Commission backs letter supporting Roberts family conservation easement that would cap development at four homes

The Bradford County Board of County Commissioners voted to approve a letter of support for Roberts Capital Ventures’ application for an agricultural protection conservation easement covering roughly 1,000 acres, a move the property’s conservation representative said would reduce allowable building rights on the land to four.

The action, moved by Commissioner Daughtry and seconded by Commissioner Spooner, passed by voice vote (tally recorded as 3–0). The commission’s support is for the family’s application to state conservation-buy programs; the county did not purchase the easement itself.

Ramesh Butch, introduced as the director of conservation acquisitions for the Northwell Land Trust and the preparer of the application, told the commission the land is currently zoned RE and AG and “allows a certain amount of units per acre.” He said the easement proposal would “eliminat[e] all but 4 of those,” and that the remaining four building rights “ostensibly is for the family,” but “if the current owner chooses not to build those 4, the property can be sold to another owner outside of the family. The restrictions remain in place.”

Butch also addressed public-access and recreational questions. “The level of public access would continue to whatever it is today,” he said. “It could increase if Mr. Roberts or the next owners wanted to allow it. But there is no guarantee that the public has access under a conservation easement, just like it doesn’t have a guaranteed access today, unless there is a physical location where county property or public property fronts on the lake today.”

Commissioners pressed for details on uses that would be restricted. Butch said the easement’s purpose is to protect conservation values and would limit uses that “would destroy the property in terms of conservation value,” citing development, subdivision, and mining as examples. He said limited, low-impact commercial or recreational activities that do not harm conservation values — for example, small-scale guided hunts or boutique, low-footprint operations — could be consistent with the easement, but large commercial recreational facilities or major infrastructure would be inconsistent.

County staff and commissioners also discussed the tax and permitting consequences if any of the four building rights were exercised. Butch said houses built under the easement would still be subject to local development codes and property taxes: “Those 4 stay on the tax rolls, stay at fully taxable value because they’re not conservation. Conservation is everything that’s not developed.”

The commission’s letter expresses support for the Roberts family’s application to state programs to purchase a conservation easement; the easement itself would be negotiated between the Roberts property owners and the state if the state elects to buy it.

Proponents of the easement framed it as a way to protect lakeside viewsheds and wildlife habitat from large-scale subdivision along Lake Sampson and related lakes. Opponents or concerned residents at the meeting had raised questions about whether the public’s ability to access lakeshore areas would be reduced by a private easement; commissioners asked staff to continue communicating with the applicant about the possibility of reserving a county-access parcel as part of future negotiations.

The action recorded at the meeting: a motion to approve a letter of support for Roberts Capital Ventures’ agriculture protection and easement application, moved by Commissioner Daughtry, seconded by Commissioner Spooner, outcome approved (voice vote; tally recorded as 3–0).