HomeMy WebLinkAboutCB 2023-07-25 attCB 2023-07-25
Approved
Page 1 of 4
CONSERVATION BOARD
July 25, 2023
Hybrid
Approved September 26, 2023
Present: Jeanne Grace (Acting Chair), Bob Beck, Anne Clark, Kate McKee* (alternate),
Nancy Munkenbeck* (arrived 7.49pm), Craig Schutt
Absent: Gian Dodici (Chair), Steve Bissen, Andrew Miller, Tim Woods
Liaisons: Spring Buck* (Town Board)
Staff: Loren Sparling (Deputy Town Clerk)
“*” denotes attendance via Zoom
The meeting was called to order at 7.02 p.m.
Review and Approval of Minutes from May 30, 2023
On motion made by C Schutt, seconded by B Beck, the minutes of June 27, 2023 were
unanimously approved.
Update: Agriculture Advisory Committee
C Schutt reported that the Ag Committee met on July 12th. They reviewed parts of the
Ag Protection Plan in anticipation of the Zoning Law update. In particular, they reviewed
current definitions and made a list of definitions they either feel need updating or ones that are
lacking that they feel should be added. They plan to review other sections of the Plan next
month so as to be prepared with input as the zoning law is updated.
Update: Rail Trail
B Beck reported that the Town Board passed two resolutions last Thursday. One was to
accept a donation of land from the Knickerbocker Bed Frame Co to be used for construction of
one of the ramps for the Rte 13 bridge. The second resolution was to guarantee the backstop
for the cost increase to the project, which we anticipated; this a requirement by DOT for the
grant. The Town Board voted unanimously in favor of this. We don’t know the exact cost yet
because we have not sent out a Request for Proposals; we won’t know until a month or two,
when we get responses back from construction companies.
Update: Town Board
S Buck felt that if there were going to be discussions about developing ballfields or
parks for the Dryden community, organizations like Cornell Design Connect should be
engaged. The Town Board supported this notion.
S Buck reported (via Dan Lamb) that there had been additional conversations with the
company interested in putting up electronic billboards. They are on board with keeping to dark
sky requirements.
Discussion of Wetlands on Town-Owned Property in the Village of Dryden
S Buck confirmed the Town Board’s commitment to the wetlands. The access route to
the landlocked parcel through the wetlands will be changed so that the wetlands are not
infringed upon. From Dan Lamb, she learned that an alternative right-of-way was found,
accessing the parcel from another direction, that would not infringe upon the wetlands. The
CB 2023-07-25
Approved
Page 2 of 4
Town is going to move forward with revoking the original right-of-way and establishing another
right-of-way to ensure that the wetlands are properly protected.
B Beck asked for confirmation that a wetland delineation was going to go forward. He
wondered how much of that land is indeed wetland and whether there should even be
development there at all.
B Beck informed the Board that Cornelius had a right-of-way to his landlocked parcel
from a side street off Lee Rd, but Dryden Village denied this due to increased traffic concerns. A
Clark inquired of the scale of Cornelius’ development plans in regard to these concerns. Was it
in the range of two houses or many apartments?
S Buck has heard that there is no active plan. This is more about a right-of-way should
there be interest in building on the landlocked parcel. The Town will do a formal wetland
delineation so that the wetlands are not infringed upon. This delineation will transcend
property boundaries and not just be on Town-owned property.
C Schutt relayed that the DEC vehemently opposes a road going through the wetland.
They have already talked with Dave Sprout, who was selected by the Town to get the wetland
delineation going. What bothers C Schutt is that the document filed with Tompkins County
explicitly defines a right-of-way (ROW) and states that a road will be built on that ROW at the
Town’s expense: “5. Town, at its entire cost and expense, upon request of Cornelius, shall
construct to the Town’s then-current specifications for a town road, a road upon the Right-of-
Way, open to the public and serving Parcel A as depicted on said Survey.”
B Beck noted that the document also contained Item 6, which he is confident was put
in there as a fail-safe. It is a negotiating strategy for a sensitive negotiation. Item 6 states that if
the Town provides an alternate ROW, it will revoke the original ROW: “6. In the event that the
Town should notify Cornelius in writing that it intends to construct a road across remaining
lands of the Town running north from East Main Street to and serving in part Parcel A, upon
the completion of said road Cornelius shall surrender the Right-of-Way to the Town and said
Right-of-Way shall cease to exist.”
Paraphrasing Dan Lamb at the last Town Board meeting, S Buck offered that the Town
has the right to revoke the original ROW, provided that another route to the landlocked parcel
is identified; that is what we need to do, and that is what we are going to move forward with.
J Grace asked if it would be helpful for the Conservation Board to send a message of
support or encouragement to the Town Board. S Buck answered that it would be great if it was
a message of support. We’re all on the same page. She wanted the Conservation Board to know
that there was never any intent on the Town Board’s part to do environmental damage.
A Clark thought it would be nice to have a friendly, supportive letter denoting that they
understand that the Town is taking the wetland seriously, that the Conservation Board fully
supports a delineation, and that it’s viewpoint be considered when outlining the best possible
alternative route to satisfy Cornelius.
A Clark acknowledged Cornell Design Connect as a great group through their work
designing nature trails at the Binghamton Zoo. Depending on how extensive the proposed
wetland project is for Design Connect, it might be good to possibly involve TC3 students as
well. She suggested that TC3 be contacted for potential faculty advisors to assist with that.
