HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-09-23•
•
0
` TOWN OF DRYDEN PLANNING BOARD
SEPTEMBER 23, 1993
AGENDA: ROBERT AND DORIS SPEER - PUBLIC HEARING to adjust
westerly property line at 136 Lake Road.
STEPHEN AND GAYLE WHICHERa PUBLIC HEARING to modify
boundary lines, Morewoods Subdivision at Hunt Hill
Road.
BREWSTER CHASE: PUBLIC HEARING for a 3 lot subdivision
at Etna Road, Ithaca, NY.
PEREGRINE HOLLOW SUBDIVISION: REVIEW Snyder Hill
Environmental Impact Statement,
MEMBERS PRESENT: CHAIR BARBARA CALDWELL, CLAUDIA BRENNER, JOHN
DAVIS, MICHAEL KELLERHER, MITCHELL LAVINE,
ROBERT FLETCHER AND JOSEPH LALLEY 111.
Also present
Clinton Cott
Richard Stil
Putnam, Ralp
but not limited to: Ra
eri 11, Stephen Whicher,
lwell, Kay Barns, Donal
h Varn, Larry Fabbroni
bert Speer, Henry Slater,
Mr. Moore, Joann Stillwell,
d Gilbert, Min Creasey, Dave
and Mario Giannella.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The meeting was called to order by Chair. B. Caldwell. Joseph
Lalley moved to approve the August 19, 1993 minutes with
corrections. Second by John Davis. Approved. Joseph Lalley
moved to approve the July 15, 1993 minutes. Second by Michael
Kellerher. Approved,
Publ
to adjus
property
150 feet
Riis at
PUBLIC HEARING - ROBERT AND DORIS SPEER
ADJUST
is Heari
t their
by deed
+/- dee
13` Lake
PRELIMINARY /FINAL PLAT
MENT TC
ng on t
Westerl
ing or
p to th
Road.
PROPERTY
he applica
y property
selling a
e adjoinin
LI
ti
1
st
9
NE AT 136 LAKE ROAD
on of Robert and Doris Speer
ine at their 136 lake road
rip of land 4'feet +/- by
property owned by Ron & Della
PB 9 -23 -93 PG 2
Henry Slater stated that a variance was granted to Mr. and
.Mrs. Riis by the Zoning Board of Appeals to construct a garage
closer than 15 feet to their side boundary line. When the
building permit was granted a line was strung between the two
properties in accordance with the survey. This spring when the
Riis's applied for a loan and were required to have an updated
survey it was determined that there was an error in the
original survey. The adjusted lot line placed a portion of the
garage on the Speer property by approximately six inches. The
Speer's would like to correct this mistake by deeding the
necessary land to Mr. and Mrs. Riis. The land in question was
part of the Freeville Lumber Subdivision and the Town Planning
Board needs to approve the change.
•
L I
Mr.
Slater
also stated
that by
making this adjustment to the
boundary
line
it would not
result
in making either parcel a non
conforming
lot.
NO QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC
Joseph Lalley moved to close the Public Hearing. Second by
Claudia Brenner. Approved by all members present with no
abstentions.
SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
REVIEW OFFICER JOSEPH LALLEY
(Page 3 is a copy of the EAF reviewed for applicant Robert and
Doris Speer)
JOSEPH LALLEY MOVED FOR A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON THE SHORT FORM
EAF.
SECOND BY JOHN DAVIS.
DISCUSSION:
VOTE YES (7)
NO (0)
B. Caldwell,
M. Lavine, J.
ABSTAINED
R. Fletcher,
Davis and C.
(0)
M. Kelleher, J. Lalley,
Brenner,
JOSEPH LALLEY MOVED THAT THE BOARD APPROVE THE MODIFICATION OF
THE SUBDIVISION BY ADJUSTING THE LOT LINE SOUTHEASTERLY AS
PROPOSED ON SAID MAP,
SECOND BY MITCHELL LAVINE.
DISCUSSION:
VOTE YES (7)
NO (0)
B. Caldwell,
M. Lavine, J.
*R. Fletcher left.
ABSTAINED
R. Fletcher,
Davis and C.
(0)
M. Kelleher, J. Lalley,
Brenner.
•
•
14 -16 -4 (2187) —Text 12
PROJECT I.D. NUMBER 817.211
Appendix C
State Environmental Quality Review
SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only
PART I— PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor)
SEQR
1.
