MEMBERS PRESENT:       Dick Elkins (Chairman); Brian Precourt, Ron Bouchard, Sam Chauncey, Tucker Holland, Kate Lalley.

STAFF PRESENT:                Dean Pierce, Town Planner.

OTHERS PRESENT:            Rick Peterson, Kay Kraushaar, Rob Donahue, Gail Albert, Mark Naud, Yves Bradley.

Chairman Dick Elkins called the meeting to order at 7 PM.

 

There were no changes to the agenda.

 

Rick Peterson, former chairman of the Shelburne Planning Commission, gave background history on how the boundaries of the sewer service area were established when he was involved with the Planning Commission and Selectboard. The town plan supported development concentrated in the village on Route 7 with less density farther from the village center, said Mr. Peterson, and the emphasis of the zoning districts and town plan is on central growth dissipating to less dense growth. If the sewer capacity is utilized to its maximum there is question as to where the growth would occur in conformance with the ordinance. Capacity if utilized to maximum development would allow that area to be developed and served by town service so for every acre the service is extended would result in an acre within the denser district without service. In other words, explained Mr. Peterson, capacity would be used in the denser district, but if the service area is extended there will not be capacity for the designated zone(s). The Planning Commission needs to determine if a change in the sewer service area will compromise the goals and objectives of the area. There has not been significant development beyond the sewer boundary except what was expected (small subdivisions). The boundaries should be well considered and discussed before making a change, advised Mr. Peterson.  Dick Elkins explained the Selectboard asked the Planning Commission to consider the extension based on a request from the O’Briens. Brian Precourt commented on the confusion with the state’s gallon per day calculations for sewer allocation which was changed from 120 gpd per bedroom to a flat 210 gpd for the dwelling. There was agreement growth in town has been slow. Water use has decreased and sewer flows are flat. Tucker Holland observed density within the sewer district in certain areas has increased, but impact on the sewer district by build out should be determined. Dick Elkins stated past research indicated there are approximately 1,400 existing sites within the sewer district.

 

Kay Kraushaar, former Planning Commission member and current DRB member, stated there seems to be a pattern of action being triggered by one inquiry to the Planning Commission or Selectboard, and this is of concern. Any action needs to be in support of the general vision of the town as opposed to responding to a single request. Sam Chauncey noted the Planning Commission does not necessarily act on a single request, but does want to be responsive and is always willing to look at new possibilities. The impetus could be through a specific proposal.

 

Suggested amendments include:

·        Rewrite second sentence in the introductory paragraph to read: “The town has historically contained a fairly diverse range of housing types and sizes.”

·        Rewrite the third sentence in the introductory paragraph to read: “In recent years this has been accompanied by a substantial amount of housing for elders.”

·        Rewrite the fourth sentence in the introductory paragraph to read: “The town has made efforts to encourage more modestly priced housing and in recent years has partnered with a nonprofit organization for that purpose.”

Language acceptable as drafted.

 

Rob Donahue, Chairman of the Paths Committee, explained the policy language broadens the scope of the work done by the Paths Committee and “puts teeth” in the development guidelines and broadens what is required per Sections 1900.7 and 1960.4. Brian Precourt commented positively on having language about maintenance of paths.

 

Staff will incorporate items listed in the recommended actions into the task matrix.  There was mention of locating a park-and-ride facility and having the bus stop at the train station. There was also mention of the grant application by the state to re-establish Amtrak service on the western side of the state.

 

Suggested amendments to the transportation section include:

·        Replace “Planning Commission” with “Development Review Board” in Sidewalks, Path and Trails, Recommended Actions #7 and Streets, Roads and Highways, Recommended Actions #7.

·        Delete Recommended Actions #2 in Public Transit because this is complete.

·        Delete Recommended Actions #2 in Rail Transportation because this is complete.

 

Kay Kraushaar asked how thorough the report was on the impact to natural resources and habitat by the zoning change. Homes are alarmingly close to the river and with residential development there are dogs and activity 24/7 which disrupts wildlife. The area is an animal corridor. The zoning was set as Commerce and Industry because of the railroad and safety issues, continued Ms. Kraushaar, and development would be away from the sensitive areas and closer to the railroad. Ms. Kraushaar urged walking the property and having an official report done by a wildlife biologist rather than just anecdotal information. Once the change is made there is no going back, cautioned Ms. Kraushaar.

 

Gail Albert, Shelburne Natural Resources Committee, echoed the remarks about impact on wildlife, noting the area is a deer wintering yard and an animal corridor. Ms. Albert observed there appears to be a pattern of making zoning changes in response to requests that upend the town plan which has taken years to develop. If the Planning Commission is going to react to individual needs, then there is not a plan in place which is in the best interest of the town.

