Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-05-19 TOWN OF GROTON PLANNING BOARD Tuesday , May 19 , 1987 BOARD PUBLIC PRESENT -;George Totman , Chairman Gary Wood , Zoning Enforcement Mike Post , Vice - Chairman Officer Nancy Ostrander , Core Secretary Robert Walpole Cecil Twigg Roger Gleason O' Verl Rankin -',Monica Carey " Bill Casolara G . TOTMAN , Chairman , opened the meeting at 8 : 15 p . m . Bill Casolara was introduced to the Board as the new member , filling the vacancy previously existing . M . CAREY made the motion the minutes of the April 27 , 1987 meeting be approved as presented ; V . RANKIN seconded the motion and the motion carried . PROPOSED SALE of land owned by MARVIN TOROK ,* Tax Map Nos . 31 - 1-26 , 35 - 1 - 1 , 32 - 1 - 22 . 29 32 - 1 - 23 . 2 ; 32 - 1 . 38 . 1 R . WALPOLE * ( Passed out a series of maps to the Board for information purposes ) Basically this is a proposal , we are going to be selling this property at public auction . Map No . 35 - 1 - 1 and Map No . 32 - 1 - 38 . 1 those two pieces of property are located almost to Cobb St . on the bend of Pleasant Valley Rd . , used to be the former Neil Todd farm . This property is owned by MARVIN TOROK . Those two pieces of property are almost adjacent to each other but on opposite sides of the road and also carry different tax map numbers . The other two sheets , if you put them together , are located on Sincerbeaux Rd * contains the main house of Marvin Torok along with 50 acres and listed as separate tax parcels . Across the road , west on Pleasant Valley Rd . , is a 58 acre parcel and a 48 acre parcel . There are actually five parcels of property , they all carry different tax map numbers . We are going to be subdividing these into smaller pieces of property . I refer you to the sheet I gave you as to what we did in the Town of Ithaca . We had to have sub - division approval . I met with the Town of Ithaca Planning Board . This is how we advertised it in the Town of Ithaca ( referring to sheet of paper given to the Board ) and we were very successful on the sale last Tuesday night . I came here to brief the Planning Board ahead of time . The reason I am doing this is to avoid any phone calls and questions later on . Number one , so that every Planning Board member knows what is happening . This is a briefing , I am not filing any formal proposal at this time , otherwords there would be a sketch plan with it . and a preliminary environmental impact statement . If required , I will present it at the next formal meeting of the Board . We may not have to go to subdivision regulations . We are planning on breaking PLANNING BOARD - 2 - May 19 , 1987 these five parcels down into smaller parcels making them more saleable . G . WOOD : In your auction sale ? R . WALPOLE * In the auction sale , It may be sold in its entirety ; each tax parcel may be sold i� n its entirety ; the house may be sold with only ten acres . These are the options we will be offering for sale . I need to know what regulations to follow if it was to be broken down into smaller parcels . We are talking 15 to 20 acres per parcel . It would be up to the new owners to break it down smaller if they want to . I need to know where I stand . It may be sold just as you see it or it could have five new owners . G . TOTMAN : Each one of these parcels , as I see it , are separate entities of themselves . G . WOOD : Yes . G . TOTMAN : None of them are part of each other , so totally they could be sold individually without a subdivision . G . WOOD : That ' s correct , to five or one owner . R . WALPOLE * My theory is , for example , the house , I would probably break it into two parts . I G . TOTMAN : That would require a subdivision , a minor subdivision . G . WOOD : Maybe we could set some guidelines here . One split of any one of those parcels is not a subdivision . If you took the one with the house and sell off the house with ten acres and the rest of the parcel to somebody else , that is not a subdivision . Two splits or more , that is la subdivision . R . WALPOLE : If I go into 3 or 4 , if we do sell it that way , there would be the contingency subject to the approval of the Town Planning Board for a minor subdivision . G . TOTMAN : That ' s correct . R . WALPOLE : I won ' t be finalizing this until we ' re through shooting the grade shots . This has to be set by Thursday morning that is one reason I am meeting with you tonight. If I have to go to a minor subdivision , if we propose that , the sale will be contingent , and that will be stated in the contract , subject to the Town of Groton Planning Board approval . But I need to know any ramifications tonight before I get into this . Basically I could break this into ten parcels without formal approval . I may want to break it into 15 parcels and if so , that means I have a minor subdivision . PLANNING BOARD - 3 - May 19 , 1987 G . TOTMAN : If they are two acres , if you keep them five acres and above . . R . WALPOLE : They will all exceed five acres , they will be 15 to 20 acre parcels . There - will be nothing under 15 acres . G . WOOD : I ' m not sure , George , I look at Section 200 and I don ' t see that . B . CASOLARA : Section 112 . 