Planning Commsission Minutes

TOWN OF SHELBURNE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MEETING
JULY 10, 2003

MEMBERS PRESENT: Rick Peterson, Chairperson; Fred Schmidt, Reg Gignoux, Kay Kraushaar, Chris Neme. (Hilda White and Claude LaPierre were absent.)

STAFF PRESENT: Shannon Courville, Zoning Administrator.

OTHERS PRESENT: Stephen Date, Elaine Date, John Kohler, Larry Bean, Marie Bean, Michele Maresca, Tom Henry, Dave Marshall, Steve Mackenzie, George Faris, Joe Fallon, Russ Capri, Susan Davis (Shelburne News)

AGENDA:  1. Call to Order and Approval of Minutes of June 26, 2003 2. Design Review Application and Site Plan Amendment, Tom Henry/Mountain Cable Communications, 6055 Shelburne Road (DR00-5R & SP00-5R) 3. Presentation: Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission Build-Out Analysis 4. Sketch Plan Review Amendment Continuance, Burlington Drive-In Theatre, Inc./Bullrock Corp./Shelburne Bay Senior Living Community LLC, 185 Pine Haven Shore Road (SUB98-06R3) 5. Expiration of Bay Colony Plat Approval 6. Other Business, Correspondence 7. Adjournment

1. CALL TO ORDER Rick Peterson, Chairperson, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Approval of Minutes of June 26, 2003 MOTION by Reg Gignoux, seconded by Chris Neme, to postpone action on the 6/26/03 minutes until the next meeting. VOTING: unanimous (4-0) [Fred Schmidt not present for vote]; motion carried.

2. DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION AND SITE PLAN AMENDMENT, TOM HENRY/MOUNTAIN CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, 6055 SHELBURNE ROAD (DR00-5R and SP00-5R) Tom Henry appeared on behalf of the applications.

APPLICANT COMMENTS It was noted the applicant is leasing the property from Adelphia. Tom Henry stated no changes to the building or the site are planned. The interior will be repainted. Office space previously used by Adelphia will be used for private piano lessons. There will be three teachers two days/week and two teachers three days/week, mainly in the afternoons through the school year. The summer teaching schedule is very light. Seven parking spaces are needed (one parking space per student per teacher) and one space for the teacher. The garage area will continue as the electronic hub for Adelphia. There will be occasional maintenance at the hub done in the mornings.

STAFF REPORT The Planning Commission received staff reports on the design review application and site plan amendment, dated 7/10/03.

PUBLIC INPUT Marie Bean, neighbor, stated there were many trucks at the site when Adelphia was located there, and the shrubbery that was planted is not being maintained. Also, the generator that was installed is not as was described by Adelphia. The applicant, Mr. Henry, will discuss these matters with Adelphia. Chairman Peterson noted prior approval conditions still apply to the site.

DELIBERATION/DECISION Design Review Application and Site Plan Amendment, Tom Henry/Mountain Cable Communications, 6055 Shelburne Road (DR00-5R & SP00-5R) MOTION by Kay Kraushaar, SECOND by Reg Gignoux, to grant design approval to Tom Henry/Mountain Cable Communications for the use of the building at 6055 Shelburne Road for music instruction in accordance with the plans submitted (DR00-5R). VOTING: unanimous (5-0); motion carried. MOTION by Fred Schmidt, SECOND by Kay Kraushaar, to approve the request that the parking requirement of seven spaces is reasonable. VOTING: unanimous (5-0); motion carried. MOTION by Reg Gignoux, SECOND by Fred Schmidt, to approve the site plan amendment by Tom Henry/Mountain Cable Communications for the property at 6055 Shelburne Road (SP00-5R) in accordance with the plans submitted and with the following conditions: 1. within 60 days of the approval, the property owner shall record a “Memorandum of Municipal Action” with the Shelburne Town Clerk’s Office (this document will notify future property owners of the approval and conditions); 2. previously issued conditions related to the enclosure and screening of the exterior back-up generator on the property shall remain in effect. DISCUSSION: There was discussion of the previous conditions being maintained and enforced or adding conditions to the current approval. The consensus of the Commission was to include Conditions #2 as stated above in the current approval. VOTING: unanimous (5-0); motion carried.

3. PRESENTATION: CCRPC BUILD-OUT ANALYSIS Michelle Maresca, CCRPC, reviewed the results of the build-out analysis for Chittenden County done by the CCRPC. The analysis is a planning tool for the region and municipalities. The form and pattern of development were analyzed as well as what affects development. Ms. Maresca reviewed the objectives and assumptions of the analysis, methods used (identifying existing development and land constraints due to manmade and natural resources), zoning parameters, and development potential. The analysis includes data collected from 2001 to the present. Results indicate the highest residential build out is Burlington, Colchester, So. Burlington, and Williston, and the highest non-residential build out is Colchester, Williston, So. Burlington, and Essex Town. The county is about half way to residential build out (53,000-60,000 units). By 2035 under current zoning policy, the increase in housing demand will be 53,000 units countywide. There will be an increase in employment of 98,000 jobs. The zoning for residential falls short of demand projections, but the zoning is in place for commercial and industrial demands. Ms. Maresca reviewed additional data related to patterns of development, and the net and total potential residential and nonresidential development per zoning districts. For non-residential, 26% has been used to date (Shelburne has the eighth highest density in the region and the eighth greatest build out potential in the region). Due to technical problems, residential numbers were not available at this time. Ms. Maresca will forward this information to the Shelburne Planning Office. How the Regional Build-Out Analysis could be used as a tool for planning was discussed as well as the importance of historical land use information and land use change at the parcel level.

