Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-09-18 TOWN OF GROTON PLANNING BOARD MEETING Thursday, 18 September 1997 Board Members (*absent) Others Present George Totman, Chairman Joan Fitch , Board Secretary Monica Carey George Senter, CEO Sheldon Clark *Jeff Lewis Verl Rankin *Cecil Twigg George VanSlyke Public Present Robert Walpole ; James Henry, Attorney The meeting was called to order at 8900 p.m. by Chairman George Totman. Approval of Minutes - Meeting of August 21 , 1997 A motion was made by Member Monica Carey to approve the Minutes of the 21 August 1997 Planning Board meeting as submitted . The motion was seconded by Member George Van Slyke, with all Board members present voting in favor. Roger W. Gleason - Lick Street - Discuss Proposed Boundary Change - TM # 121 - 1 - 21 .2 G. Totman : Okay. Let's get started . What's the tax map number for this, for the minutes? M. Carey: 26- 1 - 14 V. Rankin: This is Grace Jones over here then , right? G. Van Slyke : Yes M. Carey: Now what did we do before here? R. Walpole: The tax map that we're discussing right now, for the record , is part of 121 - 1 -21 . 2 . G. Van Slyke : That's Gleason's tax number, right? G. Totman: As we approved this before, we required him to have a 60-foot road strip down there for future development. And all the request is today is to move that 60 feet from one side of the lot to the other side of the other lot. R. Walpole: It's already been approved . G. Van Slyke: We approved that. G. Totman : Okay, R. Walpole: Let me just update you . G. Totman : Okay, then I 'll know what you're talking about. 1 Groton Town Planning Board Meeting 18 September 1997 R. Walpole: Ed and Lil bought Grace Jones' house which is the where the house sits here on the survey. They also bought the lot next door which we have not closed on yet. We'll be closing briefly. They want to purchase two acres out back and then we're going to take and make this all one deed for their protection . All they're doing is adding. The same people that bought the house -- they bought the lot and they're adding two acres out back. G. Totman: Oh , I see . This is a one-lot subdivision . R. Walpole: Yes. In the end, this line here will be gone and it will all be one deed. We're just adding on to the property -- same people. G. Totman: Refresh my memory -- don't we have one-lot subdivision here? G. Senter: This is the first time I've seen this, George. But you don' t need approval for a one-lot subdivision . G. Totman: We don't need approval for a one-lot subdivision. R. Walpole: I took it as a boundary line change . G. Totman : Okay, G. Van Slyke : Because of the back boundary, is that why you think that? G. Totman : They're buying the lot and then he's getting a boundary line change to put them all together. R. Walpole: Basically, to keep you informed in case he does something else . G. Van Slyke: In case who does? R. Walpole: Roger. So we're on the record , here . Because it took long before to get this thing straightened out. G. Totman: You're right. R. Walpole: So that was the agreement five or six years that if I was to continue working on this property that we would keep the Planning Board informed so if he did happen to sell out tomorrow morning, or something happened, that everything is in place and it's on the record . M. Carey: You're removing basically all the boundaries except for the outside and adding on two acres. R. Walpole: That's correct. It's the same person adding onto the property . G. Totman: Just for clarification, the people that bought Grace Jones' house are buying the lot next door and, right directly behind that they are buying two acres. The request tonight is to take out the three inside boundaries and make it one large lot. R. Walpole: Most likely. I don't know if he's going to add it onto the house in the end after Russ gets through here. This probably will be all one lot before it gets through . V. Rankin: He better do it fast. R. Walpole: It will not be kept as three lots, it will probably end up being one lot. G. Totman: Any questions? (There were no questions. ) We got to decide what you're going to do with it. R. Walpole: Well , I got to send you an official application. 2 Groton Town Planning Board Meeting 18 September 1997 G. Totman: Oh , you haven't done that yet? R. Walpole: No because we have not finalized everything and I want to make sure were not going to have any problems. Then we'll get back and get everything finalized and then file the official paperwork to make it legal . G. Van Slyke: So we don't have to really approve this tonight? R. Walpole: No. It's for informational purposes and telling you what we are doing. V. Rankin: Now this is the 60 foot here? R. Walpole: That's correct. Now if the Planning Board doesn't see any problem, then we'll file the proper paperwork so that it can be taken care of. Roger Gleason - Lick Street - Discuss Proposed Subdivision of Land - Portion of TM # 26 1 - 14 . 