www.WashingtonCT.org The Town of Washington, Connecticut Town Planning Process

Open Space

Minutes from Meeting on October 28th, 2004

Dan Sherr, Chairman of the Conservation Commission's Open Space Subcommittee greeted the 50+ townspeople at 7:30pm. Dan opened by stating that the objective for the evening was to inform people about open space and the preservation of open space. The goal is to ensure that there is open space for our generation and future generations, to control the town's destiny and future, utilizing the Washington 2003 Town Plan of Conservation and Development. Mr. Sherr encouraged the townspeople present to ask questions and enter into conversation and dialogue.

Mr. Sherr introduced Susan Payne, Chairperson of the Conservation Commission. Susan acknowledged the various people who have been working on Open Space Preservation. These people included the Land Use Commissions, George Ward, Steep Rock, Allie Chapin, William Fairbairn, Dirk Sabin, TCP Ad Hoc Committee, Open Space Steering Committee, and Open Space Inventory Committee, Jack Field's work on the Open Space Plan, Conservation Commission Members, and the Farmland Task Force. Ms. Payne went on to state that there needs to be balance between conservation and development. We need to preserve our water resources and farming while maintaining diversity and rural character.

Dan Sherr's agenda for the evening is to cover the following information about Open Space: What is being considered? Why is it important? How can we make it happen? Mr. Sherr went on to state that there are two types of Open Space, first is perceived Open Space and secondly permanently protected Open Space. Dan added that they are not opposed to development but would like to see managed growth and preservation of what people consider precious parts of town.

What is being considered? Washington at present has 60% perceived Open Space and 19% permanently preserved Open Space. His goal is to have 30% permanently preserved Open Space by 2015. Dan's power point presentation showed a map of what is presently permanently protected, perceived but unprotected and developed land in the Town of Washington. Outlined in the Open Space Plan and the 2003 Town Plan of Conservation and Development are a list of Open Space priorities in order of importance which are: 1) farmland/farming 2) rivers, streams, wetlands, lakes, major groundwater resources 3) watershed 4) continuity of open space 5) ridgelines and 6) wildlife.

Why is it important to preserve open space? Maintaining the town' s rural character and farming (2300 acres are presently owned or leased by farmers), protecting our drinking water, preventing over development ( presently there are 2060 building lots in town there is an opportunity for 2350 more building lots - present population is 4000 added development could increase the population by 6000. It was noted for every additional $1.00 in real estate taxes paid the town pays $1.16 in services.

How can we make it happen? The 2003 Town of Conservation and Development leads the way along with the Open Space Plan. In 2003 an Open Space Fund was established with seed money of $25,000. Citizen's conservation gifts add to the open space inventory. Open Space is not solely funded by taxes. A .33 mil rate increase could add $300,000 a year to the open space fund. This would break down to $33.00 on every $100,000 of the assessed valve of a property. The money in the Open Space Fund is used for two purposes 1) land acquisition and 2) tax reductions for permanent preservation of land. The question was asked if people who already have eased land could get the tax reduction. The answer was yes.

Jack Field gave a history on the Open Space Plan. He explained that PA490 for open space does not permanently preserve land; it only preserves the land temporality which is not the goal they are working toward.

Somebody inquired about there being two farms in Washington on the market. Carlos Canal who is on Steep Rocks Association's newly formed Farmland Task Force addressed the audience. Mr. Canal confirmed the fact that both the Potter Farm for 8.5 million dollars and the Seymour Farm for 24 million are on the market. Mr. Canal went on to state that it is difficult to preserve Washington's farms with an aging farmer population - there is a need for younger farmers. Farmers land is their nest egg and they deserve a comfortable retirement after years of working long days seven days a week. In Washington about 800 acres are owned by farmers and another 1500-1600 acres are leased by farmers. On the Seymour farm 318 acres were permanently preserved in 1992 through a state farm preservation program. Someone asked how the land can be used under the program. Continued farming use can occur on the land. Someone else asked about federal tax breaks for easements, the answer was that there is a large upfront tax break but the property needs to meet specific requirements. In Washington dairy farming is no longer viable, but there are lots of alternatives such as organic, nursery, horse, flower etc. Mr. Canal is researching the question of converting the land for these alternate farming needs and creating a market for the products. Susan Payne interjected that Washington needs to become "farming friendly" to the alternative farmers - buy locally.

Dan Sherr summarized the presentation touching on the three questions about Open Space what is being considered, why it is important and how to make it happen. He ended by stating that "we are all stewards" and opened the floor for questions and comments.

The first question was if there was a prioritized list for open space preservation. Susan Payne addressed this question referring to the work done by the Open Space Inventory subcommittee created under the Conservation Commission. This subcommittee tried to prioritize properties for preservation, they developed criteria. It was a difficult process and they were reluctant to come forward with a list of specific properties. Work will continue on the Open Space Inventory.

The next question was to define a conservation easement. A conservation easement permanently protects the land while the property owner retains ownership and use. A deed restriction doesn't have the same status as a conservation easement; a deed restriction ends but the conservation easement does not.

The suggestion was made to put a moratorium on development while deciding what needs to be protected, identify prime areas. The suggestion was also made to do bonding as a way of acquiring desired land. The reply to these suggestions was that a moratorium has not been discussed but could be and the bonding issue has come up in discussion.

Finally it was asked if preserving land using present regulations i.e. set asides for subdivisions and restrictions on wetlands, slopes etc. and if these areas were figured in on the open space calculations are we at a larger volume. Areas preserved by the regulations (wetlands, slopes etc.) are 27-28% and they are not figured into the open space calculations. Margie Purnell an Inland Wetlands Commission member stated that these areas are not totally safe - people are getting very creative with building plans.

Carlos Canal ended by stating that they are not reinventing the wheel, other towns do tax abatement and have floated bonds. We are not alone and will get guidance.

The forum closed at 9:00pm.

Submitted subject to approval,

Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary