Selectboard Meeting Minutes

TOWN OF SHELBURNE SELECTBOARD
MINUTES OF MEETING
0CT0BER 12, 2004

MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Dates, Chairperson; Jim Dudley, Lisa Levine, Chris Neme.

ADMINISTRATION: Paul Bohne, Town Manager; Peter Frankenburg, Financial Officer.

OTHERS PRESENT: Jim Talley, Will Dodge, Abdoula Kebbeh, Rich Ranaldo, Patrick O’Brien, Rick Peterson, Susan Elderton, Mark Snelling, Michelle Zimmerman (Burlington Free Press); Sue Davis (Shelburne News), and others.

1. CALL TO ORDER

Mr. Dates, Chairperson, called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Add the following items: Item 6b - Windmill discussion; Item 15 - Executive Session.

3. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION

None.

4. UPDATE ON PROGRESS OF THE US ROUTE 7 RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

Rich Ranaldo, Route 7 Reconstruction Project Manager, provided a public relations brochure that included a public survey requesting public input on the project and VTrans/project contractor contact information. The brochure will be sent to residents and businesses within a half mile of the project, and available at Town Hall. Website address: www.us7shelburneroad.com. Consultant e-mail address: us7-alert@dufresne-henry.com. Mr. Ranaldo reported that the project is on schedule. There is one change related to the Bay Road box culvert which was moved to the next construction season. The contractor will work through Thanksgiving. Mr. Ranaldo reported the contractor is blasting ledge and crushing rock on-site at the Rt. 7/Webster Road jughandle. The crushed rock is used as a sub-base for the roadway. Traffic has been diverted to the east lane and work is progressing on the west lane, including installation of the road underpinnings, the sewer line and storm drains. The roadway should be paved just south of Bay Road by this fall. The east side will be worked on next year. Soil is being stockpiled across from Jelly Mill Commons. A new driveway is being installed at the Commons. The proposed traffic light at the jughandle may be operational by next fall. There are weekly meetings held on Thursdays, 10:00 a.m. The public is invited to attend the meetings. Lisa Levine expressed concern about safety in the area south of the left turn at the top of Webster Road/Rt. 7. Mr. Ranaldo will review the area. Mr. Ranaldo noted that traffic control personnel, head inspectors and contractors were cognizant of communication and cooperation between the South Burlington and Shelburne projects to keep the traffic flowing. Mr. Dudley suggested turning off traffic signal lights when a traffic control person is at an intersection to minimize driver confusion. Jim Talley, resident, asked if J.A. MacDonald, contractor, will be leaving any open excavations during the winter hiatus. Mr. Ranaldo explained the contractors are required to leave any excavations in a safe condition over the winter as well as during the on-going construction season. Sue Davis complimented J.A. MacDonald on the exemplary job in maintaining a clean job site.

5. THREE-YEAR EXTENSION OF SEWER ALLOCATION FOR RIVERCREST ESTATES

Patrick O’Brien, O’Brien Bothers, explained the three-year sewer allocation extension request. Applications have been submitted for construction of a water supply system and permitting is being pursued as well. MOTION by Mr. Dudley, seconded by Ms. Levine, to extend the three-year sewer allocation to O’Brien Bothers, dba Rivercrest Estates, as presented/requested. VOTE: unanimous (4-0); motion carried.

6. PRESENTATION OF ISSUES CONCERNING CONTINUED TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICE USING THE SOUTH WATER TANK AND/OR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MONOPOLE TOWER ON THE MECHWIN PROPERTY

