Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-02-16 TOWN OF GROTON PLANNING BOARD Thursday , 16 February 1995 Board Members (*present) Others Present *George Totman, Chairman Robert Walpole *Monica Carey George Senter, Sr. , CEO *Sheldon Clark *Jeff Lewis Verl Rankin George VanSlyke *Cecil Twigg The meeting was called to order at 8 #08 p.m. by Chairman Totman. G. Totman: Let's call the meeting to order, and order is what we want. Has everybody read the minutes of the January meeting? All the way through? Does anybody want to move that they be accepted? \ J. Lewis: I so move . G. Totman: Jeff moves and Cecil seconded . All in favor? (All were in favor. ) I know Walpole 's going to be here in a few minutes because he's down here for some minor subdivisions, and I just left the meeting where he was at. So the next thing on our agenda was "Looking forward to the update status of Land Use Ordinance change from Town Board action. " I was not able to attend the Town Board meeting. I did find out last Friday that it was not on the Town Board agenda again this time , and the Town Clerk asked if they wanted it on the agenda and their answer was "no . " But I asked Monica to make sure she was there to bring it up . And I asked Lyle Raymond to also represent us there to see if we could at least get them to talk about it. My report back, and I 'll let Monica make the report, was that I got a very favorable report back from Monica on what the Town Board did. And once the Town Board got it on the agenda and started talking about it, the Town Board was very favorable toward what we were doing and they wanted to move on with it. The Board did , and I got the same feeling from Lyle Raymond that the Board itself had no qualms about what we did. They thought we had done a nice job . I 'll let Monica make a report on the meeting. M. Carey: I went to the meeting and Lyle and I brought it up when they asked for any questions from the floor. We asked them what the status was for the Ordinance and Carl Haynes spoke right up and said anytime you want to set a date , it's fine with me . He pulled out his appointment book and we hashed around what date would be a good date and we ended up deciding on March 9th as the date at 8 o'clock. They asked a few questions like what did we think would be controversial . I said maybe the change in road frontage from 200 down to 150 feet. I said I talked with a lot of people who were quite interested in these flag lots ; I don 't think that will be controversial, but I think people will be interested in it. And I know people that are interested in attending the Public Hearing and hearing about the flag lots and make sure that they do get in the Ordinance . Other than that, I thought it went real well and I want to thank Carl Haynes because he really helped get this started and he got it going. So put it on your calendar -- March 9th at 8 o'clock. G. Totman: It's very important, I think, that the Planning Board is all there that night . There 's going to be questions - - anytime you change an ordinance or start a new one, there 's always people against zoning, no matter where you go . But there's a lot of people that don't understand it and they like to ask questions. The Town Board and the Planning Board are going to chair this together so it's an equal thing. My suggestion to the Town Board early on was that we 'd hold the meeting together, jointly, because we've been working with it much more than they have . They can read what we 've done , but there 's a lot of thoughts that are put into it and a lot of reasons behind a lot of things that are there that the Town Board couldn't actually handle themselves . I 'm sure they are going to look to us for answers. Now, if you want to have just questions fielded to any one of you, that's fine with me . I 'd like a sense of direction how you'd like to handle it. When people ask the question and look at the Planning Board for Town Planning Board Meeting February 16, 1995 an answer, do you just want to have me point to someone and say do you want to answer this, or do you want me to answer it -- how would you like to field these kind of questions? C. Twigg: I think you should answer those , unless you think someone in particular has better -- you've followed it more closely and your language is better - - you don't stutter quite as much . G. Totman: Since when did you tell me my language is better than yours? CO Twigg: In this case. G. Totman: I appreciate what you 're saying, but I just want to make sure that what we do is united and the feeling of the Board . C. Twigg: Somebody might point to Jeff Lewis and say "Jeff, I want you to answer this question. " G. Totman: I just don't want to do it and have you feel that I was ignoring you or whatever. Once in a while I might say "Do you agree with this?" so the people would feel that the Board is sort of unanimous in their feelings. I 'll leave it at that. I don't have anything else on the agenda tonight, except for the three subdivisions that Bobby's got and he told me he'd be here by 8 : 15 . And that's a couple three more minutes, so we'll wait for him. Is that all right with everybody? (At 8 : 15 , Robert Walpole arrived and the meeting continued.) G. Totman: MR. Walpole' s here tonight, and he's getting a little bit like Roger Gleason who used to come about every week for a new subdivision. Bob , we've got three here . Which one do you want to deal with first? R. Walpole : Doesn't make any difference . G. Totman: Why don't we take the new one first. George Bushnell (TM # 39- 1 - 16. 