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)