372 R. Walpole: Now there's 24. 88 acres in that tax parcel of 26- 1 - 14, You have a map in front of you that shows -- we got a purchase offer on 300 feet of road frontage , 4 acres. V. Rankin: That's in this area here? R. Walpole: Yes, it's out of this 24 acres here. It's that piece right here. Now, the sister has put a purchase offer on two acres with 166 feet which borders the north side of Dully's property. That leaves 116 feet left with 18. 88 acres out back. Now this becomes a three-unit here . It could very well be sold as 18 acres, or in the end we may split that into a flag lot at 10 acres, 9 acres each . That's the only options we have . We wanted you to look at this tonight. If we sell it as two flag lots, obviously we have to come in with an official application. I just don't know at this point how it will be sold . It could be sold as two more units, or just as one unit, or it could be a minor subdivision of three units, or it could be very well go to a four-unit subdivision by splitting the 116 feet into two flags. V. Rankin: You're talking about the 18 acres out back? R. Walpole: That's correct. So I'm open to your comments on that. M. Carey: Lick Street's growing. G. Totman: Does everybody understand what he's talking about? (All understood, " uh- huh . ") Anybody have any problems with it? V. Rankin: Is this all workable land out in here? R. Walpole: It's all tillable , yes . As a matter of fact, Space has got it right now. And it could very well be sold, at this point, to Space or someone . I don' t know what's going to happen to it. The worse scenario here is that it could end up being a four-unit subdivision. V. Rankin: You mean out back here? R. Walpole: Yes, if we were to put a flag in here. G. Van Slyke : Bing, bing -- two flags. R. Walpole: Two flags. G. Totman: That's what flag lots were intended for is to use up -- to make it so you can use the back land. 3 Groton Town Planning Board Meeting 18 September 1997 M. Carey: I don't see any problem with that. G. Van Slyke: I don't see anything wrong with it either. R. Walpole: We'll file an official application . G. Totman: Okay. Frederick Portzline - TM # 31 - 1 -7. 2 R. Walpole: Did I ever come in and tell you that we're selling Portzline's? While I'm here I'll just brief you on what we're doing out there . J. Fitch: Would you give me the tax map number on that, please? R. Walpole: 31 - 1 -7 . 2 What we're doing -- we're in the L- 1 zone -- what he would like us to do at this point -- there's about 94 acres in the complete complex. We have , at this point, four acres -- if you're going south on Route 38, which will be on the right-hand side of the road below his house toward -- it's up on the right-hand side - - we have a proposed three lots of four acres each -- taking it back to the back property line 175 feet of road frontage each . East side of the road, next to the big yellow warehouse, up to the brown house . I can't think who lives there. G. Senter: Terry Ripley use to. R. Walpole: Back. This is the brown house . His boy works in the pizza shop -- big guy. Up to his house, taking in the land that goes across the railroad tracks -- there's land across the tracks -- we're estimating 10 acres in there -- two lots of 640 feet of road frontage , five acres each . Two lots on that one side, three lots on this other side. The idea, at this point, down the road is that he would leave probably 55 , 529 53 acres with the house. He may decide to sell the house someday. He wants to reserve down the road -- this would be a major subdivision -- a two-acre lot -- if we're coming back toward the Village beyond the old meat plant, bordering the Village property, leave a two-acre lot there in case he wants to build a house up there. The balance of the property would probably be sold with the old meat plant because of the sewer system that goes way down back. So the worst scenario here could be one, two , three , four, five , six, seven, eight -- eight lots . But at this point that would be four on one side and four on the other. G. Van Slyke: He's selling the meat place too? R. Walpole: Not at this point. There's still some problems -- leases and stuff. I don't know what all the problems are in reference to that property. G. Van Slyke : It's understandable, I guess. G. Totman: Well, there's no major utilities, no roads or anything. It's basically more lots than normal