HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-02-01 TOWN OF GROTON PLANNING BOARD
Public Hearing Transcript - Tuesday , 1 February 2000
Members , Groton Planning Board (*Absent) Others Present
George Totman, Chairman Joan Fitch, Recording Secretary
Monica Carey Fran Casullo, Town Attorney
*George Van Slyke Chas. & Nancy Peacock, Applicants
Van Travis
Barbara Clark
April Scheffler
Brenda Talbot
Other Officials & Public Present
Glenn Morey, Town Supervisor; Colleen Pierson, Town Clerk; Lewis Sovocool and Don Scheffler, Town
Councilmen ; Mark Gunn , Town CEO ; Ron Senecal, Al Thayer, Jr. , Donna Thayer, Elaine Burin ; Lauren
Bishop , Ithaca Journal .
The Public Hearing was opened at 7*35 p .m. by Chairman George Totman.
Charles & Nancy Peacock, Applicants/David & Joseph Bail, ROs - 2 McLean Road (Elm Tree Inn
Site) - TM # 38 -5- 10
G. Totman: Well, it's past the witching hour of 7 :30, and I imagine if there was anyone else
coming they would be here by now. We're going to open up the Public Hearing. First of all , I'd like to
just have Mr. & Mrs. Peacock just explain briefly to the people who weren't here at our preliminary
meeting just briefly on what you're planning on doing and what your expectations are . If you would ,
would you please use the mike .
N. Peacock: What we plan to do is open up a restaurant and tavern, basically what it used to be
before -- a family-style restaurant, open Wednesdays thru Saturdays for lunch and dinner, and on
Sunday to have a Sunday brunch .
G. Totman: And your hours of operation?
N. Peacock: Right now in our Business Plan we have it open from 11 or 11 : 30 to serve lunch until
4 o'clock and then serve dinner from 4 : 30 to about 8 : 30 or 9 .
G. Totman: Do I understand correctly that once you quit serving dinner, you don't plan on
keeping the bar open until later in the evening?
N. Peacock: Our intention is to have the bar open when the restaurant is open . If we have
customers in the bar, we certainly wouldn't throw them out the minute the restaurant closed . We
don't intend to be open late night hours.
G. Totman: Is there anybody here who has any questions about what is being proposed here?
N. Peacock: Maybe there is one more thing I should bring up. We do intend, or we are in the
process of getting a variance to build an apartment for our owner occupancy upstairs. And in the Plan,
we have that we would like to put a banquet room up there to facilitate wedding receptions and things
like that. So that is our intention .
V. Travis: Mrs. Peacock, one thing that I think of when you spoke to us as a Board -- you
commented with regard to your plans for entertainment . Perhaps the people would like to hear that.
Page 1 of 10
r
Town of Groton Planning Board Public Hearing Transcript 1 February 2000
N. Peacock: Sure . It was asked if we planned to have bands as prior owners have had . That is
not our intention. If we have a reception where someone wanted to have a DJ or something like that,
there is a possibility that could happen . But we do not intend to -- we don't think the building is big
enough to accommodate a band, and the simple noise factor being right there in town.
G. Totman: Anybody got any questions from the Board that you'd like answered?
M. Carey: I'd like to make a statement for the record . Last year I was involved with the Site Plan
Review for this tax parcel, and for several months we went through a thorough Site Plan Review. I feel
that we have more detailed information before us tonight than we did a year ago with the other
applicants who applied to us for a restaurant and bar, or eating and drinking establishment I should
say. And so I feel that we gave approval for the eating and drinking establishment for this place last
year and, in my opinion , I don't think too much has changed except for ownership of the property.
And I don't see that there's any problems with what we're looking at tonight.