3 under subdivision : subdivision develops when dividing into two or more lots when one / issrIess than five acres . f G . WOOD : None of them are going to be under five acres . That is not right . entirely . 112 . 1 describes a subdivision as a division of three or more lotsl, that was revised by a subsequent law . Go down to Minor subdivision it talks about less than five acres ; a Rural Subdivision is five acres or more . R . WALPOLE@ There will be none under five acres , it would be a Rural . G . WOOD : It is still a subdivilsion . G . TOTMAN : The Board handles them differently . If it is five acres or more the Planning Board can handle it and make it a less painful project ; we can go without a public hearing if it is a Rural Subdivision . R . WALPOLE * Most of these are going to be 10 to 15 acres , depending on how the lots are sold off . In the Town of Locke we did this , Locke has no ordinance so we went to the County and met the County regulations . There will be nothing under 10 acres . We just don ' t have the time or money for smaller parcels . G . TOTMAN : On 35 - 1 - 1 , what is the road frontage on that ? R . WALPOLE * 137 feet . That will probably be sold in its entirety . When that land was bought , there is a motion somewhere here in the minutes , that allowed , if a person wanted to build a house there , that could be allowed based on the 137 foot frontage . That was discussed , I do recall it when I was on the Board years ago . G . TOTMAN : Right now the requirement is 200 feet . The County requires 150 . G . WOOD : No , the Health Department requires the 150 feet for septic . R . WALPOLE : You have 58 acres , if there is not room to build a house some - thing is wrong . G . TOTMAN : I am not saying that , what I am saying is we have to go by the book . G . WOOD : I would say this , Bob , that maybe the potential buyer should be advised that they could not build anything on that parcel without a variance . PLANNING BOARD - 4 - May 19 , 1987 R . WALPOLE : You mean to tell me they cannot build anything on that 58 acres with only 137 feet of road frontage ? G . WOOD : Not without a variance . B . CASOLARA : Could this corridor be construed as a right of way and would that make it feasible . G . WOOD : No , because the way the subdivision regulations are written you need 200 feet of frontage . G . TOTMAN : I think what Bill is asking , right in the center of that lot , the person who bought that and if he wanted to develop it , could an approved road be put down the center of that lot ? G . WOOD : That is a whole different story . V . RANKIN : Where abouts is this parcel ? R . WALPOLE : On Pleasant Valley Rd . V . RANKIN : Is that near Grotto ? R . WALPOLE : Yes . B . CASOLARA : This area is plowed now ? R . WALPOLE : Yes . If a guy buys it , he may or may not want to build there , I don ' t know ; but what you ' re telling me is he can ' t build there . G . WOOD : Yes , he can with a variance . R . WALPOLE Can he get a variance ? G . TOTMAN : That would be up to the Appeals Board , R . WALPOLE * You have a guy who invests in a 58 acre parcel , and the Supervisor is telling us at a meeting the other night that they want more tax base in this Town . G . TOTMAN : Then the Supervisor would have to change this law . G . WOOD : There is an easier way than that . R . WALPOLE : This piece would most likely be sold in one chunk ; I would hope that the guy that bought it could do something with it . B . CASOLARA : Bob , you said something about some minutes from previous meetings concerning this piece of property ? R . WALPOLE : When it was sold to. Neil Todd , I was on the Board . PLANNING BOARD - 5 - May 19 , 1987 V . RANKIN : I was on the Board , I don ' t recall . this but we should be able to look it up if it is there . G . WOOD : I don ' t think that that would accrue to a new owner . The law says that a non- conforming use goes from owner to owner . This would also be true of a non- conforming lot and this is a non- conforming lot . G . TOTMAN : I will look it up and see if I can find it . V . RANKIN : How much would that property run ? R . WALPOLE * I would say 3 to 4 hundred an acre . That piece will be sold as one parcel because of the access off the road . Somebody who invests 18 to 23 thousand dollars should be able to do something with the property ; that would create some tax base rather