APPLIpf�lLS�NSOR � 2. PROJECT NAME
1• /T �/J
3.
PROJECT LOCATION:
Municipality County
J L (
4.
PRECISE LOCATION (Street address n19 road in (ersections, prominent landmarks, etc., or provide map)
5.
IS PROPOSED ACTION:
❑ New ❑ Expansion Modification/alteration
6.
DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY:
7.
AMOUNT OF LAND AFFE TED: �[) O �–
PZ
Initially ' acres Ultimately acres
8.
WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS?
%Yes ❑ No If No, describe briefly
9.
WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT?
I t� Residential ❑ Industrial 11 Commercial El Agriculture El Park /ForestlOpen
space El Other
Describe:
10. 10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (FEDERAL,
STATE OR LOCAL►?
❑ Yes NNo 11 yes, list agency(s) and permitlapprovais
11.
GOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACT; "?I HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL?
Yes ❑ N : If yogi, 93t ar r:ncy name and permit/approval
Via
12.
AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMITIAPPROVAL REOUIRE MODIFICATION?
❑ Yes No
I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
/.2,
Applicant /sponsor U_ �. N r
l
3
name: _L! .5 _
Signature:
It the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the
Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment
OVER
1
•
0'
PB 9 -23 -93 PG 4
PUBLIC HEARING - STEPHEN AND GAYLE WHICHER
PRELIMINARY /FINAL PLAT
ADJUST LOT LINES - HUNT HILL ROAD - MOORE WOODS SUBDIVISION
The
Whicher
public
are
notice
requesting
was read
permission
by the
to
Chair:
adjust
Stephen
the
existing
and Gayle
lot
lines of
3 lots
of
an
approved
subdivision,
known
as
Moore Woods
and is
located
on Hunt
Hill
Road
in
the
150
-230
block
area. The
lots to
be altered
are
on the
west side
of
Hunt
Hill.
Mr. Whicher stated that they would lik
lines in order to shorten their driveway.
would mean a 750 foot driveway. Since the
have met with the Health Department and ev
satisfactory. There have been no changes
meeting,
e to alt
The on
last me
erything
since th
er the lot
ginal access
eting they
is
e last
NO QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC
JOSEPH LALLEY MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SECOND BY MITCHELL LAVINE.
DISCUSSION:
VOTE YES (6)
NO (0)
B. Caldwell, C.
M. Lavine, and
ABSTAINED
Brenner,
J. Davis.
(0)
M. Kelleher, J. Lalley,
SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
REVIEW OFFICER JOSEPH LALLEY
(Page 5 is a copy of the EAF reviewed for applicant Stephen
and Gayle Whicher)
JOSEPH LALLEY MOVED FOR A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON THE SHORT FORM
EAF.
SECOND BY MITCHELL LAVINE
DISCUSSION:
VOTE YES (6)
B. Caldwell, C.
M. Lavine, and
• NO (0) ABSTAINED
Brenner,
J. Davis.
(0)
M. Kelleher, J. Lalley,
8
•
•
14.18.4(2/87) —Text 12
PROTECT I.D. NUMBER 817.21
Appendix C
State Environmental Quality Review
SNORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only
SEOR
PART 1— PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Appllcant or Project sponsor)
1. APPLICANT /SPONSOR
2. PROJECT NAME
r -
3. PROJECT LOCATION: � T N ; I \ (Za
Municipality %sc.d.v ct:es County
5 Tc ,k:N s
4. PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road Intersections, prominent landmarks, etc., or provide map)
q�c 1n ry n T4 C. 4 - I - 'A 1
.
e.L 31... K �ti r I•t; t t ,L�
5. IS PROPOSED ACTION:
❑ New ❑ Expansion ModifIcatlonlalteralIon_
8. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY:
11, -Ck; -F...1 L '3
Lt. lyPC
2.2.e
7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED:
Initially ' S acres Ultimately 7 S• S acres Lj r -7 ��. c /
8. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS?
KYes ❑ No If No, describe briefly
9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT?
❑ Industrial ❑ Commercial ❑ Agriculture ❑ Park/Forest /Open space Other
Describe:
10. DOES ACTION 114VOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (FEDERAL,
STATE OR LOCAL)?