G. Totman: You came in late , Mrs . Burin, is there any questions you'd like to ask?
J. Fitch: Would you please have her stand up and use the mike, and give her name?
E. Burin: I'm Elaine Burin,
J. Fitch: Thank you.
E. Burin: I live sort of catty-corner to the Elm Tree and I'm just concerned about the
entertainment situation. I know we're not going to get into the mess we did before, but nevertheless,
there's still the noise factor and I just want to make sure that we're okay with that and that we're not
in that situation again.
V. Travis: Mrs. Peacock spoke to that very issue just before you came in and essentially, there
are no plans for any live entertainment. That was her statement and her plans call for entertainment
only for a private party, reception, or something of that nature, so they did address that. And they also
addressed that in their Business Plan they presented to the Board two weeks ago .
G. Totman: Anybody else got anything?
A. Scheffler: I would like to hear Fran's legal opinion on whether we can legally act upon this . . .
(unable to hear end of sentence) .
F. Casullo: Why don't we close the Public Hearing . . . You can address it now, George, or you
can close it.
A. Thayer: We met with Bill Stewart - -
J. Fitch: Your name?
A. Thayer. My name's Al Thayer. The Peacocks and I met with Bill Stewart down there today as
a preliminary thing there for the variance for them living upstairs. This has nothing to do with the
downstairs. Downstairs, he explained , could be opened up as it was as a bar and restaurant as far as
if it's okay with everybody else . As far as their living upstairs, that's where the variance comes in . But
as far as the restaurant and bar part, there is no reason - - that variance has nothing to do with it.
A. Scheffler: That's true , but our application includes everything, including the living quarters.
A. Thayer: Yes, and Mr. Gunn was with us there today too . That's a whole total different thing.
G. Totman: I'll ask again. Is there anybody else? If not, we'll close the Public Hearing. Once we
close the Public Hearing, the Planning Board will deliberate , talk it over, and it's not a two-way street
Page 2 of 10
e ,
Town of Groton Planning Board Public Hearing Transcript 1 February 2000
anymore. So if anybody's got anything they want to say, say it now and then we'll try to do our
business . Okay. The Public Hearing is closed.
With everyone being heard who wished to be heard, the Public Hearing
was closed at 7:42 p.m.
G. Totman : I would just like to say that in response to what Monica Carey said, there has already
been an extensive Site Plan Review done on this place . There have been no physical changes, and the
only thing different is the name of the applicants. Or I should say, the biggest thing is the change of
owners and applicants . We do have Business Plan that was talked about earlier, and we know exactly
what the people are planning on doing, what their intentions are, what their goals are. They came
before us on the 20th of January with a preliminary plan, and we went over it and discussed it with
them. And that's why we're holding a Public Hearing tonight because if we hadn't of, as a Planning
Board, agreed that we didn't need any more stuff. The application was forwarded to the County
Planning Department -- there's a section in the Ordinance under General Municipal Law, Section 239 1
and in. that requires them to go over a plan like this. We have a letter back from them saying that they
have no objections to the plan . The property is located in an M1 District which is a Medium Intensity
which allows this type of activity in that district. We have on file a copy of the sewage plan that the
County approved that okays operating a business like this on that location . So does anybody else on
the Planning Board have anything more they'd like to add?
A. Scheffler: I would like an answer of my question from Fran.
F. Casullo: Well, first of all , I'm Fran Casullo, attorney for the Town. I don't think I've met the
Peacocks. As an aside, there's probably no one in this room more than me more happy to see that
you're doing this. Since I was the one who, from October of 497 to December 23rd of 1999, that had to
deal with that issue over there, and I'm very pleased that you're doing this. And I really mean that .
And anything that I can do to assist to move you along -- it's been a long time for me to not have to
worry about it. And I'm very, very pleased about that. To address your question , April, and any
member of the Board correct me if I'm wrong -- it's my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, George --
that you want to go through the short process which would be 441 , 12 -- that right?
