HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-10-22 TB 10-22-20
Page 1 of 5
TOWN OF DRYDEN
TOWN BOARD MEETING
October 22, 2020
Via Zoom
Present: Supervisor Jason Leifer, Cl Daniel Lamb, Cl James Skaley,
Cl Kathrin Servoss, Cl Loren Sparling
Elected Officials: Bambi L. Avery, Town Clerk
Other Town Staff: Ray Burger, Planning Director
Supv Leifer called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
2150 DRYDEN ROAD
SPECIAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT
PUBLIC HEARING (continued)
Ray Burger explained this is the third meeting on this matter. The changes since the
last meeting are that the pole array in the field off George Road has been changed slightly
mainly due to a compression of the pole matrix. NYSEG changed their requirement from 50’ to
a 40’ spacing and the pole that was sitting kind of in the middle of the driveway to consolidate
all three lines has been moved to the edge of the field to aid in opening access to the remainder
of the field for potential farming. County Planning has reviewed the revised submittal and
come back with a 239 review that they have no recommendations or comments. A review
analysis by the town engineer, TG Miller, has been received. It basically talks about no
significant adverse environmental impact and recommends some mitigating measures. A draft
resolution has been presented that lists conditions. Last Friday there was a site visit by
representatives of the Town Board and advisory boards. A new configuration of the
interconnect was displayed and is on the website.
Noah Siegel of True Green said they reviewed different options and finally decided on
the plan labeled Option 1A (on the town’s website). The distance between poles has been
reduced to 40’ and still meets NYSEG’s safety standards. The guy wire will be protected and
farm access to the field has increased in width. The utility pole that first enters the site from
George Road has been moved to the north side of the access road so that anyone accessing the
field will only go under one utility wire.
They have reviewed the draft resolution and asked for guidance on where the evergreen
trees would be planted.
NYSEG has agreed to a flag on the line on George Road so that excessive tree trimming
does not occur at this site. The evergreen planting would provide additional screening in the
event the trees along George Road were to come down for some reason.
Cl Sparling asked if there was a tree cutting plan for Virgil Creek. He understands the
Conservation Board has not been allowed on site. He would like the Conservation Board to see
what trees are slated for cutting and the method. It has been suggested to him that hand tools
be used in place of mechanized equipment and that it be done by a local contractor. Condition
(d) in the resolution was modified to indicate only non-mechanized tree removal between the
pole line and the creek bank and that the cuttings would be left in place.
TB 10-22-20
Page 2 of 5
It was noted that the south bank of the creek is very steep and should be protected
from erosion. Any large trees scheduled for removal should be identified in accordance with
our zoning law.
N Siegel said their engineer and contractor visited the site and have provided a report
that he shared with the board. Trees with diameters of at least 12” were a red maple and an
ash on the south side of the creek and four red pines on the north side. There is no de-
stumping and the understory will be left. A non-mechanized method of removal will be used
between the poles and the stream and all work will be done in accordance with DEC guidelines.
Equipment will be used to set 3 poles between the stream and the edge of the clearing on the
north side of the creek.
The evergreens to be planted should be placed outside of the NYSEG right-of-way. They
will provide additional screening when leaves drop from the deciduous trees in the winter. Cl
Skaley suggested eastern red cedar might be used as it is a denser evergreen, but their
landscaper should decide what evergreen is best suited for the site.
Craig Schutt - noted that the Cornell farm in Harford is a NYSEG project, not National
Grid, and everything is underground down there. NYSEG reps should have known that.
People are misinforming us.
Why should we expect them to be so careful on Virgil Creek after the disaster they made
of Willow Glen Creek? There were supposed to be roots left and it all got bulldozed. It’s like a
highway down through there and they straightened the stream. He doesn’t believe there will be
anything different. He still says the Conservation Board needs to look at the south side and he
doesn’t know why they won’t allow that. What is the problem with giving them a site visit for
15 or 20 minutes there? He has asked over and over for access to that side and it makes him
question more and more what is really going to happen.
R Burger said code enforcement officers have visited the south side. They saw stumps
left in place along the Willow Glen tributary. The cutting plan was executed with stumps in
place to protect from erosion. Originally there was a former tractor crossing of Willow Glen
Creek and the contractor per the original site plan could drive on that same road. In order to
protect the creek more and prevent any sediment from getting in the creek, they actually put in
a culvert there. So there is a spot that has a 20’ culvert and that is probably the part that is
being viewed as having straightened the creek. It looks like a road crossing because it is a dirt
road over a culvert, but that was an improvement to avoid sedimentation because the original
plan allowed them to drive through the creek.
C Schutt said that is an improvement, but still doesn’t address access to the south side
of Virgil Creek. No one has been able to see that. He brought it up again at the site visit, but
was ignored.
N Siegel said the poles on the south side are near the panels. There are no trees in
front of the poles.
Supv Leifer closed the public hearing at 5:33 p.m. Written comments were received
from Joe Osmeloski and Craig Schutt (attached).
Dondi Harner of TG Miller Engineers reviewed their letter of October 21, 2020
(attached). Their concerns have been addressed with the conditions.
