Lansing Open Space Conservation Plan
Overview
One of the Town of Lansing’s most identifiable attributes is its abundance of open spaces and scenic vistas.
Dramatic gorges, vast fields, mature forests, and the Cayuga lakefront are spread across the Town’s landscape, contributing significantly to wildlife habitat, environmental sustainability, and the Town’s aesthetic character.
In order to plan for and prioritize these open spaces, the Town has undertaken this Open Space Conservation planning process to move towards an action plan for maintaining the community character of Lansing amidst growing development pressures.
The purpose of the Open Space Conservation Plan is to inventory and prioritize open space protection efforts across the Town. The Plan’s intent is to provide a well-informed roadmap for future actions pertaining to the maintenance and celebration of the generous open spaces that characterize Lansing.
This Plan analyzes the existing assets and resources within the Town, and prioritizes various types of open space and natural resources that will allow the Town to make informed decisions about conservation and development efforts in the future.
The Plan also lays out an implementation strategy that identifies key actions and strategies that the Town can undertake to accomplish the community wide vision for its open spaces, recognizing that this plan’s implementation will require follow on activities such as more in-depth analysis of individual properties as projects and opportunities rise.
What is Open Space?
Open space can hold a variety of meanings. Often what comes to mind includes ecological resources such as wildlife habitat, wetlands, forests, and grasslands; hydrological resources such as stream corridors and the Cayuga Lake shore, and scenic vistas and places where people can observe these features.
Most of these resources have been documented within the Town’s existing Natural Resources Inventory, but open space also includes farmland, undeveloped areas of residential lots, and recreational facilities. Most of the open spaces in Lansing are privately owned, but some are owned by public entities or organizations such as the Finger Lakes Land Trust and are available for public access.
While recreational activity can be an added benefit of open space conservation, this was not a focus of this Plan. For more information regarding parks and recreational facilities, please refer to the Town of Lansing’s Parks, Recreation, and Trails Master Plan .
Open Space Conservation Plan Vision
Vast open spaces, scenic vistas, and an abundance of natural resources are the defining features of the Town of Lansing, and are invaluable assets to the community’s residents and leaders. As such, Lansing will protect and celebrate its open spaces and natural resources to maintain its identity and preserve the rich quality of life that they afford the Town’s residents. The Town will prioritize conservation efforts, and will develop and maintain strong partnerships with local agencies, organizations, and the farming community to accomplish its goals while supporting their efforts. This will require thoughtful planning and strategic actions to ensure that this vision and the community’s goals are realized. These efforts will allow for enhanced community access and recreation, uplift local property values, and ensure the protection of crucial environmental resources that will enhance the Town’s resiliency and sustainability for years to come.
Project Goals
Benefits
The benefits of conservation efforts are numerous, and include but are not limited to: economic benefits, environmental benefits, and social benefits.
Economic Benefits
The economic impacts of open space conservation include both direct monetary benefits to individuals or governments, as well as indirect impacts such as avoided costs or appreciation of assets. These benefits include, but are not limited to:
- Property Values: Studies have shown that homeowners are willing to pay more to live in proximity to open space, particularly when adjacent lands cannot be developed, resulting in higher sale values and thus higher property tax revenues.
- Job Creation / Retention: Open space can create a variety of employment opportunities, which includes the maintenance of farming as a viable industry in the Town, which is currently a significant component of the Town’s economic base. Open space supports tourism and outdoor recreation, which can spur additional investment in supportive businesses such as rental shops, restaurants and drinking establishments; as well as park and conservation staff employment opportunities.
- Reduced Community Service Costs: Another significant benefit is the reduced cost of providing public services required for open space when compared to other land uses. Several fiscal impact studies have shown that residential development often results in a net fiscal loss for communities, when comparing the tax revenue raised versus the cost of providing public services. The graphic below shows the median cost to provide public services for each dollar of revenue raised, as shown by Cost of Community Services (COCS) Studies performed by the American Farmland Trust.
Environmental Benefits
There are numerous environmental benefits of open space conservation efforts, ranging from localized microclimate benefits to working towards long-range sustainability and resiliency goals.
- Air Quality Improvements: Research shows that trees and other vegetation can reduce particular pollution by absorbing and filtering particulate matter (EPA, 2023). Additionally, vegetation can reduce air temperatures and reduce ground level ozone or smog.