G. Totman : Go ahead .
F. Casullo: Is that right? Page 78.
G. Totman : Correct.
F. Casullo: To be honest, I guess I'm not going to argue with it. You can make an argument that
technically where it says here in the case of small, simple and non-controversial Site Plan Reviews,
depending on how you want to look at that non-controversial issue, an argument can be made that
this has some sort of controversy. Don't get me wrong . It's just that the property that you want to put
a restaurant in has just been the subject of about a two-year piece of litigation. But as far as I'm
concerned, if that's the way you want to go , I don't really have a huge problem with that.
G. Totman : Okay. What the other question that April had was, and we talked about it before,
was could we go on even though they're asking for a variance? My answer to April was, and correct me
if I'm wrong, is that we're only giving permission for them to operate a restaurant after they get their Life
Safety Inspections done and get approval from the Code Enforcement Officer that they can operate .
Basically, what we're doing is a prelude to what got to do to get operating . And we explained that to
them at the last meeting.
F. Casullo: Let me tell you what I think about that. You're going to be going before the State
Board. And I went before them this past November, on a variance . It dealt with apartments above a
tavern . I'm not sure if you'll be going to Binghamton or Syracuse . I had to go to Syracuse .
N. Peacock: Syracuse .
Page 3 of 10
Town of Groton Planning Board Public Hearing Transcript 1 February 2000
F. Casullo: I go right down. You go before a five-member board. It's a pretty lengthy application -
- six or seven copies. My feeling is this. It is a part of the Site Plan that has to be considered because ,
quite frankly, you want to live up there . And this Board, nor any other Board within this municipality,
made that decision on a variance . What I'm saying is I don't think you have to stop the entire process,
but you certainly can't give it a full-blown approval until you know if your variance has been approved.
Just look at it logically. If for whatever reason, and I don't know, if for whatever reason the State
Board denies your variance , you're not going to be able to do what you want to do up there. And then
that changes your Site Plan ,
C. Peacock: Without the living quarters, we still would like to --
N. Peacock: We intend to buy it - - purchase it whether we can build an apartment up there or
not .
F. Casullo: And I think what can happen here is more of a problem to you than the Board
because you're the ones taking a chance that, technically, the living quarter issue is the reason for the
variance . This Board can do one of three things: they can deny the Site Plan Review, they can approve
it, or they could approve upon the condition that you receive that variance . That could be done .
They're probably going to do that because they don't know. You don't know yet if you're going to get
that variance . And you have no idea until you go before that Board . Have you sent the application in?
N. Peacock: Yes. We met with the NYS Code Inspector today and we have a meeting with him on
the 14th of February and his intentions are to have variance along with our blueprints in March .
F. Casullo: Right. I was going to say it usually takes about a couple months to get up there .
And they normally make the decision right then and there . Just so this Board knows, technically, you
could still approve it but you got to leave that one condition because you don't know . No one knows
yet.
G. Totman : Excuse me, Fran . What we talked about at our last meeting, like I said I talked to
them in the fall, was if we approve this, we're only going to give an approval to run a restaurant. If they
want to do anything upstairs, they have to get a Building Permit. It's separate from the restaurant.
And they know that and that's why they went to Mr. Stewart. And I think they mulled over in their
minds that if they can't get that, although Mr. Stewart indicated that he thought it might happen, that
they would still operate the restaurant the way it has been operated.
A. Scheffler: The meeting room - - upstairs. Is that part of that variance too?
N. Peacock: Yes.
F. Casullo: George , all I'm saying, and I don't think it's all that difficult, is it is a part of their Site
Plan Application. And that's not to say that you can't grant it subject to the condition that they get
the variance . Because if they don't get the variance, it's obviously going to change a little bit. You're
still probably going to run the downstairs as a business, but what you want to do upstairs isn't going
to happen -- not that you're going to have to come running back here, but it's subject to -- they're not
going to say they're going to run a banquet facility and an apartment when they have no authority to
do so. But if you get that authority to do so , then you're all right.
