HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-05-03•t-
Planning Board
Town of Dryden May 3, 1979
•
Present: Chw. B. Caldwell, M. Lavine, C. Dann, T. Bonn, J. Motsay and Zo. S, Stewart
This special meeting of the Planning Board was held to go over Envi,roment.al
Assessment Forms for three sub - division:
1) Rocco Lucente
2) Jerry Weisberg
3) Douglas Sutton
Rocco Lucente enviromental assessment form, Seqr regulat�,gns.
The board agreed not a type two. State listed type one, sWIjO discussion based
on possibility of it being adjacent to recreation area of Fall Creek, Tt was decided
not-type one after coming to conclusion that Fall Creek not a.designated'recreation
area. Planning board agreed that this falls in the unlisted catagory, Chairwoman
Caldwell read following questions using Your Responsibilities Under.Segr Local Guide
prepared by Center for Enviromental Research, Cornell University,
1) Substantial adverse change in existing air quality, water quality, and
change in noise level.
a) Air quality - no comment
b) Water quality - no comment
c) Noise level - traffic which was .mentioned in public hearing March 15, 1979
1) Substantial increase in solid waste production, increase in potential for
flooding, erosion or drainage problem.
a) Solid waste production - no comment
b) Potential for flooding, erosion or drainage problem.
1) Drainage not as
good as
shown in reports
given to board stemming
from comments at
he saw land when
Mr. Dann stated
moving drainage.
public
spring
soil is
hearing March 15,
run -off and had
clay type, which
1979. Mr. Bonn stated
appearance of a lake area.
holds water. Making slow
2) Mr. Lucente stated that present 18" pipe would be increased in
size to 36 ". He fore -see no problems with drainage.
3) Mr. Lavine stated that he had to agree with Mr. Lucente on this
point that, if he wants to put the money into it, it's physically
possible to, drain all that land out and keep the water out. Per-
sonally he feels confusion on land and doesn't offer great oppor-
tunity for drainage. Any approval given should have a contingency
put on it that a report gotten from Soil Conservation Department.
2) Destruction of large quanitities of vegetation or fauna - no comment.
• 3) Substantial interference with the movement of fish or wild life - no comment.
Planning Board
Town of Dryden -Z- May 3, 1979
•
4) Adverse affect on a threatened or endangered specie of animal or plant or
the habitat of such a specie - no comment..
5) Impact on a significant habitat area - no comment,
Part 2 - 3) Attracting large numbers of people to a place compared to the
number of people who would come to such a place absent the action - no
comment.
4) Creating a material conflict with the communities existing plans or goals?
a) To be answered with question number 5.
5) Impairment of the character or quality of important historical, archaeo-
logical, architectural or aesthetic resources or of existing community
or neighborhood character.
a) Yes, due to response form hearing of March 15, 1979 and large
number of house, 48, to be built. Too many too fast,
b) Difference in traffic.
c) Expense to community, eventually sewer program,
d) Roads can't take all planned traffic,
e) Schools.
Chairwoman Caldwell gi}oted from .the Dryden•General Plan, page 149, under housing,
Oedium density residential development at a slow pace is desireable in the Etna area
and in the Freeville village, until such times as public sewage systems are available.
Large scale sub - division in these areas should not be encouraged at this time.
j6) A major change in either the quanity or type of energy used - no comment.
7) The creation of a hazzard to human health or safety - no comment.
8) A substantial change in the use of intensity of use of land or other natural
resources or in their capacity to support existing uses - no comment.
9) The creation of demand for other actions which would result in any of the
above consequences - no comment.
10) Changes in two or more elements, the enviroment which when taken together
result in a substantial adverse impact on the enviroment,
a) If taken as enviroment on whole, yes.
11) Two or more related actions which cumulatively meet one or more of the above.
a) yes
A summary of concerns.
1) Drainage
2) Traffic
3) Roads
4) Community character total package
5) Attracting large numbers of people.
a
0
Planning Board
Town of Dryden
-3�
'May 30 1979
These are potential significant impacts and must make notice of recommendations
for draft EIS. Mr. Lucente wanted to go ahead with decision based'on public hearing
which will be conditioned on.Segr regulations and Planning Board interpretations of
them.
