Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-08-16 TOWN OF GROTON PLANNING BOARD Minutes/ Transcript of Regular Meeting - Thurs. , 16 August 2001 - 7:30 PM Members, Groton Planning Board (*Absent) Others Present Monica Carey, Chair Joan Fitch, Recording Secretary George Van Slyke Glenn Morey, Town Supervisor Barbara Clark Tyke Randall, Town Councilman Tom Guihan *Mark Baxendell *Brad Albro ARylicants 8a Public Present None Call to Order M. Carey: It's 7: 30, so let's start and we can discuss this: Let's open the meeting and approve the Minutes from July. Avnroval of Minutes - 19 July 2001 B. Clark: I make a motion that we approve the Minutes of the July 19 meeting. T. Guihan: I'll second it. M. Carey: All in favor? (All members present indicated in the affirmative.) This becomes Action # 21 of 2001 . Discussion of EMC Workshop on Telecommunication Towers M. Carey: Well, George, why don't you talk to us. You and Tom tell us about this cellular situation. G. Van Slyke: Well, basically, the only thing - all the things we've been talking about - the different ways that they can hide them and this kind of thing. But, as I mentioned, when we wrote the Ordinance, when George Totman and I wrote it, it was because they were coming into Lansing and we were worried about where the towers were going to go. And that was our only concern. But now, like they're saying, that's not the real thing you want to be trying to restrict. You want to try to restrict how much they are going to put on a tower, where, you know, not just their location. So that really should be looked at when you do the Comprehensive Plan over again. And when you start looking at the Ordinance again, you should - M. Carey: Well, should we make an amendment to the Ordinance now? Or will we have to have a Public Hearing and go through it. T. Guihan: I think we've got to do a little thinking here. G. Van Slyke: Yes, I think that we were trying to do a fail- safe when we wrote that. We were trying to give ourselves something to go by because we had just been stung by Sirens and we went Page 1 of 6 (T) Groton Planning Board Regular Meeting Transcript 16 August 2001 through that whole mess, so we were just trying to cover our butts, you know, when it came to the cell towers. I don't think it's something we have to look at immediately, but I think it's something down the road that really you have to look at as far as the Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. M. Carey: Now why would they tell you to restrict what goes on the towers? I mean I guess you can have a lot of different cellular operations on one tower. Why would you want to restrict what's on there? What was their reasoning in that? G. Van Slyke : Well, I think that the main thing was that they wanted you to have some kind of control over the number that was going to go on there. M. Carey: What is the average number, did they say? T. Guihan: No limit. G. Van Slyke: There's no limit to how many they can have . T. Guihan: The tower out on Sincebaugh Road - that's one signal. Well, the guy who owns the tower could sell 20, 30 more signals and just put them on and it would turn into a nightmare. It would work for the company, but it sure would be a - M. Carey: Because of the flashing lights? T. Guihan: No - just the frequencies. M. Carey: Oh, the frequencies. G. Morey: Now I have a question. You're a ham radio operator. With all those different frequencies, high, low, medium and everything else, would that interfere with the TV and radio stations and things like that? T. Guihan: A cell tower? G. Morey: Yes. T. Guihan: No. G. Morey: I mean besides the cell towers, they put microwave - T. Guihan: With ham radio it doesn't interfere with it. In the old days it did. . . G. Van Slyke: Okay, what they were talking about too was instead of having single towers, like you put a tower here and the next thing you know, to get coverage for the area, there's another tower over here. What they are saying is do intermediaries. What you're really looking at when you're looking at cell towers and these cellular positions, you're looking for the coverage. You're not looking for where the tower is going to be located because they were showing a diagram—okay, here's a tower, here's a tower, and they are sending their signals. So if you are within the range of a signal, fine and dandy, but if you're down in the gully, you're not anywhere near. I can give you an example. Groton City is a dead spot. You get over where I live and as far as your cellular phone goes, you might as well hang it up because there's no use in having one. You can't get a signal. You've got to go to the top of Hatfield Hill or go someplace where the signal's going to be. In Cortland County, McGraw, Cincinnatus are dead spots. Their cellular doesn't work there. You're just not going to get it. So what they're saying is, you want to be looking for the coverage instead of building—bing, bing, bing—towers everywhere. Use some of these