Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1971-08-18 GROTON TOWN PLANNING BOARD MEETING August 18 , 1971 8 : 05 P . M. - 10 : 05 P . M . PRESENT : H . Dow , Chairman G . Totman R . Cotanch R . Gleason Z . Kane E . McLaughlin Others - A . Clark - Ithaca Journal V . Rankin Be Erlitz D . Jensen D . Sanford The meeting was called to order by Mr . Dow and copies of the Minutes of the July 21 , 1971 meeting were passed out to the members of the Board to read . Mr . Totman moved that the minutes be approved as written amd Mrs . Kane seconded the motion . H . Dow : Opposed ? Then they are accepted as written . We want to welcome our new member tonight , Ed McLaughlin , - - Ed is here as a result of an appointment by the Town Board two weeks ago and we are very glad to have him in our group . He lives out west of Town which gives us a spread geographically in our representation . Now , has everybody got their homework done for tonight ? I ' m glad you ' re here , Ron , because I have a feeling we will have some questions . R . Cotanch : Anything concerning Spain I ' ll answer , but as to this - - - - - H . Dow : We were to bring our thoughts to go over tonight on these copies of the 701 study you were given last month and when you are per - using 54 pages it ' s hard to determine how best to proceed at this point . What Zana and I did - - we made our notations on the pages as we went along - - questions we wanted to ask and points we wanted to clear up and I know Ed did that too , so I presume everybody has notations and , ideally , if we all had an index of the pages we marked , we might move faster . I don ' t have any particular method to proceed by unless we just start with page 1 and if we have no comment ; , as we give the pages by number , will just go on to the next page . Will that be a good way to go at it ? R . Cotanch : O . K . B . Erlitz : Is there an extra copy anywhere - R . Cotanch : No , - - I have more at home . - 1 - R . Cotanch : I have one comment before you begin - - you asked me to check on legal aspects on what happens now and I talked with Tom Nieder - korn and Ben Bucko and both have different views . Tom said we must have a public hearing and Ben said that as we had not been appointed as the official zoning commission by the Town Board that we had no legal right to hold any public hearings as such . There - fore , the Town Board would then act as their own zoning commission and we could then study this report and make it as a recommendation to the Town Board and pass it on to them without any further in - formational meetings or public hearings as such . E . McLaughlin : The Town Board would then be obligated to hold them? R . Cotanch : Yes . We can , of course , hold any public informational meetings we want to if we think it ' s necessary . Now , I have a question on page 1 - Article 3 Definitions No . 1 - "building any structure or . . . . . . . . or enclosed . " I have the question , does this include a patio ? So a patio is a space , that is covered , and sometimes it ' s enclosed . H . Dow : But can ' t be closer than 6 ft . to a boundary line ? G . Totman : This is taken care of further on in the study . Some discussion was held on this subject by G . Totman , H . Dow , A . Clark and R . Cotanch , H . Dow : Now on page 2 , - - are there any points marked by anyone ? Page 3 ? R . Cotanch : In 11 "Dwelling Unit - one or more rooms . . . . . and independent en - trance , " - - could this be construed to mean that a dwelling unit , 8 -unit apartment house , - each must have an independent entrance ? G . Totman : That would be under 14 , Ron . It covers that . Some discussion was held on this by E . McLaughlin , H . Dow , G . Totman , R . Cotanch and others and it was decided to leave it as is . H , Dow : How about page 4 ? Page 5 ? R . Cotanch : Under 30 - - doesn ' t our swimming pool ordinance specify the amount of lot that can be covered up by a swimming pool ? Here we are contradicting this but including them in the total gross area . H . Dow : There ' s something that lurks in my memory too about the ratio of a swimming pool area to the total lot area . Some discussion was held on this by R . Cotanch , A . Clark , H . Dow and others . R . Cotanch : Anyhow in this classification now , swimming pools would be con - sidered as open space rather than a covered lot . Z . Kane : Doesn ' t the other ordinance take precedence over this ? 2 - R . Cotanch : Yes , - - if it ' s more restrictive . A . Clark : I don ' t think the two are contradictory . H . Dow : I don ' t either , really . H . Dow : Now , we go on to Page 6 . E . McLaughlin : I have one there . These are definitions again but this was some - thing that I was - - on the signs and billboards - - it ' s my own personal opinion that 150 square feet is big enough for a sign and anything bigger than that should be banned . R . Cotanch : Are we measuring one side or two ? E . McLaughlin : One side . Some discussion was held on this by Z . Kane , A . Clark , E . McLaughlin , H . Dow and others . A . Clark : About 400 sq . ft . for a billboard is just about right . E . McLaughlin : I ' m just totally against billboards and we have some now - - H . Dow : I guess this