5) . R. Walpole: George Bushnell owns approximately 60 acres on the McLean-Cortland Road . There's a copy of a survey there . If you look, I think it's 1 . 279 acres and he sold that lot. Here 's the overall map which will give you a better idea of what's going on here . He sold this lot off and I think there was a CO issued on it in September 1994 . There 's been a house built here . Since then , if you will look at your yellow rough draft, the balance of the land and the barns are under contract to be sold , leaving the house, with approximately one and a half to two acres of land , for George as a main residence . This triggered the subdivision as we actually got three lots off the same property. G. Totman: So how much room is there from the east side of the property that he's saving for the house to the end of his real property? R. Walpole: On the east side? G. Totman: The Cortland side of the property that he's keeping. R. Walpole: It will be at least a hundred feet. CO Twigg: That's this portion here? G. Totman: So he's not leaving enough there to become a building lot? R. Walpole: No, there's probably going to be 216 feet with the house . Co Twigg: How come it don't go - - or is it just a line? R. Walpole: Previously, when we sold him the property, the property was bought from Bucky Carl , for some unknown reason he had two parcels done on this survey - - they were all recorded as 65 acres . This line here was previously, at the time this property was transferred back in 1988 -- all I 'm doing now is looking for preliminary approval . There will be a final survey which will show everything. 2 Town Planning Board Meeting February 16, 1995 There are numerous things in the contract that have to be taken care of, so I just want preliminary approval . G. Totman: The only question I would have , and there 's nothing illegal about it, is why you ' d only keep a hundred feet on that one side . With our present ordinance, and the future ordinance , it can't be used for a building lot up front. R. Walpole: You have misinterpreted the whole concept of this . When this new survey comes in, this lot here will be cut out and this line here will be gone. All that other property is being transferred to the new buyer. The only thing that Mr. Bushnell 's going to own there is his home , plus approximately 200 feet of frontage to make a legal conforming lot that complies with the Town Law today, and that's it. Everything else is gone to the new buyer. G. Totman: That I understand. But when I asked you how many feet, you said a hundred feet. R. Walpole : Well, from the line to the edge of his house. G. Totman: But once this is approved, the land will be gone -- then that hundred feet doesn't mean anything . R. Walpole: It absolutely means nothing because that will be part of the 60 acres being transferred. G. Totman: You should have told me that the first time . R. Walpole : That's why I only want preliminary. . . . G. Totman: Does anybody have any questions? CO Twigg: No . M. Carey: No, it looks okay. G. Totman: I don't see anything wrong with it. At the next meeting we can take that up . R. Walpole: If we have all the other conditions made . G. Totman: I'll tell you , and you have to have new surveys, but we can pass it and then hold our approval until you come in with the survey. Then we can just sign it and make it official . R. Walpole: That's fine . G. Totman: If you know that's going to go that way. R. Walpole : We know the lines are pretty correct right now. G. Totman: But you've got until the third Thursday in March . R. Walpole: We have some banking conditions we have to satisfy first. I know that Emerson Avery asked me this morning when I was coming to the Planning Board meeting. C. Twigg: What other one you got there? R. Walpole : The other simple one I'd like to get out of the way, and somebody's got to get the big map out. . . G. Totman: John VanAlmelo . R. Walpole: This is on the Smith Road . We have #4 and I think George issued a building permit on that. Number 1 we have a contract on, but we do not have approval on it. But this will be part of it. We have people looking at # 2 and # 3 as one unit. But we made some changes . We were going to have five 3 Town Planning Board Meeting February 16, 1995 lots, but since the Health Department regulations get into a problem with engineering for under five acres, we are increasing this one . This may very well go into a