- Climate Resiliency: Climate change will continue to have adverse impacts to communities across the globe, and in Upstate New York this often presents itself as severe weather events and increased precipitation. The conservation of crucial ecosystems that are designed to retain stormwater (such as wetlands), as well as the protection of sensitive landscapes, particularly those subject to erosion, will reduce the risk of flooding impacts to property.
- Water Quality: Vegetated stream corridors and forest lands help to slow water down as it moves through the watershed, which allows it to be filtered. This helps to remove any particulate matter or pollution that has been collected as stormwater moves over impervious surfaces or agricultural land - thus protecting the water quality of the Town and the region as a whole.
- Wildlife Habitat: Open spaces provide crucial habitat for all native wildlife populations, and supports biodiversity which has significant impacts on the long-term sustainability of the local ecosystem.
- Reduced Emissions: By designating land as open space, the greenhouse gas emissions of the materials, construction, and operation of new development in the Town are avoided.
Social Benefits
Social benefits include benefits for both residents of Lansing as well as the broader regional population. It should also be noted that many of these social benefits have implied financial benefits, as discussed in the examples below:
- Public Health Improvements: There is a wide body of research that suggest that access to open space can improve public health metrics, both physical and mental. This is due to a variety of factors, including but not limited to increased opportunity for physical activity, air quality improvements, increased shade during warmer months, and stress reduction. As suggested above, improved overall community health can result in reduced healthcare spending on both the individual and collective level.
- Quality of Life Benefits: One of the strongest messages received during the public input process of this Plan was how important the Town’s open spaces were to the character and quality of life in the Town. People are drawn to live and stay in the community due to the breathtaking scenery and opportunities for outdoor recreation. Open space conservation will help to maintain this appeal for both new and existing residents, which also helps to maintain property values in the Town.
- Increased Social Cohesion: The Town’s open spaces not only create a sense of shared identity and pride in the community, but also can help foster improved social cohesion in those areas that are dedicated for public access. Parks and nature preserves support opportunities for neighbors to gather and interact, both formally and informally. Public access also allows for increased equitable access to natural resources.
What We've Heard
Public engagement occurred throughout this planning process and played an important role in identifying community needs, values, and potential conservation opportunities. The public outreach efforts helped to ensure that the Plan reflects the Town’s values and vision for future conservation efforts by engaging community members in an inviting atmosphere that encourages input from all residents.
To maximize community involvement, the project team, including the Conservation Advisory Council (CAC), the consultant team, and town staff, developed and implemented a flexible Communications & Outreach Strategy (COS) that identified key players, desired outcomes, timing, and methods for public engagement. The major components of the strategies employed are summarized in the graphic to the right. A full summary of the COS and public engagement results is available in the Additional Resources section of this page.
Community Survey Results
In order to better understand community values and opinions regarding Lansing’s open space areas and to identify priority locations for conservation efforts, the Town’s Conservation Advisory Council created a brief community survey. Presented below are a summary of the responses received - for more detailed information, the full survey summary is available in the Additional Resources section of this page.
How important do you think open space (farmland, forests, scenic views, water resources, etc.) is to quality of life in Lansing?
Should the Lansing Town government actively conserve open space in the Town?
Which open space features are most important to you? (Select up to four in no particular order):
Which do you feel are the top four benefits of open space conservation?
Do you support the use of tax dollars (federal, state, local) to protect natural areas?
Do you support the use of tax dollars (federal, state, local) to protect scenic views?
How long have you lived in the Town or Village of Lansing?
Open Space Index
The Open Space Index (OSI) provides a systematic rating of land across the Town based on various natural features and other open space characteristics. The OSI enables the Town to be strategic in its allocation of funds and efforts by providing a tool to both proactively identify parcels and resources that meet the goals of the open space program; and to analyze the merits of individual projects and opportunities as they present themselves.
The following steps were utilized to create the OSI, which are summarized below:
- Establish Ranking Criteria
- Identify parcels to be evaluated
- Analyze data for each parcel and assign scoring
- Compile results
Establish Ranking Criteria
To determine the relative value of each open space parcel identified, and apply consistent criteria for evaluating each parcel, the project team developed a ranked list of criteria to evaluate each parcel.
The CAC developed the list of evaluation criteria used based on Question 6 in the Community Survey, but further refined it to include additional attributes of the landscape that were deemed essential to include through discussions of the CAC.
The table on the right illustrates the categories used and their respective rank compared to the other criteria. Associated with the relative value of each criteria, a weighted value for each category was assigned that was applied to the scoring shown below. This ensured that the most important criteria to the community was given additional emphasis during the scoring process.