is directed against commercial advertisers mostly , isn ' t it ? More discussion was held on this by A. Clark , E . McLaughlin and others . H . Dow : Do you want to go to Page 7 . G . Totman : May I ask a question ? Maybe I ' m wrong but on the majority of these things written in here as I read it through - - now I was looking at things that might have appeared in here that we didn ' t discuss previously , - - things that were thrown in by someone more professional than we are - - as I read this through I didn ' t find anything different than what we have been going over for the last two years and I wonder if whether we couldn ' t just discuss everything in general ? H . Dow : I ' m thumbing through now and unless you say stop , I ' m going to skip through pages 8 and 9 . Now then go over on page 10 . I ' m asking a question . The first paragraph on page 10 I have marked "clarify as to limits . " It says : "hereafter as a re - sidential . . . . applicable lot area and frontage requirements . . . shall apply and . . . . shall also apply . " Z . Kane : I read that over three or four times and gave up . A . Clark : What is meant , it ' s that the more restrictive of the two will apply . Some discussion was held on this by G . Totman , A . Clark , R . Cotanch and others . - 3 - H . Dow : Paragraph 7 , page 10 : " In determining the percentage of open space required . . . . porches or . . . . . shall not be considered a part of the building , " - now that comes in to Ron ' s first question . Then it doesn ' t need clarification , does it ? R . Cotanch : It still means if someone feels like it they could put a patio right up to your lot edge . C . Totman : No , - - the purpose for No . 7 in saying " in determining the . . . . . part of the building " so they are not going to be taking up space near the building which would still have to be that distance from the boundary line . This is mentioned later on . It very clearly states that nothing can be closer than 6 ft . Some discussion was held on this by R . Cotanch , G . Totman , H . Dow and others . H . Dow : We ' re skipping 11 , now go over on page 12 - - and I bring up my perennial question here : 601 . 11 - "Land Use Activities - one family . . . . . including mobile homes . " Now I can understand that in agricultural and low intensity areas but why would mobile homes apply in the medium intensity area ? A . Clark : You have already said that a dwelling unit includes a mobile home . H . Dow : My point is this , - could there not be trouble by encouraging mobile homes in that M area ? G . Totman : We have already taken care of mobile homes in the earlier part by calling them a dwelling unit . I think that part there should be crossed right out because we have already said it ' s a dwelling unit and if it ' s left in here would cause confusion . By crossing this out , we ' re not saying there is any difference . .between regular homes and mobile homes . I think that " including mobile homes " should be crossed out . H . Dow : That ' s one part of it in the moderate intensity area which usually is not intended to be a mobile home area - - usually where houses are reasonably close together . Some discussion was held on this by Z . Kane , R . Cotanch , A . Clark and others . H . Dow : Then I guess all we can say to clarify this thing is just to draw a line through " including mobile homes . " H . Dow : Now look at the last one on that page . I raise the question as to why we would ever consider a mobile home park in a medium intensity area ? R . Cotanch : I think it would go along with the commercial characteristics of Route 222 . H . Dow : I can see apartment houses but - - mobile homes ? Some discussion was held on this by H . Dow , Z . Kane , R . Cotanch and others . - 4 - H . Dow : Now , page 13 - - I ' m sure going to put this one to you - - let ' s go to No . 601 . 20 "a drive - in theater . . . . areas where they are per - mitted . . . . . agricultural and medium intensity . " Why in the world do you want one in the medium intensity area when it could just as well go in a low intensity , too ? Some discussion was held on this by A . Clark , R . Cotanch , Z . Kane and others . H . Dow : 601 . 23 "Churches " - - why not in the medium intensity area? G . Totman : Because , there again the medium is strictly designed for very high density or commercial and if you allow a church to go into a com- mercial area there will be problems with the church and the noise from other commercial things there . H . Dow : 601 . 25 - " funeral homes " - - why can ' t it be well located in a low intensity area ? Some discussion was held on this by E . McLaughlin , G . Totman , Z . Kane and others . G . Totman : Looking at the time spent in putting these ordinances in - - they will still have to change them in a year or so where they ( the Town) sees there ' s an inequity and so I really think a lot of these things we can . . . . H . Dow : There could be a variance in here we should deal with . Now on over to page 14 - 601 . 32 - 601 . 