Motion #1:
Mr.Lavine made motion what Planning Board prepare and distribute appropriately
a notice of positive declaration on this project, which will require DEIS, The
reasons being the possible significant impact associated with points number 3, 4?
and 5 of box 4 of the table discussed previously and in which is in point #l, The
motion second by Mr. J. Motsay. Motion carried with four voting yes and one against.
Motion X62:
Mr. Lavine made following recommendations:
1) DEIS consider an alternative with fewer units and an alternative with
phased-development,
2) DEIS also to identify and consider other ways of minimizing impairment
of existing neighborhood character.
3) Minimizing noise and safety hazzards of increased traffic.
4) In addition, present-detailed assessment
of projection
of
impact
on
0 schools, traffic patterns, and roads via
the new
proposed.'Route
community.structure,
13,
5) Likelihood
of affectively
and
efficiently convert to a publ,c.sewer
systems.
Impacts of that
on
full development.
6) Make explicit studies from the SES report in .terms of concerns pre^
sented at this meeting on drainage.
7) Include information in the DEIS on all the other catagories identified
in seetmon 6, 17 and 14 of DEC.
8) Affect of
various
alternatives, immediate impact
based on
demand of
housing,
or fewer
units or phased.development on
community.structure,
Motion second by Mr. J. Motsay and carried with unanimous vote.
Motion #3:
Mr. Lavine made motion the board give conditional approval to the first stage
of preliminary platt contingent upon completion of Segr process acceptable to this
board and contingent upon satisfactory Health Department report. Motion second by
Mr. J. Motsay.
Mr. Bonn was against the motion, stating not a good president to set. The board
�sked for reports previously and not received any. Obvious impacts without statement.
t willing to approve project at this point.
Mr. Lavine withdrew his motion based on Mr. Bonn's discussion. Second by Mr.
J. Motsay.
i
S
Planning Board
Town of Dryden
•
Motion #4:
-4^
May 3, 1979
Mr. Lavine made-motion that with consent of the sub-divider
j. Planning Board
would like to delay the decision on preliminary platt until further infQrmation.re,.
ceived from SES report. Motion second by Mr. C, Dann Motion carried with unanimous
vote.
o�x
& ��rg Enviromental Assessment. Form, Segr Regulations,
Mr. Lavine
stated disappointment
with
short form and in the future the long
form should be
considered versus the
short
form.
Positive points.
1) More than 10 acres? Yes approximately 50 acres,-involved with 16 units,
2) More than 750 gallons per day of sanitary sewage? Yesp taken care by
on site disposal system.
3) Fresh water wet lands extends into northerly edge of tract, No pro,
posed development if within 100' of wet lands,
9 Mr. Lavine stated concern over intersection.
Motion
Mr. Lavine made motion that the board issue a negative declaration on Weisberg
proposal. Motion second by T. Bonn. Motion carried by a unanimous -Vote,
Motion #2:
Mr. Lavine made motion th
project contingent on reports,
Ellis Hollow Road from county
from DEC concerning wet lands,
unanimous vote.
at the.board give preliminary.platt approval on the
on potential hazzards at proposed intersetion.of
and town highway departments, contingent on approval
Motion second by Mr. J. Motsay, Motion carried with
Douglas Sutton Enviromental Assessment Form - Segr Requirements,
This is an unlisted action. The EAF was not completed to the boards standing,
additional information needed. Mr. Sutton will bring information:required to our
next meeting of May 17, 1979. Reasons why:
1) Part 1 - A3total acreage before and after does not add up,
2) 5B berries beneath bedrock?
3) #8 - depth water table answered withrquestion mark.
4) #9 - no hunting or fishing opportunities presently exist - � ;answered no,
• 5) #12 - is project site prently used by the community or neighborhood
as an open space or recreation area - answer no,' There are .people
that hunt, hike and ski.
6) PartB -lg - maximum vehicular trips in one day - answered50,. Answer
seems low.
ti
Planning Board
Town of Dryden �5 -a May 3t 1979
• 7) Part B "2 - Acres vegetation to be removed, Answer for homes, 'More
specific,
8) Part B -14 Is project or part of-100 year flood .plain? No
9) Part B -25 - Any federal.permit.requi,red etc, What about DEC -for wet
lands.
Meeting adjoured at 11:00 P.M.
Respectfully submitted;
Joan Bray � Secretary