No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 5 2023 Planning Board Meeting Minutes_FINAL 1 Town of Enfield Planning Board & Public Hearing Wednesday, April 5, 2023 At 7 pm In-person at the Enfield Town Court House and via the Zoom Meeting Platform Present: Planning Board Chair Dan Walker; Planning Board Members; Ann Chaffee, Rich Teeter (8:45 left meeting), Mike Carpenter, Henry Hansteen; Planning Board Alternate Greg Hutnik; Town Clerk Mary Cornell; Town Councilperson Robert Lynch. Virtual Attendance: Planning Board Alternate Aaron Abb. Call to order: Dan Walker called the Planning Board Meeting to order at 7:00 pm Review of Minutes: Henry Hansteen motioned to approve the March 1, 2023 minutes and Ann Chaffee seconded. Discussion: Mike Carpenter suggested removing a sentence and the boards consensus was to keep in the sentence. Vote: Dan Walker, Aye; Mike Carpenter, Aye; Ann Chaffee, Aye; Henry Hansteen, Aye; Rich Teeter, Aye; Carried. Public Hearing: Planning Board Chair Walker opened the Public Hearing at 7:07 pm Paul & Kathryn Tunison – They are currently the only residents of Tucker Road. Tucker Rd is a Town road and the road cannot currently handle the influx of an additional ~20 residents. He shared that it is the towns responsibility, not necessarily the developers (the developer should assist if possible) to maintain the road and handle any issues with water runoff. They are concerned that water quality is an issue and should be further investigated. Paul commented on the covenants that are being recommended and he would like to see the covenants included. Kathryn asked if the town has any plans to pave Tucker Rd, there are currently no plans to pave Tucker Rd. Russ Carpenter – He has some concerns of water runoff and water quality/quantity. He thinks the town should consider putting in a water district as well as a sewer district. One house incorrectly placed with cause runoff issues for 5 acres. Anne Koreman – As the county legislature district representative she wanted to hear any concerns that area residents brought up. Marguerite Wells At the original meeting when this discussion had been brought up, it was noted that some of these parcels had been farmed until the land was in the process of being sold. What is the impact on tucker rd., what is the impact from the pig farm, these are some of the questions that she posed. She was not pleased with her contact with the developers as they would not speak with her and said they would meet her at the public hearing. The cost to pave Tucker rd would be over ~$200,000 per mile of paved road. She thinks that they could do a better job of placing the houses so that the farmland can be used as farmland. Ms. Keller – She lives across from Tucker Rd on Aiken road. They have had issues with water quality/quantity. Secondly the northeast corner of Tucker and Aiken Rd. The ditching above Tucker Rd on Aiken road appears to be sufficient. Something that the town may need to do is correct the water runoff issues on Aiken Rd, as the land is quite wet. Marie Van de mark – She had a lot of questions. She is interested in the deed restrictions per the lots/lot sizes. With that are they saying residential as limited, as residential can include 4 lots. She shared the opinion that it is good to keep viable farmland as farmland. Most of the area on that whole block has salt and sulfur without having high productive wells. If people are going to be purchasing lots, what are they proposing and what are they offering? They may not be able to develop the property. Are they offering the property already developed when selling the parcels? These are all questions and concerns that she has. Dustin Griffin – He has water runoff concerns and water quality concerns and he is worried about what is in the water runoff that comes onto his property and any increases of traffic. He is also in favor of keeping farmland as farmland. He wants to know if the developer has completed a plan of action for what will happen with the potential increase of water runoff. 2 Pat Nelson – She has invested monies in planting nut trees. Even with one house added to Halseyville Rd she has noticed a decrease in the amount of water that she has, she has some serious water issues that have developed in the last year. We are not on an aquifer and our water is provided by streams. Robert Lynch – He lives on Gray Rd and this project does not have a direct impact him. He shared that this is the biggest controversy to hit the town since the Black Oak Wind Project. He would like the developer to pay for a full environmental impact survey. He shared that several residents in the proposed development area have many issues with their water quantity and quality. The farmland issue is of concern. We have a comprehensive plan and we need a comprehensive environmental impact study completed. Diane Achilles’ – She has