Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCAC Minutes - 11_10_20Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council Minutes Page 1 of 8 Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council (CAC) Minutes of Video Conference (Zoom) Meeting on Tuesday, November 10, 2020 Danby, New York Council Members present: Clare Fewtrell (chair), Joel Gagnon, George Adams, Jonathan Zisk, Ruth Sherman & Brittany Lagaly. Don Schaufler & Mary Woodsen (arrived later) Council Members absent: Bill Evans Others present: Elizabeth Keokosky (secretary), Ronda Roaring (Danby resident), David West (new town planner), Katharine Hunter (former CAC member) Informal Introduction of New Town Planner David West informed us that he had been managing a countywide housing rehab program, the Community Housing Development Fund, which is a collaboration between Ithaca, Cornell, and Tompkins County for funding affordable housing (under the Department of Planning and Sustainability at the county level). He’s married with 2 children (in middle school and high school now) and has been in Ithaca for 11 years. He has a Masters from Cornell’s Department of City and Regional Planning and worked on Community Housing Trusts with INHS for his thesis on how to assess values of housing within these Trusts. In addition, he had a part-time consulting firm with C.J. Randall (a former Danby planner) and also opened a vintage furniture store with his wife. He is enthusiastic about Danby’s forward looking planning approach. On December 1st he will start working halftime in Danby and halftime still for the County. He goes full-time in Danby in January 2021. Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council Minutes Page 2 of 8 After this introduction, the Zoom Meeting was officially called to order at 7:15. Deletions or Additions to Agenda: Delete item 8 on Planner search status. Change discussion on Forestry Class to after Management Plans until Schaufler arrives. Privilege of the Floor (PoF) Comments were kept until discussion of the Management Plan. Approval Minutes MOTION for October 13, 2020 Fewtrell moved to approve Zisk seconded Unanimous approval REPORTS AND UPDATES 1) Management Plans for Sylvan Lane and Deputron Hollow Road Town Properties – Jonathan Zisk Zisk expressed some frustration with the continuing process of including suggestions and re-editing that CAC members have been requiring of him, but admitted that there are some open-ended aspects of the plans, such as the Emerald Ash Borer problem, yet he remained committed to the low level/low scale oversight that he has been advocating. He did suggest that 4 or 5 interested people should combine their expertise and spend a few hours walking through the properties taking notes for a baseline list of current species. This should be a recommendation in the plans. Zisk asked what happens next, and Gagnon advised the group that when the plans are completed they would go to the town board, which has to hold a public hearing before they are adopted. Questions or adverse public comment could send them back to the CAC for further work. POF: Keokosky (secretary) suggested the document could benefit from some rearranging and reformatting with large topic headings to make it more readable, and volunteered to do so. The offer was accepted. Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council Minutes Page 3 of 8 POF: Roaring also thought the plans needed reformatting, and other work, and debated some of the content. She made the suggestion that people living on or near Deputron Hollow should be invited to look at the management plan and offer their opinions. She said that though the property was near the headwaters of 6 mile creek, and though the creek forms the Hollow and is the focal point of the area, the creek was not mentioned. She also disagreed that the moist property section (mentioned in the plan) existed on such a steep slope. She thought more active management should be done, such as replanting chestnut oaks that had originally been there before a logging job took them out in the 80s, and giving help to the hemlocks, which are the signature tree of the area. She would also like to see restoration of an understory of native plants, such as lady’s slipper. Zisk debated these conclusions and called some of these suggestions beyond the scope of the management plan, which had been kept deliberately simple. Nevertheless, he asked Roaring to email them to him. Gagnon told Roaring she would have a chance to respond again at the town board level and said he thought including the other landowners in the Deputron Hollow area was an excellent idea. Not just to discuss the management plan, but as part of a larger effort to preserve more of the Hollow and as a springboard to a larger action in the neighborhood. 