Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-06-16 tw TOWN OF GROTON PLANNING BOARD Tuesday , June 16 , 1987 BOARD ( - present ) PUBLIC PRESENT '-George Totman , Chairman Gary Wood , Zoning Enforcement %;Mike Post , Vice - Chairman Officer Nancy Ostrander , Cor , Secretary Philip Munson %Cecil Twigg Roger Gleason %;Verl Rankin '-Monica Carey % Bill Casolara G . TOTMAN , Chairman , opened the meeting at 8 & 00 p . m . Correction to minutes of the May 19 , 1987 meeting , page 6 ' . . . . . . . . Barry Proper should be James Proper . . . . . . ' , B . CASOLARA made motion minutes of May meeting be approved with correction ; M . POST seconded the motion ; Motion Carried , PROPOSED SUBDIVISION by ELEONOR MUNSON located on Sovocool Hill Rd . near the Town of Lansing and Town of Groton Town Lines . Tax Map No . 33 -1 - 1 . G . TOTMAN : Application from Philip Munson , in the name of Eleonor Munson , Phil , would you like to explain it to the Board . P . MUNSON * This property is located at the west end of Sovocool Hill Rdo that runs into the townline of Lansing / Groton townline ; we call it Weaver Hilton , Zeke Weaver used to live there we bought this maybe 15 years ago from Zeke . We also bought the land on the north side of the road . This piece is on the south side of Sovocool Hill Rd . The house that is there is nothing to speak of , we were going to tear it down but someone wanted to buy it so we leased on an option to buy plan but he never had any money so he never bought it . There is eight acres on the south side of the road . We own land on the north side of Sovocool Hill Rd . , the old farm and the Goodman farm west of it . Verl Rankin owns land south and east of the property . A boy by the name of Scheffler lives on the old White property . I don ' t know how you measure here , do you measure to the center of the highway or just to the edge of the highway ? G . WOOD : Edge of the highway . P . MUNSON : To the right of way , then . It is 325 feet from the edge of the highway back to the property line on the south side of the property . If we make these 200 feet wide , which is in the other map , we end up with . 65 , 000 square feet , which is close to an acre and a half . Our experience is that any time a person gets much over an acre , they don ' t take care of it . Also , if you notice on the last sheet , a cut off with a dotted line where it says 44 , 000 , that is what a lot would look like and there would be a strip of land up the back side that would be fairly useless . I was hoping you would allow me to leave it with 150 foot frontage , which would be all right with the County ; and it PLANNING BOARD - 2 - June 16 , 1987 would leave a little over an acre for each lot and I could go clear to the back of the property . It would be a clean deal rather than leaving a narrow strip . If I make them 200 feet wide I ' m going to nearly an acre and a half or I would have to cut it off . To me , nobody is going to take care of that back chunk . I would like permission to divide it into four lots and keep the corner lot and the farm across the road . G . TOTMAN : You ' re talking about 3 different lots ? P . MUNSON : Four different lots actually . Four lots with 150 feet frontage and the back strip would remain with the main farm . G . TOTMAN : You do have enough space to divide them into four lots with 200 foot frontage ? P . MUNSON : Yes , and they would be 325 feet deep . The last lot would be bigger if we went 200 feet . I just don ' t see the sense in making such large , deep lots . I would rather cut them in two and try to get Verl to take over the back strip that would be at the 220 feet deep point . C . TWIGG : Is that workable land ? P . MUNSON * It is all workable land except it is all grown up , it is not worked now . There are trees in there that are 12 to 15 inches on the butt . All that use to be a pasture . It has grown up and it is pine trees , red pine and one thing and another . C . TWIGG : That should be the ZBA ' s decision , shouldn ' t it ? G . WOOD : No , as a matter of fact I don ' t think anybody has the authority to approve a non- conforming lot - other than the Town Board , M . POST : We have talked about these things before , our primary responsibility is to interpret the rules , to say the person either conforms to the Ordinance or he doesn ' t conform . We are in agreement here that he does