major later on because on this particular tax parcel you have one , two, three , four, and the fifth lot could be as high as 40 acres . Or, you could have one, two, three , four. It' s too premature at this point. We do have wetlands involved on the fifth lot here and the DEC has told us they will come in and mark it in reference to comply with the Health Department, G. Senter: On his survey, doesn't it say that the wetlands is 200 feet from the last lot line? That goes into the woods? R. Walpole: It goes into the woods. The buffer zone may just catch that fifth lot in there . We have the 100-foot buffer zone we have to contend with . DEC will mark that. G. Senter: So there's another lot that will go in beyond the fourth one? R. Walpole : Yes. That may all be one lot of 35 to 40 acres. G. Senter: How about into the woods though , Bob , I 'm saying? R. Walpole : Not at this point. We did have a lot set up there . G. Senter: Okay. Lot 4 stops at the woods. . . . R. Walpole : At the edge of the woods, right. G. Senter: And that's 200 feet from the wetlands? R. Walpole: Oh , no. The wetlands are further than that. I think what they meant there is the fifth lot we had there . . . . C. Twigg: You say a hundred feet from the wetlands . It has to be a hundred feet - - not the lot line , the building. R. Walpole: No . Co Tw1w Or the septic . M Walpole: There 's the wetlands that is marked by DEC -- up on Smith Road which is below Wickham Road and Spring Street . The wetlands cannot be disturbed . And nothing else can be disturbed within a hundred feet of the wetlands. It's what they call a buffer zone . You can use it, but you cannot do anything there without a permit from the DEC . Co Twim You can cultivate it? G. Senter: You can pasture it, too. R. Walpole: Yes, but you cannot put anything else in it. J. Lewis: Or a parking lot? R. Walpole: I 'm not sure about a parking lot. You can 't change it, so a parking lot, I would say, would be out. It will affect the next 40 acres we sell, but they can still build in there as long as they are outside the 100-foot buffer zone. Even though this is set up for four, this could come back a three -- this line would be eliminated if the person takes it as one unit. G. Totman: If we pass it for four now, and you sell it for three and they don't want to have two lots when they buy it - - they just want to buy one lot - - all it takes is just coming in here for a boundary change . 4 Town Planning Board Meeting February 16, 1995 R. Walpole: Okay. Because we would really want to do that and the reason why is strictly because of the Health Department regulations. G. Totman: We have no problem with it. Absolutely no problem . R. Walpole: We 'll keep you informed as this thing goes down. G . Totman: So you want to get that approved tonight? R. Walpole: That's up to the Board . G. Totman: I mean , would you like to? R. Walpole: Doesn't make any difference to me . C. Twigg: Then table it, then . R. Walpole: If you want to do it next month , that's fine . I don't have a problem. M. Carey: Yes , but the bank's approved that first lot so you 're going to have to have a subdivision . . . G. Totman: You can't sell another one until you get it approved. R. Walpole : Then you better go for the approval tonight. M. Carey: I see no problem with it - - road frontage is okay -- more than an acre lot. G. Totman: Anybody else got any questions? We haven't done the SEAR yet. George , do you want to do the SEAR. CO Twigg: I think we ought to break Lewis in on it. M. Carey: I do too . Jeff Lewis then reads aloud Part 11 of the Short Environmental Assessment Form. Negative responses were obtained to questions A and Bin Part 11. C1 , after reading, resulted in the following discussion, M. Carey: Should we mention the wetlands? CO Twigg: I don't think so because the DEC watches that. It isn't part of this, really. M. Carey: Yes, but we should mention it just to say we know there's wetlands there and they are being properly taken care of. G. Totman: Cecil, one of the reasons for (and I hate always to agree with a woman) . . . . C. Twigg: I understand it, George. We went through it before. G. Totman: What she 's saying is that by just saying "no" here it looks like we didn't really look into It, So if somebody questions it later on, we can say "yes, we did look into it -- there's wetlands there , but the problem has been addressed properly. " Does that make sense? C. Twigg: Yes. I think Monica's right, too . Jeff Lewis continued with the SEAR form and upon completion it was determined by the Planning Board that the proposed action would not result in any s4piiBcant adverse environmental impact, resulting in a negative declaration. 