may8

Minutes of Citizens’ Advisory Committee meeting for Wilmington Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP): Policy sub group meeting

May 8, 2006 , Wilmington Town Hall

Attendees

	Jeanne Ashworth
	Judi Gould
	Kara Page
	Absent: Garrett Dague, Tom Hinman, Dawn Stevens, Lisa Nagle

Background

This subgroup effort was planned on April 18 during LWRP policy/strategy “training” session with Andy LaBruzzo and Lisa Nagle , from 3-5 at Town Hall. See April 18 minutes for details.

Items

	Discussion of draft text for policy #3 and #4, and ideas for #1.
	Agreed: policies should include promotion of local ownership/operation of businesses in town, wherever possible; also support for workforce/affordable housing.
	Policy #3 draft – with comments from 5/8 meeting included - is attached to the end of these minutes.
	Policy #4 draft – awaiting comments – is also attached.

Next steps

	Subgroup provides comments on policy #3 to Judi Gould and on #4 draft to Kara Page
	Subgroup meets Monday May 15, 2006 over lunch (12-4) at town hall
	Subgroup provides drafts of remaining policies as outlined below:

For more information on the Wilmington LWRP, please contact:

Jeanne Ashworth , Town Supervisor (946 7179) or Kara Page , ASCI (946 7557)

________________________________________________________________________________________

Policy #3 Draft:

Policy 3 Enhance Visual Quality and Protect Scenic Resources throughout the Waterfront Area

The waterfront area is stunningly beautiful. According to the Wilmington Wild Forest Unit Management Plan, scenic vistas include:

	“ State Highway 86, between Lake Placid and Wilmington is a state-designated ‘Scenic-Byway’ because of its diverse mix of natural resources, with outstanding scenic, cultural and recreation features also found within the highway corridor. “The lands adjacent to the corridor are the most-visible to the traveling public and frequently determine the image and atmosphere of the Adirondack Park for many visitors.”
	“ Whiteface Mountain and its surrounding area afford an endless variety of open space and scenic vista. The Whiteface Veteran’s Memorial Highway in the adjoining intensive use area, often referred to as “the road to the top of the Adirondacks,” introduces thousands of visitors to 360 degree panoramic views of the Adirondack Park every year. A single vantage point yields the High Peaks region, with Lake Placid in –between the south and west, and Québec , Vermont , and Lake Champlain to the north and east.”
	Additional local vistas are described below.

Maintaining, protecting and enhancing this area are of utmost importance not only for the public’s appreciation and enjoyment, but for the preservation of the wildlife and aquatic environment.

Recreational elements and cultural elements resulting from the waterfront area must enhance the natural environment and not detract from it in any way. The interplay of the built and natural environments is of particular importance to visual quality and also must be in harmony with the natural environment.

The intent of this policy is to protect and enhance visual quality and protect recognized scenic resources of the waterfront area. The policy is applicable to the scenic resources of the LWRP waterfront areas identified in Section II of the inventory.

3.1 Protect and Improve Visual Quality Throughout the Waterfront Area

The following standards and guidelines will be used to protect and improve visual quality:

· Prohibit the introduction of discordant features.

· Restore deteriorated and remove degraded elements.

· Upgrade roadside views and scenic areas by removing excessive and unused household items from sight.

· Screen activities and views which detract from visual quality.

· Preserve existing vegetation where it enhances the waterfront and water quality and establish new vegetation to enhance scenic quality.

· Allow for selective clearing of vegetation to provide or enhance public views.

· Group or orient structures to preserve open space and provide visual organization.

· Assure proper scale, siting, forms, colors and materials are used for new structures introduced and they are compatible with and add interest to the existing scenic elements. Consider Adirondack style architecture where applicable.

· Anticipate and prevent impairment of important landscape elements that contribute to scenic qualities.

· Recognize and regulate water-dependent uses as important additions (or distractions) to the visual interest of the waterfront.

· Protect scenic values associated with public lands, including public trust lands and waters, and natural resources.

· Regulate trash disposal and control littering in all public viewscape areas.

· Control excessive noise.

· Remove utility poles and lines that interfere with scenic views.

· Encourage underground utilities.

· Promote sign criterion that contributes to the scenic beauty of the area.

3.2 Protect Aesthetic Values Associated With Recognized Areas of High Scenic Quality

Protecting aesthetic and scenic values associated with the waterfront and any areas designated as scenic areas of statewide significance are essential. These areas include, but are not limited to:

· Lake Everest and the beach area

· The Wilmington Dam

· The Historic Bridge

· The Flume

· Designated Trails

· Designated Fishing Areas

· Whiteface Mountain Ski Area, Tollbooth, Tower and Trails

· KOA Campground Overlook

· High falls Gorge

· The Notch – Falcon Area

· Open farmlands along lower West Branch and Haselton Road

· Cooper Kiln Trail Views

· Heritage Park

Preventing impairment of scenic components that contribute to high scenic quality are crucial.

Policy #4 Draft:

Policy 4.0 Minimize loss of life, structure, and natural resources from flooding and erosion.

