Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-12-16 TGPB OWN OF ROTON LANNING OARD Minutes of Regular Meeting - Thursday, 16 December 2004 – 7:30 PM – Town Hall Members, Groton Planning BoardOthers Present (*Absent) Monica Carey, Chair Joan Fitch, Recording Secretary Barbara Clark Gary Coats, Town CEO Tom Guihan Glenn Morey, Town Supervisor *Mark Baxendell Vicky Monty, Town Attorney Brad Albro *Mary K. Gloster Janice Haines Applicants & Public in Attendance Noreen Turcsik, Applicant; Augustine Adams, Applicant; Terri Burkholder for Cingular Wireless, Applicant; Russ Demond, Lee Shurtleff The meeting was Called to Order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairperson Monica Carey. NB EW USINESS Stephen & Noreen Turcsik, Applicants/ROs – 1217 Spring St. Extension – TM #24.-1-4.1 – Preliminary Site Plan Review for Proposed Candle Shop Chairperson Carey recognized Noreen Turcsik, who explained that she would like approval to open a retail sales candle shop in an existing 12’ by 20’ building on her property, as shown on the sketch accompanying her application. She stated that the candles were made onsite and explained the process. Chair Carey noted that the Short Environmental Assessment Form, although attached in the packet, had not been completed by the applicant, so time was taken to do so. CEO Gary Coats asked the applicant if she was going to have classes onsite, and Ms. Turcsik responded that she did not intend to do so. He advised that, if so, this would be covered in the Fire Safety Inspection which is performed on every business in the Town. In response to Chair Carey’s question, Ms. Turscik stated that the proposed candle shop building is located 700± feet from the road. Member Clark asked if she would have a sign, and the applicant stated yes, she would — a real-estate sized sign, metal, at the end of her driveway. She was advised to contact CEO Coats for the sign. She also noted that the shop was located about 40± feet from her home. Regarding her hours of operation, Ms. Turscik stated that at present she was only going to be open on weekends as she worked elsewhere during the week. At the request of Chair Carey, Board Member Barb Clark read aloud Part II of the Short Environmental Assessment Form. Negative responses were obtained to all questions therein. Therefore, a motion was made by Member Brad Albro that the action, based on the information submitted, will not cause any significant adverse environmental impact, resulting in a Negative Declaration. The motion was seconded by Member Tom Guihan, with the vote recorded as follows: Ayes: Chair Carey Nays: None Member Albro Member Clark Absent: Member Baxendell Member Haines Member Gloster Member Guihan Motion carried. Page 1 of 5 (T) Groton Planning Board Minutes of Regular Meeting 16 December 2004 This becomes Action #47 of 2004. A motion was then made by Member Janice Haines to approve the Preliminary Site Plan for the proposed candle shop, as submitted, with a Public Hearing to be set for 20 January 2005 at 7:30 p.m. The motion was seconded by Member Clark, with the vote recorded as follows: Ayes: Chair Carey Nays: None Member Albro Member Clark Absent: Member Baxendell Member Haines Member Gloster Member Guihan Motion carried. This becomes Action #48 of 2004. CEO Coats advised the Planning Board that he would perform a Fire Inspection of the proposed business before the Public Hearing in January. Augustine Adams, Applicant/RO – 3 Stevens Road (McLean – former Patchwork & Pies) – TM #38.-4-5 – Site Plan Review/Special Permit for Proposed Renovations & Vehicle Sales Lot Chair Carey recognized the applicant who stated he had purchased the former Patchwork & Pies building at this intersection in McLean, and he wanted to renovate the existing building to include two 2-bedroom apartments on the second floor, and an efficiency apartment, professional office, and car sales office on the first floor. The car sales office would be used in conjunction with a proposed vehicle sales lot to be located in the front of the existing building as shown on an extremely rough sketch accompanying the application. Chairperson Carey noted the applicant was seeking approval to park 16 cars on the proposed sales lot. Mr. Adams stated it would be more likely 5-10, but he wanted as much as possible because he heard the County may be re-doing the intersection and he would lose some of his road frontage. Supervisor Glenn Morey stated this has been rumored for the last five years. Chair Carey stated she had talked with County Planning who had just received Mr. Adams’ application, but they hadn’t completed their review under GML. In a letter to Chair Carey, dated 16 December 2004, the Tompkins County Planning Department informed her that they had many concerns and issues, and may request more detailed information as they performed their review; they also noted that the submittal they received “may be incomplete.” The letter, which has been placed on file for the record, stated that although the Town could hold a public hearing on the matter, it could not make any decision until it received County Planning’s 239 recommendation. Chair Carey stated that the rough sketch provided by the applicant left a lot to be