TOWN OF SHELBURNE

MEMBERS PRESENT:       Tom Koerner, Chairperson; Milton Edelman, Steve Waltien, Boris Funtow. (Gwen Webster recused herself.)

ADMINISTRATION:           No staff was present.

OTHERS PRESENT:            Marcel Beaudin, David Webster, Gwen Webster, Larry Williams, Peter Richardson, Stuart Bennett, Margery Sharp (Shelburne News).

 

Chairman Koerner called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. following a site visit to the Shelburne Inn by the Zoning Board. Introductions were made. It was explained Gwen Webster will not participate as a board member in the deliberation/decision on the Catamount HIS/Shelburne Inn application. A 2:2 vote (tie vote) means the application approval is denied.

 

Postponed until the next meeting.

 

3.         PUBLIC HEARING

Larry Williams and Peter Richardson, Housing Strategies, Inc., appeared on behalf of the application.

 

APPLICANT COMMENTS

A brief overview of the project was given. The project involves three buildings: Shelburne Inn, the motel, and the adjacent building (house) on Falls Road. There are use changes proposed for Shelburne Inn and the motel. Shelburne Inn will change to restaurant and retail/office space on the first floor and office space on the second floor. The existing landscaping will be augmented and repairs will be made to the storm water drainage system. The building façade will be improved. The existing porch will be replaced with a porch to match the original construction time period of the house. The brick wing walls will be removed and the wall reframed with windows (facing the new deck). The roof on the kitchen area will be reconfigured to slope to the north. The clapboards will be scraped and repainted. The slate roof on the main building will be repaired. A standing seam roof will be put on the porch and on the new addition dining room. The windows will be replaced with historic wood windows (simulated divided light).  Regarding changes to the motel, the building will be converted to 14 condominium units (eight flats and six townhouses with garages). The footprint of the condo units will be in line with the existing porch on the structure. The single car garages are included in the parking calculation for the site. The building will be re-sided and new windows and wiring installed. There will be a painted 8’ high fence on the northern property line. Landscaping will be done in front, and the existing stone wall will be replaced with a white picket fence and plantings. The balcony on the motel will be removed. The construction will be built up from the foundation wall. Access to the site is shown using the existing curb cut (plan labeled “CP-B”), but it is hoped to persuade VTrans to move the access road 15’ to the south to align with the access drive to the mobile home park behind the property (plan labeled “L1.0”). This would allow for additional parking along the Shelburne Inn building. There is parking behind the building on Falls Road. The dumpster will be located behind the building on Falls Road. Residents of the condominium units will have use of the dumpster. Forty parking spaces are needed for the 80-seat restaurant, but the Planning Commission can reduce the number of parking spaces to 20 spaces if there is sufficient parking within 500’ of the site. The restaurant will only be open in the evening (5 p.m. opening) and for Sunday brunch so the parking for the retail and office spaces can be used. Also, there are 18 public parking spaces within 300’ of the restaurant. The traffic study that was done revealed there will be no significant impact on traffic circulation in the area from the development.

 

STAFF REPORT

The Board received a staff report on the application, information on the RPUD district, and a copy of the traffic report.  There was discussion of the access to the property. It was suggested the Board could approve the plan with the existing access and if the curb cut is moved south by 15’ and the access aligned with that of the mobile home park, staff can determine if an amendment of the conditional use approval is needed.

 

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Stuart Bennett, 5203 Shelburne Road, asked about the sequence of approvals. It was explained the Zoning Board can condition the application’s conditional use approval on subsequent approvals from the Planning Commission and Design Review Committee. Mr. Bennett commented positively on the proposed fence and asked to have input on the type of fencing to be installed. The applicant indicated willingness to try to address Mr. Bennett’s concerns, noting the fence will be a solid barrier, 8’ high from the top of the existing stonewall (fence to be on top of the stone wall) and 10’ from the north side of the building. Mr. Bennett expressed concern about the proposed balcony facing the road (west) and overlooking his house stating a solid façade on the north would be a better solution.  Mr. Bennett asked about exterior lighting (there will be exterior lighting) and building beyond the footprint. The applicant assured the Board that there would be no construction beyond the plane of the building. A patio may be built, but no gazebos or decks.  Mr. Bennett asked about the existing trees at the west end of the building along the property line. The applicant stated that they would try to preserve the trees. The fence will connect to the building then run along the property line. Some trees will have to be removed to accommodate the fence.

 

David Webster, adjacent property owner, urged the applicant to locate as much parking as possible on the site because the restaurant will need the parking.  It would also be prudent to designate the parking for the condominium units. Mr. Webster expressed concern about the parking on the southern boundary of the property on Falls Road and potential impact on drainage. The applicant stated there will be catch basins to handle and direct the drainage away from the Webster property.

 

Gwen Webster, adjacent property owner, expressed concern about the number of windows on the second floor of north side of the building. Unless the building has central air conditioning, having separate air conditioners in each window will be very noisy.  Ms. Webster also expressed concern about the amount of parking, noting if the retail and office uses are on-site until 6 p.m., the parking spaces will not be available to the restaurant.  In addition, if the restaurant decides to open earlier to serve lunch, parking will not be available. It was noted if the restaurant adds to the hours of operation, an amendment to the conditional use approval is needed.

 

Comments/concerns from the public were summarized as follows:

1.                  An 8’ solid barrier wood fence measured from the top of the existing stone wall and located 10’ from the north side of the building beginning at the northwest corner of the building and running along the property line to the back of the property or a mutually agreed upon fence will be installed.

2.                  Trees in the northwest corner of the property will remain.

3.                  The storage space under the balcony will be regulated to ensure the area does not become a catch-all and an unsightly nuisance. (The applicant indicated the area will be well landscaped street frontage, and the condominium association will regulate commonly owned space.)

4.                  Doorway entrances to the condominium units will be approximately 14” off the ground (one step down to the ground).

5.                  There will not be lights on the fence. (It was noted the zoning regulations dictate no adverse impact by lighting, and the Planning Commission reviews exterior lighting.)

6.                  A designated loading space for deliveries must be shown on the site plan. Restrictions may be placed on delivery times, for example, deliveries Monday through Friday, 7 a.m. – 7 p.m. and on Saturday and Sunday, 11 a.m. – 5 p.m.

7.                  A delivery schedule must be worked out by the condominium association if the restaurant is part of the association.

 

The Zoning Board entered deliberative session at 9:10 p.m.

Motion was made during deliberative session. (See Findings, Conclusions and Notice of Decision from application CU05-24).

 

There was no other business.

 

Minutes respectfully submitted by M.E.Riordan, Recording Secretary.

 

 

Dated at Shelburne, Vermont this 12th day of September for the meeting of August 8, 2005.

 

_________________________________      _________________________________

Thomas Koerner, Chair                                    Gwen Webster, Vice Chair

 

 

 

_________________________________      _________________________________

Steve Waltien                                                   Boris Funtow

 

 

 

_________________________________     

Milton Edelman