Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-02-28Conservation Board February 28, 2017 Town of Dryden Conservation Board February 28, 2017 Members Present: Bob Beck, Peter Davies (Chair), Charlie Smith, Gian Dodici, Milo Richmond, Nancy Munkenbeck, Craig Schutt, Steve Bissen and Tim Woods (Alter- nate). Joe Osmeloski, absent Liaison Present: Dave Weinstein, Planning Board and Linda Lavine, Town Board Guests: none The meeting was called to order at 7:04 PM Review and approval of minutes from January 31, 2017: C. Schutt moved to approve the minutes as presented. S. Bissen seconded the motion and the minutes were unanimously approved. Reports and Updates: Ag Committee: C. Schutt - see attached Planning Board: D. Weinstein - see attached - P. Davies had a question about the septic tanks in the cluster subdivisions on El- lis Hollow road; he is concerned about more sewage entering Cascadilla Creek. D. Weinstein pointed out that is a Health Department question and outside of the Planning Board’s purview. D. Weinstein also stated that with the approval of more conservation subdivisions, we are allowing more density into areas that were not that dense and questioned the septic tank implications. Since the Town does not yet have a conservation subdivision in place, they don’t know what the effect will be on the surrounding wetlands, etc. in terms of nitrogen or phosphorus. - B. Beck asked if we have confidence in the Health Department’s judgment on this kind of situation. D. Weinstein replied that was a good question because the Health Department has different goals than the Town. - L. Lavine suggested that might be a good project for a Master’s student. - D. Weinstein would like to see the Planning Board, and eventually the Conserva- tion Board, look at the issue of density development in this Town. Do we want to let it densify as much as it will or do we want to say we are not interested in grow- ing beyond 20% more than now. S. Bissen asked if the Town has areas that they want to focus residential density. Yes, we have areas identified for commercial growth. P. Davies asked if there areas zoned non-residential, non-commercial, “forever wild”. D. Weinstein said that we have conservation zones but they can still be densified. - P. Davies suggested asking a representative from the Health Department to attend a meeting at a future date. - C. Smith verified that neither the Town Board nor the Planning Board have ad- dressed the question of septic systems in terms of density. - D. Weinstein stated the Comprehensive plan has goals for each zone but the reali- ty is that for each zone the minimum acreage is one (1) acre. - In regard to the Dryden Road Solar Project, both the County and the Planning Board have asked the developers to move the proposed solar panels out of the 100 year flood plain. The developer agreed that they were looking for an alternate site but they are not overly concerned because the panels are raised and thus the wa- Conservation Board February 28, 2017 ter should flow under them. If the panels come down (trees floating in the flood, etc) is there a potential toxicity problem? No one had a response to the potential damage. - D. Weinstein told the Board that Cornell University is holding a Water Law Con- ference for Activists on March 25th and L. Lavine agreed to forward an email with more information to the Board. EMC: Steve Bissen - no report Town Board: L. Lavine - A solar law has been passed and the Town has (3) three applications already. - Please see attach letter below for comments by member J. Osmeloski. - S. Bissen questioned why the solar industry isn’t looking at the parking lots. He suggested using solar panels as a cover for the lots which would, additionally, provide shade for cars and pedestrians. - There is a great deal of concern in Ellis Hollow regarding the Borger Station. More information below. Freese Road bridge: D. Weinstein - The bridge was built in 1887. - Over 60 people have signed a petition, including all of those that live on Freese Road, to keep the bridge a one lane bridge. - L. Lavine indicated that the belief that the bridge will be turned into a two lane bridge is not necessarily true. It was an idea discussed years ago when the Town was looking at a cross-Town route. She does not believe there is any prejudice in fa- vor of a two lane bridge. - The bridge is on the NYS Historic Bridges list and eligible for Historic status. - D. Weinstein feels that the next step is the formation of a committee made up of members of the community, the engineers, and someone from the Town to look at what the options are. A consultant will be hired and will lay out the options and the costs. The approach should be “this bridge should stay unless you can prove to us beyond a doubt, that