lived on Aiken Rd for over ~20 years. She has had two houses put in near her and if she does two loads of laundry and everyone takes a shower then her water is gone. She has to turn her pump off and let it sit for hours before turning it back on to get water again. Dan Walker closed the public hearing at 7:43 pm. Sketch Plan review for 1703 Mecklenburg Road. The property owners have combined two parcels. There is one mobile home at the corner of the property and they would like to build a tiny house, Quonset hut and a park model mobile home. There will be four tenants in total. Tom Amici shared that Alan Teeter had been to the proposed development. The four homes would share the same septic and water systems. Dan shared that it would require site plan approval, he asked the board their thoughts. Dan asked if the properties would use the existing driveway. Mike asked what part of the site plan review law are we looking at that requires site plan approval. Dan is concerned as it is high density on a small parcel. There will be one well to serve the 4 homes (10 gal a minute). Mike wants to know that we are keeping with our existing laws and if we need to put any conditions on the approval. Dan stated that the planning board needs a better site plan map. They need a map that shows the placement/spacing of the homes with all of the dimensions. Tom Amici will provide the planning board with the requested map. Discussion continued. The Amici’s will be added to May’s meeting agenda. Public Hearing Breezy Meadows Subdivision: Dan had a discussion with Highway Superintendent Rollins and he feels that Tucker Rd is in fairly good condition for a gravel road. Some of the road drainage needs to be taken care of and he does not feel the need to completely rebuild the road. In the future the town may want to upgrade the road to a paved road. He has other gravel roads in the town that are is worse shape and he is getting pressure from town residents to pave those roads. A note was added to the final plat. Dan referenced the counties 239 review which brought up some of the concerns raised by the county were also concerns from the public. Dan shared the response from the counties 239 review. Podunk Rd (w side) and the four lots on that side are all pretty much developed with hard surfaces and the subdivision would have minimal impact. The other county road is Haleyville Rd, there are two lots that front on Haleyville Rd (SW of the subdivision) and several other lots that drain down near that area. Those lots would all be slated as single-family homes on the plat. It would probably not impact the runoff, but can. He does not see any potential direct change of the drainage pattern. The county would need to approve the plans. We can put in a requirement with the site plan approval that the builders would need to follow. Mike asked who would enforce the requirements. Alan would be responsible to make sure that the individual builders would be required to complete a SWPPP. Mike asked what would happen if it is not followed. Alan (BM) the DEC could get involved as it is a state law. Each lot could end up with two structures. Enfield does not have a MS4 stormwater law and we are limited. Single family homes are exempt from the stormwater law. Mike asked if requirements in the SWPPP can be required on an individual basis. Dan is proposing that we put this in as a condition for approval. Another concern for the county is the radio tower, it has been surveyed and requirements added to the purchase. The lease agreement is between the current owners and the counties which has a lease. Dan asked if the county would like to purchase the lot with their towner on it. Dan asked if the county would like to purchase the parcel with the tower on it, Alan (BM) commented that the county had already had first rights of refusal as they would have 3 had to initially purchase the full 300+ acres. Anne Koreman shared that she would like to hear a proposal presented to the legislature as a whole. Henry questioned if stormwater runoff would be a real issue, due to the minimal reduction of absorption. He is more concerned with water quality/quantity. Mike asked Robert Lynch what the requirements were that he had requested. He would like a Hydrological Survey and a full environmental impact statement which would show the impact municipality wide. The applicant completed part 1, Dan completed part 2. The board went over part 1, and part 2 and discussed as they went along. Part 3 will be reviewed next month Synapsis (PB Chair Dan Walker) – The Planning Board is ready to declare a negative declaration and the public should expect an answer at the May meeting, or no later than the June meeting. Adjournment: Ann Chaffee motioned to adjourn and Dan seconded. Adjourned at 10:03 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Mary Cornell Mary Cornell Planning Board Clerk