not conform to the rules because he wants to create less than 200 feet frontage . The issue is what governing body can grant an exception ? C . TWIGG : This is not anything we can do , as I look at it . M . POST : In the case where there are grey areas we can consider it but this is pretty cut and dried . G . TOTMAN : One of the points you have to look at , Phil , is normally even if you go to the ABZ you have to prove a hazard or hardship to be granted a variance . There is neither one here . There is no really basic criteria for any Board to deviate from the written book . I understand what you are saying but if I am on the Board that has the authority and power to do what you want to do , what is the hardship ? z PLANNING BOARD - 3 - June 16 , 1987 P . MUNSON : None , 'there is no hardship , just poor land use . G . TOTMAN : Then we have to determine , looking at it , we agree it is a poor use of land and maybe you gut this down and sell part off to somebody else and then next somebody else comes in with the same thing ; the first thing you know the Ordinance doesn ' t mean a thing . P . MUNSON@ You would not object if I did make acre lots by running 200 foot frontage , 220 feet deep and left this strip in the back . G . TOTMAN : You would have 4 one acre lots with 200 foot frontage , no problem . C . TWIGG : That would meet the criteria . It is the _ road frontage you are lacking in your proposal . G . WOOD : Isn ' t he going to end up with five lots not four ; he is going to create four new lots . P . MUNSON * I end up with five . G . WOOD : That makes a statutory subdivision which means it has to be approved by the County Health Department as well . P . MUNSON & I read in here some where that your major subdivision is six , is that right ? G . TOTMAN : A Minor Subdivision is 3 to 4 lots less than five acres ; anything above that is a Major Subdivision . A Major Subdivision is the result of five or more lots . P . MUNSON : I have four lots with less than five acres . C . TWIGG : The corner will be five acres ? P . MUNSON * The corner one goes with the farm across the road . C . TWIGG : The reason the 200 foot frontage was put in was to keep it more rural . P . MUNSON ** All towns went to 200 when the County went to 200 . When the County went back to 150 , some towns went to 150 . Somewhere in the Ordinance there are the rights to grant exceptions . G . WOOD : To a subdivision , I ' m not sure . The ZBA may grant variances to the regulations applied to specific sites . It grants the ZBA the power to grant variances for the land usage regulation . Generally speaking , to deviate from the subdivision , that requires the Town Board approval because the Town Board enacted the subdivision regulations . P . MUNSON@ Maybe I should meet with the Town Board . PLANNING BOARD - 4 - June 16 , 1987 G . TOTMAN : No , the Town Board does not deal with subdivsions . G . WOOD : What would happen is , if the ZBA doesn ' t have the power to grant , there are two possibilities . The Town Board has granted to the Planning Board a blanket approval to modify plats when the Ordinance was enacted or they may grant specific powers to deviate . So , if he comes in here with this as a subdivsion and it does not meet the subdivision regulations , then I think the thing to do is research where that powers lays . It may be the Town Board grants the Planning Board approval power . C . TWIGG : I think that ' s the ZBA if that is to be changed . P . MUNSON * Would you like me to come back in another month ? G . TOTMAN : If you do it the other way , it would not be changing anything . G . WOOD : No , if you put the 200 foot road frontage . P . MUNSON : You agree with that ? G . WOOD : Yes , G . TOTMAN : If you make 4 lots with 200 foot frontage . C . TWIGG : I see what Phil is saying , an acre is a lot of lot . If he makes them 200 foot lots , all it is is a formality to approve it . G . WOOD : It would be the formality of going . through a Minor Subdivision , V . RANKIN : You have to have a Public Hearing ? M . . POST : Why is it a Minor ? G . WOOD : Local Law No . 