    |
  |
        |
|
|
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - August 2007MINUTES SUBJECT TO CORRECTION BY THE SHELBURNE PLANNING COMMISSION. CHANGES, IF ANY, WILL BE RECORDED IN THE MINUTES OF THE NEXT MEETING OF THE COMMISSION. TOWN OF SHELBURNE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING August 9, 2007 MEMBERS PRESENT: Reg Gignoux, Hilda White, Kay Kraushaar, Dick Elkins, Peter Gibbs, Claude LaPierre. (Tucker Holland was absent.) STAFF PRESENT: Dean Pierce, Town Planner. OTHERS PRESENT: Kristy Bilodeau, Chris Galipeau, Steve Vock, David Conard, Jacques Landry, Spencer Knapp, Barbara Cory, Paul Irish, Herb Kessel, Barbara Kessel, James St. George, Bob Rushford, Scott Homsted, Ashley Matthews (Burlington Free Press), Marge Sharp (Shelburne News). AGENDA:
1. CALL TO ORDER Reg Gignoux called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (July 26, 2007) MOTION by Hilda White, SECOND by Peter Gibbs, to approve the 7/26/07 minutes with the following corrections/clarifications: Page 7, Coastal Real Estate/Jenny Tremblay Application, Applicant Comments, 2nd paragraph – change “in front of” to “adjacent to” and change “daycare” to “gymnastics studio (Gymstar)”. VOTING: unanimous (6-0); motion carried. 3. PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW, THOMAS D. CABOT, III, 2100 HARBOR ROAD (SUB06-07) Steve Vock, David Conard, and Chris Galipeau appeared on behalf of the application. Reg Gignoux noted the Planning Commission received the lengthy wildlife report two days prior to the meeting and has had only a cursory glance at it. According to the report there are “man created problems” that can be addressed with creative solutions. APPLICANT COMMENTS Steve Vock and David Conard reviewed the covenants for the following:
Kay Kraushaar mentioned the Planning Commission recommendation of 40” in height on the woven fence rather than 48”. David Conard explained the property owner felt what is presented is a reasonable compromise of the issues. There were many meetings and much discussion prior to arriving at the compromise. Ms. Kraushaar asked if the four rail fence along the driveway will remain. Steve Vock confirmed the owner feels the need for the fence which will be a good visual barrier for cattle. There was mention of the easement for a recreation path. Mr. Conard noted the property owner does not want to impact the wildlife corridor so a recreation path on the north property line will not be allowed. A path can be located on the southerly property line. The existing bike path to the east has many unleashed dogs which impact the wildlife in the area. There are also some campers living illegally on the property. It was noted there is a trail incursion from the town path onto the Cabot property. Mr. Cabot will give the town time to rectify the matter. Dick Elkins asked that the overlap of the winter deer yard onto the applicant’s property be shown on the site plan. Steve Vock explained the areas are approximate. Deer seem able to acclimate to residential development. Problems arise with the bike path and unleashed dogs chasing deer. An overlay of the deer yard can be shown on the site plan, confirmed Mr. Vock. Mr. Elkins commented that providing more areas for the deer to cross Harbor Road rather than access points will help take an advantage away from predators, especially with fawns. When a fence was not in place the deer freely crossed Harbor Road. Mr. Vock stated the drainage swales are ideal for deer crossings. State Wildlife does field evaluations when determining deer yards. There is lots of movement and deer in the area. Dick Elkins stressed winter deer yards are not being replaced and the proposed development may be impacting a winter deer yard. Mr. Vock pointed out the wildlife expert made a determination of what is significant or not on the property so adjustments could be made to the proposal to accommodate the recommendations. David Conard added the wildlife expert did not identify any significant winter deer yards on the property. STAFF REPORT The Planning Commission received a written staff report on the application, dated 8/9/07. Dean Pierce asked about restrictions on cutting within the building envelopes. David Conard stated there are no restrictions. Mr. Pierce asked if the Planning Commission would consider changes to the building envelopes at Final Plan. Reg Gignoux pointed out the floating envelope on Lot #6 was the main issue of concern. The envelopes are large, but the density will not change regardless. Kay Kraushaar stated the building envelope has no cutting restrictions and is the only place that has trees. David Conard interjected the vegetative buffer is treed and there are other trees all around. Steve Vock explained the building envelopes restrict construction/buildings to a specified area, but it is highly unlikely a lot owner will clear cut the entire envelope. Kay Kraushaar expressed concern about the potential of clearing the trees without restriction. Dean Pierce noted the Shelburne Natural Resources Committee has not submitted comment as yet on the wildlife report. The Planning