G. Totman: That's exactly what I was saying. If we pass it, we're passing and giving them the
opportunity to make their plans now and finish getting the building ready to run a restaurant. If they
want to do anything beyond that, they've got to get their variances. If we pass this, we're not giving
them permission to renovate the upstairs or to move up there . They've got to deal with that separate
from this .
N. Peacock: And we're well aware of that.
F. Casullo: And I think, George, just to protect yourselves, and I don't see how you're getting
hurt, if you just say it's conditioned upon the fact that they get whatever they need .
Page 4 of 10
Town of Groton Planning Board Public Hearing Transcript 1 February 2000
M. Carey: What happens if they don't get the variance? Then do they have to come back with a
preliminary plan, or not?
F. Casullo: Then you're not going to be able to live up there and have the banquet hall.
N. Peacock: Right. We just didn't want a condition in there that says we can't open up for
business because we didn't get our variance .
A. Scheffler: Can we approve the restaurant part of it?
F. Casullo: Sure you could . And then the other thing, George, if you're going to go and use the
Short Form, which I think you said you want to do, what I think you've got to do is, let's be honest
here -- I think you're going to skip the Sketch Plan Conference, correct? More or less skip that process.
G. Totman: Well that's basically what we call a Preliminary Sketch Plan meeting which we had at
our January meeting.
F. Casullo: So then you move to 441 . 3. right? It says application for Preliminary Site Plan
Approval, and you're going to look at this as your Preliminary Site Plan. So you follow 441 .3, go down
the checklist, and you look at 441 . 4. the review of the Preliminary Site Plan and the general
considerations. Right?
G. Totman: That's what we did. That's why we're here tonight.
F. Casullo: Well , I think you might just want to go on the record that you have hit every one of
these general considerations, and you just want to make a good record, that you hit these general
considerations. You make sure everything on the checklist that's pertinent to this issue -- obviously, d,
for example -- I just looked at it -- existing water courses, isn' t pertinent. But if you look at the
checklist and you go a thru t and they have everything there, then you look at your general
considerations, 441 .4 a thru k, and you make all those considerations and , as you are well aware
George , handle the SEQRA issue, I think you may --
G. Totman: I was looking at 440. Normally, that's what we've done in the past -- gone to 440.
F. Casullo: Where are you in 440? Which section of 440 are you in?
G. Totman: What 440 does as we interpret it, is that after we've looked at it and listened to it and
went through this Preliminary Plan, Sketch Plan , we feel that this particular case, like we said , we've
had three or four months of Site Plan Review, we know all about the building , we've went through all
those things, so we're going through the Short Form now. With the Short Form you can decide to hold
a Public Hearing, and you can decide to forego 441 .2 and . 3 . And that's basically what we decided to
do at the last meeting .
F. Casullo: If that's the way your Board interprets it, that's fine . I just think the safer approach ,
and it's pretty clearly spelled out there , is you just simply make sure the checklist is hit on 441 . 3 and go
through the general considerations of 441 . 4, and do your SEQRA. Quite honestly, George, I thought I
was going to counsel this Board not to make a decision tonight because I was anticipating that we
were going to get -- because I'm still in my Sirens mode -- about a hundred people here commenting on
this thing. And I've always been of the opinion that when you have that number of people talking and
raising different issues, that you should wait for Joan to present you with the transcript of the Public
Hearing so that you could digest it and think about it. But since only one or two people spoke on
relatively -- on questions that were not controversial, that may not preclude you from making the
decision tonight, as long as you follow what the Code says. That's all I really have to say.
G. Totman : Are we ready to do the SEQRA then?
A. Scheffler: Would it hurt to go through the checklist . . . (inaudible)
Page 5 of 10
Town of Groton Planning Board Public Hearing Transcript 1 February 2000
M. Carey: We went over this checklist a year ago . It's all on record. Nothing's really changing .
What difference does it make if we do go through - -
F. Casullo: I think, to be honest with you , and it's up to you, but if you went through it and it
took you five minutes, and you've got it in your record, it's a lot safer.
