July 2010
TOWN OF SHELBURNE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING July 8, 2010 MEMBERS PRESENT: Brian Precourt, Sam Chauncey, Tucker Holland, Ron Bouchard. (Dick Elkins, Kate Lalley and Daren Jorgensen were absent.) STAFF PRESENT: Dean Pierce, Town Planner. OTHERS PRESENT: Nancy Herman, Ted Winfield, Sean MacFaden, Don Randall, Gail Albert, Charlotte Albers. AGENDA: 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Open to the Public 4. Update on Public Service Board Proceedings 5. Town Plan Update 6. Future Zoning Changes 7. Upcoming Meeting Schedule, Process, and Agendas 8. Approval of Minutes (6/24/10) 9. Other Business/Correspondence 10. Adjournment 1. CALL TO ORDER In the absence of Chairman Dick Elkins, Brian Precourt called the meeting to order at 7:05 PM. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Add under ‘Future Zoning Changes’: Impact Fee Waiver Request. Postponed: Noise Ordinance. 3. OPEN TO THE PUBLIC There were no comments from the public. 4. PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD PROCEEDINGS Gilmore Application Dean Pierce recalled with the Gilmore application before the Public Service Board (PSB) the town requested an extension of the deadline for comments, but a reply from the PSB want never received and the PSB made a decision on the application. The PSB contends the town’s comments were received late. The town has asked and received extensions in the past. According to Susan Hudson the PSB was confused due to the address of the property being referenced with the request for extension rather than the name of the owner of the property. Statutory changes are needed to improve town participation in hearings, said Mr. Pierce, and a letter has been drafted to legislators to discuss building support of possible legislative changes (the letter will be emailed to the Planning Commission for review/comment). Brian Precourt commented the town must be prepared to spend money to hire the professionals necessary to argue the town’s position on an application before the PSB. This is a budget question that has not been put before the Selectboard. Sam Chauncey stated changing the legislation is the ultimate way to get the PSB to recognize the town. VLCT may be willing to spearhead the effort. In the mean time the Planning Commission should always ask for a site visit and hearing. Ron Bouchard agreed submitting the legislation change is a signal from the town, but the town must be clear about the parameters and where the effort is focused because the PSB is reviewing the application as submitted and not entertaining other suggestions. Dean Pierce stressed the town must submit evidence to show there is a problem and a better solution without loss of energy generation. There was further discussion of getting the PSB to recognize the town’s point of view. The Planning Commission is concerned with what the town will look like in the future if there are many solar panels on properties throughout the town and county. With the Gilmore application, the Planning Commission agreed to be silent unless the neighbors have complaints/concerns. Nicholas/Dimmit Application (Mt. Philo Road) The Planning Commission reviewed the location of the tracker solar panel on a lot off Mt. Philo Road (Nicholas/Dimmit application). The panel will be 100’ from the road and 30’ north of the property owner’s driveway. Comments from neighbors have not been heard. The Planning Commission will request a site visit and prehearing conference for the application. Brian Precourt requested the proposed location of the panel be staked out in the field. Communicating with the PSB There was continued discussion of communicating with the PSB about the process so the town is clear as to how and when to submit information. Tucker Holland stated there should be a formal communication process. Sam Chauncey said in conversation with a PSB member the PSB has to act without much flexibility. It is not certain the PSB would be unhappy if the current legislation was changed. Brian Precourt pointed out the Hollenbeck application would have been a good test case where it could be shown there is a reasonable alternative location that would not impact the neighbors’ viewshed or the power output, but the PSB would not even consider other points of view. Dean Pierce will research consultants in energy production. 5. TOWN PLAN UPDATE Survey Questions Dean Pierce reported UVM indicated several professors expressed an interest in working on the survey. UVM will confirm their interest and notify the town. The Planning Commission discussed using a web based survey and doing inserts in the local newspaper. There was agreement moving forward on development of the questionnaire is vital. Questions could be drafted from identified issues of underground utilities, affordable housing, number of housing units, parking in the village center, transportation connections, development along Shelburne Road, flexibility in public works standards to allow street trees and such, and partial review of development applications. Some of the questions from the previous survey can be tweaked and reused as well. There was further SHELBURNE PLANNING COMMISSION 7/8/10 PAGE 3 discussion of survey questions (total of 10-12 questions on the survey) and quantifying the results. Tucker Holland volunteered to craft some questions for consideration at the next meeting. Design Charrette There was mention of hosting a design charrette. Dean Pierce noted Kate Lalley is contacting the University of Virginia for information. Dean Pierce reported Vermont Design Institute will facilitate a charrette for a fee. Other facilitators include Norwich University architecture department and Conway School of Landscape Design in Massachusetts. Feedback from Town Depts. Comments on the town plan from town departments are still being compiled. 