2) Report on Forestry Class – Elizabeth Keokosky and George Adams (standing in for Don Schaufler) Adams reported that there was a good turnout. (Note: Just under 40 people attended and the audience was diverse – well beyond the borders of Danby and even the county; some came from all over NY State and even other states). Keokosky felt that the combination of Jay Harris and Don Schaufler both speaking had been very effective, though it hadn’t been particularly planned that way. The goal of the program was to educate the typical property owner about the importance of using a Forester – and, as Jay Harris had reiterated, the importance of establishing a relationship with him. She had some concerns that the Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council Minutes Page 4 of 8 presentation might have been over-oriented to harvesting and not to management. Many people had responded and were particularly interested in prices on various kinds of lumber. She noted that there were not many questions about the logging ordinance, which was covered at the end. This was a little surprising but Adams reflected that such questions might have been answered elsewhere in the program. People had been brought out by the extensive advertising and the ease of a Zoom connection. They had found out about it through several Forestry associations and through a Facebook post by the Cornell Cooperative Extension. Gagnon also thought all speakers had been complementary. Keokosky felt it had been an experiment, especially in learning about Zoom webinars. A lot of time (spent by the town clerk, Janice Adelman, who set up the Zoom session working with Gagnon, Keokosky, and Schaufler) had been put into familiarizing themselves with the Zoom format, but now that the technique was familiar, another could be done more easily. Fewtrell congratulated Keokosky, and thanked her for organizing it. 3) Easement Updates – Hoffman and Gladstone - Clare Fewtrell and Joel Gagnon A report on the visit to Dan Hoffman’s property on Bruce Hill Rd. was given by Gagnon. Fewtrell had sent a draft of the Easement Baseline Report she had written to members via email. Gagnon noted it was missing key geographic information that Adams would have provided he had come. The property is large - 100 acres - and they (Gagnon, Woodsen, and Fewtrell) had walked the perimeter. It was sloping but flattened out in the middle. The owner and prospective buyers had made a first pass on how it might be divided into Residential and Active Use, Forest, and Environmental zones. It raised a question that applies to other potential easements (e.g., Gladstone) as well – is there a need for an additional zone? See Item 4 below. Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council Minutes Page 5 of 8 Discussion continued on the next steps with the prospective buyers and Dan Hoffman. Fewtrell asked if she should send them the draft baseline report she wrote. She needed to respond, also taking into account Gagnon’s letter and email to them. Gagnon agreed, but he noted that this easement has been a long-term effort, and it would be good to include the listing of the natural, extraordinary values to the extent to the extent they can be determined. Fewtrell was hoping Gagnon and Woodsen could come up with this list. Fewtrell hadn’t heard back from Woodsen. She would like the list finished, and the collected information sent back to potential easement holders’ court. Fewtrell reported that the Gladstone easement had been held up by one of Gladstone’s pot-bellied pigs requiring surgery. 4) Question on Easement Use Zones designations – Gagnon Gagnon reported that what we are finding is that everyone feels that their property is special, but the Environmental Protection Zone was developed to protect something rare or unique – something at risk – a special woods, or plant or animal. It was not meant for woods that easement owners want to stay woods but which can also be managed – can become sugar bush, for instance. Currently there is no provision for that, and the Environmental Protection Zone is too restrictive and for others the Field and Forest Zone is not restrictive enough. Should we add a Forest Zone for a way to keep a forest area always forest, with only forest-specific uses? This would be an alternative to creating exceptions in an existing zone. Sherman, who is considering an easement and has a nice forest, is afraid the Ag and Forest Zone would not prevent future owners from harvesting or clear cutting for lumber. She would like to see harvesting for firewood be the limit. (Here the host lost connection to the Zoom session and some confusion resulted and it took a while to reconnect as a different session. . Schaufler and Woodsen joined the meeting at this juncture and the Secretary continues from her notes.) Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council Minutes Page 6 of 8 Gagnon asked what we can put in a Forest Zone, and Zisk responded, “Just manage for limited forest health.” Sherman felt that wasn’t clear enough. Sherman’s concern is that if they have 100 acres and put it into an easement then future buyers could cut trees for profit. She resonated with horse-drawn logging, which had minimized invasiveness and had been selective, leaving big trees for long term forest development. She was OK with cutting for firewood and trails. Fewtrell had similar concerns about a meadow – which needs management to stay a meadow. It takes active management. An Ag Zone allows this but not field and forest. Zisk noted that we can’t mandate care, only restrictions. Gagnon added that we cannot even enforce restrictions. The whole current template is based on the premise that we want to minimally restrict. The main goal is to reduce the developmental potential. Zisk said one step is needed between managed (ag and forest) and completely restrictive (environmentally protected). An additional zone which allowed specifically some restrictions on forest. The end result of this discussion was that Sherman would head up a group consisting of Zisk, Schaufler, and herself to write up a description for a Restrictive Forest Zone and report to our next meeting. After CAC approval, it would be run by the town board and the town lawyer. 5) Inspecting Current Easements – Ruth Sherman Sherman reported on status of annual monitoring on current easements. Since possible tax abatement is connected to annual monitoring it helps motive easement owners. She had now inspected the Curtiss easement with Zisk and Fewtrell. Palmer easement will be scheduled in future. 6) Easement Signs – George Adams Looking for options, Adams (through his wife, Camille) checked with Gnomon Copy but they can only make a sign that is stiff (tin) and cannot be wrapped around a tree. Adams reported that he had Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council Minutes Page 7 of 8 submitted a picture of the sign to Voss. He was asking about the set- of-25 or more quantity and was waiting on price (aluminum stock, $8 per sign was basic charge at this quantity). He suggested that someone needed to take ownership of the original digital copy and it should also be stored somewhere on the town website. Distribution of signs was discussed and the suggestion made that they should be put where the public can see them to make best use of them, since it would be too expensive to make many copies. Discussion of costs and advantages of various pricing packages plus setup fee followed. Questions were raised about whether the cost for 25 is the same for each sign or whether the first 24 are more expensive, and whether there will be a setup charge each time signs are ordered, or just the first time. Fewtrell came up with a total of 10 needed now for current easements. Group questioned should provision be made now for the future to take advantage of buying in quantity? Should sign be put on a board or wrapped around the tree. Schaufler noted that if the signs are wrapped around a tree, aluminum roofing nails should be used as they don’t rust. 7) Logging Ordinance –Don Schaufler and George Adams Adams reported that he and Schaufler continue to prune back the original draft to make it easier to enforce. They are looking for ways to encourage hiring a forester without making it an absolute requirement. They are going to talk to Danby Code Enforcement and the Highway Department about ways for enforcing an ordinance. Might need a consulting forester to occasionally help work with Code Enforcement Office inspection. Fewtrell requested a report of those conversations and a preliminary draft ordinance for the next meeting. Gagnon asked about bonding. Adams said yes, that was in there, as well as worker’s comp. (Performance bond differs from liability insurance, which addresses usual insurance logger must carry.) Adams said the most important thing is not a forestry plan but a logging plan, which lets the town know what is going on and the impact on roads so highway dept. can be notified. Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council Minutes Page 8 of 8 The logging plan need only be a simple document (including landing location and other basic information), whose main purpose is to inform the town. The Code Enforcement officer has a certain number of days to respond with a permit. He/she has to communicate with Highway department for feedback from them. Fewtrell warned that we must produce something that won’t be totally ignored. Adams suggested ways to work with loggers, but admitted it is not completely water-tight. So how do get people to report? This is the rationale for, not a toothless ordinance, but neither a too restrictive one. Another discussion point was how to use the town fee to encourage use of a forester? Schaufler pointed out there are no state guidelines for what is a forester. But the harvesting guidelines in the ordinance are encouraging a qualified person. The forester is not the logger – the logger is an additional person - but having a consultant forester can help and advise the landowner on his/her goals and will increase the landowner’s income since he/she can oversee a competitive bidding process between loggers contracting for the job. There was no Executive session Next Meeting through Zoom is on December 8th at 7p.m. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:59 p.m. _____________________________________________ Submitted by Elizabeth Keokosky (Secretary)