5 Town Planning Board Meeting February 16, 1995 G. Totman: Does everybody agree with these findings? Are there any further questions? (Everyone agreed, and there were no further questions.) If not we'll declare this a negative dec. M. Carey: And I 'll second it. G. Totman: Is everybody in favor? (All were in favor. ) It's passed . Now we will take care of the third one that he's got. M. Carey: Well, we want to approve the subdivision . G. Totman: I'm sorry -- that's right. M. Carey: I 'll make the motion that we accept this four-lot subdivision and waive the public hearing . C. Twigg: I 'll second that. G. Totman: Any questions? The motion is on the floor. (There were no questions . ) All in favor? (All were in favor. ) Carried . Now, has everybody got this Christofferson thing? R. Walpole: Take a quick look at it and I 'll summarize it over on the tax map (Part of TM #24- 1 -3 . 2 - 1319 Spring Street Extension) , Some I 'm involved with and some I'm not involved in . From where the current survey you have in your possession roughly at this point is 216 feet of road frontage. If you continue farther on the survey map , you'll see a number that says 575 . 57 feet. That goes to this previous subdivision that was approved back in June 1992 , M. Carey: The whole 575 feet? R Walpole: That's correct. It gives you a better idea on where you are on the property . Now, looking at and I think somebody has had copies of this before - - the bigger map is here - - looking at this unit to reference where the survey is attached right here , this Mizer (sp?) -- now I 'm not involved in this transaction here with Mr. Mizer who owns the 49 acres back here , but he is buying all of the woods. There will be a survey from this point, which is the property just transferred to Philip Aiken , I believe, or Atkins, to Mizer's corner will become Mizer's property (Dan Mizer) . It's not landlocked . The other 14. 82 acres is going to be transferred to the gentlemen that built the house east of Mizer's strip that goes back to his big property. CO Twigg: That's the 14 acres you're pointing to? R. Walpole: That's correct. That will leave the three building lots that are already approved, plus probably 15 to 16 acres with 575 feet of road frontage . At this point, she's indicated that she -- if there's no interest in these building lots -- this 15 or 16 acres -- would be sold as one unit. G. Totman: Is that the one that Mary Decker's got the other part of? R. Walpole: That's correct. She wants out. G. Totman: So basically, all we're approving tonight is this one lot where the house is. R. Walpole: That's correct. And there's 15- 16 acres that will be left-- -- - G. Totman: Before we get into that, let's do the SEAR Jeff. . . Jeff Lewis then reads aloud Part II of the Short Environmental Assessment Form. Negative responses were obtained to all questions, and it was the Board's determination that the proposed action would not cause any significant adverse environmental impact, thereby resulting in a negative declaration. 6 Town Planning Board Meeting February 16, 1995 G. Totman: Cecil made a motion that we declare this a negative dec . Monica seconded it, and all are in favor, and it passed . CO Twigg: So he wants this one approved tonight -- might's well, right? There can't be much wrong up there . They are big lots. G. Totman: Our rules and regulations call for 200-foot frontage, an acre of land, and he's only asking for a one-lot subdivision out of a larger piece of land . Even if you held a public hearing and everybody complained, you'd have to have a reason for not approving it. I can 't find any reason and I personally don't see any reason to delay it and call for a public hearing, unless somebody else does. J. Lewis: I 'd like to make a motion that we approve this subdivision without a public hearing. M. Carey: I 'll second it. G. Totman: All in favor? (All were in favor) Anything else , MR. Walpole? R. Walpole: Yes. One other thing. At the meeting tonight and for the last ten years, the Business Association asked the Town officials and the Village officials , and George Senter has been on the Village Board before , to come in and talk about economic development. One of the major questions tonight was put to the Mayor and the Village Board of Trustees, after discussion for ten years, when is the Village officials and the Town officials, along with some development people , possibly going to sit down and look at some type water or sewer district extension and have a 5-acre , 10-acre , or 50-acre site available so that we have some interest of outside concerns that we have these capabilities. To this day, as we sit in this room, we have nothing in the township or do we have anything in place. G. Totman: Can I comment? R. Walpole: Yes -- just a second. And I would like to see the Planning Board, and we're going to push this, and we have asked the Town before and years ago we asked the Town - - the County was going to give the Town $5 , 000 to do a study and the Town Board turned it down in reference to a water district. The Village certainly has sufficient water. It certainly has sufficient sewage capabilities . I know you spent a year, a year and a half, two years working on the Comprehensive Plan . But we had phone calls last week from a local concern and we have