Almost all of the waterfront areas in the 1000-foot buffer area within the boundary are located within a 100 – year floodplain and have experienced flooding in the past. The surficial geology, slopes, and flash precipitation events common to the area predispose it to frequent natural erosion. This predisposition is augmented by human activities, including road and structural development in erosion-prone areas and close to river and lake shores; highway management that uses heavy sand or salt deposits to protect drivers in winter (one of which contributes to sedimentation and the other of which kills roadside vegetation, thereby removing a natural buffer against road-related sedimentation); and inadequate sedimentation controls including lack of sediment traps (on Wilmington roads whether town, state or county, at Whiteface ski area parking lots and bridge, perhaps at water management station – check with Bill S on that, along river tributaries and possibly beach area, upstream in NE in housing development areas, and along rte 86).

The Town of Wilmington participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and has local laws covering flood damage prevention [DOES IT?]. These laws are designed to prevent future property damage within the flood hazard area. It needs to identify ways to address building sites that were sited within the flood hazard area before these laws were established. In addition, the Town has not established a storm water management plan, although it would like to.

Erosion continues to be a significant problem all along the banks of the West Branch, upstream from North Elba and downstream to Black Brook and beyond, and on the shoreline of Lake Everest .

Sub-policies and policy standards related to Policy 4 include the following:

4.1 Minimize losses of human life and structures from flooding and erosion hazards.

Standards that are applicable to the Town in regards to protecting life and property using various flood damage prevention and management measures include:

	Avoid development, other than environmentally safe water-dependent uses, in hazard areas;
	Re-locating development and structures away from areas of known flooding hazards as much as possible;
	Use new and enhance existing vegetative non-structural measures which have a reasonable probability of managing flooding and erosion, based on shoreline characteristics including exposure, geometry, and sediment composition;
	Providing funds for housing rehabilitation in the floodplain only in the context of flood proofing, and only when determined as “no practicable alternative;”
	Use “hard” structural erosion protection measures only where above measures are not sufficient to protect the principal use or the use is a necessary, environmentally friendly water-dependent use or reinforces the waterfront redevelopment area.
	Mitigate the impacts of erosion control structures.
	Manage development in floodplains outside of coastal hazard areas so as to avoid adverse environmental effects, to minimize the need for structural flood protection measures, and to meet Federal flood insurance program standards.
	Consider establishment of a Waterfront Focus District to address continuing waterfront is sue s, including flooding and erosion.

4.2 Preserve and restore natural protective features.

Every effort should be made to enhance existing natural protective features such as rocks, bushes, trees, and other native vegetation by the use of non-structural measures that are appropriate to manage erosion problems.

	Re-seed roadside ditches immediately after digging and minimized mowing along erosion-prone roadsides. Use only native species.
	Prohibit waterfront development or interference that changes the flow of the river (Sedgwick’s, 1970s, e.g.) or “channelizes” it to prevent movement.
	Protect beach area with rock buffer [?] to prevent flooding and sand removal in extreme weather events.

The Town should endorse the use of hard structure erosion protection measures only when avoidance is not appropriate because the structure is: water-dependent; construction of a hard structure is the only practical design alternative; the hard structure is limited to the minimum necessary; and adequate mitigation is provided to ensure that there is no adverse impact on adjacent properties.

4.3 Protect public lands when undertaking erosion or flood control projects.

Every effort should be made to protect the loss of public lands threatened by flooding and erosion using the techniques and standards described above.

4.2 Preserve and restore natural protective features.

Prevent development in natural protective features except development as specifically allowed in 6 NYCRR Part 505.8.

Maximize the protective capabilities of natural protective features by: avoiding alteration or interference with shorelines in a natural condition; enhancing existing natural protective features; restoring impaired natural protective features; and managing activities to minimize interference with, limit damage to, or reverse damage which has diminished the protective capacities of the natural shoreline.

Minimize interference with natural watershed processes by: providing for natural supply and movement of unconsolidated materials; minimizing intrusion of structures into watershed waters and interference with watershed processes; and mitigating any unavoidable intrusion or interference.

4.3 Protect public lands and public trust lands and use of these lands when undertaking all erosion or flood control projects.

Retain ownership of public trust lands which have become upland areas due to fill or accretion resulting from erosion control projects.

Avoid losses or likely losses of public trust lands or use of these lands, including public access along the shore, which can be reasonably attributed to or anticipated to result from erosion protection structures.

Mitigate unavoidable impacts on adjacent property, natural watershed processes and natural resources, and on public trust lands and their use.

4.4 Manage navigation infrastructure to limit adverse impacts on watershed processes.

Manage navigation channels to limit adverse impacts on watershed processes by designing channel construction and maintenance to protect and enhance natural protective features and prevent destabilization of adjacent areas; and make beneficial use of suitable dredged material.

Manage stabilized inlets to limit adverse impacts on watershed processes.

4.5 Ensure that expenditure of public funds for flooding and erosion control projects results in a public benefit.

Give priority in expenditure of public funds to actions which: protect public health and safety; mitigate flooding and erosion problems caused by previous human intervention; protect areas of intensive development; and protect substantial public investment in land, infrastructure, and facilities.

Expenditure of public funds is: limited to those circumstances where public benefits exceed public cost; and prohibited for the exclusive purpose of protecting private development, except where actions are undertaken by an erosion protection district.

Ensure that private flood insurance liabilities do not impinge on public resources by requiring full coverage of private property and landowners’ full commitment to restoring any damage to areas in a timely way that fits with other LWRP aesthetic, environmental and economic guidance.

4.6 Consider statistics on extreme weather events when siting and designing projects involving substantial public expenditures.