Grafton Planning Board Action – That’s The Way It is

by Kieron Kramer
The Marcel Forette minor subdivision discussed at length, perhaps considered by some to be discussed ad nauseam, in last month’s report on the Grafton Planning Board was very nicely resolved at this month’s Planning Board meeting on Monday, August 22, rescheduled from August 15, by using the ancient and often practiced legal principle of “that’s the way it is.”
Forette has a parcel in the shape of a staple and his proposed subdivision would have left one three acre lot without any access in spite of the old time concept of “reciprocal easements” in the leases of the staple-shaped property and the two abutting properties when they were originally separated about 100 years ago. Last month, it seemed that Forette might be facing a highly convoluted, lengthy procedure to subdivide his land, possibly having to rely on the purchase of a strip of land from his neighbor. This would necessitate a subdivision procedure for that before the Forettes’ could go forward. The reciprocal easements actually refer to one point on the shared corner of what would now be four lots, two owned by Manley and Straw and the  proposed Forette two lot subdivision. One point does not a passage make. As Surveyor Bill Darling said at this  meeting, “They have access legally but not practically.”
But how simple it turned out to be. Darling, who presented the surveys maps and other relevant material on behalf of the Forettes had contacted Town Attorney Sal Ferlazzo and had shown him deeds going back over 100 years in which the 3 acre lot had always been landlocked. At this point, Ferlazzo applied the age old “That’s the way it” is principle and told all parties that the subdivision could go forward but that it would have to have language in the deed and on the recorded survey map that indicated that the landlocked parcel “is an unusable piece of land”  and has always been for 100 years. Ferlazzo will provide the legal language to be used. This will make it clear to any future purchaser the status of the parcel as a matter of public record. Planning Board Chairman Tom Withcuskey had also spoken to Ferlazzo to explain that this was an existing parcel, and said at this meeting, “There is no rule in the subdivision regulations prohibiting this [leaving the parcel as it was].” A Board member said, “It’s been that way for 100 years; why straighten it out now?” This is fortunate for the Forettes because the neighbor doesn’t want to sell a strip of property at this time that would provide access to the parcel.
So Withcuskey made a motion to accept the application from Forette, which was approved 5-0, and asked for a $150 check for the permit fee which Forette wrote on the spot. Darling had already submitted maps and a copy of the Forette deed, and he will double check with Withcuskey and Ferlazzo about the legal language that will be included on the new deed and the recorded map so that it will be clear that the 3 acre landlocked parcel is unusable. The Board went over the Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) on the spot and after reading out loud about a dozen questions, it was determined that the project would not result in any significant adverse environmental impact. The Forette subdivision is located on a private road called Miller Way which runs off of Blue Factory Road.
Public Hearings
Withcuskey set a public hearing on the subdivision for July 22, which gave everyone pause. The Forettes were stunned for a moment until he corrected himself. Goyer joked with the Forettes, “So, we’ll see you next year; I guess it will take that long to get the language from the lawyer.” And everyone had a good laugh. The hearing is scheduled for 6:30 pm on September 19 before the next regular meeting.
Everyone was relieved that this ended up being settled so easily. “After all, it’s not his [Forette’s] fault that this was how they separated land 100 years ago,” Withcuskey said after the meeting.
Another public hearing was set on September 19, this one at 6:45 pm, regarding the Ken Bruno subdivision on Pondview Road abutting Dyken Pond. Bruno wanted to subdivide his lot into two lots. One will be 6.92 acres; Bruno’s house is located on this proposed lot. The other lot borders the pond and will be 4.53 acres. As requested at the May meeting, Bruno has gotten County Health Department approval for his water and septic system on the new parcel. Withcuskey has already talked to the Town Attorney about this subdivision, and he made a motion to accept Bruno’s application with the contingencies that an engineer’s plan laying out the septic system that was approved by the Health Department and a letter from the  homeowners association indicating that they had no objections to the size of the parcels be submitted. The Board voted 4-0, with Scott Newell recusing himself, to accept the application with the two contingencies. Bruno had written a check for $150 at the May meeting when this was last discussed. Next, the Board reviewed Bruno’s EAF and determined that there would be no significant environmental impact caused by the subdivision.
Bly Subdivision Approved
There was a public hearing held at 6:45 Monday evening on the Joseph and Kathleen Bly subdivision. Their property is located at the corner of Mill Road, a Town road, and County Road 84, also known as Old Road. A house is located on a lot of 3 acres, and a 6.88 acre lot will be left vacant. No comments were made at the hearing, and no one showed up for it except Bill Darling who brought a map of the subdivision in case interested parties wanted to look at it. There were no interested parties. It was as quiet as a church.
During the regular meeting the subdivision was approved unanimously. Withcuskey, who made the motion to approve, said, “I stopped in at the site and talked with Joe; everything seems to be in order.”
Toward the end of the public hearing there was a brief conversation about the telephone service up in the Jay Hakes Road – Blue Factory Road area. Withcuskey had been trying to call people up there about permits, and the Forettes live in the area. The service has been interrupted, and it has been taking a long time to restore it because of the strike by Verizon line workers. Withcuskey said he knew someone at Verizon and had called to say that because the cell phone service is spotty in that area, the lack of land lines was a health and safety risk. He was told that the service would be restored by Wednesday, August 24, at the latest. Town Supervisor Tyler Sawyer had called, too.