no place today to talk with anyone about. And this was an outfit involved with 85 employees with the idea that they were going to go to 150 . We don't have nothing in this area to show. Okay, George , G. Totman: Can I talk now? R. Walpole: Yes. G. Totman: Basically what Bobby' s talking about is the outward goal of this committee , or whatever, is annexing some of the Town land to the Village . R. Walpole : Not even annexing. G. Totman: Well, so they can get the public water and that sort of stuff. Being a businessman in the Village -- I 'm asking a question now - - and active in all the affairs, the business association, and that sort of stuff, tell me what you think of this idea. There has been, in the past, a committee who was not appointed by anybody who called themselves the Groton Economic Development Committee or whatever it was called . It's gone along the wayside now. I think it's a proper name for what you 're talking about. But I would like to just run by the Town Board and the Village Board and the Village Planning Board , and I would be in favor of - - maybe not the whole Board - - let this Board appoint one or two people, let the Village Planning Board appoint one or two people , with one or two people from the Town and Village Board - - maybe six or seven people -- mixed up people -- and sit down and explore ways the Town and Village can work together and come up with some kind of a plan that everybody could work with . Call that committee the Groton Economic Development Committee , and let it be known once and for all that the Groton Economic Development Committee is associated with the government bodies and it's not an ad hoc committee. Does that make sense to you? 7 Town Planning Board Meeting February 16, 1995 R. Walpole: Yes, G. Totman: Do you follow what I 'm saying? I would very much like to present that to the Town Board, if I could . My problem is, like I said , I don't go to their meetings, but I 'd just as soon talk to somebody about it. R. Walpole: It's very strongly needed . Nothing to the project we did at R & H Pontiac . This is a 23- month project. If it hadn't been for Mr. Marchell waiting, no one else would have ever waited this long. And when Gary Watrous and I and a couple of others were returning from a meeting in Syracuse, Gary said he'd had calls and had to tell them no . Twice this first year, we've had to say no that we don't have anything . And we don't. And it gets a little discouraging because I think people would come here . I realize it's going to take someone -- I 'd be more than glad to see a motion by the Board , the Town Board, and have the motion go back to the Village Board and the Village Planning Board for assistance . I think it needs to be generated . We 've talked about it and it's being talked about again right now . But unless there's initial -- and I think the Town is the only way to go -- public water and public sewer are very important. C. Twigg: They started that one time on Cornelius' . They said that could be fixed . Wasn't that laid out so the sewer and water could be connected to that? R. Walpole : Number one, to eliminate public outcry, I think it has to be on a main route. Route 38 or Route 222 . That road is designed and owned by the State . And it's designed for heavy-duty truck traffic , if the truck traffic was involved . I think you're eliminating the outcry from the general public . G. Totman: If you try to do anything big like that on that road the Cornelius property is on , Cecil , the trucks and heavy traffic will tear up the road and the Town will have to pay for it. If you put it on one of the roads that Bobby's talking about, the State will pay for it. R. Walpole : And maintain it. And you don't get the outcry. J. Lewis: The question is - - which way? There's State routes three ways out of Groton -- 222 , and 38 each end. R. Walpole: I think your only route is 222 - - you've got natural gas. We've got water in the area and sewer would come down the hill into the system without getting into pumping stations. CO Twigg: And you 've got three-phase power. R. Walpole: That's correct. G. Totman: From what you 've listened to and talked about , does anybody feel strongly enough about that to make a formal request to the Town Board to look into it and consider appointing a committee , as such , and contacting the Village? C. Twigg: If this is of importance , and we have people that are looking for this kind of real estate , and the real estate is available . . . . R. Walpole : I think anything's available , but you need the cooperation of all parties involved . C. Twigg: But there's some legal aspects to it that somebody's going to have to address. I would make a motion that we approach the Town Board about forming a committee to look into this. We can 't do much . The Town Board has the authority to do anything like this. We are in a suggestive capacity, right? G. Totman: You have to always remember that the Planning Board is only an advisory board to the Town Board . And we 're saying we think it's a good idea to form a committee - - equal partners with the Planning Board and Town Board , Village Board , Village Planning Board to look into forming a committee called the Groton Economic Development Committee so we can look into the possibilities of what we can do to help the economic conditions of Groton . 