Identify parcels to be evaluated
For the purposes of this Plan, the team only evaluated parcels that were over 70 acres in size. The evaluation included all parcels within this size threshold, regardless of existing land use, which resulted in a total of 119 parcels analyzed. The map to the right shows the parcels analyzed, and the breakdown of properties analyzed by land use is as follows:
- 75 Agricultural Parcels
- 18 Residential Parcels
- 17 Vacant Parcels
- 4 Industrial Parcels
- 2 Commercial Parcels
- 2 Community Services Parcels
- 2 Recreation Parcels
- 1 Public Service Parcel
Analyze data for each parcel and assign scoring
Prior to weighting with the Priority Points established for each category, the project team assigned each parcel an unweighted value between 0 and 3 for each of the 11 categories. These points were assigned based on a quantitative analysis performed using GIS, in which the team performed an overlay analysis that depicted the spatial relationship between the characteristic in question (e.g. farmlands) and the parcel. The data used for each of the categories, and how the team assigned each parcel a value is described as you scroll down.
Agriculture
For the Agriculture + Farmlands category, the team used three data sets to determine the ranking of each property.
The first dataset was the Tompkins County Agricultural Districts, as shown on the map to the right. If the parcel was located within a County Agricultural District, it received one point.
Agriculture
The second dataset was the land use classification assigned to the parcel based on the New York State Property Tax Class Codes. If the parcel as within the “100” category, the team deemed it to be currently used for agricultural purposes, and thus the parcel received an additional point.
Agriculture
The third dataset used was the presence of prime agricultural soils. If at least 25% of the parcel contained soils identified as Prime Soils or Soils of Statewide Importance, the parcel received an additional point. The prime soil data utilized was from the Gridded Soil Survey Geographic (gSSURGO) Database for New York.
Forest + Woodlots
For the Forest + Woodlots category, the team utilized the National Land Cover Database. The team used the percentage of a parcel that was covered by forests and woodlots to assign points to each parcel, as described in below:
- 0-10% of parcel covered: 0 points
- 11-40% of parcel covered: 1 point
- 41-70% of parcel covered: 2 points
- 71-100% of parcel covered: 3 points
Wetlands
For the Wetlands category, the team used Tompkins County 2012 Wetland Designation data. The team chose to use County data over NYSDEC Wetland or NWI data due to its more detailed analysis conducted at the local level, as opposed to a state or nationwide scale. In regard to the assignment of points, they ranged from 0-3 points based on the total acreage of wetlands present within each parcel, as described below:
- 0 - 0.5 acres: 0 points
- 0.5 - 2 acres: 1 point
- 2 - 10 acres: 2 points
- 10 + acres: 3 points
Floodplains
For the Floodplains category, the team utilized Preliminary Flood Hazard Zone designations from FEMA, released in January 2023. Point assignment was based on the total acreage contained within each parcel that has a 1% annual chance of flooding, as shown below:
- 0 - 0.5 acres: 0 points
- 0.5 - 2 acres: 1 point
- 2 - 10 acres: 2 points
- 10 + acres: 3 points
Stream Corridors
Regarding Stream Corridors, the team used two datasets: the 100’ Perennial Stream Buffers and 50’ Intermittent Stream Buffers created by Tompkins County based on hydrology data for the Tompkins County Natural Resources Inventory. The team assigned points based on the percentage of the parcel covered by these two datasets.
- 0-5% of parcel covered: 0 points
- 6-10% of parcel covered: 1 point
- 10-15% of parcel covered : 2 points
- 15% + of parcel covered : 3 points
Cayuga Lakefront
For the Cayuga Lakefront category, the team conducted a visual analysis of the parcels alongside the Cayuga lakeshore to determine which parcels were adjacent to the lakefront. Such parcels received three points, all other parcels received no points for this category.
Significant Wildlife Habitat
For the Significant Wildlife Habitat category, the team used three data sets to determine the ranking of each property. The first dataset is the NYSDEC Rare Plants or Animals data, which are generalized areas where NY Natural Heritage has data regarding rare animals and/or rare plants. The second dataset is the NYSDEC Significant Natural Communities dataset. The third dataset is bird habitat quality information from the Cornell Lab of Ornithology, shown below.
