Victor Conservation Board hears developer on wetlands buffer, easement plan for Nicolola subdivision

At the Town of Victor Conservation Board’s Oct. 21 meeting, developer Keith Nicolov outlined changes to the Nicolola final subdivision after state review designated wetlands on the site and imposed a 100-foot no-disturbance buffer.

Nicolov said the proposal would develop 42.4 acres into seven lots with access from County Road 9 and that the design now places about 22 acres into a conservation/open-space easement that follows the state wetland and the town’s 75-foot stream buffer. “The DEC basically took jurisdiction of the wetlands at the southeast corner of the site and that automatically entails a 100 ft buffer beyond the delineated wetland,” Nicolov told the board. He said the easement layout and buffers together amount to roughly half the parcel, consistent with the district’s 50% open-space requirement.

Why it matters: The state buffer reduces the developable area on Lot 7 and other portions of the site and will shape what future homeowners can do near the creek and wetlands. Board members pressed for easement language that will be clear to future owners and recommended durable monumentation to mark easement corners so markers are not lost over time.

Board members discussed three common easement templates used in town reviews: natural resource easements (most restrictive), site-specific easements (allow tailored permissions such as limited seasonal mowing) and open-space easements (least restrictive). The board recommended a site-specific easement for Lot 7 to permit seasonal mowing or limited agricultural activity while keeping the rest of the property under natural-resource protections. “Site-specific…you literally check the box for seasonal mowing,” a board member said during the discussion.

Nicolov and board members also raised the question of agricultural (AG) exemptions. The applicant noted Lot 7 is larger than eight acres and has been farmed; he asked whether that history could qualify the lot for an AG exemption despite the wetland designation. Board members said that determination is made at the state level and encouraged the applicant to pursue the matter with appropriate authorities.

On stormwater, the applicant said the design uses shallow infiltration basins to recharge storm runoff rather than permanent ponds. He described the basins as treating the initial “first flush” of pollutants for routine storms and allowing overflow routing for extreme events, and noted the soil in the area is highly permeable, which favors infiltration approaches.

The board and applicant agreed on next steps: town staff will send the applicant a template site-specific easement form (via staffer Lisa) that Nicolov’s team can complete and return before the planning-board hearing, which the applicant said is scheduled for Oct. 30. The board emphasized that the easement language should be clear for future owners and, where possible, avoid ambiguous allowances that would undercut the buffers’ conservation purpose.

No formal board vote on the subdivision was taken at the Conservation Board meeting. The board did conduct routine business: members voted to approve the Sept. 16 and Oct. 7 minutes by voice vote (verbal assent recorded; specific tallies were not provided in the transcript) and later approved a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:07 p.m.

Next steps: Nicolov’s team will receive the easement template from town staff, refine the site-specific provisions for Lot 7 and proceed to the planning-board hearing on Oct. 30 for final site-plan review.