HomeMy WebLinkAboutCAC Minutes - 02_08_22Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council Minutes Page 1 of 7
Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council (CAC)
Minutes of Video Conference (Zoom) Meeting on
Tuesday, February 08, 2022
Danby, New York
Council Members present: Joel Gagnon, Margaret Corbit, Mary Woodsen,
Jonathan Zisk, Brittany Lagaly, Don Schaufler , Katharine Hunter
Council Members absent: Clare Fewtrell (on vacation)
Others present: Elizabeth Keokosky (secretary), Ronda Roaring (Danby resident),
David West (Danby Town Planner), Ted Crane (Danby Resident)
Zoom Meeting was officially called to order at 7:04.
Deletions or Additions to Agenda: Gagnon requested an addition: a report on
Town Solar Panels be made the first item (this ended up being the third item).
Privilege of the Floor (PoF): Ted Crane noted CAC Tax Abatement discussion on
the agenda would determine what he would say, but he wanted to make sure
that the people who were on the Tax Working Subgroup of the Planning Group
(involved with Zoning) had some input.
Approval Minutes MOTION for both December 09, 2021 and January 14, 2022
minutes
Gagnon moved to approve both
Corbit seconded
Unanimous, except for Fewtrell, who was absent.
REPORTS AND UPDATES from agenda.
1. Report from Temporary Easement and Tax Abatement
subcommittee – Joel Gagnon
Gagnon reported that there had been three meetings so far, one of
Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council Minutes Page 2 of 7
which was with Jay Franklin (Director of the County Assessment
Department). In the first, the subcommittee had decided to proceed on
a dual track of collecting information – (1) from the experiences of the
other four towns doing the same thing (two of these towns were
Bethlehem and Orchard Park near Buffalo), and (2) talking with Jay
Franklin. At a meeting with Franklin, he made it clear that he believes
that any tax break should be available to the whole county, not just to
Danby; that a 50% abatement in county tax was the maximum he
thought should be applied; and that he thought a reduction in school tax
would be unlikely. As a town, Danby, is allowed to do what it wants.
Part of the subcommittee’s discussion was to clarify what the state law
allowed them to do (with input from the Town Attorney, Guy Krogh),
and once that was accomplished then to decide what they really wanted
to do. The subcommittee came up with an initial proposal for 3
categories of easements: 29 years, 49 years, and perpetual.
CAC members discussed how a property parcel is divided up between
residence and open land. Crane made the point that division and taxing
of land is formulaic and done through software. This method generates
two assessment figures. But the issue left for the committee to untangle
is how this works with a conservation easement, which applies to the
whole parcel.
Gagnon said that they were going to put out “feelers” to the Ithaca
School District to gauge their receptivity to a tax abatement within the
context of what the CAC would present as an environmentally important
municipal innovation.
In reference to the above choice of easement categories (which includes
only the upper end of the range for short-term easements), Crane made
the point that in Orchard Park the vast majority who used the
temporary easement option signed up for 15 years and then renewed.
2. Status of annual easement monitoring and placing easement signs
– Jonathan Zisk, Don Schaufler & Margaret Corbit
Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council Minutes Page 3 of 7
Zisk reported that not much has changed since January since time of
year is not good for walking property. Signs are up on Rt. 96B and
Deputron Hollow. Melchin/Schott property and Curtis property have
been walked, but still needed to be written up.
3. Solar Panels – Gagnon
Gagnon discussed status of a proposed solar farm on Bald Hill Rd. He
said that there had been 3 different delineations (Note: meaning precise
boundaries) of wetlands on the property. This was both because of rule
changes under different federal administrations and because two
different contractors had given quite different reports. Now the
wetland designation was so broad that it was threatening the whole
project. Gagnon asked CAC members why solar farms were bad for wet
lands. Corbit responded that much of the damage was caused by the
construction with heavy equipment. Zisk added the shadow cast by the
panels is also destructive. Schaufler remarked that there is always a
trade off, and decisions can also be affected by the alternative options
(or lack thereof).
Planner West said the developer would like to move the SEQR ( State
Environmental Quality Review (PDF)) forward – and get a negative
declaration of significant environmental impact. (Note: scientists
disagree somewhat with regard to how wet a system must be to qualify
as a wetland, the precise mixtures of vegetation needed to characterize
a wetland, and the full range of soils characteristic of wetlands. These
differences of opinion have given rise to dozens of slightly different
wetland definition criteria used by scientists, states, local governments,
federal agencies and others. See:
https://aswm.org/pdf_lib/14_mapping_6_26_06.pdf )
The developer (Norbut) would like to get a consensus point of view
between both contractor appraisers - where are the wetlands, if they
are really wetlands, and is the town OK with them going ahead?
Federal rules would give Army Corps jurisdiction, which is stricter. If it
Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council Minutes Page 4 of 7
doesn’t meet federal definition, should town rules apply? It’s a
negotiating point. Different permits are required, some more expensive.
A greater expense might kill the project.
DEC considers solar panels to be a pervious surface (allowing water to
pass through; permeable). They are also using pervious roads as spec-
ed by DEC, which keeps the project within a lower category. This allows
the developer to say that they are creating less than a acre of
impervious surface.
The parcel being considered goes out to Route 96 (on its east end)
where it becomes a creek/swamp. The Army Corps would require that
any loss of wetland on this part of the site be replaced by creating a
another similar wetland in an off-site location – which is questionable in
effect and cost. Wetland decisions also depend on management
practices.