Commission agreed additional time to review the very comprehensive report is needed. Mr. Pierce commented maintaining the intact forested areas and minimizing impact is stressed by the wildlife expert in the report. Peter Gibbs asked for clarification of the covenants with regard to approval by the homeowners association of plans for building on the lots. PUBLIC COMMENT None. DELIBERATION/DECISION Preliminary Plan, Subdivision, 2100 Harbor Road, Cabot (SUB06-07) MOTION by Kay Kraushaar, SECOND by Peter Gibbs, to continue review of the Preliminary Plan submitted by Civil Engineering Associates on behalf of Tom Cabot for the subdivision of an existing 152.5 acre parcel at the intersection of Harbor Road and Bay Road until 8/23/07. VOTING: unanimous (6-0); motion carried. 4. PRD FINAL PLAN REVIEW, FOREST PARK REALTY CORPORATION, PORTION OF 7727 SPEAR STREET (SUBO6-04) Patrick O’Brien appeared on behalf of the application. APPLICANT COMMENTS Patrick O’Brien reviewed changes to the site plan noting the building envelopes are reduced in size and more clearly defined. The building envelope of Lot #6 was enlarged due to the fact the lot is mainly pasture area (originally there were two lots known as Lot #5 and Lot#6, but this was combined to one lot now called Lot #6). Recreation courts can be built in the building envelope on Lot A, but no outside lighting is allowed. Also, the size of the building envelope on Lot A is reduced. The access road no longer loops around, but is now a cul-de-sac. The land along the adjoining property line cannot be developed. This was done in response to the neighbors’ concerns. The location of the access drive is approved by the Fire Chief. There are pull-outs. A field experiment revealed car headlights are more visible to the Kessel house if the road is moved more into the meadow. Trees will be planted to further screen headlights. A revised landscape plan was presented to the Planning Commission and Mr. O’Brien reviewed the tree plantings which include evergreens and fruit trees. Screening between the Knapp residence and the building envelope for Lot #7 was also reviewed. Gaps in the hedgerow will be filled in. Pine trees (8’ high) and other native trees and shrubs will be transplanted. More trees will be planted if necessary per a gentleman’s agreement with the Knapps. The mass of cedar seedlings shown on the site plan will not be planted. There will be a two-tiered boulder retaining wall to mitigate vehicle noise and a 3:1 scale swale to control drainage per the Kessel’s request. Concerning the waste water system, a state permit has been received. Still pending are storm water and erosion control permits which are presently in the public comments portion of the application process. Some maintenance will be done to the roadway ditch. Legal documents (deeds, covenants) have been drafted. The farmette has a separate building envelope for farm structures (barn). Mr. O’Brien requested the option to locate non-permanent structures, such as movable shade shelters, outside the building envelope. Streetlights are not proposed for the development and there is a 20’ easement on Irish Hill Road for a bike path. Patrick O’Brien mentioned the road name (“Sugarwoods Drive”), noting the name cannot be used so the approval condition relative to the road name must be amended. A list of new choices will be submitted to the town. Attorney Bob Rushford confirmed the “Right to Farm” declaration is included in the legal documents. The covenants address lighting plans for each house as part of the architectural review. Lighting is not allowed in Lot A. If Lot A becomes a nuisance to adjoining property owners they can enforce the covenants as it relates to the issue. Animals and pond aeration to control mosquitoes is covered in the covenants. No further subdivision of remaining lands is stated in the covenants. Other issues such as open space, private roads, and tree cutting limits are also covered in the legal documents. Patrick O’Brien pointed out effort is being made to submit legal documents with the final plan application. Mr. O’Brien pointed out the effort made to submit the legal documents with the final plan application. STAFF REPORT The Planning Commission received a written staff report on the application, dated 8/9/07. Dean Pierce mentioned phasing the project. Following discussion, the Planning Commission agreed no more than 10 units per year can be built. PUBLIC COMMENT Spencer Knapp, neighbor to the proposed development, spoke in supported of the “fine tuning” of the plan. Concerning the landscaping buffer on Lot #1, a natural looking buffer is preferred. There appears to be no need for the cluster of six inch high cedar seedlings, however, needed screening will not be fully evident until construction begins (to be addressed via a gentleman’s agreement between the Knapps and Patrick O’Brien). Mr. Knapp confirmed there is concern about night time activity on Lot A which is located in the center of the meadow, but the covenants provide the lot owners with an enforcement mechanism if a nuisance develops. Jim St. George expressed concern about