in a small subdivision, but there's no utilities and all that stuff you have to look at . Normally, it would be a major subdivision. Well, it still is -- but G. Senter: It's split by a highway. G. Totman: It's split by a highway, but what I'm saying is there's no new roads or new utility lines or things like that required. G. Senter: Now, being split like that, would it make it a major, or two minors? Just for input. G. Totman : Well, our precedent has been, in the past, is the roadway changes it. Like in Roger Gleason's case over the years . G. Van Slyke: So it could be two minors then. 4 Groton Town Planning Board Meeting 18 September 1997 G. Totman: That could be two minors, yes. G. Van Slyke: But hasn't he done something with the one side already, though? Hasn't he subdivided that? G. Totman: Portzline? R. Walpole: He sold the old house off. I think it was five acres with that old house . G. Senter: That's what Terry Ripley bought wasn't it, Bob? R. Walpole: Yes. I think it's five acres. Pardon me -- okay, there's 2 . 88 acres there, but I think that was sold off three or four years ago , and then you got the one lot out front where the mobile home is. It's on a separate tax parcel. That's been there for years. S. Clark: Didn't Doug Brown buy a chunk of land around there? R. Walpole: That's back in the Village . If you come back in, there's Tom O'Brien, and where the old Village sign used to be, and then Brown bought that additional 15 acres. That was a subdivision that we had to put through the Village . S. Clark: That was Portzline land? R. Walpole: No that was a Munson property. But that's inside the Village . Roger Gleason - Core Clark Street Extension & Lick Street (# 1 -see later heading) - TM # 16 - 1 - 18 . 12 R. Walpole: Next one . Gleason. This is off tax map number 16- 1 - 18. 12 , This is on the corner of Clark Street Extension and Lick Street. This is where he sold to Maccou, he sold to Rood , and then he sold to Rood again . G. Van Slyke : Wait a minute. We don't have that one . R. Walpole: Let me go get a copy for you . Okay, I've got to wait until the machine warms up . Herbert Tichenor - Spring Street Extension - TM # 321 -2 -2 R. Walpole: While that warms up , let me get onto Herb Tichenor's for just a minute so we can clarify a couple things. All right. Let me refresh everyone's memory on Herb Tichenor. We've got 33 . 78 acres up there. We have his new house on sits on the tax map -- the last four numbers, I don't have the first front taxes . In that particular piece where his house sits there's 138 feet of road frontage. Now it's my understanding, interpretation here, that if I am to subdivide that based on the last round we went, that we wanted to have 200 feet of continuous road frontage . It's also my understanding that the Zoning Board Chairman called me and said that that variance was never recorded or never passed. M. Carey. I thought that he couldn't get enough road frontage and so then we continued on to the other side of the property. R. Walpole: That's correct. M. Carey. So it wasn't continuous . G. Totman: As I recall it, it went for a variance and it didn't get passed as a variance, but the Zoning Officer gave him a building permit anyway. R. Walpole: Which he was legal to give them. 5 Groton Town Planning Board Meeting 18 September 1997 G. Totman: Oh -- where do you get that? R. Walpole: Right here. It's very legal to give him. G. Totman: Nobody at the time thought so , Bob . R. Walpole: Well, you tell me when a guy owns 677 feet of road frontage , plus the 138, why a building permit cannot be issued. G. Totman: But he wasn't building the building in the 600 feet, he was building it in the 138 . R. Walpole: He was building in the 138 , but he owns the 33 . 78-acre parcel . G. Totman: It was decided by everybody at that time that it had to be continuous. R. Walpole: He owns 677 feet, plus the 138. G. Totman : I know. If he wanted to build the house where the 600 is, fine. But that isn't where he built the house . R. Walpole: The building permit was issued. G. Totman : I know it was. R. Walpole: In the 138 feet. G. Totman: And at that time the Zoning Officer and Planning Board went round , and round, and round . And they turned him in to the Town Board for it. R. Walpole: But then there was a variance . G. Totman : A request. And they turned it down. R. Walpole: They never acted on it. G. Senter: Bob, do you want copies of something? It's warmed up . R. Walpole: Yes. They never acted on it because what's his name called me and - - G. Totman: Lyle? R. Walpole: Lyle. And he said it was never acted on . Anyway, that' s water over the dam . What I want to do is make it legal. I would presume to make it legal is that we -- I would give him 150 feet of continuous road frontage west of Al Sim's (??) house which makes 288 feet with that house, as a legal building lot. G. Van Slyke: We don't know what you're talking about here. He built the house in between two houses, right? R. Walpole: Yes, but he owns all the property around it. G. Van Slyke : He doesn't own this , nor does he own this . R. Walpole: That's correct. But he owns everything round it. He owns all this up through here. M. Carey: As it stands right now, it's an illegal lot. R. Walpole: No it isn't. Tell me where this lot is illegal? 