Minutes - 20031124 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

4. Statements in opposition to the proposal. {Planning Board Chair will ask each them "Have they been sworn in?" and if so, proceed; if not the Clerk will swear them in.] There was no one to speak in opposition to the proposal. 5. Rebuttal statements by supporters. {Planning Board Chair will ask each of them "Have they been sworn in?" and if so, proceed; if not the Clerk will swear them in.] None. 6. Rebuttal statement by the opposition. {Planning Board Chair will ask each of them "Have they been sworn in?" and if so, proceed; if not the Clerk will swear them in.] None. Commissioner Jacobs: First I want to ask questions about something that Commissioner Halkiotis just said. Are there in fact cars for sale that are parked on this property and would that be consistent with the zoning? Robert Davis: No, that would not be consistent with the zoning. We'll have to look at that. Commissioner Halkiotis: I didn't mean to blow the whistle on anybody, you know. I always follow the righteous path. Commissioner Jacobs: I wish you would look into that and talking about having access kind of in the middle where it would be more dangerous, more movements going in bath directions. So could you please just talk about the thinking behind that? Robert Davis: You're speaking of the access back off of Oakdale all the way to the back? Commissioner Jacobs: Correct. Robert Davis: Even if you look at the existing site, you can see that there's a retaining wall there where they have done quite a bit of cut into that area. And they were looking at the prospect of doing more cutting on that site to do that. We preferred, actually, the rear access for the interconnectivity back there. That was not well received, and there was going to be a lot more dirt to be moved, and probably a loss of more trees, although it looks like they have got most of them on the back, at least where the driveway is. They still own some of that properly back up on the top of the map, back over to the west. But ideally, a road back there could serve this tract, the adjacent south tract, and also the western tract. Commissioner Jacobs: To me, this is an example of how we make anecdotal decisions that destroy any comprehensive planning opportunities. Because if, say there was a light at Millhouse, and then somebody wanted to go over to Oakdale by not going on Old 86, it would be so dangerous as to virtually be eliminated as a possibility to have to leave through the middle of properties and through the traffic coming, even if there is a right turn in and a right turn out, as opposed to going along the northern portion of the property -the western portion, excuse me.