❑ Yes W No If yes, list agency(s) and permit /approvals
11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACT; IN HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL?
® Yes ❑ No 11 yes, list ac ency name and permitlapproval
u�`c�( )v. oyez-Y►?c
.S -��
12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMITIAPPROVAI REQUIRE MODIFICATION?
❑ Yes ONO
I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
Appllcantlsponsor name: T hta3 IL Date:
Signature:
If the action is In the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the
Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment
OVER
1
r.
•
•
PB 9 -23 -93 PG 6
MITCHELL
LAVINE
Stillwell
subdivision would
MOVED THAT THE BOARD APPROVE THE MODIFICATION OF
as agent for Brewster Chase.
THE
Slater
SUBDIVISION
present any
that the map
was the same that was
primarily
approved
some
AS MAPPED.
SECOND BY JOHN DAVIS.
DISCUSSION:
VOTE YES (6) B. Caldwell, C. Brenner, M. Kelleher, J. Lalley,
M. Lavine, and J. Davis.
NO (0) ABSTAINED (0)
A4001ZC3 VU00 /)
MR. AND MRS. MOORE COKE BRIEFLY TO THE BOARD CONCERNING
REVISIONS TO THE WfgB SUBDIVISION• PERMISSION WAS GIVEN
TO WALK THE LAND. A SKETCH CONFERENCE SHOULD BE SCHEDULED FOR
THE NEXT MEETING. IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF THE MINUTES /APPROVAL
MATERIAL WAS AVAILABLE FOR THE NEXT MEETING.
• a•..• a a• a• a a a a• a•• a a a a v• a a.•• a a a• a a.•. a a a•• a a a a a
BREWSTER CHASE - PUBLIC HEARING - FINAL PLAT
3 LOT SUBDIVISION - INTERSECTION OF ETNA & PINCKNEY ROAD
Joann
Early
Stillwell
subdivision would
appeared
as agent for Brewster Chase.
Henry
Slater
noted
present any
that the map
was the same that was
primarily
approved
some
time ago.
The
Board
noted that the
subdivision would
have a long
driveway
however
as it was
25' wide should not
present any
problems
for
emergency travel,
FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
REVIEW OFFICER JOSEPH LALLEY
The agent appeared as a favor for the applicant and was not
familiar enough to answer the boards questions relating to the
EAF•
There
appeared
to be a discrepancy
with the figures
submitted
for soil
drainage
for site description on the overall
project.
The agent appeared as a favor for the applicant and was not
familiar enough to answer the boards questions relating to the
EAF•
•
PB 9 -23 -93 PG 7
The review officer fel.Lthere were enough inconsistences on
the EAF to warrant a the Public Hearing until the
applicant can be present and /or a new EAF form has been
completed.
JOSEPH LALLEY MOVED THAT THE HEARING FOR BREWSTER CHASE BE
RECESSED UNTIL THE NEXT BOARD MEETING BUT NO LATER THEN THE
BOARD MEETING IN NOVEMBER WHICH WILL BE ON OR ABOUT NOVEMBER 16,
1993.
SECOND BY MITCHELL LAVINE
DISCUSSION:
The agent was advised that the Zoning Officer would be able
to answer questions relating to the application.
Readvertisement will be necessary before continuance.
VOTE YES (6) B. Caldwell, C. Brenner, M. Kelleher, J. Lalley,
M. Lavine, and J. Davis.
NO (0) ABSTAINED (0)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PEREGRINE HOLLOW CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
The SEAR time frame /sequence was reviewed with the following
to take place: 1. Determine completeness /accuracy of DEIS. 2.
Public review and comment period. 3. Public Hearing
(Optional) 4. Prepare Final EIS. 5. Findings of each involved
agency. 6. Final decision.
The Board reviewed the Scope list which was approved on
2/20/92 with the DEIS.
CLAUDIA BRENNER REVIEW OFFICER
Claudia read the Scope List and the following comments from
the Board were noted:
J. Davis (11 A -E) felt that a summary of the mitigation
measures should be put up front. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
(111 C. Design and Layout) Dave Putman stated that the first
section of this is essentially what he felt was not exactl
J
I
The report as to the outline of the scope. econd section vv
are what the engineers felt they should comment on. Board was
satisfied with the DEIS for this r.�tl
C]
•
•
PB 9 -23 -93 PG 8
(111
D. Construction
MR. FRABBONI
and Operation)
HE WOULD
J. Lalley
RATHER THEN CROSS
REFERENCE THIS
would
like to see
a best
and
worst time
scenario
for completion
of all
phases of
the
project.
