HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-03-17Af '
.Town of Dryden March 17th, 1983
;Planning Board
The Planning Bd. met on March 17th, 1983. Members present were R. Chase, R. Lamp -
a, J. Hunt, B. Lavine, Chr. B. Caldwell, E. Dolloway, C. Evans, and Z.O. S.Stewart.
Chr. Caldwell called the meeting to order at 8:00 pm and asked for corrections
or additions to the February minutes.
J. Hunt called attention to a statement by B. Lavine on the minutes as words were
left out by the secretary. B. Lavine corrected the statement to read, "B. Lavine
said he goes along with the idea, but, there should be coordination from the Planning
Bd. along with County Planning and the Co. Economic Advisoru Bd."
B. Caldwell asked for other corrections. J. Hunt moved the minutes be approved
as ammended.
B. Lavine seconded the motion. All yes. Motion carried.
Larry Fabbroni presented the final plan for Bernard Cornelius' ten lot sub- divi-
sion . He showed maps to the P1. Bd. He said that there are no substantial changes
from working with John Anderson. The biggest question remaining was testing the
soil on lots 6 thru 10. The results from that were that the fills on those lots
should be 2-� ft. In addition to that, his comments and questions on drainage resulted
in this map, showing in detail, what grades the di-tches.should be, the grades of the
swails along the back lot lines on lots 6, 7, 8, and 9, and on the side swails coming
perpendicular to the back lot lines: The finished elevations are shown there. It
works out nicely that the drainage for lots 6, 7, 8 and 9 will be much better than
it is now. The adjacent owner has put several culverts under the old railroad right -
of- way and the water comes under the right -of -way and spill's onto lots 6thru'10 and
sits there. This drainage will improve those lots. Lots 1 thru 5 were tested before
and based. on the tests, show water as shallow as 6 ft. in the test holes. Once the
the drainage scheme is in place, those lots will be tested individually to determine
any of those lots need fill for a fill system. They may just need normal fields.
e ditches are shown at 1% with some with 5 %._. In this type of soil, you would see .
osion at 7%.
We worked it so:.the right -of -way back to lot 2 is the minimum ft. requested. The
Health Dept. is sor of insistant on the acre lot. All the lots are now an acre plus.
On lot 3 the right -of -way was shifted over 10 ft.
John requested the notes you see on here to be put on here. There was a lot of
concern on the top -soil taken out. On this map, it's a 30 ft. area that extends from
lots 1 to 4. Inv shaping up each one of these lots, it would be a minimum of 6 inches
of top -soil that would be replaced once it was filled in. The road is 314 of 1% grade.
The ditches are lower, the road is 4 ft. higher than the ditches. The State Highway
Dept. has requested these curves. Lots 4,6,7,8,9, and 10 had 18 ft. added to them.
Lot 5 extends farther to the north so there is way in excess of an acre. Lots 1 and
2 are the same. Lot 3, by squaring off the corner and adding the 15 ft. strip is in
excess of an acre.
B. Lavine- Did you change placement of the road at all so that the mound is a
different dimension?
L. Fabbroni- -The mound is just drawn a little differently.
B. Lavine- How tall is this mound supposed to be?
L Fabbroni- 4 to 6 ft. high.
B. Lavine -' Is it your plan to plant a double row of trees there?
B. Cornelius- Yes. The top of the mound right now is six feet. We're going to
plant two rows of trees pine, seven ft. apart.
B. Caldwell- Is the set backs where the mound is satisfactory to the state
as far as visibility?
L. Fabbroni- That's what they're finally going to tell us. Right now the
rn is limiting more than the mound would.
B. Lavine- Is it unusual to have a 7 ft. deep ditch in front of your house?
L. Fabbroni- When the lot lines are tapered up to the fill and the house loca-
tion the only area that will be that high are where the fills are themselves.
B. Lavine- So these are not finished grades then?
L. Fabbroni- No, I chose to give you an idea with those finished elevations
i
I
U
A A
and ditch lines what the finished elevations woud be. Where you see the field, in the
20 ft. from the edge of the field to the ditch line, you would go down 7 ft. at that
point. If you can picture it contoured in with the driveway. The driveway is start-
ing out on a road elevation that is 4 ft. higher than the ditch and then coming up
4 or 5 ft. coming up the 70 ft. to the house. 19'
B. Caldwell- Any ideas on how to cope with erosion problems while the road is
being built?
L. Fabbroni- You can rest assured in John's approval letter that he request hay
bales. He wanted, from his letter, a method specified.
B. Lavine- The process is that the road and ditches be completed before any
construction on the sight.
L. Fabbroni- Not necessarily, but, that's how we're proceeding. Lot 2 is,-prob-
ably the first lot tot.be built on and least critial with respect to the grade of the
road and it is conceivable that lot can be built upon while the road is being com-
pleted.
B. Caldwell- You have to have a road in and accepted by the Town before a build-
ing permit can be issued.
L. Fabbroni- I don't agree. You should be able to start one lot while the road
is being built.
B. Lavine- That's Town policy. I guess the problem is that the sub- division
can be approved and not the road.
B. Cornelius- If that road has to be in and oiled and stoned, I won't be able
to build anything. I would have to spend $28,000 to build a road before I could get
anu returns. What I'd like to do is build 3 houses in the next year and have trees all
planted and everything green to show. I don't want it to look like a construction
sight.
