    |
  |
        |
|
|
August 2006
SELECTBOARDMINUTES OF MEETINGAUGUST 8, 2006 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chris Neme, Chairperson; Jim Talley, Chris Boyd. (Absent: Jane McKnight, Robert Roesler.) ADMINISTRATION: Paul Bohne, Town Manager; Peter Frankenburg, Financial Officer; Town Planner, Dean Pierce. OTHERS PRESENT: Rad Romeyn, Mike Lynch, Jeff Jackson, Katherine Stockman, Bill Shearer, Dick Reid, George O’Brien, Willard Jackson, Dick Walters, Ellin London, Jim Carroll, Glenn Good, Susan Good, John Dinse, Gwen Webster, David Webster, Jed Graef, Peter Stern, Margie Stern, Bernie Guillemette, Cecile Guillemette, Randy Rowland, Maureen O’Brien, Jim Dudley, Jim Limanek, Joanne Limanek, Chris Preston (Shelburne News), Ashley Matthews (Burlington Free Press), and others. 1. CALL TO ORDER Mr. Neme, Chairperson, called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. 2. CHANGES TO AGENDA Add to the agenda: Item #12, Executive Session, Litigation Matters. 3. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION VELCO Dick Reid, resident, submitted a written statement, dated 08/08/2006, regarding the proposed VELCO substation expansion and impacts to the federal land state mapped floodplains, the McCabe’s Brook floodway, and wetlands. Mr. Reid asked the Selectboard to call a special meeting. The Ad Hoc VELCO Committee appears to be defunct, said Mr. Reid. Staff will investigate the status of the Ad Hoc VELCO Committee. Mr. Bohne noted the deadline for comments on the VELCO proposal is 8//21/06. Mr. Neme pointed out there are timing issues; several Selectboard members are (will be) out of town. Pond Road Rad Romeyn, resident, stated the Zoning Board of Adjustment rejected the Town’s position regarding the Boehland appeal, and Pond Road neighbors are upset. Mr. Romeyn asked about other alternatives or strategies to pursue. Mr. Bohne commented only a verbal decision, heard secondhand, not from the Zoning Board, is what is being referenced. There are no written Findings of Fact at this time. Further recourse is premature when the official decision is not known. Randy Rowland attended the Zoning Board meeting and has party status. There is a 30-day appeal period. Zoning Changes Ellin London, resident, said she attended the last Planning Commission meeting, and when the zoning regulations will be incorporated into the Town Plan was not clearly stated. Ms. London suggested a moratorium be put on the zoning changes until the Town Plan update is complete. Mr. Neme agreed to the need to finalize the Town Plan before addressing zoning regulations. Webster/Farmstead Road Joanne Limanek, resident, expressed concern about safety at the Webster/Farmstead Road intersection. There is a blind spot entering Webster Road and a dip in the road. Mr. Bohne reported the outcome of a study of the intersection sight distances met the criteria. There is sufficient sight distance. Mr. Neme recalled a neighbor suggested placing a Stop sign on Webster Road, but that is not practical. The Selectboard will consider reasonable suggestions. Ms. Limanek suggested removing the dip in Webster Road and installing a rumble strip or speed bump. A neighbor had suggested placing a mirror on the other side of the street. Mr. Bohne stated the Public Works Director will investigate the matter. Fencing A gentleman in the audience reported the owners of the (yellow) house on the corner want to install a fence to protect their toddlers, but the neighbors asked him not to put up the fence. Shelburne Point Dick Walters, resident, stated the Shelburne Point community feels the Jackson family has presented a responsible development for the point. The development could have many more lots per the zoning, but the proposal is only for six or seven lots which cannot be seen from the lake. Lake residents are concerned about the Planning Commission’s proposal to double the setback and the impact of escalating changes, demands, and such. The Selectboard needs to set the tone for encouraging responsible development, stated Mr. Walters. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER ADOPTION OF STORMWATER DISCHARGE ORDINANCE. Mr. Neme reviewed comments/input received regarding proposed changes to the draft Stormwater Discharge Ordinance. It was noted the original draft ordinance and changes have been reviewed by the Town’s engineer. The ordinance is a civil ordinance which clarifies what can/cannot be discharged into the system in order to assure the discharges are clean. The Town is asking townspeople to abide by the outlined Best Practices Management (BPM). MOTION by Mr. Talley, seconded by Mr. Boyd, to adopt the Storm Water Discharge Ordinance as presented. VOTE: unanimous (3-0); motion carried. 5. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE UPDATED TOWN PLAN Mr. Neme stated the Selectboard has reviewed the entire draft Town Plan update (07/25/2006), and the Town Planner, Town Manager, and the Planning Commission Chairman have consolidated comments/input, including comments on Volume I, Vision Statement. Dick Walters, resident, asked if there was any discussion of limiting the square footage of “mega-houses”. Mr. Neme stated language in the Vision Statement notes Shelburne is an economically diverse town. Mike Lynch suggested home size could be related to the size of the lot. Mr. Tally pointed out that information on fractional homes has been received. Constraints are found in the zoning regulations, but the Town Plan sets the tone. Mr. Neme stated size is addressed in the Town Plan Energy section. Dean Pierce noted house size is on the list of item to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. It was the consensus of the Selectboard to have the Planning Commission review the issue in review of the draft Town Plan. Ellin London, resident, questioned why the Town returned school impact fees. Mr. Neme explained a legal standard must be met to demonstrate capital projects. The School Board projections for new students did not support expansion of the school so the Town had no choice but to return the fees. The Selectboard reviewed the following in the draft Town Plan:
There was further discussion of language related to “require” (page 18, point 2) and “…to the maximum extent to require…” (point 7), which are not recommendations, but requirements to be done to the maximum. There was also discussion of draft zoning in the Rural district changing from five acres to 10 acres resulting in 80% of the rural districts not being considered for development. At issue is the Land Trust not purchasing development rights from a farmer if the town’s zoning achieves the same. Regarding Page 16, 2nd sentence indicating development discouraged in the rural districts, Mr. Jackson suggested a benefit-to-cost analysis. The price to keep land open needs consideration. There was discussion of density in Shelburne Village, and the situation whereby a modest house in the village is razed and replaced by a large house built to the setbacks. The Planning Commission could address this matter with additional language and a goal pertaining to “open space that remains in a natural state through appropriate legal mechanisms.” John Dinse, Shelburne Point resident, spoke of erosion and Shelburne Point. Mr. Dinse also commented on the Planning Commission proceedings with the proposed Shelburne Point development and micro-managing the Jackson plan. Clarification of Section 1700 was requested relative to growth and cover and the shoreline. People are paying significant property taxes and are interested in protecting views, stated Mr. Dinse. Definition of “nuisances” is needed. Mr. Dinse expressed concern about social engineering, noting there are legal issues relative to property rights and rights of privacy. There were no further comments. MOTION by Mr. Talley, seconded by Mr. Boyd, to continue review of the update of the Town Plan to September 12, 2006, starting on page 24. VOTE: unanimous (3-0); motion carried. 6. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER AMENDING THE REDEVELOPMENT SECTION OF THE TOWN OF SHELBURNE ZONING BYLAWS (Associated with the Shelburne Inn Redevelopment) Mr. Neme reported the Planning Commission made suggested modifications. The Selectboard received the amended Redevelopment section of the zoning bylaws. Dean Pierce stated the Planning Commission looked at buildings and building standards. Comments were received from the Historical Preservation Committee. One recommendation forwarded to the Selectboard is to use the word “significant” relative to a building and whether to allow removal of a building with no historical significance. The following changes to language were suggested: 2.a, Structures:Except as noted below, Existing Structures shall be those in existence on the effective date of this bylaw amendment. "Existing Structures" shall include the reconstruction or replacement of a "Non-significant Existing Structure" within the same footprint as approved by the Planning Commission, such approval including a finding. The Planning Commission may determine that a structure is a "Non-significant Existing Structure" and may permit reconstruction or replacement unless such structure is… (iii) That the design for a proposed reconstruction or replacement of such Non-significant Existing Structure will be architecturally compatible with the existing neighborhood. 2.b: Strike the words in the first sentence "expansion of the" and rewrite to: “The building area outside the existing footprint...” 