Mr. Bohne briefly reviewed the current temporary three-year agreement between the Town of Shelburne and three wireless carriers on the south water tank near Shelburne Industries. The carriers must make a “good faith” effort to move the antenna off the tank. Will Dodge, RCC Atlantic, Unicel, stated leases and permits were signed in the spring of 2002. Not much work has been done to explore alternate sites. In 2003, Unicel tried to institute a collaboration between the five operating telecommunication companies, and contacted different landowners regarding potential sites. Giant Solutions was hired to analyze the sites. A report was done. Mechwin Corporation is the only willing landowner. There are a few sites on the Mechwin property where a tower could be located. RCC is at a height of 75’on the water tower currently, and if re-located, must have as good coverage as presently. The study shows that the next best site will provide 57% coverage, which is a dramatic loss of coverage. RCC assumes the Town will want all five carriers on the same tower. The carriers need at least 10’ of vertical separation between antennas. This will result in a 140’ monopole at the Mechwin Corporation. Each carrier will be allowed three antennas, flush-mounted to the pole. A 140’ monopole will be within sight of Route 7, and it has been determined that FAA-approved lighting of the monopole is needed due to the proximity of the airport. Gypsum Engineering, specializing in FAA regulations and hazard markings, has determined the proposed pole fails the slope test by 85’. Abduola Kebbeh, engineer, explained the FAA study that included aircraft landing and flight patterns, airport location, and potential FAA instructions regarding pole lighting and markings. Due to the location of a potential tower on the Mechwin Corporation property, the FAA can expect permanent lighting. Mr. Dodge said part of the FAA determination is what type of aircraft utilizes the airport. White and red markings are at least likely. RCC has asked for a legal opinion from the Shelburne Town Attorney (Steve Stitzel) regarding proceeding with the Mechwin property or the need to wait for a FAA determination. Mr. Stitzel said RCC could proceed with permitting and attempt to ask the FAA to use the most minimal lighting, stated Mr. Dodge. Mr. Bohne showed a map of the proposed area including the airport location. Mark Snelling explained landing and take off patterns at the airstrip and the proposed pole site. There was lengthy discussion regarding the current height of the water tank (75’) versus a 140’ monopole with the five carriers (Mr. Kebbeh said that a multi-tenant platform would still require horizontal separation distances), visual impacts due to markings and lighting a monopole (anything over 54’ would require marking or lighting), the potential for two more telecommunications carriers locating on the water tank (Mr. Dodge noted that one carrier was interested, but it was unclear if Verizon was interested), and what the Town was obligated to provide with regard to space for telecommunication companies. Mr. Kebbeh explained that each antenna array must point in a particular direction, and if all five companies are on the tower, space requirements mean increased height. The water tower space is limited. Mr. Bohne reported that US Cellular indicated they could put an antenna on the tank and get the service desired if a 20’ section was added. Lisa Levine asked if additional companies could locate on a shorter pole elsewhere as a possible solution. Mr. Bohne stated the economics of locating two carriers on a monopole is not known. It is expensive to go through the permit and Act 250 processes. Mr. Dodge said that regarding Act 250, new towns look to see if a carrier can use existing towers. Carriers are willing to build a monopole, but to get through the Act 250 process, a strong policy statement saying the Town supports the carriers is needed. Mr. Bohne pointed out if the Town added 20’ to the water tower, Act 250 review would be triggered. In response to a question about new technological improvements, Mr. Kebbeh said the only new improvement is a reduction from one-direction, three-antenna array to one antenna. Mr. Dates asked if the current configuration (separate company antenna) could be consolidated to one antenna receiving, sorting, and sending signals to each individual carrier. Mr. Kebbeh explained each carrier receives signals on different frequencies. The systems are all different. Mr. Dodge stated that the current panel antenna (1’x 4’x 8’) is the best technology currently. All carriers try to have small arrays without many sites, but macro sites will continue. Ms. Levine asked if the current three carriers on the water tank would consider cost sharing a monopole for two new carriers. Mr. Dodge presumed any company would be able to raise capital. The arrangement is possible, but it is hard to get five organizations to work together. There was further discussion of FCC regulations related to specific tower locations and heights, Telecommunication Board hearings (Mr. Bohne noted that the Telecommunication Board will have a hard time denying an application if it meets specifications), Act 250 and appeal processes (abutters or those with a tower in their viewscape can appeal a decision to the Environmental Court), and a profile of radio frequencies (Mr. Dodge said that a study conducted last fall showed exposure was 30% lower than the guidelines). Mr. Kebbeh said there are three-pairs of antenna pointing in three different directions for a total of 6 radios at 10 watts per radio. Mr. Neme asked for an estimate of the cost of a monopole. Mr. Dodge said $1 million may be realistic (the cost includes permitting). A smaller tower would cost less. A 140’ monopole is similar to the Williston dispatch tower. The carriers are seeking a clear statement of the preferred option from the Town (two more carriers on the water tank or construction of a 140’ monopole on the Mechwin property). Mr. Dates noted if changes are needed to the current ordinance, a public hearing is required. Mr. Dodge read a section of the current ordinance related setbacks being “subject to technical review” and being “100’ from human habitat”. Mr. Bohne said the Water Commission is concerned about carriers locating on the water tank relative to maintenance issues. The tank must be repainted every 20 years. Water Commission input should be solicited. Every antenna must have a bracket welded onto the tank and cable trays welded up the side of the tank as well. Mr. Dudley suggested the alternate option of two monopoles at less than 140’. Mr. Kebbeh reiterated RCC has adequate coverage at 75’. Two carriers with three antennas at 75’ and a circular boom could be done. Anything above 54’ must be marked which means two towers marked and/or lighted. Mr. Dates suggested all carriers would benefit if a sixth “managing” company was formed. Mr. Dodge pointed out in the suggested scenario one company would have access to the FCC licenses and have monopoly control. FCC regulations do not allow trading licenses. RCC can provide an explanation as to why this can not be done. Mr. Dates summarized the options: stay with the current agreement or remove carriers from the water tank. Further information from the carriers and additional public input is needed by the Selectboard before a decision is made.

