[0:00] The list is actually the same project
from the town of Kingsbury, Del Cath
[0:04] Systems, but one is a area variance and
one was a
[0:11] site plan review.
So, um
[0:16] I think so we'll do the
variance first.
[0:21] Um
So,
[0:24] one of the things
This is where I actually looked at the
[0:27] write-up. It's basically they're
requiring a setback relief.
[0:30] The um they're going to build an
addition to the building to house
[0:35] additional manufacturing, storage space,
etc.
[0:39] Because [clears throat] of setback
requirements, they only need a 1 ft 11
[0:42] in relief request.
So, um
[0:47] I
So, Pamela did this buffer map before
[0:50] she left. The first thing that I noticed
on the buffer map is
[0:54] Del Cath is shown on our property
records as owning the parcel behind it.
[0:59] And it looks My first thought was,
"Well, why don't they just merge the two
[1:02] lots?"
Well, it turns out at some point, based
[1:06] on the records that were submitted by
the applicant, Rozell probably purchased
[1:10] all of the Del Cath lots owned by that.
So, our property systems are probably
[1:16] not updated yet, which means they would
definitely need this variance because
[1:20] they don't own that lot.
[1:23] » [clears throat]
[1:31] » Other than that, I mean, I didn't see
anything that wasn't very
[1:35] straightforward. It's an addition in a
commercial building in a commercially
[1:39] developed area.
It's just a 1 ft 11 in variance.
[1:44] And everything stays on their own
property. Yep. It's just that the buffer
[1:48] will go down to 23 and 1/2 ft instead of
25 ft in their parking lot.
[1:52] Understood.
I was just asking for clarification.
[1:56] Matter of local interest?
Tim?
[2:00] You did that? Uh I would make a motion
that we send it back as a matter of
[2:05] local concern. Okay. Second?
I'll second that.
[2:10] I always just get one vote.
>> [laughter]
[2:14] » All in favor?
Aye. Aye.
[2:18] Aye.
Okay. All right then. So, the next one
[2:22] is the site plan review. Again, same
project. There are
[2:28] drawings
I'm going to give you tiny drawings
[2:31] at the back of the meeting. Um
the back of the packet.
[2:44] And it appears that they're adding their
house offices
[2:49] and the factory space.
[2:56] That's the same lot?
It's the same lot, yep.
[2:59] That's what this shows on
[3:08] Isn't that gray area is the new one?
Shaded area?
[3:13] Building is pink.
Um the at the very back of the packet is
[3:19] all of the drawing.
[3:25] I guess you can find the drawing.
Yeah, the shaded in area.
[3:31] But my eyes aren't as good as they used
to be.
[3:35] I was going to say I'm jet
simply because Yeah, it says shaded
[3:39] shaded area of the proposed building
expansion. There's I'm going to take
[3:44] that with me. I'm going to take a few
tests right now.
[3:47] » [laughter]
>> Yeah, look at the second second map.
[3:50] Yep.
Yep.
[3:59] I'm wondering
I'm also
[4:03] Are there anything you saw as relative
concerns Laura?
[4:09] Not that I saw.
[4:12] Okay.
[4:18] And what's the judgment on this one?
Local concern again?
[4:21] Well, Mr. Chairman, do you want to make
that motion?
[4:25] Well, put me on the spot. Well,
I'll make the motion make it a matter of
[4:29] local concern. I'll second that.
All in favor?
[4:34] Aye. Aye.
Aye.
[4:37] Opposed?
Carried.
[4:41] Um
Okay, next project that is
[4:46] Granville.
Um
[4:49] So, this is a site plan approval
for a fairly small It's a 2.44 MW solar
[4:57] farm on 9 acres.
The um
[5:01] the full plans, the large scale ones are
there if anybody wants to take a look at
[5:05] them. Also in the black binder is
Granville's solar law.
[5:10] Um what I what we put in the package for
you is the application. Um this did come
[5:17] to Granville once. It went back because
the Granville planning board asked for a
[5:22] few changes.
The changes are at the very back of your
[5:28] um at the very back of your packet
um from Lamont Engineers. Um
[5:35] This is basically changes that were made
to this project as a result of requests
[5:41] from um Granville's
planning board.
[5:48] But there is a a lot of the changes
related to the decommissioning plan.
[5:53] Mhm.
[5:55] So, there is a full decommissioning
plan. Um
[6:02] This is a 9 acre solar farm on a 20 3
acre plus or minus acre parcel.
[6:13] And the and the site is fairly flat.
On the river.
[6:19] This is the new river news. Yeah, so
here's the buffer The buffer map is in
[6:23] here. It
should be in the back so you can see
[6:25] where it is.
[6:32] And it is also um in agricultural one.
[6:37] Laura, on the agricultural data
statement that's in there. Mhm. The
[6:43] question where it asked, is the parcel
actively farmed? Both boxes are checked.
[6:48] There's a question mark next to yes.
That's what I was looking for. So, no.
[6:56] I'm not familiar with that area.
Could be.
[7:10] So, according to the Ag data statement,
it's actively farmed.
[7:15] Um
Walkers
[7:17] by three different farms.
Oh oh no, this is the adjacent farms.
[7:23] Walkers, Harry Wilbur, and Kenneth
Thomas would have active farming on
[7:28] their own parcels.
I don't see the question mark that
[7:32] you're looking at in the system. Uh it's
on this one that looks like yes.
[7:43] Well, that
Okay, so those were So, that the
[7:45] question mark that I'm seeing is under
Henry Wilbur.
[7:49] So, again, that would be an adjacent
land owner.
[7:52] Okay, I see what you mean then.
That's farms within 500 ft of the
[7:56] parcel.
>> Got you.
