Grafton Planning Board Action – Last Complete Survey In 1794

by Kieron Kramer
There were no public hearings scheduled before the regular Grafton Planning Board on Monday, December 17, so after the Pledge of Allegiance, roll call and the acceptance of the minutes of the previous meeting, the Board moved immediately to the subdivision application of Wes Vars. Vars wants to sell to his son Joe a five acre parcel from his 96 or so acres at the top of the hill on Snyder Road.
[private]Originally this subdivision was the topic of an informal discussion in April. During the informal discussion Wes Vars told the Board that the new parcel would be 3.68 acres. He brought a survey map of the small parcel but not a map of the entire property with the subdivision marked on it. The Grafton Planning Board requires a survey map of the entire property before a subdivision will be approved, and Vars said he would return with an appropriate map.
At the meeting on Monday Wes Vars was not present and neither was the survey map requested in April. Instead, a map showing most of the Vars property and the area of what is now a five acre parcel with an inset of the County tax map of the entire property in the corner was presented by the surveyor representing Vars, Frederick J. Haley of Stephentown. Haley had consulted with the Planning Board’s attorney, Sal Ferlazzo, who suggested that the new parcel be 5 acres or more. A five or more acre parcel created by a subdivision in Grafton does not need a County Health Department permit for the installation of a septic system before the Board can approve the subdivision, and so simplifies the transfer. The health permit and the building permit must be obtained by the new owner before a dwelling can be constructed on the site.
Haley said that “the EIS would be very short” because “there are no proposed changes.” Planning Board Chairman Tom Withcuskey said he had visited the property and there is no problem with access, wetlands or power lines. He is familiar with the land because the County radio tower and two commercial cell towers are on lots abutting the Wes Vars property.
The snag, however, is the lack of the survey map of the entire property. Haley said that the last time an entire survey of the property was done was in 1794. According to Withcuskey, this property has been in the Vars family for many generations and was probably part of a Land Grant at that time. Although Haley admitted that he “did not resurvey all four sides,” he argued that the full survey was not needed because there was enough information in the map presented and because he would certify that the tax map is accurate  and stand on his reputation that the parcels are conforming. Curiously, the map submitted showed slightly different acreage remaining for Wes Vars. In three places it said, 91.3 acres and in the fourth place it said 92.6. This discrepancy was noticed after the meeting by Planning Board Secretary Jessica Crandall.
The need for the full survey map was broached by Planning Board Member Scott Newell and supported by Board Member Owen Grandjean. Haley said, “This punishes people who have large pieces  [of land].” And Joe Vars said he was not interested in paying $5,000 for a full survey. You can see the basis for his objection since this is a land transfer between father and son. But Grandjean said, “We have always asked for a complete survey.” As the saying goes, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Newell said, “We have run into situations where survey maps are different.” He could have been referring to the Terry Lamphere subdivision in November of 2011 when the requirement for a complete survey showed that the tax map was wrong. Lamphere had been paying taxes on 30 acres more than he owned and, consequently, saved more in taxes than the complete survey cost. Or he could have been referring to the Billings lot line adjustment from January, that was to be discussed again later in this meeting, where the abutters had to get a court settlement to resolve the discrepancy between surveys with all the expenses that accrued or to the faulty surveys of the Boyce and the Alexander/Colvin abutting properties that also needed lawyers and their fees.
In the interest of fairness and consistency it is likely that the Board will require the complete survey map. Nevertheless, they accepted a non-refundable application fee of $150 and scheduled a public hearing at 6:30 pm on January 28 on the Vars subdivision contingent on Ferlazzo’s opinion on the survey requirement. In his zeal to represent his client Haley said, “We have gone above and beyond the requirements for all other parcels” referring, perhaps ill-advisedly, to five other conveyances from the Vars property years ago. When asked if this did not change Vars’ simple subdivision into a major subdivision with all the complications that that entails, Haley said that those subdivisions occurred before 1963, implying that they were, essentially, grandfathered. Ferlazzo will also be asked for his opinion on this wrinkle before the hearing is held.
An Unsugar Shack
In January a public hearing was held regarding the lot line adjustment applied for by the Billingses for their property on Agan Way off of Shaver Pond Road. Four land owners, John and Patrice Nash, Leo and Marie Carroll, Thomas Pascucci and the Billings, agreed to accept a NY State Supreme Court ruling to settle their property line disputes. The disputed land was divided equally among the abutters. Of the landowners only Leo Carroll appeared at the public hearing in January, but the attorneys for the parties were present and retired to the back room during the public hearing to discuss the final terms of the agreement.  After ten minutes they returned only to have Carroll and his attorney leave the room to consult further.  The decision on this subdivision was tabled until the March meeting of the Planning Board but did not come up again until Monday’s meeting.
According to Withcuskey, the sticking point is a shed on the Billings property that impinges 10 feet into the 25 foot right of way that Carroll, Pascucci and Nash use for access to their properties. Two lawyers appeared representing the parties – one representing Carroll, Nash and Pascucci – the other representing Billings. They maintained that there were “no changes since the last round,” and asked for a public hearing which will again be attended by Carroll. Apparently, after consultation with Ferlazzo, the parties are eager to resolve their differences so the Billingses can file their lot line adjustment. Ferlazzo had suggested that the distance from the shed to the edge of the right of way be measured and included on the map that would be filed with the County showing the new width of the right of way. According to Withcuskey the distance  is “15 feet plus” which he said was wide enough for access by emergency response vehicles.
Because the original application has been dormant for more than 60 days a motion was made by Withcuskey to “reaccept” the application. The Board voted unanimously to do so, and a public hearing was scheduled for 6:45 on January 28.
Newell Resigns
At the end of the meeting Scott Newell announced his resignation from the Planning Board. His house is under contract to be sold, and he will be moving to Pittstown. “I don’t think it’s fair to be a member of the Planning Board without living in Grafton,” he said. Chairman Withcuskey thanked Newell for his service. Newell replied, “I’ve had a lot of fun.”
Next Meeting
Because of the holiday on January 21, which is Martin Luther King Jr. Day, the next Planning Board meeting will be on Monday, January 28, at 7 pm with possibly two public hearings before, beginning at 6:30 pm.
A Moment Of Silence
Withcuskey adjourned the meeting “in memory of the children and teachers who were killed in the terrible massacre at the Sandy Hook School.” It was a very long, very silent moment.[/private]