Supv Leifer moved the resolution, it was seconded by Cl Skaley. The board discussed
the conditions and language was added to (d) regarding use of non-mechanized tree removal
and maintaining the integrity of the streambank.
TB 10-22-20
Page 3 of 5
Joe Osmeloski said he is completely against this plan and knows that the board is going
to go forward with it. His major concern is oversight. There is no oversight in this town. There
are still no poplars planted by the cell tower and that should have been done already. Once
this is approved, they will be allowed to basically do what they want. There is no oversight.
There was a plan to go underground and it should be going underground. We’ve been lied to
before about this plan, and this group has lied about this plan. He is completely against this
and doesn’t believe that once they have their approval there will be any oversight. The SUP for
the cell tower required poplar trees to be planted in certain locations and that hasn’t happened.
There is no oversight in this town.
R Burger said he will check on the Verizon cell tower site and the planting plan will be
executed.
RESOLUTION #130 (2020) - Approving Site Plan Amendment and Reaffirming SEQR
determination for Electric interconnect at 2150 Dryden Road, Tax Parcel 38.-1-3.11
Supv Leifer offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
WHEREAS,
A. Dryden-Tompkins Solar II, LLC (True Green Capital Management) has applied to amend
their site plan for the large-scale solar facility at 2150 Dryden Road, Tax parcel 38.-1-3.11
detailing how this facility will interconnect to the electric grid, and
B. The original site plan was approved by the Town Board on August 17, 2017, and
C. An application dated 8-17-20, visual analysis dated 7-29-20, response letter dated 9-
17-20, a SWPPP modification report dated 9-23-20, and a sketch plan labeled “Pole Farm
site plan, Option 1A” dated 10-16-20 have been submitted, and
D. The Town Planning Department considers the application complete and in conformance
with the requirements of Town Zoning Law §1102, and
E. A public hearing was held on September 17, 2020 and resumed on October 15 and
October 22 with public comments registered in the meeting minutes and considered by this
board, and
F. The Tompkins County Planning Department has reviewed the application pursuant §239
–l, -m, and –n of the New York State General Municipal Law, and
G. In a letter dated October 21, 2020, the Tompkins County Planning Department stated
that they have no recommendations or comments on this proposal, and
H. The Town Engineer has reviewed this application and provided comments in a letter
dated 10-21-20 regarding the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and
environmental impacts and this has been considered by this board, and
I. Pursuant to the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) and its
implementing regulations at 6 NYCRR Part 617, the Town Board of the Town of Dryden
TB 10-22-20
Page 4 of 5
has, on July 20, 2017, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after
having reviewed and accepted as adequate the Environmental Assessment Form Parts 1, 2,
and 3, and
J. The Town Board has reviewed this application relative to the considerations and
standards found in Town Zoning Law §1104 for site plan review.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
1. That the Town of Dryden Town Board hereby reaffirms its negative determination of
environmental significance that was made on July 20, 2017, in accordance with Article 8 of
the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 New York State
Environmental Quality Review for the above referenced proposal, based on the information
in the EAF Part 1 and for the reasons set forth in the EAF Parts 2 and 3, and, therefore, a
Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be required.
2. The Town Board approves the sketch plan documents as referenced in C. above, as a
site plan amendment for 2150 Dryden Road, and waives further site plan review,
conditioned on the following prior to issuance of a Certificate of Compliance:
a. A landscaping plan, to include at least 10 evergreen trees to augment the screening
provided by the natural vegetation buffer along George Road as well as maintaining that
existing vegetation buffer, shall be submitted to and approved by the Town Engineer and
Planning Director.
b. Confirm with NYS Department of Environmental Conservation that this plan meets their
Virgil Creek setback requirements.
c. Bollards shall be placed to protect the guy wire anchors nearest the 40 foot wide access
lane at the east corner of the 18 pole matrix.
d. Vegetation removal across Virgil Creek will be limited to only those trees that will
immediately impair the overhead lines and shorter understory vegetation will not be cut.
Any tree stumps should remain to avoid soil disturbance. Future tree cutting should be
limited to these same requirements. Utilize only non-mechanized tree removal between pole
line and streambank and leave cuttings in place. Protect steep terrain to south of creek
from erosion, and continue erosion control for the life of the project. Streambank integrity
must be maintained.
e. The pervious access road detail per NYSDEC requirements be added to the plan set.
f. The Town of Dryden Standard Conditions of Approval as amended August 14, 2008.
2nd Cl Skaley
Roll Call Vote Cl Sparling Yes
Cl Servoss Yes
Cl Skaley Yes
Cl Lamb Yes
Supv Leifer Yes
Supv Leifer asked R Burger to make sure these conditions are followed and to check on
the Verizon cell tower site.
TB 10-22-20
Page 5 of 5
R Burger said there is an application for a third storage building at the 4 Seasons site
at 1400 Dryden Road. He’d like to schedule a public hearing for November 19. The time was
set at 6:35 p.m. There is still potential for First Light to be ready for their public hearing that
night.
There being no further business, on motion made, seconded and unanimously carried,
the meeting was adjourned at 5:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Bambi L. Avery
Town Clerk