6 Groton Town Planning Board Meeting 18 September 1997 G. Totman: Wait a minute , Bob . I understand what you're doing - - you're trying to re-hash something that this Board, the Zoning Board of Appeals, and the Town Board all agreed at that time that that building permit should never have been given . R. Walpole: Then why is the house there? G. Totman: Because the house was up with a building permit before everybody knew about it. The Zoning Officer gave the building permit illegally. G. Van Slyke: He never came to the Planning Board to have it approved until after the fact, did he? That's the way I understand it. G. Totman: I remember that one very carefully. V. Rankin: Well, what does he want to do now? R. Walpole: Number one, the house is there. The variance was never passed . G. Totman: So what do you want to do now? R. Walpole: Well, what I'm suggesting is where the house is, there's 138 feet, is to make that lot an additional 150 feet west of Sims' house and make the lot out around it. G. Totman : For what reason? R. Walpole: Because he wants to sell some of these lots up here . G. Van Slyke: What's he going to do with this stuff back here? R. Walpole: He may sell that, but I'll get into that here in a minute . But I want to make this a legal lot now. G. Van Slyke: Why couldn't you make it a legal lot by making it a flag? Well , he built in the pole and you're not supposed to be able to do that. M. Carey: He's not back far enough for a pole on a flag. R. Walpole: What I'm suggesting is that you go 150 feet west of Sims' house ; the line goes out around so you've got a legal building lot. V. Rankin: But he can't build on that 150 feet. R. Walpole: No, he can't build in here , no. This will go with the house so, technically, you've got 288 feet of road frontage . He cannot build in here . M. Carey: I guess maybe I thought that was the way it was supposed to be set up . G. Van Slyke: Now what's going to happen out in here? R. Walpole: I'll get into that here in a minute. But see it's understood that any future division of this property must be accomplished in such a way that the parcel on which this home sits has at least of 200 feet of continuous street frontage . G. Totman: And what you're doing there -- it doesn't have 200 feet of continuous frontage. R. Walpole: But this was never passed. G. Totman: Now this is a Plan Review written by the Building Inspector. When you get a building permit, you get a Plan Review. That's what this is. That was his stipulation , not any Board's. 7 Groton Town Planning Board Meeting 18 September 1997 This didn't go to the Zoning Board of Appeals or Planning Board . If you got a building permit from George Senter right now - - Re Walpole: This is the one the Town just gave me a little while ago. G. Totman: Yes, but that's from the Building Inspector -- not from the Boards. G. Senter: See , the variance that I recall, George, was passed because the time had expired inbetween - - G. Totman : That's right. You're correct. R. Walpole: Is that what happened? G. Senter: That's what it was. That's why they couldn't act on it because it had already lapsed past the time they had to do that. V. Rankin: Yes, you're right. G. Senter: So by whatever you want to call it -- V. Rankin: Well, the family was supposed to change things after that. I don't know whether they did nor not. R. Walpole: See, the building lot today is 150 feet, so all I was saying is make it a legal lot. I mean he can't build it there . G. Totman: Let me put it this way. I disagree with -- G. Van Slyke : What's it going to cause him no to be able to do it later if he screws it up? G. Totman: Bob -- G. Van Slyke: Is that a stipulation we put in? G. Totman : No, we really didn't. Just give me two minutes, okay? George , from your memory, and correct me if I'm wrong, what I said so far about the Building Inspector and all that sort of thing. He was all wrong. I know because I worked with him at that time . G. Senter: I won't comment on his being wrong. I don't want to comment on that. G. Totman: No. But