desired, especially with regard to parking on this .49± acre site. Mr. Adams stated that there was additional parking available at the rear of the parcel – enough for at least ten cars. He stated he had already placed a couple of cars out front for sale and had received a lot of response. Member Janice Haines commented on the difficulty with line of sight at that intersection, especially if cars are parked on the proposed sales lot. Chair Carey asked the applicant if he had talked with the Health Department regarding the proposed increase in sewage from the expanded use of the building, including offices and apartments. Mr. Adams said he had, along with CEO Coats, but had not received any response as yet. CEO Coats stated he had a letter and will get a copy of it to the Board members. Chair Carey stated the Board would want to see what the Health Department says, and she advised the applicant that if he gets the go-ahead, he would need Health Department approval. CEO Coats stated there were lots of things to consider with mixed occupancy: fire separations, egresses, parking requirements for the dwelling units (2 per unit, 1 for the efficiency, for a total of 5). Customer parking would also have to be provided. Page 2 of 5 (T) Groton Planning Board Minutes of Regular Meeting 16 December 2004 Chair Carey stated the Board would need a letter from Tompkins County Highway, and she thought the request for 16 sale vehicles was too many for the lot. Member Tom Guihan stated he would like to see a Site Plan, drawn to scale. CEO Coats advised that the applicant would have to go through the Building Permit process once the Planning Board decided what was going to be allowed, and there were problems with natural light and ventilation because of the arrangement of the windows in this building. Chair Carey informed the applicant that the Board could not act on his application at this meeting as they needed additional information—letters from County Highway and the Health Department, a response from County Planning, and a detailed Site Plan, to scale. Member Guihan also wanted to see a sketch indicating the layout of the proposed apartments and offices for each floor. With no further discussion, a motion was then made by Member Brad Albro to postpone any action on the application until the 20 January 2005 meeting of the Planning Board. The motion was seconded by Member Guihan, with the vote recorded as follows: Ayes: Chair Carey Nays: None Member Albro Member Clark Absent: Member Baxendell Member Haines Member Gloster Member Guihan Motion carried. This becomes Action #49 of 2004. Cingular Wireless, Applicant/Russell Demond, RO – 1075 Old State Road – TM #19.-1-24.1 – Proposed Cell Tower Chairperson Monica Carey recognized Terri Burkholder, representing Cingular Wireless who was seeking approval to construct a 195-foot cellular tower on this site. Ms. Burkholder presented a very complete, precise application which included a health safety evaluation of electromagnetic fields, a “no hazard” letter from FAA, a NEPAS Environmental Summary Report & Checklist, an Easement Agreement and a Ground Lease Agreement between Cingular and the property owner, Russell Demond. Ms. Burkholder explained the siting process and why this particular parcel was selected. It is proposed to cover Routes 222 and 90. The type of tower selected had the least visual impact, which was a concern of CEO Coats. A photo of the proposed monopole tower (which has no guy wires) was shown to the Board members. She stated that the applicant “tries to co-locate any time they can.” The proposal was submitted to FAA and, as stated earlier, they had received a no-hazard letter from them and the tower would not have to be lighted. A four-foot lightning rod would be placed at the top of the 195-foot tower, making the total height 199 feet. An existing access road would be used which they will upgrade by adding #2 stone. Technicians visit the site four times a year – every quarter – for required inspections; parking is indicated for two vehicles, with a turnaround. Member Guihan asked about the fall zone for the tower. Ms. Burkholder stated that this had been addressed. CEO Coats advised that the lease was for a 100’ by 100’ property, with fencing within at 80’ by 80’. They have also obtained a permanent easement from Mr. Demond agreeing not to put any buildings, etc. within the fall zone (an additional 99 feet), as shown on a map accompanying the application. The fence will be locked using a chain and padlock. Chair Carey asked Town Attorney Monty if she saw any problems with the application; she stated she had received a copy of everything and had no concerns. CEO Coats reminded the Board that if the tower is not used for a period of twelve months, there is an agreement with the owner to remove the tower and restore the land to its original state to a depth of two feet below the surface. This agreement will also be with the Town – which has been provided. Page 3 of 5 (T) Groton Planning Board Minutes of Regular Meeting 16 December 2004 Board Member Guihan asked what the antennae/platform would look like. Ms. Burkholder stated the antennas are between 4 and 6-feet tall and 8 inches wide, and they are attached to a triangular platform (w/adjustable height) on the tower. There will be six per platform. She stated they had a co-location agreement with all the major carriers, who could also utilize the proposed tower. Lee Shurtleff stated that he was present as the County Administration was interested in what the plan was for the proposed tower, and they are looking to upgrade the County’s radio system by utilizing from 8-12 tower sites throughout Tompkins County in an attempt to co-locate on them as needed. Town Supervisor Morey stated he was pleased with the thoroughness of the Cingular application. He then asked Ms. Burkholder if there would be any noise associated with the tower. She responded that the generators used only in a power emergency were very quiet and, in fact, people could stand by it when running and carry on a conversation. She’s never heard of a tower “whistling” in the wind, but if someone every reported same, there would be a technican sent to the site to resolve it. Cingular would control only the location of other carrier’s antennas on the tower, and this would be a three-carrier tower. Electric service would be underground to their 11.5’ by 20’ equipment building set on a slab and located within the compound. Each prospective carrier would have their own equipment building, which would require a Building Permit. Ms. Burkholder explained the construction of the tower and stated that it was actually over- designed, and the foundation was 26 feet into the ground. Member Guihan asked if the tower would ever be lighted, or if it would ever be extended above the 195 feet; Ms. Burkholder responded that it would not. Chair Carey acknowledged receipt of a letter from Tompkins County Planning, dated 15 December 2004, which stated it had reviewed the proposal and had determined it had no negative impacts. This letter has been placed on file for the record. At the request of Chair Carey, Board Member Clark read aloud Part II of the Short Environmental Assessment Form. Negative responses were obtained to all questions therein. Therefore, a motion was made by Member Albro that the action, based on the information submitted, will not cause any significant adverse environmental impact, resulting in a Negative Declaration. The motion was seconded by Member Haines, with the vote recorded as follows: Ayes: Chair Carey Nays: None Member Albro Member Clark Absent: Member Baxendell Member Haines Member Gloster Member Guihan Motion carried. This becomes Action #50 of 2004. A motion was then made by Member Clark to accept the Preliminary Site Plan as being complete, with the Public Hearing to be set for 20 January 2005 at 7:40 p.m. The motion was seconded by Member Guihan, with the vote recorded as follows: Ayes: Chair Carey Nays: None Member Albro Member Clark Absent: Member Baxendell Member Haines Member Gloster Member Guihan Motion carried. This becomes Action #51 of 2004. AM–18N2004 PPROVAL OF INUTES OVEMBER Page 4 of 5 (T) Groton Planning Board Minutes of Regular Meeting 16 December 2004 A motion was made by Member Guihan to approve the Minutes of the 18 November 2004 Planning Board meeting, as submitted. The motion was seconded by Member Clark, with the vote recorded as follows: Ayes: Chair Carey Nays: None Member Albro Member Clark Absent: Member Baxendell Member Haines Member Gloster Member Guihan Motion carried. This becomes Action #52 of 2004. OM THER ATTERS Comprehensive Plan Chair Carey asked Supervisor Morey if he had received a request from County Planning regarding a resolution from the Town Board and/or Planning Board regarding their Comprehensive Plan, and Supervisor Morey replied that the Town Board had already taken care of the resolution at its last meeting. He stated the County made every effort to consider public comments: traffic, more bike paths, protection of open spaces. Code Enforcement Officer Comments CEO Coats explained that he would like site plan reviews for businesses go into the regular inspection schedule; some should be annually, and some should be every two years. He stated he would talk more about this with the Board at a future date. Chair Carey’s Comments  Chair Carey stated there would be two public hearings on the January 2005 agenda, and she reviewed the procedures for same with the Board. During a public hearing, the applicant explains what is planned, and then it is opened for public comments only. Once everyone from the public has been heard, the hearing is closed and then only the Board discusses the matter and arrives at a decision. The Board does not speak during the public hearing, and the public does not speak once the hearing is closed. However, a Board member may ask a question of the applicant.  Chair Carey stated that the Adams application was going to be a difficult one. CEO Coats asked where snow was placed in the winter. Chair Carey commented on the two vehicles presently on the property, and CEO Coats stated he would check into the matter. A DJOURNMENT At 9:01 p.m., a motion was made by Member Clark to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by Member Albro, with all members present voting in favor. Joan E. Fitch, Board Secretary Faxed to Town Clerk & emailed to Chair Carey & Board Member Gloster on 1/3/05. Originals mailed. Page 5 of 5