Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-04-16Planning Board - Town of Dryden "Regular Meeting 4/16/87 Present: Caldwell, Slater, Rotunda, Chase, Lee, Lavine Absent: Bobnick 1. Public Hearing on application of Block for approval of a 5 lot. subdivision on Hunt Hill Rd.'- there was no one present for the applicant. The long EAF form which Mr. Slater had sent to Mr. Hines, attorney for Mr. Block, has not been received. A copy of a letter to Mr. Hines from Mr. Andersen, Tomp. Co. Health Dept., was read. It appeared that the Health Dept. and Mr. Hines -had not been able to get together to adequately review the proposal. There were 19 people present (names on file with zoning officer) who wished to go on record as being opposed to the proposal feeling that the area has some substantial problems with drainage, possible well contamination, and that the proposed subdivision is not in keeping with the character of the area nor with the defined purpose of the zone in the zoning ordinance. Moved, 2nd, Carried to not approve the proposed subdivision. Applicant will have to reapply if he wishes to be considered again. Members of the public present expressed interest in the definition of a subdivision, possible zoning changes, and were encouraged to attend Planning Board meetings and Town Board meetings and related meetings. 2. Public Hearing on application of Richard and Mary Neff for modification of their proposed subdivision on North Rd. to allow 2!1 g it into two or more phases. Mr. Novelli appeared with Mr. and Mrs. Neff. The proposal, originally'designed for 15 lots has been reduced to 14 lots to allow adequate separation distances and buffering on what was originally lot 1 (the apartment lot) and lot 2. The dimensions of the lots on the north side have been adjusted. Raised fill systems are being proposed. Phase l will include lots 112,7,8, and 9 to station 8, the most effective stopping point for installation of utilities. Total length of road on Phase 1 will be approx. 850' with much of it already started for the apartment building on Lot 1. Mr. Lavine is still concerned about the length of dead -end roads. Mr. Novelli has provided Mr. Slater with some information on national standards which we will consider at our next meeting. One of the streams, which we had thought might be a classified stream, apparently is classified only for a short distance, and that is far enough from the proposed development to.not.cause problems. Mr. Slater will check and adjust his records accordingly. There were no comments from the public on this proposed modification. Moved,2nd,Car*ried to a)approve the development as a whole in concept and b') to grant approval to Lots 1,2,7,8 and 9 as Phase 1 subject—'to usual Health Dept approval, acceptance of the road, and satisfactory drainage and erosion.control as specified by the SCS or zoning officer if SCS is no longer providing that service 4 30 Expansion of RB -1 Zone We havh been considering the possible ekpansion of the RB -1 zone for some time:. We have-. :been presented with petitions and discussion, follow -up information on our questions, have had ample opportunity to review the request, have made adjustments as needed, and feel that it is timely that we act on this at this time although we are still in the process of a comprehensive review of our total zoning ordinance. Therefore, Moved, 2nd, Carried that the Planning Board recommends to the Town Board that the RB -1 zone be expanded as per the petition on file with the zoning officer and with the approximate boundaries as per the overlay available but _P Planning Board - Town of Dryden "Regular Meeting 4/16/87 Present: Caldwell, Slater, Rotunda, Chase, Lee, Lavine Absent: Bobnick 1. Public Hearing on application of Block for approval of a 5 lot. subdivision on Hunt Hill Rd.'- there was no one present for the applicant. The long EAF form which Mr. Slater had sent to Mr. Hines, attorney for Mr. Block, has not been received. A copy of a letter to Mr. Hines from Mr. Andersen, Tomp. Co. Health Dept., was read. It appeared that the Health Dept. and Mr. Hines -had not been able to get together to adequately review the proposal. There were 19 people present (names on file with zoning officer) who wished to go on record as being opposed to the proposal feeling that the area has some substantial problems with drainage, possible well contamination, and that the proposed subdivision is not in keeping with the character of the area nor with the defined purpose of the zone in the zoning ordinance. Moved, 2nd, Carried to not approve the proposed subdivision. Applicant will have to reapply if he wishes to be considered again. Members of the public present expressed interest in the definition of a subdivision, possible zoning changes, and were encouraged to attend Planning Board meetings and Town Board meetings and related meetings. 2. Public Hearing on application of Richard and Mary Neff for modification of their proposed subdivision on North Rd. to allow 2!1 g it into two or more phases. Mr. Novelli appeared with Mr. and Mrs. Neff. The proposal, originally'designed for 15 lots has been reduced to 14 lots to allow adequate separation distances and buffering on what was originally lot 1 (the apartment lot) and lot 2. The dimensions of the lots on the north side have been adjusted. Raised fill systems are being proposed. Phase l will include lots 112,7,8, and 9 to station 8, the most effective stopping point for installation of utilities. Total length of road on Phase 1 will be approx. 850' with much of it already started for the apartment building on Lot 1. Mr. Lavine is still concerned about the length of dead -end roads. Mr. Novelli has provided Mr. Slater with some information on national standards which we will consider at our next meeting. One of the streams, which we had thought might be a classified stream, apparently is classified only for a short distance, and that is far enough from the proposed development to.not.cause problems. Mr. Slater will check and adjust his records accordingly. There were no comments from the public on this proposed modification. Moved,2nd,Car*ried to a)approve the development as a whole in concept and b') to grant approval to Lots 1,2,7,8 and 9 as Phase 1 subject—'to usual Health Dept approval, acceptance of the road, and satisfactory drainage and erosion.control as specified by the SCS or zoning officer if SCS is no longer providing that service 4 30 Expansion of RB -1 Zone We havh been considering the possible ekpansion of the RB -1 zone for some time:. We have-. :been presented with petitions and discussion, follow -up information on our questions, have had ample opportunity to review the request, have made adjustments as needed, and feel that it is timely that we act on this at this time although we are still in the process of a comprehensive review of our total zoning ordinance. Therefore, Moved, 2nd, Carried that the Planning Board recommends to the Town Board that the RB -1 zone be expanded as per the petition on file with the zoning officer and with the approximate boundaries as per the overlay available but