2 of 1984 revised the definition of a Minor Subdivision from 2 to 4 lots to read 3 to 5 . This would be creating five lots . The next problem comes up , if you sell five lots that becomes a subdivision by state definition and ;: in the first place you have to have the sewage system designed by an engineer and secondly , I think , you are required to put in underground electric . P . MUNSON : Does that apply for four ? g . WOOD : I ' m not sure how this would be treated . You are creating five lots all together , ; granted you only want to - sell four . P . MUNSON : But what ' s left is over five acres so that doesn ' t become a lot , that is part of the farm across the road . G . WOOD : Are you sure of that ? PLANNING BOARD - 5 - June 16 , 1987 P . MUNSON : I don ' t know , I thought that was what I read . B . CASOLARA : Is this one big lot ? P . MUNSON * That and 40 acres across the road are together . B . CASOLARA : Two parcels of land ? P . MUNSON : One parcel split by a road . G . WOOD It has been traditional for the Planning Board to treat those as separate parcels because they are separated by a public right of way . B . CASOLARA : So there is one parcel on the south side of the road that you want to divide into five lots ? P . MUNSON : Yes , G . TOTMAN : On the four showing here and the one big one on the north side of the road , how many deeds are involved . P . MUNSON : One deed , including the 40 acres across the road , one Tax Map Number . G . TOTMAN : If you come back 220 feet deep and draw a line right straight across , you have 4 lots that are an acre a piece with 200 foot frontage and you are asking for approval to get that passed as a subdivision ? P . MUNSON : I ' d rather go to the ZBA, if I could , and ask about the 154 foot frontage because I like that use of land better. B . CASOLARA : It seems you have options , it is your decision . P . MUNSON * If you tell me the ZBA is the place to go , then that is where I want to go . G . TOTMAN : You can go to somebody beyond us if you want to , but from my recollection from what has been passed from the very beginning of the planning and zoning in the Town of Groton ; it was the option the Town Board had , directed from the State , to give the Planning Board subdivision plat approval and that took all authority away from anybody else and put it .in the Planning Board ' s hands . P . MUNSON : The ZBA then does not operate in subdivisions ? G . TOTMAN : Not in my interpretation , in this particular case . M . POST : Even if you went to the ZBA , they would have to turn you down . C . TWIGG : They would have to because they have a specific list to follow and if they went down this list and No . 1 is hardship and you PLANNING BOARD - 6 - June 16 , 1987 don ' t meet that , they quit right there . If you had a lot and say , it did not have quite 200 foot frontage but you had lots of back acerage , then you go to the ZBA and they give you a variance because you did not have road frontage but had plenty of acerage for sewage and so on ; I think that ' s what the ZBA would do . G . TOTMAN : If you turn to the second page of the map you gave us , where you see the dotted line by the 44 , 000 , extend the line all the way across the back of those four lots and cross off the line ahead of the 46 . 5 , that won ' t be a lot barrier then ; his land then from the corner lot would extend out beyond the four lots and not make it a separate lot , it would still be part of the corner lot ; so he is asking for a subdivision of 4 lots with 200 foot frontage and 220 feet deept . That I can see no problem , do you Gary ? P . MUNSON : Except there would only be three lots , is that right Gary ? G . WOOD : This is not to scale . G . TOTMAN : Where does the 1 , 080 feet point go :?- :; . ' . P . MUNSON : From the corner . C . TWIGG : 1 , 080 ; you put in four that is 800 feet and that leaves 280 feet for the corner lot . G . WOOD : Where is the house on the corner lot ? P . MUNSON * Way in the corner . G . WOOD : This lot with the creek going through it , remember you have to have a 150 foot circle for the septic for the Health Department . So for 3 lots you can get the 150 foot circle but the one with the creek you probably can ' t . P . MUNSON * The creek is a wet weather creek ; sometimes it dry and sometimes it is full . It is about 3 to 4 feet deep . - - - G . Wood got the Tax Map to look up for scaleevo%W%%; G . TOTMAN : Just assume that they are going to mow or keep up the 3 / 4 or acre of land , the rest of it now is undergrowth and trees growing in hedgerows ; you are not going to make any more profit out of it by cutting that back and keeping that piece of land . P . MUNSON : No . G . TOTMAN : What you see. from the road is somebody with an acre of land with a hedgerow across the back . That ' s not really all that uncommon . You could divide into 220 foot lots and solve your problem with the creek , you could go that way . I PLANNING BOARD - 7 - June 16 , 1987 C . TWIGG : Does he require an Environmental Impact Statement ? G . TOTMAN : I think you should go to the County Health Department about the creek , I don ' t know what it looks like , according to what Verl said it is man made . P . MUNSON : The Town put it there for run off . G . TOTMAN : You should check with the County Health Department if you are talking about diverting it and leave into 400 foot lots . P . MUNSON : If I get it passed for 220 and the people want it deeper then I am landlocked . I would have to have it deeper for all of them , then I landlock myself . But that ' s not really true , because if you give it to any one of them you could give the whole strip to them .. There ' s no point in selling something that , as I ' ve seen through experience , it does not give an advantage . C . TWIGG : I think this is a little different , if you sell it they probably are not going to change that in the back from what it has been the last 20 years . G . TOTMAN : Back to the original question . He asked for 154 . foot frontage , we cannot approve that . My suggestion would be to resubmit the application for 200 feet and what you are going to do about the creek . I would suggest before you go any farther go to the County Health Department and find out what to do with the creek ; be back at the July 21 meeting with the information . Assuming that you are going to do what you just said , we can give tentative sketch plan approval tonight . That will take care of step no . 1 ; on this as 200 foot frontage . This gives you the feeling that so far what you are proposing , and you don ' t change anything , we can approve it formally at the next meeting . CECIL TWIGG made the motion to approve the map with the 200 foot frontage as the preliminary sketch plan for PHILIP MUNSON subdivision on Sovocool Hill Rd . Tax Map No . 33 - 1 - 1 ; BILL CASOLARA seconded the motion . VOTE : ALL in favor . Motion carried . PROPOSED subdivision presented by ROGER GLEASON located on Clark St . and Old Stage Rd . Tax Map No . 121 - 1 - 21 . 2 : G . TOTMAN : Roger is applying for a Major Subdivision , R . GLEASON : I don ' t know if maybe you might want to include Proper ' s lot in this too . G . WOOD : He already has that .. R . GLEASON & He has it but it wasn ' t officially approved that way . Tax Map No . 121 -4 - 12 . 5 PLANNING BOARD - 8 - June 16 , 1987 G . TOTMAN .e What we will do tonight is practically the same thing we did with Mr . Munson earlier . If we go through this and clearly understand what Roger is submitting , we are approving his preliminary sketch plan , or we can request changes if we want . I think what he has done is what we asked him to do at the last meeting . Then he will submit a final plat , according to the subdivision regu-latins and we will .then hold a public hearing . Roger , it calls for five copies . R . GLEASON : Yes . G . TOTMAN : You have a copy of the subdivision regulations ? R . GLEASON : Yes , I . have a copy of the Major Subdivision Rules and Regulations . There are some parts of that , . though , that really don ' t apply to this thing . G . TOTMAN : Which ones are you referring to ? R . GLEASON : It has to do with open space . G . TOTMAN : In some Major Subdivisions where you are creating a small village with houses around , it is put into the Ordinance you are required to put in trees of certain size to make the asthetics of the land look so it is not barren . Where in this particular case you are talking about one huge parcel of land and 3 or 4 small parcels all bordering on the road . B . CASOLARA ; It is in here so we can have some control . R . GLEASON : Right , what. I am asking is for you to spell out what I have to do ; I ask that you modify some of the regulations . Really , with the exceptions of a few things , it would almost be the same as a Minor . G . TOTMAN : Is everyone aware of what the Major Subdivision calls for ? Board members answered affirmative "" - So you follow what I am saying . Roger , you have a copy of the Major Subdivision Regulations ? R . GLEASON : Yes , the thing is before I go to work and hire someone to do it , I want to know what they have to do because I don ' t want to pay for something I don ' t need . If it is too extensive you get into a cost problem . G . TOTMAN : We are not dealing with roadways , we are not dealing with any of that stuff , we are dealing with , as I understand it here , this is the way you have it laid out ? R . GLEASON * Yes . PLANNING BOARD - 9 - June 16 , 1987 G . TOTMAN : You have it laid out so that the parcel going to Proper is No . 