water run off by the manure pit. Water comes down the existing ditches and culvert with force now. There is erosion. There will be additional run off with the development. He questioned the impact of additional water with the development. Mr. St. George suggested a culvert across Spear Street by the manure pit be installed to divert water from the ditch. Patrick O’Brien explained there are two storm water ponds to be constructed in the proposed development. Per state regulation, drainage cannot exceed the threshold that existed pre-development. The lower house sites will have individual systems, called “wet gardens”, to catch and slow the run-off from the gutters, giving water time to infiltrate the soil and avoid erosion issues. Herb Kessel spoke of headlight glare. Originally there was to be a berm at the beginning of the driveway, but by moving the road closer to the hedgerow there is no room for a berm. A fence will be installed if necessary. Patrick O’Brien stated the fence will be six foot high, scalloped, and extend approximately 20’ along the drive. A fence will not be installed if it is not needed. There will be a four foot high fence along the access road by the storm water ponds as well as around the storm water ponds. It is anticipated a fence will be installed by the owner of the farmette lot. Reg Gignoux questioned if there are wild animal corridors on the property. Patrick O’Brien said there are deer and turkey, but no known critical crossings identified on the property per town and state maps. At one point in time a coyote travel corridor through the property was identified by the University of Vermont. Mr. Gignoux mentioned fences should be at least 24 inches up from the bottom rail and no greater than 40 inches high to allow wild animals to move through the site. There were no further comments. The evidentiary portion of the hearing was closed. DELIBERATION/DECISION Final Plan, PRD, portion of 7727 Spear Street, Forest Park Realty Corp. (SUB06-04) MOTION by Hilda White, SECOND by Kay Kraushaar, to approve the Final Plan submitted by Forest Park Realty for the subdivision of a 96 acre parcel located south of Irish Hill Road and east of Spear Street consistent with the materials submitted with the application and dated as listed in the Staff Report of August 9, 2007, and the landscape plan labeled “L-1” and dated 8/9/07, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to filing a mylar, the applicant shall revise proposed legal documents to the satisfaction of the Town Manager and Town Attorney, and said documents shall address the issues identified in the approval of the Preliminary Plan. 2. There shall be no further subdivision of any lots. 3. All structures including buildings used for agricultural purposes shall be limited to locations within building envelopes, and furthermore, all lots shall be subject to restrictions on the cutting of vegetation outside the building envelopes. 4. The Planning Commission hereby specifically authorizes the following waivers: · To substitute a gravel surface for pavement on the private road. · To serve Lots #5, #6, and #7 from a 40’ wide right-of-way with an 18’ wide driveway and one foot shoulders that tapers down to 14’ wide. · To modify the lot area from a required five acres to an area as small as 1.2 acres as part of the PRD. · To reduce lot frontage from a required 400’ to as small as 40’ as part of the PRD. 5. The existing small house on proposed Lot #14 shall be removed to conform to the 75’ PRD setback, however, the existing house may remain until a Certificate of Occupancy is obtained for a new house on Lot #14. 6. Prior to commencing construction, a pre-construction meeting shall be held between the developer, his engineer and contractor, and Town staff, and further, additional meetings shall be held a requested by Town staff during construction (e.g. following large storm events). 7. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a “No Parking/Fire Zone” sign shall be installed near the access drive for the pond/dry hydrant. 8. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a Letter of Credit for 100% of the cost of the required landscaping with a term of two (2) years shall be submitted along with a financial guarantee agreement revised to the satisfaction of the Town. 9. Landscaping depicted in the proposed Landscaping Plan must be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any new residence constructed in the project. 10. All exterior lighting installed on the lots shall utilize full cut-off fixtures and be designed to minimize impacts off of the properties where they are installed. 11. The project shall conform to applicable Shelburne Public Works specifications. 12. No more than 10 units per year shall be built (start date is the date the first building permit is issued). 13. A six foot high (maximum) fence may be installed along the access road for a distance of 25’ within fifty feet of the intersection. 14. The road name depicted on the site plan may be changed. VOTING: unanimous (6-0); motion carried. 