 

Yves Bradley, Pomerleau Real Estate, pointed out the Naud parcel was originally zoned for 286,000 s.f. of manufacturing space with two rail spurs. There would have been up to three shifts of work which would have been noisy and significant in terms of impact to the area. Housing, retail or mixed use will not have more of an impact than a manufacturing use. The job of planners, continued Mr. Bradley, is to assess how the plan is working. Considering a request for a change of use on the Naud property is good planning because the Planning Commission is deciding the direction being taken in the past was not a good one so other options need to be considered. If the desire is not to develop the land the town can buy the property for conservation. The property owner feels a change of use on the parcel will make it usable. There is much industrial space that is built and not in use. It does not make sense any longer to have an industrial facility located far from an interstate ramp.

 

Mark Naud, owner of the property, recalled the parcel was purchased before the town had zoning regulations in place. The property was to provide an opportunity for rail development, but over time the parcel has developed into what it is today. There has been much discussion over the past 10 years of how to develop the property. The land was permitted through the town and state processes with consideration of natural resources (no endangered species or protected areas were found). There is even less demand today for industrial development. In fact there is an adaptive reuse plan in place for Commerce and Industry South. The question for the town is whether the parcel is properly zoned. The greenway and buffered area should remain and be enjoyed by all the townspeople, said Mr. Naud. Gail Albert clarified the suggestion is to carefully consider the difference in traffic and intrusion by residential development versus industrial. Yves Bradley interjected changing the zoning does not change state and local permit requirements which cover exactly the expressed concerns. Dean Pierce noted there are commercial and non-industrial uses such as office uses allowed in the Commerce and Industry zone.

 

There were no further comments.

 

 

 

 

 

Brian Precourt recused himself from the Planning Commission.

 

Mr. Precourt explained the need for a directory sign for the shopping center property (presently such a sign is not allowed), noting there are other directory signs in the Village District. The sign regulations need to be updated to include directory signs in the Village District, stated Mr. Precourt. Dean Pierce suggested the regulation be modeled after the Mixed Use District, but tailored to the Village District relative to sign size. Staff will draft language for consideration by the Planning Commission.

 

Brian Precourt mentioned the request by Rite Aid for a drive-up window which is not permitted for retail uses, only banks. The possibility of expanding the drugstore is being explored. Traffic circulation is an issue. Should Rite Aid not renew their lease the 2,400 s.f. of space will readily be filled, assured Mr. Precourt, adding Rite Aid and Kinney Drugs are looking for a location on Route 7.

 

Ron Bouchard observed drugstores and hardware stores help the vitality of the shopping plaza so every effort should be made to keep the stores there. Kate Lalley added a good mix of stores in the shopping plaza is critical to the type of smart growth the town is trying to promote.

 

Kay Kraushaar noted the DRB looks at internal circulation and safety of pedestrians. A drive through window may generate more traffic. Also, in the shopping plaza a patron can park their car and visit two or three stores without having to drive. Regarding drive through windows in general, Shelburne is Shelburne because there are no national chain stores and drive through service windows, said Ms. Kraushaar, adding it will set a precedent if drive through windows are allowed for retail uses. Brian Precourt pointed out Rite Aid, Aubuchon, and Peoples United Bank are national companies. Also, the regulations do address drive through windows in the Mixed Use zone with limitations. Tucker Holland opined allowing a drive through window for a drugstore will not necessarily attract a McDonald’s to town. The service window can be limited in scope to a certain type of establishment.

 

Staff will draft language for consideration relative to drive through service windows for drugstores. Brian Precourt returned to the Planning Commission.

 

Presentation of the survey analysis by UVM will occur on 12/6/10. The comprehensive results will be emailed to the Planning Commission. Shelburne News will publish several articles on the results of the survey.

 

A presentation by the Norwich students will be held on 12/8/10 on re-imaging development of Shelburne Road from South Burlington to Webster Road.

 

 

Ron Bouchard spoke in support of encouraging businesses to supply childcare. The Planning Commission could provide the impetus and create a committee to help businesses cooperate with each other and establish a central daycare service.

 

 

The meeting was adjourned at 9 PM.

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:       Dick Elkins (Chairman); Brian Precourt, Ron Bouchard, Sam Chauncey, Tucker Holland, Kate Lalley.

STAFF PRESENT:                Dean Pierce, Town Planner.

OTHERS PRESENT:            David Webster, Gail Albert, Jason Cadwell.

Chairman Dick Elkins called the meeting to order at 7 PM.

 

There were no changes to the agenda.

 

None.