than leaving it vacant . Be CASOLARA : I don ' t think anybody is denying the fact we want to increase the tax base in the Town ; more at issue is what the regulations are . G . WOOD : I think sometimes the regulations don ' t always apply . R . WALPOLE : These questions are going to be asked of the Zoning Officer by the prospective buyers . In the. Town of Ithaca the Zoning Officer was prepared for them because he was briefed ahead of time . That is why we are telling you now . What I am saying , is if a guy can ' t buy 50 to 60 acres of land without having major problems somethings wrong . V . RANKIN : I think he should know about it ahead of time . He might respect the Town all the more knowing there are regulations . R . WALPOLE : The copies of the Zoning Law are given out . G . WOOD : His question as he directed it to the Planning Board , I brought up another issue , if you wanted to build a structure on the 58 acres it requires a variance from the Appeals Board , R . WALPOLE : It will only be sold as one parcel beacuse of the road frontage , the larger portion of the acerage is pretty well land locked . G . WOOD : 137 feet is a fairly wide corridor to work with . G . TOTMAN : Personnally , I think it would be good for the Town but we don ' t have the authority to say that . The Board of Appeals would have to address that one issue . The rest of it I see no problem with it . As long as the people are prewarned and they have copies of the Zoning Law . R . WALPOLE : Basically , if we go to a third break on a parcel inside one particular tax map number , we will have to come and get sub - division approval . That will be a contingency in the contract . PLANNING BOARD - 6 - May 19 , 1987 That will be the only contingency based on our application for a Rural Subdivision . V . RANKIN * When are you selling this ? R . WALPOLE : We have not set the date , it will be sometime in June . Basically , if you get me whatever I need , I don.' t need anything unless we go to the third split then we must apply for a Rural subdivision . We have to conform to the Town regulations . If we break into two parcels , it is not a subdivision , if we break into three I need to come back for a Rural Subdivision ; and 200 foot road frontage is required . G . TOTMAN .9 Correct . Do you think the sale will be before the next meeting , June 16 ? R . WALPOLE : I don ' t know . We have sales on the 19th and 18th , it most likely will be the last week in June . PROPOSED SALE of parcel to BARRY PROPER by ROGER GLEASON located on Old Stage Rd . G . TOTMAN : At the last meeting Roger ' s problem was discussed . He talked about selling a parcel of land to Mr . Proper . I think you all got copies of that in the mail . He is tentatively thinking of sometime puting a dwelling on the new parcel . Roger ' s statement on the application says that it will remain agricultural for five years . My first question , Roger , when and if you sell that to Mr . Proper you leave , on the east side of the proposed track , some land that borders Clark St . and Old Stage Rd . What is your intention of that ? R . GLEASON : As of right now nothing . G . TOTMAN : I ask for two reasons . Number one , you know that you already have sold enough land off this one parcel of land , 2 or 3 other parcels of land as minor subdivisions , right ? R . GLEASON * They were Rural Subdivisions , G . TOTMAN : The question is now , you are dividing again , it would almost make it a Major Subdivision . Secondly , if you are selling this ( Proper parcel ) and you plan on breaking that ( east side of track ) into 2 or 3 parcels , if that is the case , it would make more sense to include it in your request now . R . GLEASON * The problem is at the present time I don ' t know what kind of division to make of it , it could be done three ways . G . TOTMAN : With what I have read in the Ordinance , basically , what you are asking for now and with what has already be done it becomes a Major Subdivision . But in order to make it a Major Subdivision I PLANNING BOARD - 7 - May 19 , 1987 we would have to have a layout draywnt/ oef i°epwE e °rack of land ; and not knowing what your going to sell it , we could imply what direct to put you in . Gary , do you follow what I am saying ? G . WOOD : I follow exactly what you are saying . I feel in some way you are overlooking , what I believe , is the fundamental tenet of the subdivision regulations and that is to provide some guidance on how this subdivision may be made . Roger ' s approach has always been , if someone comes along and wants say 3 acres along a creek or whatever , and Roger sells him the 3 acres , and just let the thing grow ; which is exactly what planning is suppose to prevent in a sense of making sure things happen in a way they ought to happen . There is probably a limited number of driveways that ought to come out on Clark St . Ext . at the top of that curve , for one thing . There is probably a limited number of driveways that ought to go on Old Stage Road . One ought to give some guidance on how that is to be developed rather than just nodding a head every time he comes in to see you . 