R. Chase- What lots would you build on?
B. Cornelius- Lots 2, 4, and 7 or 8. I can't sell the houses ti the road is done
anyway because -of the bank, so please, don't make me have that all done.
B. Lavine- That's Town policy. It's on the books previously.
J. Hunt- That's not for our discretion. You would have to go to the Town 0
Board.
L. Fabbroni- You defeat your own prrpose.if you can't start one house. The
heaviest equipment that's ever going to go over that road will be cement mixers,
etc. You could get four years out of that road if you would wait to oil and stone it.
B. Caldwell- Is there some kind of desision that. we want to make?
B. Lavine Something about erosion control during construction.
B. Caldwell- Have you checked that corner radius with the Town Bd?
L. Fabbroni- No.
B. Caldwell- Have you decided on a road name yet?
L. Fabbroni- No, We could get that from Jack Miller just before getting your
signature, if that's ok.
B. Lavine- I move that we grant approval for this development as proposed, con-
tingent upon erosion control, street naming,Highway approval, Health Dept. approval,
and any other agencies which are standard in all of our projects.'
J. Hunt seconded the motion. Vote- All yes. Motion carried.
I
B. Caldwell said that the Co. Sanitary Code is under revisio'n -of the 200 fte
circle.to,' relying on" separation distances. A question from B. Lavine on if you're
computing the 100 ft. from from the neighbors well are you.also taking away some
possible use of his land? B. Lavine presented a letter from concerned homeowners
on Ringwood Rd. The concerns as proposed in the letter art that the house would be
15 ft. from the creek which has moved it's banks considerably in 1972, 1976, and
1981 and that the only place for the septic field would be very close to the property
line of 1�a_ne.ighbor who at this time would maintain appropriate separation between
his well,and this new septic system, but, if he and to put in a replacement well, it
would be right next to this septic system. B. Lavine suggested that this be looked
into and.-consider the idea of making hour separation distances be maintained all with-
in your lot or have to take it out of the easement of the adjoining lot.
B. Lavine- I would like to .propose a.motion for a resolution from the sense of the
board to be passed onto the Health Dept. such that I would propose some concern
if there is a separation distance technique-being used, that something be considered
Oout maintaining it within the lines of the existing lot or the crossing the
ot line with a formal easement. Also, that sand filters be considered as an alterna
tive on appropriate b.itas, to the separation distance method. And that set backs
from creeks be based on something that might take into consideration more than
just the hundred y or flood.
J. Hunt seconded the motion.
Vote- All yes. Motion carried
LIA11L
r
f
e WcdI7 Z 7114 /244 AP
J11,5/1 >6e�3 Q
V r
M
vo
s�
i
E
March 10, 1983
Mr. John Andersson
Dept. of Environmental Health
Trumansburg Road
Ithaca, New York 14850
Dear Mr. Andersson:
Thank you for keeping my wife and me .informed regarding the application by
Bernard Cornelius for a variance to build a house on the lot next to our
home, which is Tax Parcel No. 345 -14.
This letter is to explain our position on this matter, for the record.
First, let me say that is not just we who oppose the variance but many
of the homeowners in the neighborhood are concerned about this proposed
waiver of the health code, and also, they are upset about the variance
that was approved by the Board for the small lot just across the road.
We believe a variance would have an adverse effect on the population den-
• city in an area where there exists problems with drinking water supply and
quality. Three very serious floods in the past eleven years have washed
out the banks of the creek all along Ringwood Road causing a great amount
of property damage. The neighborhood thinks it would be very ill- advised
for the Board to authorize the construction of a house as close to the
creek as Mr. Cornelius proposes to do, as it could have bad ecological
consequences.
The Health Board is aware of the troubles that many residences on Ringwood
Road are experiencing with their wells, and so we believe the Board should
be more determined than ever to uphold a strict health code.
1 do not want a septic system leeching into my yard that would preclude my
drilling a new well should my existing water supply disappear, as, in fact,
It has for several of my neighbors.
It has been suggested that Parcel 3 be deeded to Parcel 1 and 2, to meet
the health code's required square footage to build. 1 do not see that this
would help, because only a very narrow strip of land is on the south side
of the creek.
Unfortunately, the
surveytmap
prepared by
Mr. Fabbronl
does
not
show
the
continuation
of the
creek
through Parcel 3.
When a copy
of
the
survey
of
our
lot is placed next
to.Mr.
Fabbroni's,
it is shown
that
the
creek
does
not
pass outside of
Parcel
3, but actually
follows a
course
parallel,
ap-
proximately
30 feet
from my property line.
After the
flood
#%f
June,
1972,.
the
•
creek was actually
on
my land. Please
see copies
of these
maps
enclosed.
i
El
There is no good reason for th
someone wants to build a house
This certainly is not a hardsh
chase this land. One offer is
letter to Mr. Cornelius, dated
knowledged by him.
e Board to grant this variance; Just because
is not a valid reason,
ip case., as I have made several offers to pur-
made at the bottom of the enclosed copy of a
October 16, 1982. The letter was never ac-
I should appreciate your continuing to keep us
if the Health Board does grant the variance, 1
strictions are made, such as limitations on the
etc, required to conform to this special waiver
enc.
Informed in this, matter, and
would like to know what re-
number of bedrooms, bathrooms,
of the.Health Code.
Sincerely yours,
Norman L. Chrismer