Significant Wildlife Habitat
Lastly, the Northeast Bird Habitat Conservation Initiative Mapping Tool Data was utilized, provided by the Cornell Lab of Ornithology. This data provides habitat quality for a variety of bird species types, including Forest Birds, Scrub/Shrub and Young Forest Birds, Grassland Birds, Wetlands and Marsh Birds, and Coasts and Shoreline Birds. The habitat quality is ranked from zero to seven, with seven being the highest quality habitat. The map at right shows the example of the Scrub/Shrub Bird Habitat data.
For more information on this data, please view the NBHCI Mapping Tool.
Grasslands + Meadows
For the Grassland + Meadows category, the team used the National Land Cover Database. The team used the percentage of a parcel that was covered by grasslands and meadows to assign points to each parcel, as described below:
- 0-10% of parcel covered: 0 points
- 11-40% of parcel covered: 1 point
- 41-70% of parcel covered: 2 points
- 71-100% of parcel covered: 3 points
Steep Slopes
For Steep Slopes, the team utilized Tompkins County Elevation Data. For the purposes of this analysis, slopes greater than 15% were designated as steep slopes. The team assigned parcels points based on the percentage of the lot that was covered in steep slopes, as shown below:
- 0-10% of parcel covered: 0 points
- 11-40% of parcel covered: 1 point
- 41-70% of parcel covered: 2 points
- 71-100% of parcel covered: 3 points
Unique Natural Areas
For Unique Natural Areas (UNAs), the team used Tompkins County designated UNAs as the dataset. They assigned points to each parcel based on the percentage of the property that is covered by a UNA, as shown in the table below:
- 0% of parcel covered: 0 points
- 1-5% of parcel covered: 1 point
- 6-25% of parcel covered: 2 points
- 25% + of parcel covered: 3 points
Susceptibility to Development
For the Susceptibility to Development category, the project team used three data sets to determine the ranking of each property. The first dataset was existing public sewer data. If a parcel was within 0.3 miles of public sewer service, it received a point. Similarly, the team used public water data - and parcels within 0.3 miles of water service also received a point. Lastly, if a parcel was in the Residential - Moderate Density (R-2), Residential-Mixed Use (R-3), Commercial Mixed Use (B-1), Commercial (B-2), or Industrial/Research (IR) Zoning Districts, it received a point. The team selected these zoning districts due to their intent of allowing a higher density development than what is permitted elsewhere in the Town - whether residential or non-residential.
Compile Results
Once the project team assigned unweighted scores to each parcel for each category, each value was weighted based on the Priority Points for each category. The project team then summed the weighted values for each parcel to develop an overall comparative ranking, which translated into “High,” “Medium-High,” "Medium-Low," and “Low” priority parcels in regard to open space value. The results of this ranking process are displayed at right.
This analysis identifies 18%, or 22 parcels as low priority parcels, meaning they had the lowest scores comparatively. The analysis ranked 41%, or 49 parcels as medium-low priority, 26% or 31 parcels as medium-high priority, and 14% or 17 parcels as high priority.
Several of the high ranking parcels are currently protected through the Finger Lakes Land Trust, including the Bell Station Property and the Cayuga Cliffs property. This helps to validate the ranking process, as these have already been identified as high priority areas for conservation by local conservation experts and residents alike.
The map below shows a comparison between the priority ranking results and the results of the crowdsourcing mapping performed as a part of the community survey. As shown below, there is significant overlap between where community members identified important locations for conservation, and which areas of the Town were ranked highest as a part of the OSI.
Implementation Options
Various strategies can be used for accomplishing the Vision and Goals of this Plan. The implementation options presented should be viewed as a toolkit of potential actions the Town or its partners may undertake as opportunities arise. The types of strategies include the following:
- Potential Amendments to Development Regulations - Zoning or other local land use regulation tools
- Land Conservation - Direct land acquisition or conservation techniques
- Other - Various actions that do not fall into the first two categories
Each of the strategies include a brief description, a generalized cost estimate, potential partners, and an estimated timeframe. Timeframes are meant to describe the estimated time an action will take to complete, not how soon the action item should be accomplished. The generalized cost estimates, based on order of magnitude, use the symbols below to reflect the following estimated cost ranges:
- $: Under $50,000
- $$: Between $50,000 and $100,000
- $$$: Over $100,000
- N/A: No Cost
For the potential partners identified, the project team highlighted entities that are identified as a potential lead agency in bold text.
Potential Amendments to Development Regulations
Land Conservation Techniques
Other Implementation Options
Potential Funding Sources
Potential Grant Funding
Get Involved!
ArcGIS Survey123