anyway, this building permit was given not in accordance with either Planning Board or Zoning Board of Appeals. And it was caught after the house was being built and it was just kind of -- time limits ran out and it kind of ran away and was gone and the guy laughed all the way to the bank and said, ha, ha, I beat you . So what I would say now, in the best interests of the Town, and in the best interest of the land available around here, consider the fact that we got taken . Okay. Let him extend this property over to here like this and make that a lot right there. And this leaves this to be a real lot here and not a part of that lot. R. Walpole: I don't care what you do . I'm just --- G. Totman: And this is 150 feet. Make that a real lot there and forget that part there. J. Fitch: George, could you be more specific for the minutes? Instead of saying right here, and right there. R. Walpole: Well, whatever the Board wants to do . And I'm here for informational purposes before we file an official application. All I 'm trying to do is make it legal . V. Rankin: Pulled a dirty deal, period. He knew better. 8 Groton Town Planning Board Meeting 18 September 1997 G. Totman: (To secretary) . They want to extend it around Lot 7 and make 150 feet on the other side so it would all be part of one lot, but with a separate lot in the middle of what would be a U- shaped parcel. G. Van Slyke: That doesn't make any sense to make this thing wrap around somebody else's property. R. Walpole: I agree. All I'm trying to do is -- G. Van Slyke : We didn't discuss it. G. Totman: See, the problem is, and I don't agree with this, but if the Zoning Ordinance says 150 feet and you've only got 145 , the Building Inspector cannot give you a permit. You've got to get a variance. I think we ought to concede that we were taken there, put a boundary line out behind there and make it a lot, and forget trying to make that a horseshoe lot around it. V. Rankin: Yes, M. Carey: Yes, I agree. G. Totman: Wouldn't that make it better for him, too? G. Van Slyke : I think it would make it better for the Town. G. Totman: I'm looking at -- G. Van Slyke: Because then you wouldn't have this thing wrapped around somebody else' property where someday you might have to have a boundary change or something because the guy doesn't want this property wrapped around him. G. Totman : I think what you've got to look at is, number one , we are an appointed Planning Board and one of our jobs is to plan for the future and the betterment of the land placement in the Town. And doing something like that looks to me like it's just trying to do something to satisfy something so he can sell some more lots. My feeling is, the house is there . Make where the house is a lot. Let them put a boundary line around there like I drew that line , and then proceed on like it was a normal subdivision. Just that makes sense to anybody? G. Senter: Where did you draw a line, George? R. Walpole: Well, we've got to make sure it's an acre, an acre and a half, two acres, anyway. G. Totman : Well, it's got to be an acre. That's all it's got to be is an acre. Make it an acre of land and we'll approve a boundary change and make that legal. R. Walpole: And then from the standpoint -- he's talking maybe three lots; in this particular case , it may end up being four lots with a 77-foot flag depending on the survey here to sell the balance of the property out back. Or it may go with the house . G. Van Slyke: What do you mean? The back property might go with the house? Well, if we change the boundary, it can't go with the house. R. Walpole: Why can't it go with the house? M. Carey: We'd have to do another boundary change . R. Walpole: All I'm trying to do is get this thing straightened out. He wants to sell a couple lots. But I thought we need to look at the whole thing . What I want to know is -- look at the worst scenario here so that the Board is looking at the whole thing. And if we sell two lots and then sell the rest of the property with the house -- 9 Groton Town Planning Board Meeting 18 September 1997 G. Van Slyke : Could he possibly use that 77 and flag one section here, and then this other piece could go with the house? R. Walpole: That's correct. It could in the end . V. Rankin: Of course if you get too far back there you got a gully. G. Van Slyke: This isn't going to be very valuable. R. Walpole: It's strictly hunting land and recreation, that's it. V. Rankin: He took all the timber off it. G. Senter: Yes, the timber's all gone. R. Walpole: Use it just for recreation, or somebody here that builds a house here may buy it. The big thing here was the reason I put the 150 feet here was to make