other things, you know, like, you know, these smaller sites like on telephone poles and things like that that allow .you to get the coverage you want without having to put up all of these towers all over the place trying to make that coverage. That was one of the things that they were talking about. Page 2 of 6 T (T) Groton Planning Board Regular Meeting Transcript 16 August 2001 T. Guihan: I think what - really, Groton ought to be worrying about the future. It's like between here and Cortland. Supposing between here and Cortland there was a big expansion - M. Carey: Do they eventually think they will use satellites for a lot of these signals? T. Guihan: They didn't say anything about that. M. Carey: Oh, really. I thought that was something in the making. G. Van Slyke0 He didn't say anything about that. Okay, that was the other point he made, too . When we're talking about like on a tower and they put every new thing that they put on a tower, whether it's analog or digital, it should have a permit. So they can put as many things as they want to on that tower, but every time they do they should have a permit from the Planning Board or the Town in order to do it. That way you have some control over how many things are going to be put up there. T. Guihan: Some of them are grotesque. You couldn't believe how many doo-dads they had hanging off of them. M. Carey: Sounds like you guys had a really interesting meeting. G. Van Slyke: Yes. T. Guihan: It was very good. G. Van Slyke: Well, we don't need to get into it, but they did talk about the different types of towers and the whole idea that there are certain ones that are more safe or safer to operate. Like the difference between doing a lattice tower versus doing the guy wire things. Because I think when we wrote the Ordinance, I can't remember exactly, I didn't look back, but we were thinking guy wires. Most of the earlier towers, that's what you saw. The thing running up the pole and all you've got is guy wires coming down. So they are not really as secure as if it was a lattice type . He says don't write ordinances for towers only. T. Guihan: Well, the Town could use a little tax revenue couldn't it? Every time they put another unit on, that's tax money. That's why you can't just okay the tower. M. Carey: Well, thanks for your report. Anything more, George? G. Van Slyke : I just had one other thing. There's an Article 78 in State Law. I don't know if you guys want to read it, but it deals with cell towers. And they're saying you can't discriminate against an individual for putting up a tower . And when you're writing an Ordinance, or anything, you should avoid where you are banning something. Remember when we went through that whole deal with the junk car business years ago? We were trying to write an Ordinance that would take care of the junk car business, and you could write it so specific that you're being prejudiced, you're hurting somebody by taking away their rights. So you don't want to write it in your Ordinance so strictly that you're going to ban something or ban somebody's opportunity. This is all in Article 78 he's talking about. I thought it was really an interesting session. T. Guihan: I didn't even go to sleep . M. Carey: Well, that's good. Executive Session to Discuss Personnel Matters M. Carey: As long as we don't have anybody from the public here, everybody' s got the different individuals who have applied for different positions here and we can talk about them now. G. Morey: When you discuss personnel matters, you've got to go into Executive Session. Page 3 of 6 (T) Groton Planning Board Regular Meeting Transcript 16 August 2001 M. Carey: Okay. The Goddards aren't here so I was going to just jump ahead. If they show up, we'll work on it. If they don't - G. Van Slyke: They probably can't get down. You can't get down 222 . J. Fitch: No, you just have to go around like I did. M. Carey: We'll just give them a little while longer to get here and in the meantime we can go into Executive Session and discuss the applicants who have applied for the different positions. Somebody like to make a motion to go into Executive Session? G. Van Slyke: I'd make that motion. T. Guihan: I'll second it. M. Carey: All in favor? (All members present indicated in the affirmative. The time was 7:40 p.m. ) . M. Carey: Okay. We'll call the meeting back to order again. (The time was 8 : 07 p. m.) Robert & Carol Goddard. ROs - Cor. Salt Road & Old Stage Road - TM # 20- 1 -20. 