The Town Board asked the CAC to look at , the affect of solar panels on
wetlands(Zisk and Corbit agreed to take this on as a committee and
report back). They were to answer the question: were solar panels
damaging and in what way? The question remains important even if
this particular project doesn’t happen, because of the current emphasis
given to solar energy, and its strategic importance to the town.
Gagnon noted that the consultants reports contained a lot of
information that could be used. Hunter then noted that alternative uses
of this same land may also run into wetland problems. She asked is
spending Norbut’s money to research the condition of the property for
solar panels and then using the results for another purpose ethical?
4. Updates on Proposed Easements: Roaring (Margaret Corbit),
Ravencache/Stein (Brittany Lagaly), Woodsen (Jonathan Zisk),
Hoffman/Karlsen (Joel Gagnon).
Roaring easement - Differences were discussed between what CAC and
Roaring considered appropriate zones for her property Roaring had
sent an edited version of the easement to Corbit proposing that CAC add
back exceptional values to her property and the second zone be put
Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council Minutes Page 5 of 7
back as an environmental protection zone instead of restricted forest
use zone. Since CAC had already rejected those designations, Corbit felt
that they were at an impasse and wondered where to go from here.
Corbit also noted that as the town moves forward with the tax
abatement initiative more criteria are likely to be added for accepting
easement donations, so if it is to be considered at all, this Roaring
easement needs to be done as soon as possible.
Gagnon said the difficulty pivots about what is decided to be an
exceptional value. Zisk had put together a list based on previously
noted exceptional values by CAC and also the Finger Lakes Land Trust.
The Roaring property it was generally agreed does not contain the
necessary exceptional values to warrant creating an environmental
protection zone.
Corbit was going to edit a final draft and send it back to Roaring.
Gagnon suggested talking to her first.
Ravencache easement – Legaly’s work on this for her own property was
praised as well written and put together, but she noted that she hadn’t
realized residential and active use zones were so prohibitive. Gagnon
said it was less restrictive than the Agricultural zone and the least
prohibitive – inclusive of everything the others left out - but it wasn’t
clear if this changed anything because Legaly had already worked
around the problem had prompted her remark.. Gagnon also clarified
that Schedule B and baseline documentation are the same, and serve as
a compendium of reference information to be used as a point of
departure for future monitoring and reports.
Woodsen easement – Zisk said that there were many unusual values and
the property was exceptional because of the variety of land features,
growth ages, and animals. He is still working on the write-up.
Hoffman/Karlsen easement - Gagnon said that new zoning circumvents
the road block to the three houses that they want to put up since they
had wanted to avoid subdividing. They want to avoid the impacts and
expense of a long driveway and are still exploring siting options with
Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council Minutes Page 6 of 7
that objective in mind. A meeting with Planner and Code Officer to
decide on what to do next has not yet happened yet.
5. Easement document outline and discussion – Margaret Corbit
Corbit described a 2-page initial conservation easement process
document for a new CAC member she had written, first for herself, and
then for other members. She said there was a space on the Town’s
collaborative platform called a CAC folder, but she didn’t know yet how
to use it. There is also a public space. She didn’t think that we should
complain about Town Clerk getting files over to new website since she
was accomplishing an enormous amount, the latest being a town
newsletter.
6. Report on Agricultural Presentation Series– Elizabeth Keokosky
Keokosky reported that around 35 people attended the last
presentation, “Importance of Preserving Farmland and Transitioning to
a New Generation of Farmers” – she asked if people thought it had tried
to convey too much information and got some favorable feedback. She
said her main concern now was getting all presentations on the Danby
website for the public to get access to. There was some discussion
about how the Town Clerk could offload some of her work onto the
CAC.
Keokosky described Timothy Woods’ proposed presentation, “A
Paradigm Shift to Bio-Sequestration & Regenerative Agriculture.” She
will write an article for the Danby Newsletter. The presentation uses
the movie, ”Kiss the Ground,” available on Netflix, as a starting point.
This is scheduled for March 10.
7. Status of February 10th Native Plants talk – Brittany Lagaly
Legaly reported the talk was on Thursday at 7pm. She had advertised
on Facebook and in the Danby News. It will be a Zoho (new town
platform) Webinar. She is organizing a Facebook group to share costs
for buying native plants and seeds.
Town of Danby Conservation Advisory Council Minutes Page 7 of 7
8. Status of Timber Harvesting law – Jonathan Zisk & Don Schaufler
Zisk noted that they still need a report from Laura Shawley and the
Highway Department (specifically on what they do now with bonding).
Responding to requests to make the law less complicated, Zisk has made
9 points summarizing it. As it is written now there have been
complaints that there is too much to read before you arrive at what you
have to do. (There is also some confusion as to whether it is to be an
ordinance, or rather an addendum or appendage to some other law,
such as zoning law.) Corbit suggested embedding links from those 9
points to take the reader specifically to the section where he/she needs
to go. Zisk said that in essence the points then become the table of
contents. So the conclusion was to make it not shorter, but more
accessible, using the technique of embedded hyperlinks to simplify the
document. Zisk is going to rework it in this format. Corbit said the top
level link should be whether or not I need this document.
Schaufler reiterated that the conversation with Laura was mostly about
referencing the bonding process they already have in place in existing
law and having the highway department meet the prospective logger
before the application is approved by the zoning official.
Gagnon suggested using Writer in Zoho as a group document editor.
Zisk said he preferred comments to edits, citing some bad experiences
he had in the past.
There was no Executive session
Next Meeting via Zoom is on March 8th 2022 at 7p.m.
Adjournment at 8:56
_____________________________________________
Submitted by Elizabeth Keokosky (Secretary)