6.b) WIND TURBINE REQUEST

Rick Peterson, Shelburne Planning Commission Chairperson, explained the wind turbine application by Jonathan Fishman, Quaker Smith Point, as outlined in the Selectboard’s informational packet. The Public Service Board (PSB) invites comments from the Shelburne Planning Commission and Selectboard. Power generated by the turbine will feed into the public power grid as a public service so the PSB rather than the local board will hear the application. The amount of power generated is not clear. The Planning Commission identified concerns about location on the waterfront and visual impacts. The Planning Commission decided to petition the PSB to conduct a hearing to allow comments. The Selectboard is requested to join in the request for a public hearing. Mr. Neme calculated a 10-kilowatt windmill generates enough power to serve one or two houses. When electricity is not being used, it would go to the public grid. MOTION by Mr. Dudley, seconded by Mr. Neme, to join with the Shelburne Planning Commission and to authorize the Town Attorney to request the Public Service Board conduct a public hearing on the application for a wind turbine on Quaker Smith Point. DISCUSSION: Mr. Dates reported a letter was received from Sam Webb noting concern he was not notified of the application. VOTE: unanimous (4-0); motion carried.

7. AMENDMENTS TO THE MOTOR VEHICLE ORDINANCE 

First Reading Mr. Bohne reviewed previous discussion/presentation of safety and parking concerns along Falls Road and Church Street. Letters regarding proposed changes to the Motor Vehicle Ordinance were sent to the four affected property owners and the church. The proposed changes will potentially eliminate 20 parking spaces. It was discovered the funeral home has 20 parking spaces behind the building. There was discussion of a potential sidewalk on Church Street which could be done in the next construction season, a pedestrian crosswalk near the Falls Road/Church Street intersection, roadway widths, and proposed changes to parking along Falls Road. Mr. Bohne said staff will draft a letter to residents and the craft school saying the Town will be installing parking signs and businesses should work with customers to not park on the sidewalks. A ban on parking is not an option. Parking is critical to the success of businesses. Removing 20 parking spaces will negatively impact businesses. Mr. Bohne explained the proposed changes to parking along School Street that included no parking on the east side, bus parking at the school, nose-in parking on school property and no parking on the west side at the corner to the second entrance at Davis Park. Signage will be added to keep parking away from the intersections. Parking will be allowed on the west side of School Street. It is expected people will park on Harbor Road and Turtle Lane. Mr. Neme questioned whether the changes will create new problems, and if residents were notified of the proposed ordinance changes. Mr. Bohne replied no additional letters were sent out. Ms. Levine said that the Newbury Cup was scheduled for the weekend, and asked if the Town will have police directing traffic at the event. Mr. Dates asked if a response has been received from VTrans regarding use of the commuter rail station parking lot. Mr. Bohne reported a letter was received from Anne Candon, VTrans, but it was unclear what could be done with the station parking lot at this time. MOTION by Mr. Neme, seconded by Mr. Dudley, to warn a public hearing on 10/26/04 on the proposed changes to the Motor Vehicle Ordinance. DISCUSSION: Susan Elderton, Falls Road resident, pointed out her house is on the west side of the art gallery, and at times, it is necessary to park in front of her fence. Ms. Elderton asked if the parking ordinance will impact her property. Mr. Bohne explained if the property owner is parking on their own property rather than in the Town’s right-of-way, then there is no issue. Currently, there is no parking on (Ms. Elderton’s) side of Falls Road. VOTE: unanimous (4-0); motion carried.

8. LIQUOR LICENSE FOR CUCINA ANTICA

The Selectboard signed the liquor license application for an existing restaurant, formerly Soltera’s, for a sign change to “Cucina Antica”.

9. MEMBERSHIP IN THE VERMONT COALITION OF MUNICIPALITIES

Lisa Levine provided a report on Vermont Coalition of Municipalities (VCM) goals and objectives relative to changing the impacts of Act 60. It was noted the handout is dated 1998 and the website is out-of-date. It was felt Act 60 issues have been addressed with the passage of Act 68. The Board questioned the direction of VCM. There was discussion of the interest by the towns of Killington and Manchester to secede from Vermont to join New Hampshire, Act 68 impacts and concerns, a payment of $250 for a two-month membership rather than joining after January 1, 2005 for the next legislative session, and concern that the Legislature would not pursue changes to Act 68 without a push from the coalition or other organization. Ms. Levine volunteered to attend the VCM statewide meeting on 10/28/04, 1-4 p.m., in Rutland. Mr. Dudley suggested finding out if other towns will be attending. Mr. Neme questioned how VCM decides a position and expressed concern about the organization representing Shelburne’s position.

10. REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM PENALTY FOR LATE PAYMENT

MOTION by Ms. Levine, seconded by Mr. Neme, to waive penalty of $81.74 for late payment of property taxes by Darienne Oaks, 516 Acorn Lane, as presented. DISCUSSION: Ms. Levine observed if the bank gave a refund of the overdraft fee, there must be legitimacy to the linking of funds (as noted in the letter). Mr. Dates clarified a bank will give a refund to keep an account. Account linking is an unclear issue. Mr. Frankenburg said the check was returned for insufficient funds. Ms. Oaks called and said to resubmit the check which staff did last week. It is not known if the check has cleared yet. Mr. Neme spoke in favor of the motion, noting the Oaks made a good faith effort and are in good standing with the Town. Mr. Neme supported giving the benefit of doubt. Mr. Dates asked how the Town will handle the situation should the check be returned again. Mr. Frankenburg said the Town will assess penalty and interest again. Mr. Neme suggested adding a condition to the motion. CALL THE QUESTION by Mr. Dates. Discussion ceased. VOTE: unanimous (4-0); motion carried.