6. FUTURE ZONING CHANGES Noise Postponed. Zoning Change Requests Gail Albert Don Randall, Sean MacFaden, and Char Albers representing Shelburne Natural Resources Committee discussed protecting the LaPlatte watershed on the Naud property if there is a zoning change. The Naud property is currently zoned commercialindustrial, but a zoning change to allow more dense development has been mentioned. Ms. Albert stated to protect the watershed it would be better not to break up the parcel with development. Tucker Holland suggested a good use of the town’s conservation funds may be to purchase some or all of the property. Ms. Albert agreed this should be discussed, but funds are limited; there may be a way to coalesce with development and protect the watershed. Char Albers stated the Naud property is high value land because it is part of the LaPlatte corridor. The committee has been looking specifically at conserving a greenway all along the river corridor. Sam Chauncey asked committee members to consider any changes to the town plan that are needed to accomplish the committee’s goals. Gail Albert stated the open space plan needs to be supported and sensitivity increased to issues of concern to the Natural Resources Committee. Making a decision that affects one piece of property can set a precedent for future pieces of property. The committee would like to discuss the whole picture with the Planning Commission before the town plan update is complete rather than just comment on development, suggested Ms. Albert. Tucker Holland mentioned the ‘land bank’ concept where a fee is paid to the land bank by the buyer of a property. Funds accrue and provide the town with leverage for more buying power to conserve land. Ms. Albert said the natural resources committee will take the concept under consideration. Regarding future zoning changes, the Planning Commission agreed each requested change will be considered. Impact Fee Waiver Request SHELBURNE PLANNING COMMISSION 7/8/10 PAGE 4 The Planning Commission reviewed the letter from Gregg Beldock, dated June 28, 2010, regarding waiver of recreation and education impact fees for the Bullrock development (Shelburne Senior Bay Living). The Selectboard grants waivers, but the Planning Commission can make comment on requests. Mr. Beldock submitted payment of impact fees of $66,000 which is the amount due provided the waivers are granted. There was discussion of waiving both the education and recreation impact fees for the elderly housing development. The Planning Commission agreed the senior residents do not contribute to the school population, but do use recreation facilities in town. Also, if an elderly individual builds a house in town that individual would be required to pay all associated impact fees. It was noted Mr. Beldock did submit evidence of the development being elderly housing, but did not provide evidence in support of the housing units being affordable in perpetuity. MOTION by Sam Chauncey, SECOND by Tucker Holland, that the Planning Commission inform the Selectboard in the Planning Commission’s opinion Bullrock is eligible for waivers as outlined in Section 9 of the Shelburne Impact Fee Ordinance, Elderly Housing Units, for 50% reduction in the recreation impact fee and 60% reduction in the education impact fee, and further, that the Planning Commission has no evidence as to whether Bullrock is eligible for an additional 5% reduction in each category. VOTING: unanimous (4-0); motion carried. 7. UPCOMING MEETING SCHEDULE, PROCESS, AND AGENDAS Agenda Items Public Hearing on Airport PUD Zoning Language (July 22, 2010) Noise Ordinance Town Plan Update Schedule (begin with Vision and Natural Resources sections) Survey Next meeting(s): July 22, 2010 Joint Meeting with DRB in mid-September 8. APPROVAL OF MINUTES June 24, 2010 MOTION by Ron Bouchard, SECOND by Sam Chauncey, to approve the minutes of 6/24/10 with the following correction(s)/clarification(s): Page 3, Update on Public Service Board Proceedings, 1st paragraph, sentence reading: “Tucker Holland suggested residents adjacent to the Hollenbecks…” – rewrite to read: “Tucker Holland suggested if residents adjacent to the Hollenbecks are concerned following the PSB decision then they should send a letter pointing out alternate locations.” VOTING: unanimous (4-0); motion carried. 9. OTHER BUSINESS/CORRESPONDENCE Regional Plan There was mention of the town’s representative on the Regional Planning Commission attending a future meeting of the Shelburne Planning Commission. SHELBURNE PLANNING COMMISSION 7/8/10 PAGE 5 10. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Tucker Holland, SECOND by Sam Chauncey, to adjourn the meeting. VOTING: unanimous (4-0); motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. RScty: MERiordan