this lot legal because I did not want to make a non-conforming lot. G. Van Slyke : It was non-conforming to begin with . G. Totman : It's would be interesting if everybody had a copy of the minutes . Gary apparently got so confused at that particular time, and I didn't know he'd taken it to the Town Board, but these are the minutes of the Town Board when Gary was explaining it to the Town Board. And everybody was batting it back and forth and he just gave the permit. I was trying to read here just a minute ago . He says, "Aw, shucks - - what am I supposed to do?" He said, "Just give them the permit. " It's right in the minutes. But I think we ought to forget that and do that, and move on. R. Walpole: That's fine . G. Totman: That's my opinion. If we get a consensus of the Board -- G. Van Slyke : I don't see any purpose in wrapping it around another property. R. Walpole: Anything we're going to start with we're going to start here at the top line and come down over the hill. The worse scenario here -- I'm going to sell one lot first -- 150 feet -- and start from the west line so we've got control . I didn't want you to see a sign up there and all of a sudden say now, what's he doing. V. Rankin: Well, I'm not happy to give him permission to do anything. G. Van Slyke : I wouldn't want to be your enemy. I'll always want to be your friend, Verl. Herbert Tichenor " Tax Map Ending in 1 . 26 R. Walpole: Back to Tichenor again . Dealing with Tax Map that ends in 1 , 26, The Town abandoned -- I'm assuming the Town has abandoned the road from the property line at his old house - - they abandoned the line going into the Village. Now, by law, that land goes back to the current owner. Tichenor's on both sides, and the Town of Groton, and Walpole on the other end here . This lot here, 1 . 26 acres has got the metal building - - I forgot what size it is, but there appears to be 40 feet from that property line to where this line -- I'm assuming the Town abandoned it at the property line because they do plow down here because that's where the pavement is. According to the records, they abandoned it and I'm assuming that it ends at the pavement. Which means that there's 35 , 40 , 50 feet -- the survey will determine that. Can that be used as a flag lot if someone wanted to put a house out there? M. Carey, Does it drop off quite a bit? 10 Groton Town Planning Board Meeting 18 September 1997 R. Walpole. It's right at grade with the road. M. Carey: Oh , really? For quite a ways? R. Walpole: It's all -- it's a nice lot. G. Totman : Which side are you talking about here? R. Walpole: This one right here . V. Rankin: By the building . R. Walpole: Yes, where the steel building is. That building's 40 by -- G. Totman: And it's 259 feet of road frontage? R. Walpole: Well, no , because this road's been abandoned by the Town . G. Totman: Oh, I see. R. Walpole: See , this is the old property line where his old house that Bill Leaver has. Bill Leaver's in number five see, and the title is still in Tichenor's name. But that property line ends -- and that's where the pavement ends. So I'm assuming that's where that abandonment starts. V. Rankin: They can build any place they want to. G. Totman : They can't abandon a road and make a landlocked piece of property when they abandon a road can they? R. Walpole: There's still road frontage . V. Rankin: I think they can; they've done it already. G. Totman: If the Town did, and they cut him down so he had only 15, 20, or 40 feet, they made that a legal lot by doing it. I would think a good lawyer would pick that up . R. Walpole: Well, it's been abandoned . Colleen looked it up . G. Totman: Because the Town can't legally create a non-conforming lot by abandoning a road. R. Walpole: I don't know about that and I don't want to get into that hassle . V. Rankin: Well , if you want to build on an abandoned road, that's your problem. You can build there. G. Totman : No you can't. V. Rankin: Why can't you? G. Totman : Because George won't give you a permit. R. Walpole: Hold it. Hold it. There's 40 feet that's on an approved Town road. G. Totman : Well, I say, if it was abandoned that way, then it's still a legal lot. G. Senter: If it's a flag lot, then they come before the Planning Board and get approval . G. Totman : No . The Town's the one that created it. 11 Groton Town Planning Board Meeting 18 September 1997 G. Senter: Yes, but it's still a flag lot, George . It doesn't have enough frontage for a regular lot. G. Totman : I'd go to my attorney on that one . G. Senter: That's the way I see it anyway. G. Totman: I'd approve it. I wouldn't even call a meeting on it because it's not something that the owner