[8:10] Recommendation on this one? So, they
made the appropriate changes that the
[8:14] town of Granville has requested? Yes,
this originally came to us in February
[8:20] and then Granville contacted us and
asked us to pull it subject to further
[8:24] review by
their planning boards, attorneys,
[8:29] whoever else they wanted to have a look
at with. And then they brought it back
[8:32] to us for this one. Did they have a
decommissioning plan at that time? I
[8:36] believe most a lot of the changes were
related to the decommissioning.
[8:41] And again, you will see um that plan is
at the at the back and
[8:46] um
[8:51] I guess I didn't make color copies for
everybody, but the changes on my copy
[8:55] are colored, so I don't know if you can
tell the difference.
[8:57] I know it.
I think
[9:00] in the past, at least the most recent
past, that have been on the only
[9:04] recommendation that we've sent back or
notification that we've sent back on the
[9:08] town of Granville was to make sure that
they coordinate with emergency services
[9:13] for site development plans.
Not site plan review, but understanding
[9:17] of the site and operations prior to
emergency occurrence. Okay.
[9:22] But other than that, I'll make a motion
it's a matter of local concern.
[9:26] I'll second that.
I'll second.
[9:30] We're getting you going now. I'll
second. We're getting you going now. I'm
[9:32] saying take a breath.
Any further discussion?
[9:36] All in favor? Aye. Aye.
Aye.
[9:40] Opposed?
Carried. Next, Richard Palmer Permont.
[9:44] Okay, this is another Kingsbury project.
Um
[9:50] This one
um
[9:53] the applicant
has purchased
[9:57] an existing home. He over a home on a
um
[10:03] 1 and 1/2 acre parcel.
He owns a non-emergency medical
[10:08] transportation company and is looking
for additional space to park it park his
[10:14] uh transportation vans.
So, what was provided
[10:20] was uh basically the uh
the parcel map that doesn't actually
[10:26] even show where the existing structures
are.
[10:29] So, I went and pulled as you will see a
Google Earth map and also a parcel map
[10:35] that shows where the existing structures
are.
[10:37] So, my concern on this is you have a
house here and then what looks like
[10:44] barns or sheds in the back.
What he is proposing based on his
[10:49] drawing is to put a driveway here to
access the house and a driveway here to
[10:55] access what is grass and area.
He has stated that he's looking to park
[11:00] up to eight vehicles there.
So, given that this is grass and area
[11:05] given the proximity to house, my concern
would be
[11:09] eight vehicles parked end-to-end would
get you to the back of the lot.
[11:15] Without turnaround space, you're risking
people backing out onto this 6th Avenue,
[11:20] which I would see as something that
should be addressed.
[11:37] Other than that, it's pretty
straightforward. He basically intends to
[11:40] to rent the house,
use it as a rental property and then
[11:44] park
and his statement was up to eight
[11:47] vehicles on the site.
[11:52] It doesn't say whether he's planning on
putting in a gravel area, a road.
[11:57] There's no information on that.
Is it just storage of the vans or is it
[12:03] that's where they go at the end of the
day, that type of thing or
[12:06] It's said for some of his drivers to be
able to collect the vehicles. So, I
[12:11] would guess
that if he has a network of drivers that
[12:16] he's trying to park some vehicles closer
to where his drivers are. Okay.
[12:21] It also could be that he's simply out of
space where he is. It doesn't say that.
[12:25] I'm just curious. So,
you have to park you don't have to park
[12:29] the drivers out there park their cars
there unless they get transported from
[12:33] the other facilities here.
That's actually another point. If if
[12:38] drivers are driving their own cars to
this space, they would you know, I I
[12:42] don't I don't know whether the eight
cars that he's stating includes drivers
[12:46] bringing their own cars in or if it's
actually eight medical transportation
[12:50] vans in there.
[12:54] Your recommendation on this?
[13:02] What's my recommendation?
>> Yes.
[13:05] I would
um make a note to the Kingsburg Planning
[13:09] Board to review the possible traffic
implications and if there's sufficient
[13:16] room to
make sure that they're not backing
[13:19] vehicles out 6th Avenue.
[13:22] Hey, thank you, Ted. The driver Well,
somebody got it.
[13:27] An illusion.
[13:32] So, this is just about where where it's
cut off here, just about the end of the
[13:37] parcel. So,
I don't know how much room there would
[13:42] be. And it's obviously fairly treed but
the new shape of the road would be no.
[13:47] I think you can assume that it is. They
point out
[13:52] if you're driving there, they got to
respond to it.
[13:55] With their own vehicles, I guess.
So, you don't need room for at least
[13:58] eight vehicles, you need room for at
least nine vehicles.
[14:02] I would like a replacement. I would say
more than that.
[14:05] » say 16 but actually
They have one driver for each
[14:08] » Right, cuz they have to pull the van in,
park it.
[14:12] What? Again, he may only be planning on
parking two or three medical vans there
[14:17] and the rest of them his drivers' cars.
That's unclear. The application said up
[14:21] to eight.
It says in his little description of
[14:24] project
two to three drivers per day.
[14:29] So, maybe he was figuring in with the
eight of
[14:32] having extra cars there, too.
But I
[14:35] I would concur, Laura, we should send it
back with a notation that they can
[14:39] consider where parking is and traffic
implications.
[14:48] Any other comments?
[14:52] You have a motion to send it back with
those comments?
[14:57] As in another local business.
I make that a motion.
[15:05] Do I hear a second?
Okay.
[15:08] If that's all the motion, could we have
one vote today?
[15:13] All in favor? Aye.
I say vote.
[15:17] Carried.
Um that's all we have. I I um I did not
[15:22] see any A E notices or
reports of final action comments.
[15:29] So,
that's all we have for today.
[15:32] Good.