keeping the bridge is impossible.” - P. Davies verified that D. Weinstein thinks the bridge is in reasonably good condition and just needs rehabilitation. D. Weinstein stated that the concrete abutments will need to be replaced, they are the major work. - L. Lavine asked if the folks that are sending letters and emails to the Town should be directed to send those communications to the County. The Board seemed to think it would be worthwhile. C. Smith moved to send a letter to the Dryden Town Board reiterating the Conservation Board’s September 29, 2015 resolution regarding the maintenance of the Freese Road bridge as a single lane. The motion was seconded by B. Beck and unanimously approved. Borger Station: The Ithaca Journal has an article regarding the expansion of the Borger Station. The issue that P. Davies felt was relevant to the Conservation Board is the encroachment within 50 feet of two streams and three (3) wetlands. - L. Lavine shared an article/letter written by the “Interveners”, an organization ap- proved by FERC. One of the primary members is Mary Ann Adams. The article listed the issues the Interveners believe should stop the expansion of the Borger Station. Conservation Board February 28, 2017 - S. Bissen stated that the Station is trying to get variances for the wetlands to ex- pand the facility but indicated that they have not been good about damages in the past. - In the 1990s some lubricants were spilled; it was not the actual gas but the equip- ment and the maintenance thereof that was the problem. - N. Munkenbeck expressed some doubt about the extent of the wetlands. She said there is a wet place and some wetland shrubs but it doesn’t appear to be a true wet- land. She also does not remember a stream. - L. Lavine said that Dominion was not honest when they got their permits because they didn’t accurately document the wetlands until after they had approval. The people in Ellis Hollow are concerned; there has always been a degree of noise and, apparently, we have never measured the air pollution in regard to methane. - G. Dodici stated that the letter (shared by L. Lavine) seems short on details regard- ing the Borger site. He thinks it is more general, that they don’t want the Dominion pipeline going across the state. He stated that we don’t know what the resources are there or the potential impacts. It sounds like there might not a stream within 50 feet and a state or federal protected wetland would have a 100 foot buffer. - P. Davies asked what, if anything, should this committee do? He stated that the only thing they can do is express concern and the only area that falls under the Conser- vation Board’s purview would be the potential contamination of the wetlands. - L. Lavine and M. Richmond attended a presentation about the Borger Station by Mothers Out Front, a national group against global warming. M. Richmond was im- pressed with the amount of information presented; an invitation was extended to Dominion to attend the meeting but they declined. He left the meeting feeling that he was not willing to do anything to assist Dominion when they have not provided any- one along the existing line the opportunity to tap into it. Dominion has an agree- ment with Cornell but is unwilling to do anything to let the community benefit. - L. Lavine added that Barbara Lifton has sent two letters: one to the FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) Secretary Bose and Governor Cuomo & the NYS DEC asking for action to deny the permits and expansion. - P. Davies suggested we take this as information rather than taking any action. - S. Bissen recommended the Conservation Board encourage the Town Board to sup- port more investigating and Ms. Lifton’s letters. P. Davies asked that L. Lavine take the Conservation Board’s support of Ms. Lifton’s letters to the Town Board. Natural Resources Conservation Plan: Version 5 of the plan is the current copy that the Board is working from. It has the same written information as version 3 but with pictures. P. Davies went through the changes that have been sent to him and asked the Board members for feedback. Some of the questions were editorial or grammatical; the perti- nent questions follow. C. Smith suggested a chapter on alternative energy resources. P. Davies said it could be just a statement encouraging the use of alternative energy. Ultimately, it was de- termined D. Weinstein and B. Beck will work on a chapter that will follow the same pattern as the other chapters – the current status, threats to the current status and recommendations. - B. Beck stated that NYSEG, the PSC and Tompkins County have all agreed to an al- ternative to the West Dryden Road pipeline. It is possible that NYSEG will be able to put a compressor station in Lansing. Conservation