S Buck added that if we get any of these groups involved, we might want to think about
scope. A smaller scope would focus on, for example, a raised walkway or education about the
CB 2023-07-25
Approved
Page 3 of 4
wetlands. K McKee mentioned that the Ithaca Children’s Garden has a small version of this,
educating the public about the wetland and its importance.
B Beck cautioned that it may be too soon to bring in Design Connect now as the
wetland delineation has yet to be completed. (The Design Connect deadline for fall semester
projects is August 1.) Another round of Design Connect applications will occur in December,
though, for spring semester projects.
Regarding the timeframe for the delineation and who will do it, C Schutt said that DEC
can undertake a delineation, but probably will not be able to do so this year, given the amount
of work they currently have to do. The Town can hire, however, a certified delineator. It is S
Buck’s understanding that this is what the Town will do, and then have the DEC ensure
accuracy; she added the caveat that she has yet to receive confirmation for this course of
action and does not want to misspeak.
C Schutt had inquired of Charlie Smith, a former Conservation Board member, what he
knew about the wetland as he had previously surveyed it for plants. Several years ago, Smith
had visited the wetland at the east end of Neptune Drive with Bard Prentiss, another former
Conservation Board member, and determined that the wetland is home to flora rare in New
York State. Said plants are obligate wetland species, meaning that they do not grow outside of
wetland habitats. More importantly, one of the plants mentioned is the larval food for a moth
species that has only been found in minerotrophic fens. The wetlands are also classified as a
Unique Natural Area by Tompkins County.
S Buck cautioned that publicity of these rare plants might lead to theft by collectors. In
light of this, A Clark suggested that the Board not specify the flora in its letter to the Town
Board, but rather keep the language vague.
A Clark then put forth the proposition of sending a supportive letter to the Town Board
that recognizes its intent and commitment to preserving the wetland. The motion was seconded
by J Grace, and the measure passed with a unanimous vote.
A Clark will draft the letter this week and send it out to Board members for comment, in
the hope that a final version will be presented to the Town Board by their next meeting.
Other Information Items
S Buck informed the Board that she had met twice with Rick Young. Young showed her
the streambank stabilization project. He is saving tree balls/root wads for a project with US
Fish and Wildlife, whereby trees will be woven together along the creek by the Pinckney Rd
bridge. At last week’s Town Board meeting, Young reported that they are struggling because
they have the grant and a lot of supplies, but the state permits are slow in coming. He is
pushing to get that moving.
S Buck also reported that there were discussions around the need to create a new
website for the Town. This might be an opportunity for the Conservation Board to provide
additional web content or educational items than what is currently provided.
C Schutt commented on an email that S Buck had sent out to Board members,
specifically in regard to DPW actions on a beaver dam near Purvis Rd. He felt misled by Rick
Young’s statement that equipment was not used in there; the ruts that went down into the
creek suggest otherwise. No one else would have gone in there like that.
S Buck reiterated what Young had said to her, that there is nothing the Town has that
wouldn’t sink when put down there. We would have no way of getting it out. S Buck did not
CB 2023-07-25
Approved
Page 4 of 4
have the sense that there was any dishonesty on Young’s part and raised the possibility that
someone unaffiliated with the Town might have gone down there.
C Schutt redirected the conversation to ditching, stating that the Conservation Board
has made numerous attempts to collaborate with Rick Young, but he basically ignores us. S
Buck acknowledged these past interactions and stated that maybe having a new path forward
with him will help. She understood that there had been an agreement last year for DPW to do a
pilot project with the Conservation Board in regard to ditching practices. This should be well
documented, and a follow-up should be undertaken next year to see how this collaboration
went in order to capture good work done and open up a back-and-forth dialogue.
S Buck asked if there was a list of ditching sites that had been previously vetted by
both the Board and Rick Young. Gian Dodici was trying to get that list made but was unable to
meet with Young. A Clark suggested that one approach might be to see if Young already had a
mental list that he could share with the Board. S Buck said that after her next meeting with
Rick Young, she will help coordinate with the Board so that they can review a site list and start
providing input. Board members were pleased with this course of action, calling it a potential
big break towards getting things done. S Buck added that if there were roads of concern that
the Conservation Board thinks should be on the list, to email her. Even if they are not slated to
be done this year, they will be in the queue.
Last month, Tim Woods reported that beavers had plugged a culvert in Freeville,
causing flooding to occur on residential property. B Beck met with Rick Young and was told
that the culvert had since been cleaned out. To avoid a major washout from occurring at this
location in the future, Young will arrange for one of his staff to periodically clean out the
culvert.
C Schutt (via L Sparling) distributed by email a packet (see attached) that contained the
following: 1) Local Law No. 4 (2000), which created the Conservation Advisory Council; 2) Local
Law No. 1 (2004), which established the Conservation Board and stated its purpose; and 3)
Conservation Board Rules and Procedures, approved by the Dryden Town Board on February
16, 2012. He wanted to provide those Board members who had not seen it with a copy. B Beck
recalled a time when new Board members were provided with a binder containing such
information. A Clark suggested that these and other basic reference documents be put on the
website.
Given that nothing was currently pressing, the Board decided to tentatively cancel its
August meeting (scheduled for August 29, 2023).
There being no further business, on motion made by A Clark and seconded by B Beck,
the meeting was adjourned at 8:00 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Loren Sparling
Deputy Town Clerk