Tabular
form time
frames
would
be sufficient.
D. Putnam noted that the issue of erosion was not mentioned in
this particular part of the scope list however is discussed
elsewhere. The rules and regulations on Storm Water have
increased and will be required for the construction permit for
the storm water discharge. A part of that is erosion control
sedimentation plan which they are required to have on site and
is subject to DEC review. TO REFERENCE THAT SECTION WOULD BE
ADEQUATE. SPDES PERMIT WILL BE REQUIRED.
(1V B 2 e WATER RESOURCES - OTHER) ISSUES HAVE BEEN COVERED IN
THE ENGINEERS REPORT OF JULY 1991 AND ALONG WITH MAPS WILL BE
AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW AND IS AVAILABLE FOR THE BOARD IN
THE ZONING OFFICE.
H. Slater suggested that either Mr. Varn or Mr. Frabboni
help him compose the necessary material for public review so
that the documentation will be consistent. J. Lalley suggested
that after the material is assembled Mr. Putnam reviews for
completeness.
(1V 4 a.1 -6 HUMAN RESOURCES) SUFFICIENT AS IS - issue not
addressed separately but found in section A.1.j.
CONCLUDED THAT IF EACH SECTION IS REFERENCED TO A PARTICULAR
PLACE IN THE EIS WHICH DOES COVER THE SAME /SIMILAR MATERIAL
WOULD BE SATISFACTORY.
(Vill C.2
ALTERNATIVES)
MR. FRABBONI
STATED
HE WOULD
ELABORATE
RATHER THEN CROSS
REFERENCE THIS
PARTICULAR
SUBJECT.
At the Chair's request Mr. Frabboni listed the items which
he ascertained needed to be addressed for continuity:
1. There should be an executive summary with the mitigation
measures made more clearly for clarity. (thought he had
satisfied the scopeing for design and layout when it came to
open space land, landscaping, parking)
2. 111 D. for the construction phasinge at least best, worst
case tabular projection. Erosion to reference where it is
covered in the other sections. In particular 111 2. where
the SPDES permits and storm water permits were brought up.
We would add the new permit which is required to be filed
with DEC.
3. 1V, V & V1 B.2e We would reference the mapping that
detailed some of the drainage aspects that Dave brought up.
r
•
•
PB 9 -23 -93 PG 9
4. HUMAN
RESOURCES
A 4 1
-6 Make
that
a part
of
the outline
to keep
the
continuity
and
with the
original
scope.
List
the
points
that
are
covered
or cross
referenced
A
4 1 -6
item
back
to A 1j.
Ba2 &
Ba3 AT
LEAST
LIST
THE
SECTION
IN
THE OUTLINE
THAT
COVERS
THIS.
F.5
Determined
that the
County
concerns
were covered
through
out the
document
as
they
were similar
to the
Towns.
5. Vill
Cat Should
elaborate
more
as to
the
scope
request
and
reference to
other
sections
as
applicable.
THE BOARD MEMBERS AGREED THAT
CONCERNS CORRECTLY FOR THE REV
Mr. Varn suggested that as
which need to be address could
the Board before the next meet
start the public review.
MR. FRABBONI HAD COVERED THE
ISED DRAFT.
there were not many concerns
the revised draft be submitted to
ing in order that next month might
The Board stated that if the draft was given to the members
in a timely fashion that at the next meeting that determination
could be made.
JOSEPH LALLEY MOVED TO TABLE THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE DRAFT EIS
ANTICIPATING FUTURE REVISIONS BY THE SPONSOR UNTIL THE NEXT
MEETING. REVISIONS ARE ON THE VERBAL AND REQUIRED WRITTEN
DOCUMENT NO LATER THAN THE NEXT MEETING.
SECOND BY MITCHELL LAVINE
DISCUSSION:
VOTE YES (6)
NO (0)
B. Caldwell, C.
M. Lavine, and
ABSTAINED
Brenner,
J. Davis.
(0)
M. Kelleher, J. Lalley,
a a. a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a. a a a a a a a a