11. FIRST QUARTER GENERAL FUND BUDGET STATUS REPORT

The Selectboard was provided with three status reports on the First Quarter General Fund budget. Mr. Frankenburg reported Town departments are within budget at this time. A monthly summary can be forwarded to the Board if necessary. Mr. Dates said the Board should forward budget targets to Town staff by the next Selectboard meeting. On another matter, Mr. Frankenburg reported the Police Department apprehended the cemetery vandals. While the Town was arguing with the insurance company about coverage and liability, the Town Cemetery and Highway departments collaborated to repair the damage and fix 19 stones at a cost of $1,000, including labor. Mr. Frankenburg praised staff and volunteers for taking action and getting the job done at a minimal cost. Mr. Frankenburg said some homeowner policies cover this type of damage, but it is questionable whether the families can be found.

12. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

MOTION by Mr. Neme, seconded by Mr. Dudley, to approve the minutes of the Special Selectboard meeting of 09/21/04 with the attachments submitted by Ms. Levine. VOTE: unanimous (4-0); motion carried. MOTION by Mr. Dudley, seconded by Mr. Neme, to approve the Selectboard minutes of 09/28/04 with the following corrections: Page 1 – delete the last sentence which reads: “There were no further comments.”; Page 4, agenda item #8, last sentence - change to read: “… suggested that a recording secretary take and post minutes of all special Selectboard meetings.” VOTE: unanimous (4-0); motion carried.

13. MANAGER’S REPORT Mr. Bohne reported on the following: • The Police Department apprehended the cemetery vandals who are being processed. • Local students and Nature Conservancy members worked together to eradicate invasive species, such as Buckthorn, and introducing a beetle that eats purple loosestrife. The collaboration is a successful on-going program in Shelburne. • The Board will review contract language between the Town and a local union for future discussion. Mr. Neme requested a summary of key points and implications.

14. MEMBER CONCERNS

Mr. Neme asked if a meeting was planned on the sewer ordinance review. Mr. Dates suggested one or two Board members (Mr. Neme and Mr. Dates) review and summarize a review as prep work for a full Board discussion. Basic issues include current state allocation and the ripple effect, capacity projections time frame, revisiting the 10 percent set aside language, and the sewer district. Mr. Dates reported the tennis court project is complete. There is concern about skateboarders and bikes riding on the new courts. Rules are being posted. Citizens should contact the Town staff if there are problems. The final cost of the courts is under budget. Mr. Dates said a Bishop Road resident complained of speeding on Bishop Road. Stripping could be an inexpensive form of traffic calming. If the road is striped narrower and shifted over, a walking lane might be possible. Mr. Bohne reported that the day after the complaint was received, the Police Department patrolled the road for over weight trucks and speeding. There were some minor infractions, but no major speeders. In order to shift the yellow strips, the existing markings would have to be removed and redone at an added cost. Two 11-foot travel lanes can be stripped. In order to lower speed limits, conditions must warrant the request (the request is made to the state). Only one complaint (call) was received so it is unclear if there is a problem.

15. EXECUTIVE SESSION

MOTION by Mr. Dudley, seconded by Mr. Neme, to enter Executive Session for the purpose of discussing personnel matters where premature knowledge will place the Town at a disadvantage, and to invite the Town Manager to attend. VOTE: unanimous (4-0); motion carried. Executive Session wad convened at 10:00 p.m. MOTION by , seconded by , to adjourn Executive Session and reconvene the regular meeting. VOTE:

16. ADJOURNMENT

MOTION by , seconded by , to adjourn the meeting. VOTE: unanimous; motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at p.m.

Minutes respectfully submitted by Kathlyn Furr, Recording Secretary.
Accepted, Stephen B. Dates Chairman

TOWN of SHELBURNE SELECTBOARD
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING
OCTOBER 13, 2004

Members Present: Steve Dates, Jim Dudley, Lisa Levine, Chris Neme Shelburne Natural Resources and Conservation Committee Members Present: Andrea Van Hoven, Bill White, Gail Albert, Laurel Neme

