The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1987-12-17 TOWN OF GROTON PLANNING BOARD Thursday , December 17 , 1987 ; 8 * 00 p . m . BOARD ( *Present ) %;George Totman , Chairman kMike Post , Vice = Chairman Cecil Twigg *Monica Carey Verl Rankin %Bill Casolara G . TOTMAN , Chairman , opened the meeting at 8 : 00 p . m . Minutescof the November , 1987 meeting were reviewed . Correcto to the minutes as follows : Page 4 , Be Casolara : " aware around planning " should read " . :;a• r-caay= around planning . . . . " . Be CASOLARA made the motion to approve the minutes as corrected , M . CAREY seconded the motion , motion carried , minutes were approved . G . TOTMAN : Did anyone look at the Ordinance for changes ? Be CASOLARA : How do you see the Harrington Report fitting in to what we are doing ? G . TOTMAN : To be honest with you , I have not seen it . I did not put it in the agende -,� I =•have not seen it yet , it was on the table tonight when I arrived . I think you would have to agree it would take some time studying it before we make any comments on it . It is kind of hard to do at one meeting when there is only one copy . Be CASOLARA : My question is , what are your plans regarding this document with regards to planning ? . G . TOTMAN : I . would have to see what is in it first . I was not privy to that or why it was done. or�what. •he - was asked to do , per.,,aY M . POST : Wasn ' t the original motivation to collect data to have evidence to support not putting the landfill in Groton ? He may have uncovered some interesting things , like we should not be developing in certain areas because of geological issues . G . TOTMAN : If that was the original reason , it came too late , the site was picked before the report came out . M . POST L::,'F,That ' s true , but still there might be some interesting facts in there . Be CASOLARA : There was some preliminary work regarding the sitng of the landfill . I met with him in June and he was ready to review -the site plan for the landfill should that become an issue . M . POST : None of us have had a chance to look at the report . We should all review it . PLANNING BOARD . 2 . December 17 , 1987 Be CASOLARA : There is only one page here for recommendations for future development . I think it is the pertinent section of the document for the Board and perhaps it could be duplicated and sent around to the Board members . The data and maps we don ' t really need . RONALD and CAROL MARKS proposed subdivision , Chipmans Corners Rd . : G . TOTMAN : The Marks ' property was sold in 2 parcels so it does not require a subdivision . MARY ELLEN LANE proposed subdivision , Cobb St . and Durfee Rd . : M . CAREY : What about Mary Lane ' s proposal ? G . TOTMAN : She has never been back . M . CAREY : Supposedly she has sold one parcel . G . TOTMAN : She can sell one parcel without a subdivision . She did ask for a subdivision and she agreed to what we asked , then she talked to some neighbors and said she didn ' t like it . Unless she comes back there is nothing we can do about it . CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE : G . TOTMAN : There are things in last month ' s minutes about changes in the Ordinance . Things to look at . I guess probably if we are going to do something about that we are going to have to make specific suggestions . I think one of the problems Lirls , if you don ' t work with it , you don ' t realize there are a lot of ambiguities . Teresa and Collen , working in the office , meeting a lot of people with questions abouvthe Ordinance . A lot of things contradict each other . As mentioned in the minutes:;: the swimming pool requiremens and the sign requirements are things that have come up in the past . There are things all through the Ordinance like that . The chart that shows what can be where in what zone , if you sat down and picked out certain things permited in one area and not in another and try to figure out why in some areas you need a permit and other areas you need to go to the Planning Board when it is all the same usage . Those are the things we should be looking at . The other way to do it is maybe if one or two people want to take it on as a project and meet between meetings and go over these things and make suggestions at the regular meeting . M . POST : I think that makes more sense than 6 people going over it . G . TOTMAN : I ' d be glad to work with someone on . it . I don ' t want to do it myself , it should be done by the Board . With one , two or three people going over it . I think that probably Gary and myself could sit down with the people and point out what is happening . Not being involved with the actual enforcement , it is hard to see the problems . i PLANNING BOARD - 3 - December 17 , 1987 I was here when it was made , and we had it for a year and we did not notice any problems .. until I took Bob Brown ' s place while he was on vacation . When things came in to be approved I got the book out and going by it found it difficult to work with . I could not believe we passed it that way . You don ' t see it until you work with it . M . POST : We also noticed there were certain intents that we thought we had in it and it didn ' t come out that way . G . TOTMAN : If you just take one section at a time for a start . Gary suggests one of the things we talk about , and think about , is the non- conforming lot . A non- conforming lot is one that is too small according to the present Ordinance , they were grandfathered in ; and say someone has a mobile home on it . The Ordinance says you can keep what is there but you can ' t add to what is there . If you have a 10 by 40 trailer and you want to replace it with a 14 by 72 you can ' t do it because you are adding to a non- conforming lot . It doesn ' t make much sense because you would be improving the lot and you are not allowed to . Lyle Raymond and I got together probably 8 or 9 months ago because Gary Wood was having some problems with that type of thing , he was rejecting them and sending them to the Appeals Board and the Appeals Board was passing them . Lyle and I got together and suggested to Gary that as long as they are not infringing upon the side yard requirements and you are making it better and the land worth more money , then pass it . But we should look at the Ordinance and make the Ordinance state it�, ..that way . It was intended originally to have so many things in here that called for Site - Plan Reviews . Having it come out the way it did it meant a lot of things required a Site - Plan Review rather than having the Zoning . . approve it with a permit . For example : Section 351 . 123 - one unit residential building in a Rural Agriculture Zone - calls for a Site - Plan Review . But in a Low or Medium :Tensity Zone the Zoning Officer can approve it with a permit . B . CASOLARA : That has been corrected by an amendment , according to my book . M . .POST : Apparently the Ordinance books don ' t agree . We should come up with the.-�newest version of the book and make sure they all agree . Reviewing various Sections : 351 . 125- 7 . all permited with Site Plan Review ( found books did not all agree , some had amendments marked in and some did not ) 3 G . TOTMAN : Would' someone like to sit down and begin the work on the Ordinance . B . CASOLARA : I ' ll work on the sign regulations . Im not real familiar with this being a new member on the Board . G . TOTMAN : Let ' s give it. a try . I ' ll check with Gary and we can set a date when we can get together and go over this one section and use Gary and my experiences with working wth° it . Meeting was adjourned . The next regular meeting will be Thursday , January 21 , 1988 at 8 : 00 p . m . Respectfully submit� d ,