A. Scheffler: brought up at the last meeting . . . (inaudible)
M. Carey: Right. But we went through this a year ago, and this is all on record. The only thing
that's changing right now, and those people applied for an eating and drinking establishment, just like
these folks are -- the only thing that's changed is ownership . Nothing else has changed in this
building or on this property. Nothing has changed since we gave approval a year ago.
V. Travis: In going through this checklist and these general considerations will take less time
than we have taken talking about it. I think that's your point, isn't it Fran?
A. Scheffler: It also talks about proposed changes in the . . . (inaudible)
V. Travis: I don't think there's any issue though regarding if we do the SEQRA first.
F. Casullo: No, absolutely not.
V. Travis: Would you like me to proceed with the SEQRA?
G. Totman: Yes, please .
V. Travis: SEQRA is the State Environmental Quality Review Act required of all properties
undergoing Site Plan Review, and much of it is worded in governmental hieroglyphics , but we hope
you'll bear with us.
Board Member Van Travis then reads aloud Part II of the Short
Environmental Assessment Form . Negative responses were obtained to
all questions in Part II. Therefore , it was determined by the Planning
Board, upon the motion made by Member Monica Carey, seconded by
Member April Scheffler, 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 where does the Planning Board want to go from here?
V. Travis: It seems to me, in light of the illustrious past of this property, that we would be well
advised to go through 441 . 3 and 441A and affirm for the record that this was done for this applicant
as has been done for the previous applicant, and that that clears the way for the rest of our actions .
G. Totman: Would you like to read those?
V. Travis: Section 441 .3. Application for Preliminary Site Plan Approval . An application for
Preliminary Site Plan Approval shall be made in writing to the Planning Board and shall be
accompanied by the following information . This is the Preliminary Site Plan Checklist. A. Title of
drawing, including name and address of applicant and person responsible for preparing the drawing.
Satisfactory. B. North arrow, scale and date. That's satisfactory. C. Boundaries of the property
plotted to scale. Okay. Existing water courses. I'm familiar with the property and I know of none on
the premises . Grading and drainage plan . . . there's no change in that . Location , proposed use, and
height of all buildings . I believe we have that information . Location, design, and construction
materials of all parking and truck loading areas showing access and egress. I believe we have that
information , Provision for pedestrian access. I believe we have that. Location of outdoor storage, if
Page 6 of 10
Town of Groton Planning Board Public Hearing Transcript 1 February 2000
any. I believe we have that. Location, design, and construction materials of all existing or proposed
site improvements, including drains, culverts, retaining walls . . . I'm not aware of any proposed in that
regard. Description of the methods of waste disposal and location , design, and construction materials
of such facilities. We have that.
M. Carey: We have that on record .
V. Travis: Description of the method of securing public water and location , design, and
construction materials of such facilities. We have full knowledge of all that. Location of fire and other
emergency zones, including the location of fire hydrants. We don't have fire hydrants in the hamlet.
Location, design, and construction materials of all energy distribution facilities, including electric, gas,
and solar energy. We have that. Location, size, design, and construction materials of all proposed
signs.
M. Carey: That would have to go through the Code Enforcement Officer.
V. Travis: That's right. It may need a special sign permit, separate and distinct from what we
deal with as a Board to construct signs in the Town of Groton . P. Location of proposed development
of all buffer areas, including existing vegetative cover. We have the drawings that show that and
they're not proposing any additional. Location and design of outdoor lighting facilities. Yes, we have
that. Designation of the amount and location of building area proposed for each activity type. We
have that. S . General landscaping plan and planting schedule . We know the existing situation ; we
have not had proposed, nor have we proposed any additional landscaping at this point. Other
elements integral to the proposed development as considered necessary by the Planning Board ,
including identification of any Federal, State , or County permits required for the project's execution .
Those we have discussed with the applicant as to the variance , Building Code, and the like .
F. Casullo: George, at this point, what I would do is entertain a motion and vote on is whether
the Peacock application has met or not met the Preliminary Site Plan Checklist.