**************************************** MINUTES SUBJECT TO CORRECTION BY THE SHELBURNE PLANNING COMMISSION. CHANGES, IF ANY, WILL BE RECORDED IN THE MINUTES OF THE NEXT MEETING OF THE COMMISSION. | TOWN OF SHELBURNE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING July 22, 2010 MEMBERS PRESENT: Brian Precourt, Sam Chauncey, Tucker Holland, Ron Bouchard, Daren Jorgensen. (Dick Elkins and Kate Lalley were absent.) STAFF PRESENT: Dean Pierce, Town Planner. OTHERS PRESENT: Rad Romeyn, Michael Resienato, Kurt Gruendling, Ray & Barb McGee, Mike Burke. AGENDA: - Call to Order
- Approval of Agenda
- Open to the Public
- Public Hearing: Proposed Zoning Change(s) – Airport PUD
- Town Opinion Survey
- Town Plan Volume 1 Policy Language Review
- Update on Public Service Board Proceedings
- Upcoming Meeting Schedule, Process, and Agendas
- Approval of Minutes (7/8/10)
- Other Business/Correspondence
- Adjournment
1. CALL TO ORDER In the absence of Chairman Dick Elkins, Brian Precourt called the meeting to order at 7 PM. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. 3. OPEN TO THE PUBLIC Rad Romeyn re: Suntracker Solar Panel on Pond Road Rad Romeyn, 1260 Pond Road, voiced concern about the suntracker solar panel to be installed by the Platts in the designated viewscape (per the town plan) on Pond Road. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED ZONING CHANGES(S) – Airport PUD The public hearing was opened at 7:07 PM. Dean Pierce summarized the proposed zoning changes relative to the airport. Sam Chauncey pointed out the language should apply to any airport, not just the existing airport in town. Dean Pierce suggested the first sentence in Section 1930.11.D.1 be amended by replacing “Route 7 or Mount Philo Road” with “from all public highways”. The Planning Commission concurred. PUBLIC COMMENTS Kurt Gruendling, resident and pilot, spoke in support of the proposed zoning changes relating to an Airport PUD. Michael Resienato, pilot, spoke in support of the zoning changes for an airport PUD and keeping the airport intact. Mr. Resienato said he often uses the airport when he flies his guests to town to spend time (and money) in Shelburne. Mike Burke, representing the McGees, stated the proposed language gives the airport facility fair consideration and allows the McGees to make a proposal for their property. There were no further comments. MOTION by Sam Chauncey, SECOND by Daren Jorgensen, to close the public hearing regarding proposed amendments to the zoning bylaw authorizing creation of an Airport PUD and to effect related changes. VOTING: unanimous (4-0)[Tucker Holland not present for vote]; motion carried. MOTION by Sam Chauncey, SECOND by Daren Jorgensen, to forward the package containing proposed amendments to the zoning bylaw as warned for public hearing on July 22, 2010 and with the change to Section 1930.11.D.1 to replace “Route 7 and Mount Philo Road” with “from all public highways” and associated Planning Commission Report to the Selectboard for consideration. VOTING: unanimous (4-0)[Tucker Holland not present for vote]; motion carried. 5. TOWN PLAN OPINION SURVEY Tucker Holland reviewed the questionnaire he crafted which covers demographics, parking, development along Shelburne Road, affordable housing, transportation connections, burying utilities, flexibility in public work standards, and partial review of development applications. The Planning Commission discussed the following: · Removing question(s) pertaining to partial review of applications · Removing question(s) pertaining to quality schools and moderate tax rates · Incorporating the edits sent via email by Tucker Holland · Incorporating input from Fred Schmidt regarding demographic information to get a sense of the respondents · Providing examples of where there should be flexibility in the public works standards (narrower roads, street trees in the public right-of-way, and such) The draft survey will be forwarded to the Selectboard for comment and staff will solicit input from Fred Schmidt. Shelburne News will be asked about including the survey as an insert in the newspaper in early September. 6. TOWN PLAN VOLUME 1 POLICY LANGUAGE REVIEW The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed schedule and items for review in the town plan update. Town committees will be invited to attend the discussion of their area of focus. The Vision Station and Natural and Scenic Resources and Land Conservation are the first tasks. Daren Jorgensen observed the vision statement will have to be rewritten at the end of the process to ensure the statement aligns with the plan. Also, the vision statement needs to be definitive. Brian Precourt commented the current vision statement does not encourage agriculture and having a working landscape, but does discuss preserving and maintaining open space. Public use of the open space and trails should be emphasized. Sam Chauncey felt the statement as written implies economic development will occur by private developers as opposed to the town having a role or the town being a driver of economic development by providing incentives to developers (tax breaks and such). More of a public/private partnership should be emphasized. Also, the vision statement should say what the town priorities are rather than what the town will have done because it is not certain that will occur. Brian Precourt agreed the vision statement should be written so the town is proactive rather than reactive to development. The Planning Commission agreed a question should be added to the survey pertaining to the role of the town in development. 7. PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD PROCEEDINGS Niklas-Dummit The letter to the Public Service Board (PSB) drafted in consultation with the Town Attorney and staff was provided to the Planning Commission for review. Dean Pierce noted the letter is written more like a legal brief and cites various legal cases. MOTION by Sam Chauncey, SECOND by Daren Jorgensen, to approve and send the letter to Susan Hudson (PSB), dated 7/23/10, and signed by Dean Pierce. VOTING: unanimous (5-0); motion carried. Mr. Pierce said he is still researching information on the number of net metered applications that have been denied and those where the devices were relocated. Research of consultants who can provide information on energy production in various locations is being done by staff. There was discussion of the Selectboard authorizing payment to a consultant to attend a site visit. Ron Bouchard suggested the Selectboard consider approving money for a consultant to compile a spreadsheet of information on output and location. Daren Jorgensen stated there are existing charts of that type of data in electrical engineering handbooks. A loss calculation can be done. The variable is the distance from the panel to the battery connection. Dean Pierce suggested asking the Selectboard to authorize up to $750 for a Vermont consultant to compile the needed information. There was mention of the conscious lack of cooperation by the applicant, supplier, and PSB at the recent site visits to not entertain alternate locations to the proposed site. MOTION by Sam Chauncey, SECOND by Daren Jorgensen, to request the Selectboard authorize spending not to exceed $1,000 for an engineering consultant to consult on issues related to the placement of net metered panels. DISCUSSION: The consultant would be asked to provide general advice and look at the Niklas-Dummit case specifically. VOTING: unanimous (5-0); motion carried. Platt Rad Romeyn, Pond Road, stated a pubic hearing before the PSB was requested by residents as well as town staff for the Platt installation, but the request was denied. The PSB discounted the letter from Dean Pierce as personal opinion. Mr. Romeyn urged the Planning Commission to get some answers from the PSB, and ask state representatives, Joan Lenes and Kate Webb, to wrest control back to the town over placement of solar panels on the landscape. Mr. Romeyn said it is ironic that the Platts worked with all the neighbors to maintain Pond Road as a scenic landscape yet their solar panel will be in the middle of the scenic views map. The Pond Road residents have submitted a request to the PSB to reopen the investigation and put a stay on the decision. It is critical that the town and Planning Commission get control over the siting of these solar panels, stressed Mr. Romeyn, adding the Platt case will be taken to the Vermont Supreme Court if necessary because the panel will be in the middle of a designated view area per the town plan. Sam Chauncey pointed out current state law puts all the power in the hands of the PSB. The law needs to be changed. VLCT may be willing to provide support and lobby the legislature. There was further discussion of the town being shut out of the PSB process. It was stressed the town and Planning Commission in particular are not against alternate energy, but wants to have a say in how and where the devices will be located. Rad Romeyn suggested the town may want to consider designating certain zones for solar panels (e.g. solar farms). MOTION by Sam Chauncey, SECOND by Daren Jorgensen, to approve and sign the letter to Reps. Lenes and Webb regarding net metered installations and to authorize the Vice Chairman of the Planning Commission, Brian Precourt, to sign the letter in the absence of Chairman Dick Elkins. VOTING: unanimous (5-0); motion carried. 8. UPCOMING MEETING SCHEDULE, PROCESS, AND AGENDAS Agenda Items - Town plan update
- Commerce-Industry zone
- Bonuses for conversion of derelict buildings
- Items to discuss at the joint meeting with the DRB
- Items discussed with Selectboard
- Noise
Next meeting(s): - August 12, 2010
- Joint Meeting with DRB in mid-September
9. APPROVAL OF MINUTES July 8, 2010 MOTION by Sam Chauncey, SECOND by Tucker Holland, to approve the minutes of 7/8/10 as written. VOTING: 4 ayes, one abstention (Jorgensen); motion carried. 10. OTHER BUSINESS/CORRESPONDENCE None. 11. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Sam Chauncey, SECOND by Tucker Holland, to adjourn the meeting. VOTING: unanimous (5-0); motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9 PM. RScty: MERiordan
January 2010
Planning Commission Minutes
February 2010
Planning Commission Minutes
March 2010
Planning Commission Minutes
April 2010
Planning Commission Minutes
May 2010
Planning Commission Minutes
June 2010
Planning Commission Minutes
July 2010
Planning Commission Minutes
August 2010
Planning Commission Minutes
September 2010
Planning Commission Minutes
October 2010
Planning Commission Minutes
November 2010
Planning Commission Minutes
December 2010
Planning Commission Minutes
|
