HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-09-19 a
TOWN OF GROTON PLANNING BOARD
Minutes of Regular Meeting - Thursday, 19 September 2002 - 7 * 30 PM - Town Hall
Members , Groton Planning Board (*Absent) Others Present
Monica Carey , Chair Joan Fitch , Recording Secretary
*Barbara Clark Glenn Morey , Town Supervisor
Tom Guihan Tyke Randall , Town Councilman
*Mark Baxendell Sheldon Clark , Town Councilman
Brad Albro
Mary K. Gloster
Janice Haines
Applicants & Public in Attendance
Bob Walpole , Applicant; Rick Gamel, Applicant
The meeting was called order at 7 * 30 p . m . by Chairperson Monica Carey
Walpole Real Estate , Applicant / Merle Tichenor, RO - 756 Spring Street Extension - T M
#321 -2 - 5 - Minor Subdivision
Chairperson Carey recognized Bob Walpole who had submitted a rough map of the proposed 3 -lot
subdivision . The map was confusing to the Board, and Mr. Walpole explained that the original one
was colored which would have made the divisions clearer. Out of a total parcel acreage of 33 . 78±
acres, Proposed Lot # 1 was to contain 5 . 50± acres, proposed Lot # 2 would be 1 . 5± acre, with the 26 . 78±
acres shown being Lot #3 . The other parcels indicated on the map had nothing to do with the
proposed Minor Subdivision requested at this meeting. Mr. Walpole displayed a copy of the tax map
which related to the subdivision .
Mr. Walpole stated he had been before the Board previously to divide the 5 . 5± acre lot into three lots ;
this was not done . The "Tichenor Residence" parcel shown on the map accompanying the application
has 130± feet of road frontage . He then went on to report that the proposed Lot # 1 would contain a
new home constructed by Rev. Richardson ; Lot #2 was being purchased by William Leiber (sp?) , who
was purchasing it for his "protection . " Mrs. Tichenor, he stated , had only 130 feet RF on the house
parcel , but "we are leaving the 50 foot" portion of the road frontage (as shown next to proposed Lot #2)
so the total road frontage for proposed Lot #3 would actually be 180 feet, although it is split. The
applicant stated that there may be a possibility that this 50 -foot portion could change to 20 feet in the
future . Chairman Carey stated that she thought the 130 -foot non- conforming parcel would actually
be grandfathered in . Mr. Walpole stated that tonight, because of tax purposes, the three-unit
subdivision was what was being requested . Also , because of the location of the Tichenor's septic
system , this 50-foot piece needed to be kept open , even if reduced to 20 feet, in order to provide access
to it. Only Lot # 1 was being developed at this time .
Secretary Fitch asked Mr. Walpole who the owner of record was , and he responded that it was Merle
Tichenor, widow of Herbert Tichenor. (The application form does not ask for the property owner's
name / address. ) In answer to Member Haines ' questions , Mr. Walpole explained who owned each of
the parcels shown on the map and where the houses were .
Chair Carey acknowledged that "Under 6 NYCRR Part 617 . 5 (c) ( 10) , ( 12) or ( 13) of the State
Environmental Quality Review Law, the proposed action is a Type II listed action and is determined
not to have a significant impact on the environment , or is otherwise precluded from environmental
review under the Environmental Conservation Law, Article 8 . "
Chairperson Carey advised that a Public Hearing was not required for a Minor Subdivision . Mr.
Walpole , in answer to her question , stated that he would be submitting the required survey maps to
the Town Clerk as soon as possible .
Page 1 of 3
4 '
(T) Groton Planning Board Minutes of Regular Meeting 19 September 2002
With no further discussion , Member Janice Haines made a motion to approve the Minor Subdivision
as requested . The motion was seconded by Member Tom Guihan , with the vote recorded as follows :
Ayes : Chair Carey Nays : None
Member Albro
Member Gloster Absent: Member Baxendell
Member Guihan Member Clark
Member Haines
Motion carried .
This becomes Action # 41 of 2002 .
Rick Gamel, Applicant / William Cummings, RO - 941 Salt Rd - TM # 17- 1 -20 - Boundary
Change
Chair Carey recognized Mr. Gamel who was the owner of an adjacent parcel, TM # 17- 1 - 14 . He was
proposing to purchase from William Cummings a 45 . 93t acre woodlot (TM # 17 - 1 -20) that bordered the
backside of his property . Mr. Gamel was seeking a boundary change to combine this purchased parcel
with his existing parcel . He further explained there was an existing 50 -foot right-of-way on the west
side of the Cummings property which went straight down to Lick Street so there would be access to the
subject woodlot when Mr . Gamel has standing crops on his present parcel.