8 ' Town Planning Board Meeting February 16, 1995 C. Twigg: You see , we don't know what Bob knows, or the banker knows. . . . . G. Totman: Normally when you have these committees, Cecil, when you all get together and elect a chairman , a scribe, and whatever, from my experience anyway -- and I don't know about Bob - - is that you sit down and pretty much decide what you're looking for. Then you call in the bank and you call in the developers, and you get their ideas of what's out there and what can be out there as to how you want to shape this thing. R. Walpole: What we need at this point is governmental involvement. There's a lot of interest there - - even from the Village IDA. C. Twigg: How far out 222 can the Village go with water and sewage? R. Walpole : You can go right now up to Lick Street. . . M. Carey: You've got the power going out. . . . C. Twigg: The power goes all the way to Salt Road, doesn't it? R. Walpole: If you had to go to the Salt Road at this point, I think you could service it with water. There isn't any question in my mind that someday this Hunter property will probably come up . My theory is that if the Village and Town all have their apples together, that . . . . . . (unintelligible) could be bought for $200, 000 -- if the Village, the Town, and the bank had to go in together to buy this. CO Twigg: That's what I suggested before . R. Walpole: But without having any organization involved , there's no set plan . There's no water district or sewer district in hand - - they're just going to keep going right on out the door. I 'm not even saying you could ever buy the Hunter property - - I 'm just using that for an example . I just think that there's room for everything up there . J. Lewis: Your feeling is that growth is around the corner for Groton? That's what I'm getting out of what you 're saying . R. Walpole : The only thing I 'm saying is that unless we do something to encourage some growth , we 're not going to have it for sure . I sat in a school budget meeting the other night and listened attentively for an hour and a half. After listening to the Governor indicate that they are going to cut all these programs -- and every department in the State is being cut - - I heard absolutely nothing -- and they're talking about $350,000. And I fully agree with the administrators and everyone involved in the discussion at school board -- my question still comes -- if everybody else is cutting, where in heck is this money coming from? Besides raise the tax base -- I mean the taxes. So unless something is done to increase our base , and it's certainly not being done in New York State right now. . . . G. Totman: In all sincerity - - and I don't want this to get politicized at all -- but if you 've been listening to the rhetoric coming out of Albany, they are not only cutting down the money they are giving out, but they are cutting mandates . The same message the school's going to get, and the governments, is the reason that taxes are high is because of the mandates . What we , as citizens, should do -- and I 'm very sincere about this -- is go to the school boards and the county boards and say, "Look, you 've been telling us all this time about mandates. Now you've got less money coming from Albany, let's cut out some of these mandates. " People are going to scream and holler because they've become so used to it, they've grown up with some of these mandates, and a lot of the places they've been using these mandates for screens to put in programs they want. Schools are one of the worst offenders. And you 've got to say to them, "Look, people aren't going to be happy, but they'd be more unhappy if you raise the taxes . " And let the people decide whether they want these mandates to keep going, or do you want to raise taxes and not give them a choice. I really believe we've got to do that. R. Walpole : There 's not been much talk about reducing the property taxes. They give us a State tax credit and stuff, but they don't reduce your income taxes. We're suffocating the small businesses, and we're suffocating the working class people and the elderly in this State . And we're forcing business out of this State . 9 ' Town Planning Board Meeting February 16, 1995 G. Totman: Anybody else got anything to bring up before the meeting? If not. . . . J. Lewis: I 'd like to make a motion that we adjourn this meeting. CO Twigg: Did we approve all these . . . . . . G. Totman: We approved everything that's here . S. Clark: I second the motion . G. Totman: The meeting is adjourned . The meeting was adjourned at 9: 15 p.m. Respectfully submitted , I 4e Joan E. Fitch Recording Secretary 10