has created . G. Senter: Oh , I understand that. R. Walpole. I just wanted to get it clarified. G. Van Slyke: Do you stay up nights getting all this stuff for us? G. Totman : I can't believe that Fitzgerald let them do that. R. Walpole: All I'm trying to do is make it so we're aware -- so that George and I can work together on these. V. Rankin: Maybe it's not abandoned. Or did Colleen say it was? R. Walpole: Yes, we looked it up, Verl, and there's no question it's abandoned down -- G. Totman: Do you know how much road frontage they actually got -- about 40? R. Walpole: Well, we've got to measure -- we've got to do the actual survey. But I drove up in there from the survey point down to where this property line . You can see where this property line is across the road. I'm assuming that's where the abandonment starts because it's X-many feet from the center of Spring Street, G. Totman : Really, you have to have a survey before you get to arguing over it -- R. Walpole: Oh , I understand , but the Town plows down to the line here in order for Leaver to get in the house . G. Totman: If the Town did it, as far as I'm concerned they can get a building permit. R. Walpole: Otherwise, Leaver doesn't have a legal home . G. Totman: I think we really ought to see the surveys on that before we get into it. R. Walpole: I think the Town needs to establish where the line is - - where they abandoned it. G. Totman : Well , wouldn't the survey show that? Because when they do a survey they look that up, don't they? R. Walpole: The Town's got X-many feet from the center of Spring Street, G. Totman : Well, when she looked it up, didn't she find out how much road frontage was up there. V. Rankin: Probably there's no road frontage -- and they abandoned the whole road . R. Walpole: I don't know. If it is, then they've real problems . G. Totman: They got really a deadlock. R. Walpole: I don't see that as a real big problem. There's a foul up in here . 12 Groton Town Planning Board Meeting 18 September 1997 V. Rankin: I wouldn't say anything. I'd sell the lot. R. Walpole: So 1 guess you can issue a building permit. G. Senter: We'll talk about it. Roger Gleason - Lick Street (#2) - TM # 16- 1 - 18 . 12 R. Walpole: Okay, Roger Gleason, G. Van Slyke: We're back to him again? V. Rankin: Where abouts are we on Roger now? J. Fitch: 16- 1 - 18 . 12 V. Rankin: Oh , this is the one you drew the pictures on. G. Van Slyke: I want to know what you're going to do for a living after Roger goes? R. Walpole: Roger was in the other day and , if you'll look here, I'll try to outline it. Rood -- you come up -- I think he thinks he's got about ten acres in this area that a guy wants to buy for hunting or recreation. I think it's a local school teacher. It's up back of Rood -- V. Rankin: Why did you circle this here? R. Walpole: I'm going to get into that. But that's all the land that's left up in there that hasn't been sold . V. Rankin: Now, wait a minute . Where abouts is that? M. Carey: That strip crop field? Is that what you're speaking of? R. Walpole: Yes. Which leaves a flag going into it. G. Totman: You're cutting that lot in two in the middle. Is that what that line there is? R. Walpole: Well see, this land here was sold, remember, to the guy that built the house back in -- what was his name, George . The mason. G. Totman: Well, that's been sold . R. Walpole: Apparently he has a buyer for ten acres with a flag going in which is tillable and brush and so on . The only thing left up there would be the 1 . 63 acres with 150 feet of road frontage. V. Rankin: Well, what's he going to do with this back here? R. Walpole: That was sold to a mason ; they got a house on it. That's already sold . V. Rankin: So how do they get in there? Where is their right-of-way? R. Walpole: That comes in this way. V. Rankin: Oh, okay. I see . R. Walpole: It's over 20 feet - - I don't know how many feet. G. Totman: So you're applying for a one-lot subdivision with a flag pole attachment. 