5. SITE PLAN AMENDMENT, COASTAL REAL ESTATE, LLC/KRISTY BILODEAU, 3762 SHELBURNE ROAD (SP93-7R2) Jacques Landry and Kristy Bilodeau appeared on behalf of the application. Dick Elkins recused himself from the Planning Commission. APPLICANT COMMENTS Jacques Landry explained the proposal for the change of use of 200 s.f. of space to be subleased from Beads and Things. The area will be used for a massage service. Parking information for the entire plaza has been submitted. There are nine tenants at the site presently. With the massage service in place there will be 10 tenants. Peak hour parking for the tenant and the entire plaza show total need to be 66 parking spaces. There are 81 parking spaces on-site. Operating hours will be mainly evenings and weekends. Access to the massage service will be through Beads and Things. The massage service is a start-up business so there is not an existing clientele. The operator has a day job and will offer the massage service after hours. STAFF REPORT The Planning Commission received a written staff report on the application, dated 8/9/07. PUBLIC COMMENT None. The evidentiary portion of the hearing was closed. DELIBERATION/DECISION Site Plan Amendment, Change of Use, 3762 Shelburne Road, Coastal Real Estate/Bilodeau (SP93-7R2) MOTION by Kay Kraushaar, SECOND by Claude LaPierre, to approve amendment of the site plan submitted by Coastal Real Estate LLC/Kristy Bilodeau for property at 3762 Shelburne Road consistent with the plan submitted and subject to the following conditions: 1. A zoning permit for change of use and a Certificate of Occupancy shall be required. 2. All previously approved conditions not affected by this decision shall remain in effect. VOTING: unanimous (5-0); motion carried. Dick Elkins returned to the Planning Commission. 6. DISCUSSION OF ZONING BYLAW UPDATE Dean Pierce noted the materials needed for the discussion were not available for the meeting. 7. OTHER BUSINESS/CORRESPONDENCE API Property Dean Pierce reported preliminary plan approval for the API application has expired. A request for extension was received, but there is question whether the request was filed in a timely manner. A legal opinion is forthcoming. 8. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Peter Gibbs, SECOND by Dick Elkins, to adjourn the meeting. VOTING: unanimous (6-0); motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11 p.m. RScty: M.E.Riordan
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING August 23, 2007 MEMBERS PRESENT: Reg Gignoux, Tucker Holland, Kay Kraushaar, Dick Elkins, Peter Gibbs, Claude LaPierre. (Hilda White was absent.) STAFF PRESENT: Dean Pierce, Town Planner; John Adams, Zoning Administrator. OTHERS PRESENT: Mark Sperry, Roger Dickinson, Gregg Beldock, Daniel Hassan, William Alexander, Steve Vock, Chris Galipeau, Staige Davis, David Conard, Sean McFaden, Mike Anderson, Mike Burke, Ashley Matthews (Burlington Free Press), Marge Sharp (Shelburne News). AGENDA:
1. CALL TO ORDER Reg Gignoux called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (August 9, 2007) MOTION by Peter Gibbs, SECOND by Kay Kraushaar, to approve the 8/9/07 minutes as written. VOTING: unanimous (5-0)[Claude LaPierre not present for vote]; motion carried. 3. DESIGN REVIEW, WILLIAM ALEXANDER, 5997 SHELBURNE ROAD (DR07-21) William Alexander appeared on behalf of the application. APPLICANT COMMENTS The applicant did not add comment. STAFF REPORT The Planning Commission received a written staff report on the application, dated 8/23/07. PUBLIC COMMENT None. The evidentiary portion of the meeting was closed. DELIBERATION/DECISION Design Review, Sign, 5997 Shelburne Road, Alexander (DR07-21) MOTION by Tucker Holland, SECOND by Kay Kraushaar, to grant design review approval to William Alexander for a sign in the front yard at 5997 Shelburne Road consistent with the plans submitted and subject to the condition that the sign shall comply with applicable setback requirements. VOTING: unanimous (6-0); motion carried. 4. SITE PLAN REVIEW, JOLLEY ASSOCIATES, 10 EXECUTIVE DRIVE (SP03-05) The application was withdrawn by the applicant and re-filed for consolidated review (Site Plan and Conditional Use) by the Development Review Board. 5. SKETCH PLAN AMENDMENT, SHELBURNE BAY SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITY/SAM HANDY TRUSTEE FOR PAUL HANDY/BURLINGTON DRIVE-IN THEATRE, CO., 185 PINE HAVEN SHORE & 2522 SHELBURNE ROAD (SUB98-06R4) Mark Sperry, Roger Dickinson, Gregg Beldock appeared on behalf of the application. APPLICANT COMMENTS Mark Sperry clarified the application is for amendment to the Planned Residential Development (PRD). Changes include the building being extended in length by 26’ because the rooms were too small. Lot coverage is increased by three-tenth of one percent. Sketch plan approval by the Planning Commission is requested so the application can proceed to Conditional Use and Preliminary Plan review by the Development Review Board. Roger Dickinson reviewed the site plan, pointing out the building extension by 26’ to the north. The building is closer to the parking area. There are no changes to the parking area. The property has been surveyed. The site