Board February 28, 2017 - A suggestion was made to add a conclusion chapter and moving all of the recom- mendations to the end rather than at the end of each section. The Board determined they preferred the recommendations at the end of each section. - P. Davies pointed out that several sections don’t have concluding sentences or para- graphs. He asked that each section author add a concluding paragraph. - Another suggestion was to add initial pages for title, date, credits, and a table of con- tents. P. Davies stated he will take care of that. - There is a recommendation to reference the Open Space Inventory in the introduc- tion. - C. Smith said another suggestion is a short appendix detailing the history of this group: the enabling legislation and significant contributions – that will include the Open Space Inventory. Other suggestions: - Include the Open Space Inventory maps in the places that they fit. - N. Munkenbeck noted that the map of the Dryden Ag District and the title to the map are not consistent. The Ag District is a county designation but does not include all of the land that is currently being farmed in the Town. Currently, a map does not exist which shows all of the farm land in the Town. The Ag Advisory Committee is working on an Ag and Farmland Protection Plan which can be referenced. - Add the Methods and Criteria for Land Protection and Acquisitions to the conclusion and introduction. - A flood plain map is being worked on. - The Parks and Trails Maintenance Guidelines should be referenced in the recreation section. D. Weinstein is reviewing the Recreation section to verify it meshes with the Recreation Master Plan. - M. Richmond and B. Prentiss put together a summary of a discussion with the DPW superintendant regarding the appropriate mowing which can be referenced. - D. Weinstein is going to mention the Trail Maintenance Guide and C. Smith will write a sentence or two regarding mowing. - Add a reference to the Twin Sheds Management Plan in the Biological Resources section. - P. Davies explained that he is inserting footnotes as reference for specific infor- mation. If the citation applies to several areas or can be considered a general source, then it is referenced at the end. - Move the UNA description and map from Scenic Resources to Biological Resources. - Move the list of preserves from Scenic to Recreational Resources and add a map. - The Durland bird sanctuary is not open to the public and thus should probably be removed. The Board discussed which preserves, natural areas, etc should be listed. Some are private and some are not accessible to the public. Listing those places could lead to trespass. - They decided to leave the listing in the Scenic Resources section but changed the title of the list to Nature Preserves and removed sites that are not open to the pub- lic. - Add the current Dryden rail trail effort to Recreational Resources. B. Beck will work on that. There being no more business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:01PM. Respectfully Submitted, Conservation Board February 28, 2017 Erin A. Bieber Deputy Town Clerk Report of Planning Board activities from February 23, 2017 1. Public Hearing to Consider: Preliminary Plat review for a 5-lot Conservation Subdivision located at 1624 Ellis Hollow Road: proposed subdivision of a 17-acre parcel into four 1&1/4 acre parcels with a 12-acre conservation area. a. The 12-acre conservation area that is mostly a portion of the Ellis Hollow wetland will tentatively be donated to and accepted by Cornell University to be managed jointly by the Cornell Botanic Garden as part of their natural areas and the Laboratory of Or- nithology. Both entities already manage other portions of this wetland nearby, and Cornell has made public access to this wetland available from Ellis Hollow Creek road. b. Although this subdivision is generally being viewed favorably, it does raise issues about the potential dangers of increasing density of use, particularly the density of septic systems, within several hundred feet of an important wetland. If more parcels in this area are proposed for similar conservation subdivisions, this concern about en- vironmental impacts could c. The hearing remains open for public comment, and approval of the preliminary and final plat are likely to be given at the March Planning Board mee ting. 2. Sketch Plan review for a 7-lot Conservation Subdivision located at 430 Lake Road: proposed subdivision of a 57-acre parcel into 7 parcels. a. The board approved a sketch plan for this subdivision that will sit between Lake Road and the Dryden Lake and wetland. A 300-foot conservation buffer that can con- tain no permanent structures will be established upslope from the state wetland boundary to protect the wetland and a 200-foot buffer that can contain no permanent structures will be established downslope from Lake Road to make sure the impact of views from the road are made as small as possible. 