1 , then going west of there you have two more lots laid out . As I understand it when Proper buys this land he intends to build a house . R . GLEASON * He intends to build a driveway coming out onto Old Stage Rd . G . TOTMAN : So the other two lots it would be possible to have the driveways going out onto Clark St . ? R . GLEASON : I don ' t think the northwest lot wants to come out on Clark St . , it would be terrible , there is a dip there . That is one reason Propoer wanted land to build driveway to Old Stage Rd . instead of the dip on Clark St . G . TOTMAN0 What are the dimensions of these lots ? R . GLEASON : They are roughly 22 acres and I think that means they are 500 x 250 . G . TOTMAN : On the next plan they have . to be entered how much road frontage and how deep they are . R . GLEASON@ They will all be in there , as a matter of fact . . . G . TOTMAN : That tells us how much acerage but not the road frontage or how deep they are . So for the next meeting you will submit the proper number of copies of that with dimensions on it . R . GLEASON@ Right , I ' ll have a survey made which will have all that . G . TOTMAN : Submit that at the July meeting and . at that point we will discuss it and set up a public hearing . R . GLEASON : The Major Subdivision calls for topographical lines at close 'intervals , I think the lines could be something like whats called for in a Minor Subdivision . In there they call for lines every five feet , it takes a lot of work to get those there . G . TOTMAN : So according to the Rules of a Major Subdivision Roger is going to follow them and present the Board with the right number of copies with the proper dimensions , which are not here on this map . This is a preliminary sketch plan that shows us what Roger wants to do ; we will approve the concept tonight with the agreement from Roger that he will be back at the next meeting , July 21 , with all that it calls for in the Rules and if at that time we agree with what Roger is planning , and he hasn ' t changed anything , we will then set up a public hearing . One other thing , the. requirement in here for the contours , could that be expended ? R . GLEASON : There is also the requirement for trees and such could that be waived ; curbs and such ? PLANNING BOARD - 10 June 16 , 1987 G . TOTMAN : Those are in there in the case when a developer is developing a lot . of land , where he is .putting in new roads and you want to keep the pattern of the land ; where here. . you are only selling some land parcels along the edge of the road . G . WOOD : In a word you are not putting in street lights and curbs and sidewalks . G . TOTMAN : Right . G . WOOD : Along those lines I would recommend to you that that could be waived along with the others . Be CASOLARA : No contours ? G . WOOD : When you are doing a normal subdivision with streets and such that is the only way to determine runoff . Be CASOLARA : So that would be specific for new G . WOOD : I think the only purpose it would serve in this case would be to know where the drainage is going to go from the houses . Be CASOLARA : Would that come under the Board of Health ? G . WOOD : No it doesn ' t , not in this case . Be CASOLARA : You would need Board of Health approval for wells and septics , R . GLEASON & So what you ' re saying is I need to have to design already done for the wells on the three parcels even when we don ' t know where a person is going to put a house , perks tests and such . G . WOOD : You can make that argument , but in any subdivision you don ' t know exactly where the houses are going to set but traditionally you do this . You can look at it in another way , there may be only certain areas on the property that are suitable for drainage and wells and that determines where everything else is going to go * R . GLEASON : I guess I don ' t really know what you want , it is beyond me . G . TOTMAN : Do you know