Staff Present: Paul Bohne, Town Manager; Dean Pierce, Director of Planning

Others Present: Bill Hoadley, Bev Jacobson, John Hazen, Dick Reid, Thea Platt

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Dates at 7:00 P.M. in the Shelburne Town Center Meeting Room. This was a work session meeting with the Shelburne Natural Resources and Conservation Committee on the draft Town of Shelburne Open Space Plan. Time frame to finish the work - end of December. Section 7.5.3 Reviewed by Gail Albert - 3rd bullet needs reworking - 1st paragraph needs to be clearer as to what the trigger is and what features apply. Possibly PUD’s could be mandated for certain sized development. Maps could be grouped in the Town Plan and referenced in the Open Space Plan. - Recommendation from SNRCC - should become part of process for SNRCC to provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission. - How can the Planning Commission set density because of natural resources or reduce Project Development Envelope (PDE)? Section 7.5.4 General agreement on concept. May be added to 7.5.3 instead of a separate section. Needs to be clear that density bonus is within PDE. - There may be 3 types of open space. Needs to be some definition of each; maybe add adjectives for clarification. Section 7.5.5 Is “sensitive areas” same as “significant natural resources?” References need to be specific. Section 7.8 Consider mandating management plans for land not under development or invested in Page 2 / Special Selectboard Minutes / 10/13/04 by Town funds, but development rights have been sold and covenants placed on land. Section 7.5.6 What is appropriate distance? Could a PRD be triggered next to operating farms? Should farmer establish larger buffers near development? Should number and scope of residential projects be restricted near operating farms?

The date of the next meeting was set: Monday, October 25, 2004, 7:00 P.M., Shelburne Town Center. The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 P.M.

Respectfully submitted, Paul W. Bohne III
Approved, Stephen B. Dates Chairman

TOWN OF SHELBURNE SELECTBOARD
 MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING
OCTOBER  25, 2004

Members Present: Steve Dates, Jim Dudley, Lisa Levine, Chris Neme Shelburne Natural Resources and Conservation Committee
Members Present: Andrea Van Hoven, Bill White, Sean MacFaden, Kevin Kenlan, and Gail Albert
Staff Present: Paul Bohne, Town Manager; Dean Pierce, Director of Planning

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Dates at 7:00 P.M. in the Shelburne Town Center Meeting Room. This was a work session meeting with the Shelburne Natural Resources and Conservation Committee on the draft Town of Shelburne Open Space Plan. Section 7.5.7 - Buffers Question arose about referring only to mapped features or additionally delineated wetlands. A point was raised about looking at areas that could be identified with less than a 200 ft. buffer as part of the plan for streams. Could an exemption be granted when development proves that it would not negatively impact stream? Section 7.5.8 - Stormwater Question as to implementation which would likely be recommended as part of a stormwater ordinance. Dean clarified that language was taken from the NOI. It was recommended to introduce the section by referring to the NOI. Section 7.5.9 The Town would use a software program for modeling. Section 7.5.10 Begin paragraph with reference to multi-sector General Permit. A clearer delineation of the areas impacted by this section. This section should be related to other stormwater sections. Section 7.5.11 Recommendation should be to develop a community master plan for all utilities. Section7.5.12 A reference could be made to a Town effort to address lighting. The section should be shortened. Page 2 / Special Selectboard Minutes / 10/25/04 7.6.1 The SNRCC may ask for increased budget for special programs. 7.6.4 Access should be Agricultural Use of Conserved Land. 7.8 Management plans for land that has no Town participation. Discussion evolved around re-prioritization and focus of direction for future purchases. Items to be considered for change: ­ Definition of “Inventory.” ­ Executive Summary needs to be . ­ Use definition of “open space” consistently. SNRCC will redo the Document prior to another meeting.

The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m.

Respectfully submitted, Paul W. Bohne III
Approved, Stephen B. Dates Chairman

DRAFT TOWN OF SHELBURNE SELECTBOARD
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING
OCTOBER 13, 2004

Members Present: Steve Dates, Jim Dudley, Lisa Levine, Chris Neme Shelburne Natural Resources and Conservation Committee
Members Present: Andrea Van Hoven, Bill White, Gail Albert, Laurel Neme Staff Present: Paul Bohne, Town Manager; Dean Pierce, Director of Planning Others Present: Bill Hoadley, Bev Jacobson, John Hazen, Dick Reid, Thea Platt

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Dates at 7:00 P.M. in the Shelburne Town Center Meeting Room. This was a work session meeting with the Shelburne Natural Resources and Conservation Committee on the draft Town of Shelburne Open Space Plan. Time frame to finish the work - end of December. Section 7.5.3 Reviewed by Gail Albert - 3rd bullet needs reworking - 1st paragraph needs to be clearer as to what the trigger is and what features apply. Possibly PUD’s could be mandated for certain sized development. Maps could be grouped in the Town Plan and referenced in the Open Space Plan. - Recommendation from SNRCC - should become part of process for SNRCC to provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission. - How can the Planning Commission set density because of natural resources or reduce Project Development Envelope (PDE)? Section 7.5.4 General agreement on concept. May be added to 7.5.3 instead of a separate section. Needs to be clear that density bonus is within PDE. - There may be 3 types of open space. Needs to be some definition of each; maybe add adjectives for clarification. Section 7.5.5 Is “sensitive areas” same as “significant natural resources?” References need to be specific. Section 7.8 Consider mandating management plans for land not under development or invested in Page 2 / Special Selectboard Minutes / 10/13/04 by Town funds, but development rights have been sold and covenants placed on land. Section 7.5.6 What is appropriate distance? Could a PRD be triggered next to operating farms? Should farmer establish larger buffers near development? Should number and scope of residential projects be restricted near operating farms?