Member Gloster asked the applicant if he had discussed using the "old wood road" that comes off from
Clark Street with Mr. Cummings. He responded that he did, but he was not sure that road would
always exist. Member Gloster stated that where this ROW off Lick Street is shown on the map is right
where there is a "little pool and a culvert" so there 's no way "you can drive straight from Lick Street,
straight across and up the ROW the way you have it drawn in there . " Mr. Gamel responded that if the
existing culvert was made larger, this would eliminate the problem . He further explained that
originally he wanted to keep the purchased parcel separate from his present parcel , but this would then
leave the purchased parcel landlocked , which could not be done . Therefore , he simply wants to
combine TM # 17- 1 -20 with his present parcel, TM # 17- 1 - 14 .
Member Brad Albro asked Mr. Gamel if he could purchase the subject 50 -foot ROW from Mr. Cummings
to assure access to the parcel to be purchased , and Rick responded that he really did not want it, but if
anything happened to Mr. Cummings , or Mr. Cummings sold the property in the future , the ROW
would be in the deed . Mr. Gamel also stated that in his Abstract, from Percy Brown, it states that the
"water rights from this springhouse , they had water rights to that springhouse . And it's been there
forever. " The use was for watering cattle . He further explained that no one ever uses this spring,
which is still there , but the way he reads the Abstract, "if anything were to ever change other than
cattle , the water rights were null and void . " It's for farm use only , not domestic use . Member Gloster
advised Mr. Gamel to talk with a lawyer about his questions ; he stated he did , and the lawyer told him
it was "not a big deal. I wouldn 't worry about it . "
Chair Carey acknowledged that "Under 6 NYCRR Part 617 . 5 (c) ( 10) , ( 12 ) or ( 13) of the State
Environmental Quality Review Law, the proposed action is a Type II listed action and is determined
not to have a significant impact on the environment, or is otherwise precluded from environmental
review under the Environmental Conservation Law, Article 8 . "
With no further discussion , Member Mary Gloster made a motion to approve the Minor Subdivision as
requested , with TM # 17 - 1 -20 being combined with TM # 17- 1 - 14 . The motion was seconded by Member
Brad Albro , with the vote recorded as follows :
Ayes : Chair Carey Nays : None
Member Albro
Member Gloster Absent : Member Baxendell
Member Guihan Member Clark
Member Haines
Motion carried .
This becomes Action #42 of 2002 ,
Page 2 of 3
I
(T) Groton Planning Board Minutes of Regular Meeting 19 September 2002
Approval of Minutes - 18 July 2002
Member Haines wished the Minutes be corrected ; on page 4 , Lonnie should be changed to Ronnie , and
Strait should be changed to Straight . A motion was then made by Member Albro to approve the
Minutes of the 18 July 2002 Planning Board meeting, as corrected . The motion was seconded by
Member Tom Guihan, with the vote recorded as follows :
Ayes : Chair Carey Nays : None
Member Albro
Member Gloster Absent: Member Baxendell
Member Guihan Member Clark
Member Haines
Motion carried .
This becomes Action # 43 of 2002 .
Other Discussion
Proposed Housing Units in Village of Groton
Member Tom Guihan, who also sits on the Village Planning Board , reported on the proposed
controversial 36-unit housing complex off South Parkway. Some specifics :
✓ Company who locates properties for this type of housing unit looks for 50% tax break .
✓ 36 apartments , one- and two-bedroom .
✓ Rental $200-$300 / month, including utilities .
✓ Local landlords concerned their tenants may seek housing there through Tompkins County
Better Housing.
✓ Village residents were not informed of the project, so residents in area were unhappy.
✓ Site Plan Review did not occur before Village Planning Board , so project is presently stopped .
✓ Public attended Village Board meeting Monday night and had legitimate arguments .
✓ Qualifications for tenants handled by Better Housing.
✓ Property owned by/ in back of Benn Conger Inn .
✓ Concerns were increase in noise and traffic on dead-end street, increase in school population ,
project would cost the Village more than it would receive in taxes because of a 50% tax break .
Paperwork / Procedures
Member Gloster stated that the Board members had not yet received the all of the information they
requested at their last meeting, specifically the forms relating to Site Plan Review/ Special Permit
Application , and the checklist to go with it. They would appreciate receiving it in time for the October
17 meeting.
Also at the last Planning Board meeting, a motion was made, seconded, and passed requesting the
listing of both the Applicant's Name and the Owner's Name on each meeting Agenda. At the request of
Chair Carey, the Secretary stated she would include this request in these Minutes as a reminder to the
Town Clerk that this is what the Planning Board would like to have on future agendas .
Adjournment
At 8 : 30 p . m. , a motion was made by Member Albro to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded
by Member Haines , with every member present voting in favor .
E . Fitch , Board Secretary O C T U 7 2006
1vnNOO „d 10 / 3 / 02
Page 3 of 3
I