4. SKETCH PLAN REVIEW AMENDMENT CONTINUANCE, BURLINGTON DRIVE-IN THEATRE, INC./BULLROCK CORP./SHELBURNE BAY SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITY LLC, 185 PINE HAVEN SHORE ROAD (SUB98-06R3) Dave Marshall, Steve Mackenzie, George Faris, and Joe Fallon appeared on behalf of the application.

APPLICANT COMMENTS Dave Marshall, Civil Engineering Associates, reviewed the site plan showing the proposed addition to the northwest corner of the existing building. Mr. Marshall noted the existing facility is below Route 7 and essentially not visible. Setback requirements for a PRD were discussed. The project has 467’ of setback versus the required 510’. A waiver is requested. Mr. Marshall urged the Planning Commission to do a site visit for clarity of the proposal. Steve Mackenzie, architect, reviewed drawings and photographs of the facility. The different assisted living settings and uses of the building were also reviewed. The living units are different in terms of size and the nature of the kitchen area. Independent residents are required to take at least one meal from the cafeteria while assisted living residents are provided up to three meals per day. There are common areas shared by the residents to provide more of a residential rather than an institutional feel to the facility. George Faris, attorney, reviewed the zoning regulations, and pointed out the desire for the type of housing being proposed as stated in the town plan. Mr. Faris reviewed the facility (housing for the elderly, some with greater care needs than others), and the residents who are able to get around (ambulatory). Rick Peterson asked if further amendments can be expected in the future for facilities offering the next level of care. George Faris indicated the area would have to be rezoned to allow for that type of housing (nursing home). Mr. Faris pointed out the contradiction in the zoning regulations regarding flexibility with front yard setbacks (Section 1630 and Section 1630.2), and the Planning Commission’s purview to grant a waiver of the setback. Joe Fallon mentioned state statute related to planned residential development, and the flexibility provided with regard to setbacks. There was discussion of making some of the impervious surfaces on the site permeable. There was also discussion of the access roads (Pine Haven Shore Road is mainly the access) and parking (there is an excess now so additional parking may not be needed for the expansion). There are 65 independent living units presently. The proposal is to add 42 additional assisted living units and five independent living units for a total of 112 units on the site. Kay Kraushaar asked the difference between elderly housing and assisted living. George Faris clarified the facility is more than just “old people living in apartments”. There is area for congregate activities. Assisted living residents can do the same, but there is more involvement in the meals portion of the services provided. It was clarified there is no delineation between independent residents and those who need a greater level of care. Medical and nursing home types of services are not provided at the facility. Reg Gignoux asked if VNA or hospice services are provided if requested. It was clarified that residents requiring that type of support are assisted in finding other living arrangements. There was further discussion of assisted care living, independent living for the elderly, “aging in place” living, and national standards. Staff support at Shelburne Bay Senior Living Community includes housekeeping, maintenance, food and dining activities, health services. There are 17 FTE (full time equivalents) for the existing 65 independent units. During dinner, which is the peak time, there are seven staffpersons on-site. With the addition, another seven to 10 staff persons will be needed. There will be more staff available for scheduled and unscheduled health care service needs.

STAFF REPORT There was discussion of staffing requirements, parking, and density. Dimensional requirement per Shelburne’s bylaws is 3,500 s.f. per unit for elderly housing. The application is not strictly elderly housing, but falls into other permitted and conditional uses, stated George Faris. Kay Kraushaar pointed out if the housing is categorized as “elderly housing”, then the site can support 112 units according to the regulations. George Faris stated there is an issue with the staff statement related to a lot area of two acres for other permitted or conditional uses. Past approval for no more than 62 units of elderly without approval from the Zoning Board and Planning Commission was noted. The Commission agreed a site visit would be prudent. The applicant will stake out the building addition and relocated driveway. PUBLIC INPUT Past approval conditions were mentioned as well as input from neighbors. Staff confirmed the hearing was advertised in the newspaper and abutting property owners were notified. Chairman Peterson observed neighbors were not present at the current meeting.

DELIBERATION/DECISION Sketch Plan Amendment, Shelburne Bay Senior Living Community, 185 Pine Haven Shore Road (SUB98-06R3) MOTION by Reg Gignoux, SECOND by Fred Schmidt, to schedule a site visit on Monday, July 14, 2003, at 5:30 p.m. VOTING: unanimous (5-0); motion carried. MOTION by Fred Schmidt, SECOND by Reg Gignoux, to continue the application (SUB98-06R3) until 7/24/03. VOTING: unanimous (5-0); motion carried.

5. EXPIRATION OF BAY COLONY PLAT APPROVAL Russ Capri and another gentleman from the Bay Colony development appeared on behalf of the application. Mr. Capri, president of the Bay Colony Homeowners Association, noted the failure to file the plat within the 90-day required timeframe came to light as a result of a recent real estate closing. The original approval for the development occurred in April, 1989, but the plat was not filed until May, 1990. The development is built, and there have been many closings that have occurred, but this situation was not discovered until now. The state stormwater sewer permit has also expired. The town now owns the road and infrastructure, but runoff comes from house roofs and driveways (private property). Guidance on how to resolve the situation expeditiously and cost effectively is requested. Chairman Peterson advised a final plat hearing will have to be rewarned and a mylar submitted to the office. The applicant should follow up with the Town Planner.

6. OTHER BUSINESS/CORRESPONDENCE There was no other business before the Planning Commission.

7. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Reg Gignoux, SECOND by Fred Schmidt, to adjourn the meeting. VOTING: unanimous (5-0); motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. Minutes transcribed from videotape and respectfully submitted by M.Riordan, Recording Secretary.