1 . G . TOTMAN : What we have in front of us now is . . . . . . parcel and one individual . the reason I brought that other up is if we should say , okay we see no other legal way of going about this because of all these other sales you have to have a Major , then he has to come back in and then we have to say to him . . . . . we have to see how he wants to divide it before we can put any guidelines on it . G . WOOD : But I think you addressed what I sensed was your question , he does not have to start out with a formal plat . He only has to start out with a sketch plan of the whole parcel . I think this . is where I disagree with Roger , in that everything I have seen him do is someone comes along and wants a particular parcel , so you sell it to him and then somebody else comes along and the next thing you know is your boxed in ; and it may not be in your best interest or the Town ' s . I see no reason that Roger couldn ' t come in with a sketch plan of this and then the Planning Board says go ahead and sell this ; the next time he comes along he says someone wants this lot that shows on the sketch plan then provide the Board with a formal plat . I don ' t think it needs to follow that in order to do proper planning you necessarily have to have a formal plat . G . TOTMAN : Roger , how much of this land , ( referring to tax map ) do you actually own ? R . GLEASON0 ( indicated on map where his boundaries are ) The origianl proposa on the land sold to Proper , there was a mistake somewhere along the line , in the process Proper and I , because of the shape of the original proposal, revamped it ; and somewhere , and I stilF, think the revision was presented , it got filed as the original proposal and not the revised one . G . TOTMAN : So this ( referring to odd shape piece of property in middle of parcel ) should not be there ? PLANNING BOARD - 8 - May 19 , 1987 G . WOOD : That shows the shape of the proposal passed by the Board ; it is not part of the map . G . TOTMAN : Roger , did you follow what Gary was just saying ? R . GLEASON : Yes , basically , if you don ' t require , let me put it this way . . . this particular property , my intention is , Proper is going to build on what he presently owns , there would be a drive way on Old Stage Rd . instead of off of Clark St . Ext . The rest will stay agricultural . My intention is the area to the east would not be subdivided ; the parcel to the west may be subdivided . My intention orginally was not to do this . As Bob Walpole said , people aren ' t interested in small acres . G . TOTMAN : .Roger , to my original statement , you know what I was talking about . our hands are tied with the subdivision regultions . R . GLEASON If I follow what Gary was talking about , a sketch plan is all that is required , in essence . This parcel , on the west , is five acres , however I would sell it as 2 parcels . Any smaller parcels I can ' tt: get anybody to buy it . G . WOOD : The thing to do , Roger , would be to divide that into , let ' s say , one acre lots, then when somebody wants five acres , you say , okay take the five lots . If the Planning Board approves that scheme , then ten years down the road if that person thinks five acres is too much and wants to subdivide it , itAs already planned ahead . G . TOTMAN : Roger , you have 400 feet and 500 feet frontage , you could get 4 lots out of there . R . GLEASON : Then you are going to say you don ' t want those dirveways so then 2 is it ; unless you put a road up the middle and divide it that way . G . TOTMAN : You could have 2 on Clark St , and 2 on Old Stage Rd . R . GLEASON ': You are not going to put a driveway on that grade on Clark St . , it is too steep . 4%e%Discussed, possible ways to subdivide parcel west of the Proper application" G . TOTMAN : ';, What kind of a position is Proper in , is he ready to move right away ? R . GLEASON : Soon , G . WOOD : Do you see what you ' re doing , Roger , by cutting . this piece off ? G . TOTMAN : Within the last 16 years 3 parcels have be sold off this same parcel of land . PLANNING BOARD - 9 - May 19 , 1987 R . GLEASON : Actually it is 2 different parcels . G . WOOD : Over a period of time you have seen this develop into five or six residential parcels . G . TOTMAN : What I am getting at , from the Planning Boards point and what it says in the book no more than so many parcels of land in one parcel constitutes a Major Subdivision . I think , going along with what Gary says , you reapply for a Major Subdivision ; putting in a sketch plan for the west parcel and leaving the other the way it is and apply for a Major Subdivision , R . GLEASON : That is the reason I brought it in last month , to find out what to do about it . G . WOOD : It also fell apart last month because it became apparent that Roger had not sold what the Planning Board had signed for in the subdivision application , an Roger said ' I don ' t know how that happened ' so nothing could be done until went back and found out what he did . R . GLEASON : I still don ' t know what happened . G . TOTMAN : Roger , do you understand what we are saying ? R . GLEASON : yes , I think I understand that . Now , I have already put in money twice for an Agricultural Subdivision , then a Minor Subdivision , $ 30 in all , what your ' re saying is I need more now . G . TOTMAN : Let me check with the Town Clerk aobut the application fees . R . GLEASON What you want then is . . . . . . G . TOTMAN : What . we want is you read that book and see what a Major Subdivision requires . R . GLEASON : Part of it you have to sal what you require in a Major Subdivision . It says certain things bu you cannot do certain things . G . WOOD : Step one is a sketch plan before the Planning Board can modify anything . R . GLEASON * It could be a Tax Map with the sketch on it . G . TOTMAN : You have to have some kind of idea what you are going to do with the lot on the west portion . You say the parcel on the east is going to remain farm land . If you have any thoughts at all about what you ' re going to be doing with that piece of land , it would be smarter , from what we have discussed , for you to , using the proper road frontage , to make those into as smallest lots as you can make them in this area ; that would give you the leverability to sell it ; because one guy could buy 3 of those lots or 4 of the lots . But if you make it into 4 big lots it cuts down on PLANNING BOARD - 10 - May 19 , 1987 the possibilities of what you can do with it . If you put them into the smallest ones you can make and still be legal , then you can sell any number of lots at a time . •, • •,-,% • • •• • R . GLEASON . A question on Major Subdivision located on Clark St . & Old Stage Rd . G . WOOD : The problem is , when you do what you ' re thinking in the back of your mind your doing opening up those lots with a road ; then your cost of electric service is going to skyrocket . If you create over five lots , the electric has to go underground . By law , they will put in the first hundred feet and refund it . If you get 200 foot lots and you ' re paying for 100 feet that is not refundable . If you have 100 foot lots it is all refundable . If you start talking about bigger lots , you are talking about a lotmore bucks . R . GLEASON : That is the whole point I am making . The amount of money they are asking for electric that I have to put up front on , I will be money ahead to make 4 lots . G . WOOD : That may well be . R . GLEASON : Unless smothing changes , I cannot develop this Subdivision . I have to have $2 , 000 up front money per lot for electric . some of it will be recoverable , maybe . If you add that $ 2 , 000 to what I already have to get for a lot , it is beyond what anybody wants to pay . The reason I asked them , since the power was there , whether we had to underground it and they told me no . G . WOOD : You mean on the existing streets they maintain you have to go underground ? R . GLEASON : Yes , because it would be part of the same division . G . TOTMAN : The way we are leaving it , Roger , you are going to make a formal application with a sketch plan for this proposal on the 16th of June . R . GLEASON : Then we have to go through a formal hearing . G . TOTMAN : If we can agree to your formal sketch plan then , then we can start the ball rolling . %,%,-,%%"OVO' %% Major Subdivision passed previously by the Planning Board , located west of Clarki, St . Ext , and north of Old STage Rd . G . TOTMAN : Are there any questions on Roger ' s proposal ? Are there any other business that has to come before the Board ? V . RANKIN : Has the Town Board done anything with the Wilbur trailer ? G . WOOD : The Wilburs did not show up at the last Tuesday meeting so by default they are in violation . I drove by there last Saturday i i 1 { PLANNING BOARD - 11 - May 19 , 1987 i 1 and the skirting was gone . Tonight I brought my folder with me to make out the complaint to be filed if they have not complied . V . RANKIN made the motion the Planning Board meeting be adjourned ; M . CAREY seconded the motion . Motion carried . The next regular meeting of the Planning Board will be Tuesday , June 16 , 1987 . Respectfully submitted r. 014 Marga et A . Palmer 1 1 III III