39 - - I have written in "why not L " in all these cases . It was pointed out by Mr . Totman that the Town has no "L" zone in that area . G . Totman : I think some of those could be put in the "A" . E . McLaughlin : I think some of them should be in "A" , too . H . DoVI Don ' t you think we had better suggest that perhaps any of these could ideally go into the A Zone ? G . Totman : See page 27 , Section 1000 - - this has special conditions and exceptions for things like this . Z . Kane : May I ask a question - - on page 13 - 601 . 28 . If somebody owns a travel trailer can ' t they park it on their property ? G . Totman : They can ' t use it as a living area . Some discussion was held on this by R . Cotanch , Z . Kane , H . Dow and others . H . Dow : On page 15 , I have a couple of why not L ' s in there - - 601 . 42 and 601 , 43 , G . Totman : They would be permitted under special permit . - 5 - Some discussion was held on this by R . Cotanch , Z . Kane and others . H . Dow : Turn to page 16 - - down in Section 703 under Lots - - "one family ;'. . . . at least 30 , 000 sq . ft . of lot area with . . . . . frontage " , - - now why is there such a wide range 30 , 000 sq . ft . as compared to 10 , 000 sq . ft7 R . Cotanch : 30 , 000 sq . ft , is the Tompkins County Health Department ' s re - quirements . R . Cotanch : Stop at page 18; My question to begin with about the patios - - O . K4 - - 3 . "rear . . . . . closer than 6 ft . from any lot line . . . . . " Some discussion was held on this by H . Dow , R . Cotanch and others . H . Dow : All we are dealing with , really , are maximum requirements and these are the extremes probably . Did someone mention page 20 ? G . Totman : I did . It starts off at the bottom of page 19 and it ' s the same thing as on 3 different pages in this book . All through the book are calling for 150 ft . frontage and then it says here "where soil conditions warrant . . . . . . . reduced to 100 . " I think we ought to delete that where it says "and . . . . . . reduced td 100 " from all these three pages . H . Dow : I have written in here " suggest deletion " and 'pidt a period after the word feet " . G . Totman : And the same thing on the last part of 3 on that page , and on page 24 , Section 903 at the last part of No . 1 and No . 3 down at the bottom . Then on page 54 where it says " frontage " I suggest changing that 75 to 100 in all six cases . H . Dow : 0 . K . Has there ever been a question raised under minimum open space where it says " 70% . . . . . . for non -residential . " G . Totman : Everyone agreed with this . H . Dow : 0 . K . G . Totman : Could I ask a question on page 24 on Article 2 in Section 903 -the very last sentence it says "maximum frontage required shall be 200 feet " - - should that be maximum or minimum . H . Dow : I raised that question but , once again , I think whether you use maximum or minimum is the way you look at it . I think it ' s the exception we ' re looking at here . Some discussion was held on this by H . Dow , G . Totman and others . - 6 - G . Totman : Paragraph 2 , line 3 change 50 ft . to 100 ft , and all the way through where this 50 crops up . H . Dow : I would like to have you look at page 28 - - for the first time in this study comes up the question of the form of a developmental project proposal as it ' s given to the Town Board . Now this , to me , makes good reading . I think it ' s absolutely right but I just won- der if there is anything left out or whether there should be any changes made ? 1003 . 1 "any applicant wishing . . . . . . . . . for develop - ment . " Is that absolutely alright in all respects ? G . Totman : You ' re only talking about the preliminary proposal so it will give the Town Board something to look at so they can say this looks good and you can now give us a final plan . Some discussion was held on this by E . McLaughlin , G . Totman and others . H . Dow : Let ' s get over here now and you say , George , that , - - incidentally the Planning Board doesn ' t come into the picture under preliminary application , does it ? G . Totman : See , - - here it is saying in here - - it ' s the Town Board that has to make the final decision - - they would have to give you the initial O . K . to make the study . Then the Planning Board and the developer work the rest over to use according to the ordinance . H . Dow : Page 34 , 1004 . 3 " Special or Private Social . . . . or . . . . . in A and M" , - - I say again , why not in L ? G . Totman : There ' s no "L" area . H . Dow : Page 39 . G . Totman : I have a question on signs , Hicks . Now I ' m not a businessman but I 'm talking about in the M zone now where you have businesses like say the Elm Tree in McLean - - they are not what we call a commer - cial type area . This thing definitely states - - I ' m saying all that area on 222 can be commercial - - I don ' t see why we should be so restrictive there . Some discussion was held on this by those present . H . Dow : Page 40 , Section 1202 , para . 