3. Public Hearing to Consider: Preliminary Plat review for a 6-lot subdivision lo- cated at 2150 Dryden Road: proposed subdivision of a 157-acre parcel into 6 lots to be used for community solar plant development. a. A subdivision is necessary because state regulations allow only up to 5 megawatts to be generated from a given parcel, and our new solar law passed this month follows these state regulations. The solar facility in this case will generate 12 megawatts, by combining the generation of 2 megawatts from each of 6 subdivision lots. b. Several local residents indicated objection to this subdivision because 1) the solar farm will change the rural character of the area too industrial, 2) it will greatly dimin- Conservation Board February 28, 2017 ish the beauty of the current view shed, 3) it is incompatible with keeping the serenity of the graveyard it will surround on two sides. c. Both the County and the Board indicated that the portion of the facility that is planned to be placed in the floodplain on the north bank of Virgil creek should be re- moved from that floodplain area. This will probably necessitate the developers seeking an alternative 6th parcel of land nearby. d. The developers indicated that the trail corridor will not be affected by the place- ment of panels. 4. The board began preliminary discussion of minor subdivisions along Turkey Hill and Dodge roads which will be necessary for solar farm installations on both sites. 5. Introduction of sketch plan for 51 Hall Road a. This is a minor change in use of a property in the industrial district from metal fab- rication to a wood fabrication facility for the Tiny Timbers home modules. No envi- ronmental impacts or new buildings are anticipated. 6. Work by a subcommittee is continuing to revise Dryden’s regulations for utility construction under or near Dryden roads. 7. A special meeting of the Planning Board will be held on Wednesday March 1, 2017 to provide the board’s final comments to the Town Board on the proposed Planned Unit Development at 1061 Dryden Road, outside the hamlet of Varna. a. The main concerns expressed by the Town Board, that (1) this development in- crease its setback from the parcel borders to 15’, and (2) that the development be made more family and child friendly with more useable open space and places to play will be examined to see if the proposal has been adapted to meet these concerns. b. Concern has been raised that this proposal does not meet the high bar set in our zoning law for Planned Unit Developments, which are essentially resetting the rules of our zoning regulations for single parcels. Approval of this Planned Unit Development will set a precedent that could result in a low bar being established for PUD applica- tions to reset our zoning regulations for parcels all over the town. Report to CB – Ag Committee Meting 2 -28 -2017 (Craig Schutt) Ag Committee met for its regularly scheduled meeting on February 8. Cornell Coopera- tive Extension staff presented some updates on the Draft Ag Protection Plan to address the concerns expressed by the Committee at previous meetings. CCE had presented an aggressive timeline to conclude the project at the January meeting, but it became clear that timeline will not be met. The meeting consisted of reviewing the updated draft, asking questions about the data, looking at the farmer data base provided by CCE and still attempting to define a farm. There are differing opinions on the Com- mittee and CCE staff on how a farm should be defined. More discussion on that sub- ject will continue at the March meeting as well as continuing to review the draft. Letter from J. Osmeloski Conservation Board February 28, 2017 Peter, Although I am not going to be at the meeting, I would like the following statement read into the record, especially during any discussion concerning the 2 large scale Solar Farms being proposed in Dryden: " It is my opinion that the 2 proposed Large Scale Solar projects at 2150 Dryden Rd, and Turkey Hill/Stevenson/Dodge Rd are in direct contradiction to the Town of Dry- den Comprehensive Plan, The Town of Dryden Ag Protection Plan, and the Town of Dryden Natural Resources Conservation Plan. Also, I don’t believe that Large Scale (Greater than 2 Megawatts) Solar Farms were part of the original Solar Farm plans that were discussed at the meeting at Neptune Fire Dept., this past October. Futhermore, the sub-division proposed at the 2150 Dryden Rd. site, violates or contradicts many of the Dryden Sub-division laws." Thank you, Respectfully submitted by: Joseph Osmeloski (Conservation Board Member)