A. Scheffler. I make that motion that it has met the Preliminary Site Plan Checklist,
M. Carey: I second it.
G. Totman: All in favor? (All members present indicated in the affirmative) .
V. Travis: Section 441 .4. Review of Preliminary Site Plan . The Planning Board's review of the
Preliminary Site Plan shall include, as appropriate, the following general considerations : the adequacy
and arrangement of vehicular traffic access and circulation, including intersections, road widths,
pavement surfaces, dividers, traffic controls and , I think as most of you know, the McLean Road project
is having a major impact on that, and they are in the process of presenting to the public that plan , and
it is in considerable detail. B . Adequacy and arrangement of pedestrian traffic access and circulation ,
walkways, structures, control of intersection with vehicular traffic and overall pedestrian convenience .
G. Totman: That falls in the same . . . (inaudible) .
V. Travis: Exactly. C. Location, arrangement, appearance, and sufficiency of offstreet parking
and loading. We've reviewed that and that is all complete . And we had determined at our last meeting
that the parking is adequate for the size and nature of the business that is proposed . D . Location ,
arrangement, size, design, and general site compatibility of buildings, lighting, and signs. That's similar
to what we just discussed previously . Adequacy of storm water and drainage facilities. Again, that will
be part of the McLean Road project in terms of catch basins, storm sewers, and all of that, and that is
included in their proposal. Adequacy of water supply and sewage disposal facilities. We discussed that
in the previous section and, again, we have reviewed all of that.
A. Scheffler: Is that that a private well.
Page 7 of 10
'Town of Groton Planning Board Public Hearing Transcript 1 February 2000
V. Travis: It's a private well and private septic also . Adequacy, type, and arrangement of trees,
shrubs, and other landscaping constituting a visual and/ or noise buffer between the applicant and
adjoining lands including . . . existing vegetation. We have reviewed all that. In the case of an
apartment complex or other multiple dwelling, this is not that at the present time . Protection of
adjacent or neighboring properties against noise, glare, unsightliness, or other objectionable features,
we have reviewed that. Adequacy of fire lanes and other emergency zones and provision of fire
hydrants . We've reviewed all that. And, Item K, special attention to the adequacy of structures,
roadways, and landscaping in areas with susceptibility to ponding, flooding, and/ or erosion -- the
property is not subject to those .
G. Totman: Does anyone want to make a motion to approve Section 441 . 4?
F. Casullo: I think what you want to do -- you could make that last. But I think you want to do
is now entertain a motion, George, you might want to go on record basically saying what Monica said
about we've already gone through this in the recent past, that's why you want to use the short
procedure Site Plan Review of 441 . 12 , Because now you're going to use your preliminary as like a final .
I think you want to go on the record and entertain a motion as to why you want to do that and why
you want to use 441 . 4.
G. Totman : I was going to approve of it second.
F. Casullo: Well, what you're going to do -- those are then general considerations. And once that
you approve that you want to use the short form, then you can entertain a motion that after you
considered the general considerations, that's when you'll vote.
M. Carey: Do you have that, Joan?
J. Fitch: Well, I've got everything, but I don't know the form of the motion .
M. Carey: That, - - -
V. Travis: Well, the motion is that we, the Board, proceed with Section 441 . 12 , the short
procedure for Site Plan Reviews. I 'll make that motion.
M. Carey: I'll second it.
G. Totman: All in favor? (All members present indicated in the affirmative . ) We've still got to
make a motion to approve what you just went through , what we all agreed to.
A. Scheffler, Can I just bring up one other consideration that we might want to think about? Our
Code Enforcement Officer did an inspection there tonight and that possibly you might want his report
first to see if there's any stipulations you might want to put on there .
G. Totman: We've already stated , April, that we're approving them to operate a restaurant after
they meet the Code .