13 Groton Town Planning Board Meeting 18 September 1997 R. Walpole: And that takes care of all his property up in there. G. Totman: I don't see any problem with it. Anybody on the Board see any problem with that? (No one did .) Are you all done yet? Now you Board members have to remember all these things that he talked about so you don't have to ask questions when he comes back. Jon & Elaine Stewart - 33 Old Stage Road - TM # 221 - 1 -4 G. Totman: Okay, before Sheldon and Monica got here, we talked about this piece of land here on Old Stage Road, the Stewart and the Holmes properties (TM #221 - 1 -3) . We're talking about the lot where you see the Stewart property is. Right in the back side of the Stewart property is a little triangular piece of land there that was required at some time or other to be there . The Stewart property is being sold and the new owner doesn't really see any need why he should have that little triangular piece of land up there. And the person that lives in the other house, doesn't care for having that little strip in there either. Now it was brought up to me a week or so ago by three or four different people -- what do you do about it? My thought was -- it doesn't make sense to see a piece of land divided up like that anyway, even it was for getting a few feet to make an acre . It just doesn't make sense . And those are really nice looking properties through there. And changing that little boundary in there doesn't make any sense and you wouldn't ever know it from the road anyway. It doesn't change the road frontage . It's way out in the back of the lots. So the only thing I think we could do legally would be to agree to a boundary change if it was formally requested . It would require a boundary change to take this triangular piece out and just draw that line straight out there between the two properties. Have you got one of these maps, Sheldon? Here , take one . J. Henry: Holmes and Stewart have a really good relationship and they said the piece never made sense, so why not use it. Now Stewarts are selling this so I would be less confusing . And the buyers say that they don't want this thing either. But it is a boundary change . G. Totman: So you have a formal application in front of you . I don't see the SEQR here. When we take an action, we're supposed to do a SEAR. Do we have any forms in here, George? Carol said she was going to leave some out here in case we didn't have one . (George Senter searches and finds a blank form to use . ) J. Henry: When we have the survey, whichever way the surveyor thinks is the better way -- G. Totman : Basically, what you're saying is -- if we pass it we pass it from pipe to pipe and that makes it cheaper to have the surveyor change that map . J. Henry: Yes, except that the way Stewart explained it to me he said just to make the line run straight. So what I would like is for the Board to say we don't care whether it's straight or pipe-to- pipe there, whichever. G. Totman: But whatever motion we make tonight is the way it's supposed to be. That's the only problem. J. Henry: I'm wondering if you can approve the plat, because we have to get a survey -- G. Totman: Let's do the SEAR first. Well, while you're making that out, let's do it this way. Looking this all over, would someone like to make a motion to extend the boundary line between Stewart's property and Holmes' property straight back to the other line? V. Rankin: I so move. G. Van Slyke : Second . G. Totman: All in favor of that? (All were in favor.) That's the boundary change. George, would you do the honors of reading Part II of the SEAR form? 14 Groton Town Planning Board Meeting 18 September 1997 Board Member George Van Slyke then reads aloud Part 11 of the Short Environmental Assessment Form, Negative responses were obtained to all questions in Part 11, Therefore, it was determined by the Planning Board, upon the motion made by Monica Carey, seconded by Verl Rankin, with all members present voting in favor, that the action, based on the information submitted, will not cause any significant adverse environmental impact, resulting in a negative declaration. G. Totman: Now, you want something written up and typed up so you can take it to the other lawyer, right. J. Henry: I can do that, or you can sign the -- when we get a survey I can bring the survey in. G. Totman: All right. That will be all right. Or. Carol could write you up a letter and she can sign my name to it. Anybody else have anything else to bring up before the Planning Board? Other Business - New York City Conference G. Van Slyke: The Town's going to pay $500 and some dollars for this? G. Totman: No, they only pay up to five. Are you considering going, George? G. Van Slyke: I don't know. G. Totman: Really, you get a lot out of it. G. Van Slyke: Do you have to go to any one of them? G. Totman: You can go one day, or two days. You can pick out whatever package you want and just go for that. The one on Wednesday morning you may not be interested in because that's all Code Enforcement. But Monday or Tuesday is Planning and Zoning. S. Clark: Are you going? G. Totman : Yes. Anybody want to make a motion we adjourn? V. Rankin: I so move. S. Clark: I'll second that. G. Totman : All in favor? (All indicated they were in favor.) The meeting ended at 9*05 p.m . Respectfully submitted, Joan E. Fitch Recording Secretary 15