2.h:First sentence, change to read: "...the maximum building and eave height may extend to the building height and eave height of the building being replaced." Second sentence, change to read: "...the maximum building height may extend to the height of the existing building being replaced." Larry Williams, Redstone representative, asked if the proposed language changes will apply retroactively to the approved reconstruction application for the Shelburne Inn project. Dean Pierce stated the changes will not retroactively apply to the project unless the plan was modified in which case the Planning Commission would do a review. The Planning Commission approved the project as long as it complies with zoning regulations. The project must receive any necessary approvals from the Zoning Board. Gwen Webster, Zoning Board member, stated the proposed language does not address setbacks when a building is razed. Larry Williams referenced Section 2.a of the R-PUD language as proposed. There were no further comments. MOTION by Mr. Boyd, seconded by Mr. Talley, to adopt the proposed amendments to the Redevelopment Section of the Town of Shelburne Zoning Bylaws as follows: 2.a, Structures: Except as noted below, Existing Structures shall be those in existence on the effective date of this bylaw amendment. "Existing Structures" shall include the reconstruction or replacement of a "Non-significant Existing Structure" within the same footprint as approved by the Planning Commission, such approval including a finding. The Planning Commission may determine that a structure is a "Non-significant Existing Structure" and may permit reconstruction or replacement unless such structure is… (iii) That the design for a proposed reconstruction or replacement of such Non-significant Existing Structure will be architecturally compatible with the existing neighborhood. 2.b: Strike the words in the first sentence "expansion of the" and rewrite to: “The building area outside the existing footprint...”· 2.h: First sentence, change to read: "...the maximum building and eave height may extend to the building height and eave height of the building being replaced."; Second sentence, change to read: "...the maximum building height may extend to the height of the existing building being replaced." VOTE: unanimous (3-0); motion carried. 7. CONSIDER SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR ENHANCEMENT GRANT TO CONSTRUCT A SECTION OF BIKE/PED PATH Mr. Bohne reviewed the ‘Safe Routes to School’ project and the enhancement grant to construct a bike/pedestrian path as outlined in the memo from Dean Pierce, dated 08/04/2006. Jim Limanek, resident, suggested a less expensive project. The original plan calls for a path from Hullcrest to the village. The segment proposed is not a good area for a 10’ wide path (will not fit the neighborhood). There is concern for safety due to driveways and side roads/junctions, and one lane versus lanes on both sides of Webster Road. Dean Pierce explained if the town does not expend the funds, then the agreement is void. A conceptual alignment analysis will be done. The granting body will scrutinize costs. Mr. Talley suggested the Bike/Pedestrian Committee provide a recommendation. MOTION by Mr. Talley, seconded by Mr. Boyd, to apply for the Enhancement Grant of $300,000 (maximum) for a segment of the proposed Bike/Pedestrian Path project as presented. VOTE: unanimous (3-0); motion carried. 8. CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT THE TERMS OF THE GRANT AGREEMENT FOR THE SHELBURNEWOOD PLANNING GRANT Mr. Bohne reported the grant application and the proposed resolution were reviewed by the Town Attorney. MOTION by Mr. Talley, seconded by Mr. Boyd, to adopt the proposed resolution to accept the terms of the Grant Agreement for the Shelburnewood Planning Grant as proposed. VOTE: unanimous (3-0); motion carried. The Selectboard signed the document(s). 9. CONSIDER APPROVING THE MINUTES OF 07/25/2006 Approval of the 07/25/2006 minutes was tabled until the next meeting of the Board. 10. MANAGER’S REPORT None. 11. MEMBERS CONCERNS None. 12. EXECUTIVE SESSION and ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Mr. Talley, seconded by Mr. Boyd, to adjourn the regular meeting and convene Executive Session for the purpose of discussing litigation matters which might place the Town at a disadvantage, and to invite the Town Manager to attend. VOTE: unanimous (3-0); motion carried. The regular meeting was adjourned and Executive Session convened at 10:20 p.m. Minutes respectfully submitted by Kathlyn Furr, Recording Secretary. Accepted, Chris Neme For the Shelburne Selectboard
January 2006Selectboard Meeting Minutes February 2006 Selectboard Meeting Minutes March 2006 Selectboard Meeting Minutes April 2006 Selectboard Meeting Minutes May 2006 Selectboard Meeting Minutes June 2006 Selectboard Meeting Minutes July 2006 Selectboard Meeting Minutes August 2006 Selectboard Meeting Minutes September 2006 Selectboard Meeting Minutes October 2006 Selectboard Meeting Minutes November 2006 Selectboard Meeting Minutes December 2006 Selectboard Meeting Minutes |
|
|
|
Home | Contacts | Departments | Events | Information | Search | Site Map | Services | Forms | Minutes
Site by DIGITAL FRONTIER © 2008 |