 

Dick Elkins suggested the Paths Committee have the ability to request a review by an expert, such as the State Fish and Wildlife Department, to ensure a path is not in a sensitive area. Brian Precourt mentioned interconnecting the paths in town. It was noted the policy refers to “creating an integrated network” of sidewalks, bike lanes, and paths.

 

Suggested amendments to the Rail Transportation section include:

·        Rewrite Recommended Actions #2 to read: “Encourage reinstatement of interstate passenger rail service on existing tracks.”

 

It was noted the accepted term is “mobile home communities”.

 

Suggested amendments to the Housing Policy include:

·        Add “on a district by district basis” to the end of the sentence in Recommended Actions #9 (accessory apartments).

 

There was discussion of the “Ten Percent Challenge” undertaken by the town in 2004 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 10% over the coming decade, and how to determine how much of the 10% challenge the town has achieved since 2004. There was also discussion of making the Recommended Actions in the policy that have been in existence since 2007 happen. There was mention of the town sanctioning the informal energy group in Shelburne. Staff will draft a letter for signature by the Planning Commission Chairman to officially sanction the Shelburne energy committee. Jason Cadwell, representing the energy group, will have the members review the town’s energy policy and provide feedback at the Planning Commission’s meeting in January. One suggestion is to do a town-wide audit to establish benchmarks in order to measure progress toward the 10% goal. Also, the list of objectives and actions should be in priority order. Brian Precourt suggested having performance standards to ensure a level of service is provided. Energy can be saved by turning off streetlights, but this is not good if the sidewalks are dark and unsafe, advised Mr. Precourt.

 

Brian Precourt recused himself from the Planning Commission.

 

There was discussion of the draft language for drive-through service windows for pharmacies. The language is modeled after language in the Mixed Use District and specifies the window is for service from the pharmacy only and not for other purchases (food, goods). Conditional Use approval will be needed for the service window and there will be a specific definition in the zoning bylaws. Shelburne Historic Preservation & Design Review Committee wanted information on whether the drive-through will be covered and what the scale will be. SHP&DRC suggested limits be set on the structure. Brian Precourt noted internal traffic circulation with a drive-through service window is an issue. David Webster expressed concern about disrupting the housing stock in the village with drive-through service windows which will be grossly out of character in the area. Limiting the windows to pharmacies may work though. Staff will draft language defining pharmacies with drive-through service windows as a conditional use, and research other areas in the town where the service windows could occur and what the impacts or ramifications would be.

 

There was discussion of directory signs. Dean Pierce noted the draft language is modeled after directory signs in the Mixed Use District. Brian Precourt suggested municipal signs be included as well. There was discussion of appropriate sign size and allowing flexibility in overall design of the sign with oversight. The Planning Commission would like to know the size of the directory sign at the Creamery and at the town office.

 

There was discussion of the shopping plaza sign. Sam Chauncey suggested the directory sign for the shopping plaza be similar in design to the wayfinding signs in town. Brian Precourt agreed some design elements of the wayfinding signs could be incorporated in the shopping plaza sign. Kate Lalley agreed there could be some tie-in to the wayfinding signs (i.e. color, scale), but the shopping plaza sign should also be different to call out the sign.

 

Brian Precourt returned to the Planning Commission.

 

Dean Pierce noted in addition to a base framework for the program (scope, budget, and such), the AIA requires details on a steering committee, fund raising plan, educational partner, media plan, project spokesperson, and communications vehicle. Kate Lalley volunteered to chair the steering committee. Suggested members include a volunteer from the DRB, the Design Review Committee, and a community member who is an architect by profession.

 

 

Ms. Lalley will work with Dean Pierce and ask the Selectboard to authorize submission of the program application.

 

Discussion postponed. Dean Pierce noted the memo to the DRB indicating the Planning Commission is aware of the concerns and will be discussing slopes.

 

Dean Pierce reported the Shelburne Police Chief is not in favor of a noise ordinance with quantitative standards because the town does not have the proper equipment or expertise in order to enforce the ordinance. Sam Chauncey stated noise made by machinery, such as a windmill or manufacturing process, needs to be distinguished from nuisance noise such as a barking dog. Dick Elkins suggested limiting the noise ordinance to mechanical equipment and business noise. Tucker Holland stated the noise must be sustained over a period of time. Brian Precourt recalled the purpose of the noise ordinance was to establish a clear community standard so the town has standing with the Public Service Board. Staff will research other ordinances where the police are not the contact for enforcement and having the ordinance address sustained noise.

 

Staff will forward information when available.

 

 

Postponed.

 

None.

 

 

The meeting was adjourned at 9:08 PM.