The date of the next meeting was set: Monday, October 25, 2004, 7:00 P.M., Shelburne Town Center.

The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 P.M.
Respectfully submitted, Paul W. Bohne III
Approved, Stephen B. Dates Chairman

TOWN OF SHELBURNE SELECTBOARD
MINUTES OF MEETING
0CT0BER 26, 2004

MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Dates, Chairperson; Jim Dudley, Lisa Levine, Chris Neme. ADMINISTRATION: Paul Bohne, Town Manager; Peter Frankenburg, Financial Officer.
OTHERS PRESENT: Ruth Rothenberger, Dan Rothenberger, Stephen Selin, Dick Reid, Bruce Beeken, Judith Selin, Christine Armstrong, Sue Dixon, Alice Brown, Gwen Webster, Sue Davis (Shelburne News), and others.

1. CALL TO ORDER

Mr. Dates, Chairperson, called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. and opened the public hearing on amending the parking ordinance with regard to Falls Road and School Street. PUBLIC HEARING – Parking Ordinance Amendment, affecting a portion of Falls Road and all of School Street. Mr. Bohne reviewed maps of Falls Road and School Street and gave a brief history of current parking zones relative to the proposed parking ordinance amendments. State statutes prohibit parking 15’ from street corners. Signs will be posted on the corners of School Street. Parking on both sides of School Street, if allowed, would reduce the street to one lane of travel. PUBLIC COMMENT Alice Brown, resident, mentioned the crosswalk south of Davis Park and the southern school entrance, and encouraged the town not to allow parking near crosswalks. Mr. Bohne pointed out there is a 30’ buffer zone from the crosswalk to the first parking space. Ms. Brown stated that currently there is no parking along the west side of the road in front of the school or on either side of the road. Ms. Brown spoke her preference for no parking at all if the intent of the ordinance change is to increase parking. There are existing signs that say “No Parking” right up to the Creekside entrance and signage on the east side of the road. Ms. Brown commented that the temporary “No Parking” signs erected during the Newbury Cup were effective. Dan Rothenberger, resident, stated the south entrance to the condominium complex is dangerous. Dick Reid, Harbor Crossing resident, explained that Harbor Crossing has a common boundary with the middle school (near the south school entrance). A map of the area was provided to the Board. Mr. Reid pointed out the locations of the adjacent school, school parking, and school crosswalks. There are several signs on the west side of Davis Park stating “No Parking This Side of Street, and “No Parking Between Signs”. Mr. Reid spoke in support of maintaining the no parking zones which include school buses and passenger cars, and suggested tabling the proposed ordinance amendment to allow time to revisit the drafted amendment. “No parking” could be waived during events, suggested Mr. Reid. Mr. Neme asked if the Town can issue tickets since the area is already posted. Mr. Bohne stated the signs were posted without an enforcement ordinance. There was lengthy discussion regarding parking along School Street, which should be clearly posted, and encouraging parking at Davis Park and Turtle Lane. Sue Dixon, resident, suggested placing planters or installing curbs along Falls Road to prevent drivers from parking on sidewalks or from traveling too close to the sidewalks. There is no comfort barrier between the sidewalk and Falls Road and cars are traveling in excess of 35 mph, observed Ms. Dixon. A resident stated parents need to take responsibility for parking at the school, and suggested sending fliers home that promote car pooling. Mr. Dates summarized public comments as follows: School Street • No parking either side of School Street down to Davis Avenue. • Nose-in parking in the school circle versus parallel parking. • Special event parking (20 spaces on the west side of School Street). • Aggressive ticketing. Falls Road • Allow parking on the east side of Falls Road. • Two step solution – ordinance and capital budget to address proposed improvements. • Church Street concerns related to parking, which could be banned, and addressing parking on the sidewalk along the LaPlatte walking area. • Stripe a 10’ wide parking zone to delineate where the travel lane is versus parking space. • Curbing is a capital project. • No parking north from Church Street on the east side to the fire hydrant. • Parking is currently allowed from the fire hydrant to the Shelburne Shopping entrance, but the road is narrow so shifting the middle yellow stripes over to the west, painting/marking a parking lane on the east and preventing sidewalk parking is suggested. • Suggested solutions to the Church Street/Falls Road crosswalk - install a sidewalk along the north side of Church Street and stripe a crosswalk on the north side of Church Street across Falls Road or place a four foot square cement pad on the southeast corner of the parade green or a temporary crosswalk to the south side of Church Street. Mr. Bohne said notifications were sent to property and business owners announcing signage will be posted to prohibit parking on the sidewalks and violators will be ticketed. The signs will not say “No Parking”. There were no further comments. The public hearing was closed and the regular meeting reconvened.

