the town and the quality of life of its residents as the community continues to grow , now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Conservation Board in cooperation with the Agricultural Advisory Committee and the Dryden Recreation Commission and the Planning Board, is hereby charged with the task of preparing an Open Space Plan (OSP) for the Town of Dryden. The purpose of this plan is to further define a strategic path forward for the systematic protection and enhancement of open space resources including:  Conservation of Natural Areas,  Agricultural Land Protection and Improving Farm Viability,  Recreation Related Open Space Resources. 2nd Cl Stelick Roll Call Vote Cl Stelick Yes Supv Sumner Yes Cl Leifer Yes May 27, 2014 Page 11 of 17 Cl Lavine Yes Additional notes with respect to the above resolution: Conservation of Natural Areas The Conservation Board shall identify natural areas in the town, and weigh regulatory and non-regulatory approaches for conservation. Also, the CB shall identify and complete, or set a path to completion of specific objectives such as a land gift evaluation process for boards to consider when reviewing projects for possible donations or town acquisitions. Agricultural Land Protection and Farm Viability The Conservation Board shall work with the Agricultural Advisory Commit tee to develop a systematic approach to protecting agricultural resources in the town. The Town Board recommends that the Ag. Advisory Committee take the lead as the advisory board responsible for developing this section of the plan. The CB and the Advisor y Committee will explore ways to directly protect agricultural land as well as general ways to promote agriculture in the town and help farms and farm businesses to remain viable. Recreation Related Open Space Resources The Conservation Board shall work with the Recreation Department, Dryden Recreation Commission, Planning Board and possibly members of the Trail Committee associated with development of the 2005 Comprehensive Plan, to identify the types of open space that will be required of future development in the town, including off road pedestrian and bicycle corridors to connect features of the town (population centers, parks, employment centers, etc.), pocket parks, neighborhood parks, and town-wide recreation centers. As a part of this effort the Open Space Plan will create a strategic plan to acquire open space needed to accomplish current and future objectives. The Conservation Board will further compile these three distinct efforts into one Open Space Plan for the Town Board. The plan will be prepared under the direction of the Planning Department with regard to writing and analysis. It should be more strategic than comprehensive with a focus on implementation in the 1-10 year timeframe. May 27, 2014 Page 12 of 17 Attachment #2 May 27, 2014 Page 13 of 17 May 27, 2014 Page 14 of 17 May 27, 2014 Page 15 of 17 May 27, 2014 Page 16 of 17 May 27, 2014 Page 17 of 17