what you are going to do between now and the next meeting ? . R . GLEASON : I ' m going to get a hold of somebody who knows what they are doing . G . TOTMAN : You have in mind , though , what we just said ? R . GLEASON : Well , yes and no , what I would like is a letter from you saying this is waived , this I gotta do and then there won ' t be any question I guess is what it really boils down to or give Gary PLANNING BOARD - 11 - June 16 , 1987 ' the authority to instruct the person I hire , I don ' t know . If there is a question , who do I talk to before the next meeting ? G . WOOD : I can ' t make any interpretation or deviation from the Ordinance without the approval of the Planning Board , G . TOTMAN : What the minutes read up to this point , Roger , is that this Board tentatively agreed to tell you the concept of this sketch plan , if it is carried out to the bible of the Subdivision , with you proper number of copies and proper size and dimensions , we will consider that up to that point with tentative approval . Bearing in mind that it is not a subdivision requireing new streets , nor utilities or anything like that so those type of things do not enter into this particular subdivision . R . GLEASON : I ' m familiar with these , yet . . . . G . TOTMAN What you are asking about something in writing , all you need is a copy of the minutes . with that in mind , I think that takes care of what you are looking for , if somebody wants to move on that particular question . Gary , are we moving in the right direction ? G . WOOD : Yes , but I think perhaps you should look at the list of requirements and note the ones to be waived in your motion . R . GLEASON : That is what I am asking for . %;-;%;-;Board read through section 251 on Major Subdivisions ""' No . 1 remains No . 2 waived , street lines and pedestrian walkways No . 3 remains No . 4 remains No . 5 waived , public areas No . 6 waived , unseeded open spaces No . 7 remains No . 8 waived , reference to monuments No . 9 remains No . 10 waived , monuments and street markers No . 11 waived , public utilities M . POST : I have one more question , on the $ 60 , 000 value of homes in the deed . G ., TOTMAN : That is a covenant Roger is putting in his deed , there will be no mobile homes ; and no construction cost less than $ 60 , 000 at 1987 values . Once he puts that in the deed it stays there . That is proposed and put in by Roger not the Board . i a PLANNING BOARD - 12 - June 16 , 1987 BILL CASOLARA made the motion the Planning Board accept the preliminary sketch plan presented by ROGER GLEASON for a Major Subdivision , Tax Map No . 121 - 1 - 21 . 2 located on Clark St . Ext , and Old Stage Rd . in the Town of Groton , with the the following waivers : Section 251 . 2 , 251 . 5 , 251 . 6 , 251 .. 8 , 251 . 109 25141190 VERL RANKIN seconded the motion : VOTE : All in favor Motion carried G . TOTMAN : With what we did tinight , Roger , do you fully understand what you have to do for the next meeting ? R . GLEASON : Yes , I got that . When you get into Section 252 for the final plans , I will need clarification . We are not going to be putting in sewer and water facilities . G . TOTMAN : I think you will find that what we waived in the first part will carry over to the second part . Do you understand what you are doing before the next meeting ? R . GLEASON : Yes , what I think we will do is submit it to Gary to make sure it is all proper . G . TOTMAN : No , you submit it to the `Board . R . GLEASON * What I am getting at is I want to be sure our interpretations , when we do them , are right . G . WOOD : If he gets it in here ten days ahead of time we can check it over to see if he complies . G . TOTMAN : Yes , we can do that but he has to have it in here on time . R . GLEASON * That ' s what I would like to do . G . TOTMAN : You have to have . it here by the tenth of July . G . WOOD : George , did you check on the fees for this ? G . TOTMAN : Colleen has agreed to put what you already paid toward this division . It costs $ 25 for Major Subdivision plat lus $ 10 per lot . Since there was no new business for the Board V . RANKIN made the motion the meeting be adjourned ; C . TWIGG seconded the motion and all agreed motion carried The next regular meeting of the Planning Board will be the third Tuesday of July , July 21 , 1987 , at 8@00 p . m . Respectfully submitted , Y Ma gar A . Palmer