4 "professional office . . . . . . is not illuminated . " G . Totman : I think that ought to be crossed out , - - "and is not illuminated " . R . Cotanch : What do you specifically plan to do with the notes you have made on this ? H . Dow : You ' re the 701 man here tonight , what do you want us to do with them? R . Cotanch : We turned it over to you . H . Dow : Do we want to put this into the hands of the Town Board and they return it to you ? - 7 - R . Cotanch : We can make a suggestion to the Town Board or cross out something and retype it if we wish and put it in the Town Board hands as our voted -upon version . G . Totman : You mark your set , Hicks , and put your recommendations on it and you turn that into the Town Board saying we went through this and we would suggest changing these things that are marked . Let them see it intact and then they can make their changes also . R . Cotanch : It doesn ' t seem logical to retype these 54 pages at this time . G . Totman : What I would like to suggest is that once we have gone through this and agreed it was right , I would move that Hicks go to the Town Board meeting and go through it with them and tell them what we think should be changed . H . Dow : Alright , when I leave tonight my copy will be all set . Now , we are over on page 43 . Section 1206 " in determining the permissible area of . . . . . need be measured . " Some discussion was held on this by all . H . Dow : I have one big question . I would like to close with this , if you don ' t mind - - page 48 look down in the second paragraph , the last sentence where it says " such chairman or , . . . . of witnesses . " G . Totman : At a Board of Appeals you have to testify under oath . H . Dow : Page 52 , Section 1605 - - this brings up this Planning Board thing again " in approving subdivision . . . . only after these have been . . . . for the Town . " Now that public hearing will have been called by the Town Board ? G . Totman : No , - - the Planning Board . H . Dow : , Alright , then , that is the only public hearing the Planning Board should involve itself in . Alright "changes made pursuant to . . . . . of Town Law . " Now then , I wrote in the margin "what is the extent of the Planning Board ' s authority " ? R . Cotanch : 0n subdivisions ? H . Dow : Yes . R . Cotanch : The Planning Board has authority on subdivisions given to us by the Town Board . Some discussion was held on this by R . Cotanch , G . Totman and others . H . Dow : I would like to close on this - - I ' m all through and I ' ll take my copy with me . Now one thing , and this all grew out of a conversation I had with Art the other day . Here , we have the Town Board and we have the Planning Board and we get into the subject of exceptions - 8 - and variances and how to deal with these as the problems come up . The final complaint will be brought before a Board of Appeals . Art and I were discussing this and Art can correct my wording in a few minutes because I probably don ' t have it the way he gave it to me . But , in addition to the Board of Appeals , we should have another body acting in another capacity . I raised the question , why should we have more than one Board , - - why can ' t this Board take care of the exceptions and variances also . G . Totman : It would be a conflict of interests . H . Dow : This one body now - - this third body so to speak - - would be made up of members from the Town Board and members from the Planning Board - - representatives of those two Boards ? R . Cotanch : I think you ' ll find that they can only be one member because of a conflict of interest . H . Dow : The point I wanted to raise and I would - - - - A . Clark : I don ' t think a Town Board member or Village Board member can act on a Board of Appeals but I think a member of the Planning Board may sit on the Board of Appeals . G . Totman : The Zoning Board and Planning Board can be the same but the . . . . . Mr . Totman read aloud "Members of the . . . . cannot be . . . . . further removed from the pressures of . . . . . and thus more likely to pre - serve the effectiveness . . . . " Mr . Totman also read "Granting variances . . . . . . the . . . . can easily be destroyed if the Board of Appeals . . . . . . from the ordinance . " Some discussion was held on this by R . Cotanch , H . Dow , G . Tot - man and others . H . Dow : What body deals with the Special Permits ? Now on page 27 it says "Land Use . . . . . . shall not be considered . . . . . or special permit has been authorized by the Board of Appeals . " That answers my ques - tion , I guess . More discussion was held on special permits and variances by B . Erlitz , R . Cotanch , H . Dow , A . Clark and others . H . Dow : George Totman made the motion that I leave here tonight with a revised copy of this report and present it to the Town Board for their study at which time they w3111 act as we did tonight making whatever modifications they choose and then we will lodge it with the Town Board for final action . Do we have a second to that motion ? R . Cotanch : I second the motion . R . Gleason : I have some questions on the definitions . H . Dow : If you would like to stick around after the meeting , we ' ll go through these but it ' s closing time , now . Z . Kane : I move the meeting be adjourned . - 9 - E . McLaughlin : I second the motion , H . Dow : The next meeting will be September 15th but we may have to put this meeting aside , in favor of the Town Board ' s budget meeting , - - however , for the time being let ' s plan to meet then . The meeting adjourned at 10 * 05 P . M , Res ectfully submitted , Jo� ephi e Bell - 10 -