2 - Minor Subdivision M. Carey: We don't have any representatives here on this minor subdivision. I sort of would like to have spoken with the people. Does anybody know these people or anything? G. Van Slyke: The only thing I know about them is their son is a friend of my son. But that's basic. I don't know that much about the parents. They are from up around the Sempronius area originally and they came down and bought this place . I guess they are doing what they intended to do with the place. B. Clark: This map that we have shows a house on Lot 1 , but there's actually two houses up there now. G. Van Slyke: Right. The Lot 1 house is where the old lady's house was, and they burned it down and then they built the new one in that spot. So they put their doublewide in there at that spot. The new one is what they are dividing it for, I believe. M. Carey: I was thinking the new one was at Lot 2 . G. Van Slyke0 Lot 2 is where the new one is. So they kind of got them a little bit close together, but there's a lot more space on Lot 2 than where there house is located. But that' s what actually happened here. What I can't figure out, and I don't know if the rest of you look at this map, I couldn't figure out why Lot 1 didn't go back to Hall's property line. M. Carey: Yes, that's why I'd rather have a representative from the family here to explain why they made that jog back there. G. Van Slyke0 It's weird that they went with that kind of a shape and then they kind of square that off and the rest of it all goes, surrounds it, and goes to the other side of the road. M. Carey: Right. I didn't really care for that jog. G. Van Slyke: Lot 1 goes back 599 feet and 208 feet wide . And I can't figure out - man, this is the funniest configuration. Page 4 of 6 ti 1 (T) Groton Planning Board Regular Meeting Transcript 16 August 2001 M. Carey: Yes, because I was thinking, you know, they should go for a four-lot subdivision. G. Van Slyke : You see, that's what I can't figure out. That 434 is the back boundary line by Hall, right? T. Guihan: Maybe they wanted a right-of-way - G. Van Slyke: I don't know. The only thing is they are wrapping parcel three around this thing. M. Carey: Right, G. Van Slyke : I don't know how they plan on doing that. I don't know why that - G. Morey : Goddard? M. Carey: Goddard. G. Van Slyke: They just moved in there last year. T. Randall: Oh, he goes to our church. Is he the one they call Butch Goddard? I know he's putting a house there or a doublewide or something. G. Van Slyke : He put a doublewide in at the old house. G. Morey: How long ago was that? G. Van Slyke : That was last year. M. Carey: Around last fall, I think. G. Van Slyke: They went in and they took - T. Randall: I thought they were just putting their house in because he asked me about a masonry contractor awhile ago . They go to our church. They are friends of my father. I just met them early this year. Be Clark: Well, the other house that they put in they did put a concrete block basement in. It's not completed yet. It's a doublewide they moved in on top of the concrete block basement. Barber's well drilling truck is sitting there now. G. Van Slyke : The garage is going to be underneath the house. Too bad they're not here so we could tell - what I'm worried about is that little piece. I don't know why - M. Carey: I don't see how we can make any decisions on it, because they are not here to explain it correctly why they have that little jog the way it is. G. Van Slyke: Okay, let's just look at it. If they went back to the property line, that would change the division. It would go from a minor to a major, wouldn't it? M. Carey: No, it's only four. It has to be five for that. G. Van Slyke: It has to be five? Let's see, one, two, three. It would be four. Right. Be Clark: Unless they incorporated that part onto Lot 2 , M. Carey: Yes because really they are making that Lot 2 kind of a squashed looking lot. Page 5 of 6 (T) Groton Planning Board Regular Meeting Transcript 16 August 2001 G. Van Slyke: It's weird. It's a weird-looking lot. M. Carey: I don't like the fact that they have that jog back there because I think it's just going to be a problem for us in the future . Either make another lot there or extend the boundary lines all the way back, or - G. Van Slyke: Because what use are they going to have for that little jog? Be Clark: Isn't there timber back in there? Maybe they want it for a timber road right-of- way . G. Van Slyke : No, they took the timber off. M. Carey: Well, would somebody like to make the motion to table this Site Plan Review? G. Van Slyke: I will make that motion to table it until the next meeting when we can get more information on what's happening here. Be Clark: I'll second the motion. M. Carey: All in favor? (All members present indicated in the affirmative. ) Do we need to put it in the Minutes that we'd like to have a representative here? J. Fitch: It's in your motion. I'll state the motion was made to postpone until the September meeting to allow a representative to be present. This becomes Action # 22 of 2001 . Adjournment M. Carey: Anyone else have anything to bring before the Board? Glenn, do you have anything? G. Morey: No. M. Carey: Anyone like to make a motion to adjourn the meeting? G. Van Slyke: So moved. Be Clark: Second. M. Carey: All in favor? (All members present indicated in the affirmative. ) Meeting adjourned. The meeting was adjourned at 8: 16 p.m. Jo E . Fitch, Recording Secretary 9/14/01 Page 6of6