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Changes to the agenda include: Item 6 (Union Contract) to be considered before Item 5 (Budget Meeting Schedule); Add 7.b - Road Name Approval.

3. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION

Mr. Dates asked for a moment of silence in memory of Barbara “Bibs” Francis.

Stephen Selin suggested lowering the speed limit within the village to 25 mph and adding crosswalks where needed. Mr. Selin said three of his family pets have been killed on the road. The situation is dangerous. Mr. Selin provided materials showing statistics on speed related deaths and information on Vermont statutes empowering selectboards to set speed limits in their towns without traffic studies. Mr. Bohne explained that every road in Shelburne had a speed limit set according to ordinance. Harbor Road is the only road set at 25 mph because of the school. The town can petition the state to change a speed limit on a state highway (Route 7 is not a local maintained highway). Mr. Bohne suggested exploring speed limits as a future agenda item. Christine Armstrong, Bishop Road resident, asked for town support in slowing traffic on Bishop Road. Mr. Selin reiterated that state statute as noted in the handout addresses a municipality’s ability to deal with speed on a state highway. -Dick Reid, Harbor Crossing resident, read a written statement, dated 10/26/04, regarding questions related to the current VELCO Northwest Reliability Project, a potential Meach Cove Trust/VELCO agreement, and if a proposed substation would be moved out of the flood plain or wetlands. Mr. Reid noted the deadline to file a final brief is November 8, 2004. Mr. Dates said the Town was not aware of any agreement at this time. Regarding the substation, there has not been a request to move it ‘far away’, but an area at the northwest corner of the Blodgett property was reviewed. There are wetlands on the Blodgett property. The transmission line will be moved, but nothing has been agreed to by VELCO regarding poles or distribution lines. The Town has requested the lines be buried on the northern edge of the LaPlatte conservation preserve land. Burial of four out of six miles of lines is speculative and there is an associated cost.

4. CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE AMENDMENTS TO THE TOWN PARKING ORDINANCE

Mr. Bohne stated the proposed parking zone change to the School Street area is a significant change which must be re-warned. Regarding Falls Road, it has been suggested to further explore a potential Church Street sidewalk/crosswalk (this will eliminate 20 additional parking spaces as a buffer zone). A crosswalk on the north side to an “L” pad is a temporary solution. The Town can ban parking. It is unclear what dividing barriers can be, but they should be esthetically pleasing. Lines can be painted in the spring. Mr. Bohne said the Selectboard can take action now or revisit the draft amendments. Mr. Neme advised the solution to the parking or crosswalk issue should tie into the Town Plan. MOTION by Mr. Neme, seconded by Mr. Dudley, to adopt the proposed Parking Ordinance Amendment, paragraphs 2J and 2P, as presented, and to defer paragraph 2Q to a second reading at the Selectboard meeting on 11/9/04. VOTE: unanimous (4-0); motion carried.

5. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE 2004-2009 UNION CONTRACT

Mr. Bohne reviewed major issues in the draft Union Contract for Shelburne Police Department, Dispatch, Water and Waste Water Department employees. The contract will impact the current year budget General Fund by $20,000, adding one-half cent to the water rate and one-cent to the waste water rate. Mr. Dates pointed out the current selectboard can not commit a future selectboard to budget increases related to merit pay components. Mr. Bohne stated the Town will be obligated to act on the full contract. There was further discussion of contractual issues, concerns about the monetary amount being unknown, and merit pay details that would be unknown until a future date. Mr. Bohne pointed out that a merit-based system is in place now, and a prescribed formula could be run through a model. Ms. Levine asked if other towns used a step function. Mr. Bohne said that a comparison was done using data from surrounding towns and Shelburne was slipping behind. There is concern about the possibility of losing good employees. Re-training costs are high and represent a significant investment. MOTION by Mr. Dudley, seconded by Ms. Levine, to accept the proposed American Federal, State, County and Municipal Employees, Council 93, AFL-CO, Local 1343, Union Contract, dated July 1, 2004 to June 30, 2009,. Shelburne Town Employees Chapter 8 as presented. VOTE: unanimous (4-0); motion carried.

6. DISCUSSIN OF BUDGET MEETING SCHEDULE AND SETTING FY 2006 BUDGET TARGETS.

Budget Meeting Schedule December 21, 2004 January 4, 2005 January 18, 2005 January 24, 2005 (joint Selectboard/School Board budget meeting) Staff will invite interested parties to attend the first three budget meetings to gather opinions/input. FY2006 Budget Targets Mr. Dates reviewed the draft budget including salary and benefit changes, expenditures, debt management, bond items, and revenues. Items to explore are capital projects and opportunities to increase revenue via dispatch coverage to neighboring towns. Mr. Dated noted stormwater management costs are not included. An “Open Space” line item is included, but will be pulled out as a separate article.