A. Scheffler. I know that.
G. Totman : Regardless of what we do.
V. Travis: And that's a Life Safety review which is separate .
A. Scheffler. Look at the next part after K. The Planning Board may consult with the Building
Inspector. Since he's been there and looked it over, should we consider hearing what he has to say.
G. Totman : Yes, by making the motion saying that he has to approve it before they can operate
the business.
Page 8 of 10
. 'Town of Groton Planning Board Public Hearing Transcript 1 February 2000
A. Scheffler: Yes, I know that. But there are certain stipulations put on a Special Permit, and a
Code Enforcement Officer would have , maybe, some input on some of those things . . . (inaudible) .
V. Travis: Well, my experience with the Life Safety review, which I receive periodically from the
Town of Groton Code Enforcement Officer, is that that is separate and distinct from my Site Plan
Review, and that he comes through and cites me as a business owner, requires me to make those
changes to remedy the situations, and I either do it and receive his approval to be in business, or I
don't and then he takes it -- and I've never gone that far in the process - - but then he takes action
against me if I do not. I am not aware that that involves the Town Planning Board in that process.
But Fran, I would defer to you with regard to what I just said .
F. Casullo: Your point's well taken, April, but I think where it says the key word "may consult"
not shall . It's discretionary . And I think, again, there could be some work that needs to be done to
satisfy Mr. Gunn . And that goes without saying, but it's not really at this point. I would be more
concerned if my discussion with Mark had indicated that there was anything all that serious.
G. Totman : Even though they get our approval tonight, they still have to get a Certificate of
Occupancy before they can open up .
F. Casullo: Right,
G. Totman: I mean I do this for a living. I know what we're doing here, and it's done that way all
the time . You can get approval to do what you want to do , but you can't do it until the State Building
Code's been met. I've explained that to them. They know that.
F. Casullo: And I think, George, you can now get into your -- I know you wanted to approve
those General Considerations. Now you're ready for a vote, and you say after considering the general
considerations of 441 . 4. you are now ready to vote because you've looked at those general
considerations. And you'll entertain a motion that leads to a vote after your consideration and review
of 441 .4 .
G. Totman: Okay. Let me put it this way then . Would a member of the Planning Board like to
make a motion to either accept or reject the application as we've gone through these various phases?
B. Clark: I' d like to make a motion that we accept these applications.
G. Totman: Is there a second?
M. Carey: Yes, I'll second it.
G. Totman: All in favor? (All Board members present indicated in the affirmative, except for
Member Travis who abstained .) Van said from the beginning, and you were there , why he abstained
It's a matter of the Minutes of our previous meeting why.
F. Casullo: As long as it's on record, fine .
V. Travis: What about the Special Permit? Are there going to be any stipulations? I don't think
of any.
G. Totman: They have agreed to follow their Business Plan ,
A. Scheffler: We can't approve it.
G. Totman: The Minutes show we're approving them running a restaurant in the Elm Tree. They
have to get permits to do the other part.
Page 9 of 10
Town of Groton Planning Board Public Hearing Transcript 1 February 2000
F. Casullo: George, to be honest with you , just to make sure, it's approved, but they have to
understand, and it's in their Business Plan , that to do anything with the ballroom and the proposed
apartment, they have to get a State variance .
G. Totman: We'll just state it that way then. In fact, we've already done that at the other
meeting.
F. Casullo: Well, you can just state it on the record .
G. Totman: Joan takes almost verbatim Minutes, so it should be in their, right?
J. Pitch: Yes,
G. Totman: Okay,
F. Casullo: Is that what you've all agreed to about the State Board on the second floor? (All
Board members present indicated in the affirmative .)
Adjournment
G. Totman : Nobody indicated no. So, maybe that concludes our meeting.
V. Travis: I move we adjourn.
Be Clark: Second.
G. Totman: All in favor? (All Board members present indicated in the affirmative .)
The meeting was adjourned at 8 :20 p.m.
Joan Fitch V
Reco ing Secretary
Page 10 of 10