7. REVIEW OF THE SEWER CAPACITY ALLOCATION ORDINANCE

Mr. Dates provided copies of the Sewer Ordinance summary. Areas identified for review include Section 2b - capacity related to a projected 20-year life span of the treatment plants and Vermont state changes. Mr. Bohne explained allocations are set at 360 gpd for a three-bedroom house, but with the state changes, the average is 200 gallons per unit versus 480 gallons. The Town can allocate more gallons per three-year allocation period, and can approve more units per allocation. The cycle corrects itself every three years. Mr. Dates commented that extending the life of the treatment plants will allow the Town to take in more revenue, but it is unclear if the town will be allowed to do this. Mr. Dates said the sewer service area was also revisited. The build-out survey anticipated 1,800 homes. Capacity today is predicated for what was licensed at the treatment plants by the state. If the infiltration issues are fixed, capacity will increase as well. Further investigation of the impact of maintaining the current sewer service area or expanding it is needed. The consensus of the Selectboard is more information is needed for a further discussion. Mr. Neme commented a regional build-out analysis is useful, but the analysis shows that currently 80% of the build-out is within the sewer service district. Providing 210 gallons to 1,400 units each reaches capacity. It needs to be determined when to reach maximum build out (20 years, 30 years). Mr. Bohne noted that commercial/industrial usage was not included in the review. Mr. Neme stated the 10% set aside (capacity reserve) language does not actually reserve capacity, but “folds back” the amount into the total for use. The criteria should be revisited. Attachment B should show residential and commercial amounts in gallonage versus percentage, suggested Mr. Neme. The categories in the sewer service area were reviewed. Mr. Neme suggested adding gallonage in the set aside pool. The three-year allocation schedule was reviewed as well as how the 10% set aside is calculated. Set aside and industrial allocations become smaller and smaller each three-year cycle, observed Mr. Neme, adding what is not used should roll back to the plant. Also, there should be a history of what was approved in the past. Mr. Neme summarized that policy updates, language clarification, and review of the process are needed.

7.b. ROAD NAME APPROVAL

Mr. Frankenburg explained that two properties, 709 and 700 Bishop Road, are being subdivided which triggered the need for a road name. “Phillips Lane” is the proposed road name. MOTION by Mr. Dudley, seconded by Ms. Levine, to approve the road name of “Phillips Lane” off of Bishop Road as requested by the property owners. DISCUSSION: Mr. Neme recalled past discussion of the length of the driveway (2,000’) versus access from Beaver Creek Road. Mr. Dates said impact to the existing wetlands would have been greater than the proposed driveway. VOTE: unanimous (4-0); motion carried.

8. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

MOTION by Mr. Neme, seconded by Mr. Dudley, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting 10/12/04 and the special meeting of 10/13/04 with the following corrections/additions: 10/12/04 regular meeting minutes Page 6, Item 9 - add a sentence to read: “The VCM direction still is promoting education revenue sharing based on town income versus property taxes.”; Page 7, last paragraph, 2nd sentence – correct the spelling of “striping”. 10/13/04 special meeting minutes Globally correct the spelling of “John Hasen”. VOTE: unanimous (4-0); motion carried. 9. MANAGER’S REPORT Mr. Bohne reported on the following: • The Hazlett mooring system used by the Town since 1995 requires updating. There was one mooring failure this summer. Hazlett has improved the system over the years and offered to change out the entire system in order to test new equipment at less than their cost to manufacture the system. Dan Couture is inventorying the moorings for replacement. The Bay Park fund ($13,000) will be used to pay for the change out. Staff recommends spending approximately $10,000, including the purchase of new buoys. Mr. Dudley asked if the Town is liable for damages from a loose boat or if a release is signed by the boat owner. Staff will research this matter. Mr. Bohne reviewed the mooring fee structure which was increased to be competitive. • There was a resignation in the police department due to an injury. • Candidates for the position of Public Works Director have been narrowed down. Staff will interview remaining candidates on 11/12/04.

10. MEMBER CONCERNS

Mr. Neme reported on the update of the Town plan. Consultant, Michael Munson, was hired to assist the process. The committee was currently working on the Volume II vision statement. The next meeting is Thursday, 11/18/04. Discussion will include the redraft of the overarching vision statement for the village core area. The Selectboard is invited to attend the meeting. Mr. Dudley reported VTrans indicated the path was too close to the railroad tracks. The Paths Committee is exploring alternatives regarding the encroachment issue (mitigation or pursuing the current route). Mr. Dudley reported the MPO budget increased five percent with an estimated $5,500 Shelburne portion. Shelburne gets credit for “in-kind” contributions for participation on committees and task forces. The Finance Committee will discuss the matter. A summary should be printed in the Town Report as to what the MPO does/is. Mr. Neme suggested the Town advertise for a Shelburne Regional Planning Commission representative for regional corridor planning.

11. ADJOURNMENT

MOTION by Mr. Neme, seconded by Mr. Dudley, to adjourn the meeting. VOTE: unanimous (4-0); motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m.
Minutes respectfully submitted by Kathlyn Furr, Recording Secretary.
Accepted, Stephen B. Dates Chairman