plan shows more detail of existing conditions. There are a total of 133 parking spaces with the 20% waiver. The building width is within the 50’ setback and increases from 52’ wide to 56’ wide. There are six parking spaces added to the west in the upper parking lot. The building will be 35’ high with a fairly flat roof. The appearance of the building was briefly described (mansard type building with the third floor being candelabra with windows projecting out, Victoria style). The façade will only be seen from Shelburne Bay Senior Living. STAFF REPORT The Planning Commission received a written staff report on the application, dated 8/23/07. Dean Pierce observed the pond is changed slightly, noting the steep slope from the edge of the parking area to the pond. Gregg Beldock confirmed there is a steep slope along the entire eastern boundary. A stone wall will be built to make the area attractive. There was discussion of parking. Roger Dickinson stated the amount of parking will be increased by 50%. Most residents will not be driving. Dean Pierce pointed out per the bylaws the Planning Commission can determine what is reasonable for uses without a specified parking requirement. Reg Gignoux asked about the entrances to the site. Roger Dickinson stated there are two entrances, one on the northerly end which will be the main entry and one on the southerly end which will be the service entrance. Mr. Gignoux expressed concern about the wall on the east side of the property being a cold, dark cavern. Also, the façade looks like a solid wall with no texture. The space appears like a big holding area. There is no “charm”. The building looks like institutional housing, long and unfriendly with lots of walking between the entryways on each end. There is need of some architectural imagination. Gregg Beldock pointed out the façade is articulated so it is attractive. The building will be attractive inside and out, much like the Shelburne Bay award winning project. Mr. Beldock mentioned other architectural awards for buildings he has won. There are advantages to a long, double loaded corridor with assisted living and memory impaired units, explained Mr. Beldock. Also, the initial presentation is different than the final product. The inside of the building will be warm and friendly. The outside will be attractive. The wall is a challenge, conceded Mr. Beldock. There will be prism effect lighting (natural lighting). Offices and storage will be in a central area with living spaces on the outside walls. Mr. Beldock will email a copy of the façade drawing(s) to Dean Pierce. Dick Elkins stated a preference for the original parking plan because there was a buffer between the lot line and the parking. Mr. Elkins suggested eliminating some parking spaces by the entryway in the upper lot if possible. Roger Dickinson stated the next rendition of the plan will show the lower parking lot area and the access moved down Pine Haven Shore Road. Dick Elkins spoke in support of frontage remaining on Route 7. Roger Dickinson stated there is greater frontage on Pine Haven Shore Road than Route 7 with the acquisition of The Ponderosa. Also, there is more traffic to the existing building than going onto Shelburne Road. Peter Gibbs noted the west end parking area will need fill and a retaining wall. Mr. Gibbs suggested decreasing the amount of parking. There was further discussion of the parking. The spaces shown on the plan include the waiver of 20%. Gregg Beldock calculated 93 parking spaces are needed for the entire facility. More parking is shown on the plan due to the specifications in the regulations. The current lot is full, but never over full except when there is a holiday party and all friends and family members are encouraged to attend, stated Mr. Beldock. Tucker Holland expressed concern about congestion at the north entrance as the main entrance. Kay Kraushaar asked about the 26’ addition to the building. Gregg Beldock stated the goal is to make more window space and the outside apartment wall and the unit itself less deep. The corridors will be wide. Ms. Kraushaar mentioned the storm water system. Mr. Beldock pointed out there is a pond shown on the site plan. The existing storm water system for Shelburne Bay Senior Living will also be used. PUBLIC COMMENT A gentleman in the audience spoke in support of the project. There were no further comments. The evidentiary portion of the hearing was closed. DELIBERATION/DECISION Sketch Plan Amendment, PRD, 185 Pine Haven Shore & 2522 Shelburne Road, Shelburne Bay Senior Living et al (SUB98-06R4) MOTION by Tucker Holland, SECOND by Peter Gibbs, to approve the Sketch Plan submitted by Shelburne Bay Senior Living Community, LLC for 54 units of “assisted care living units” via amendment of the Shelburne Bay Senior Living Community PRD consistent with plans listed in the staff report of August 23, 2007 with revisions dated 8/23/07 subject to the following conditions: 1. Upon submitting a Preliminary Plan application for the project, the applicant shall simultaneously apply for Preliminary Plan and Conditional Use approval for the proposed “assisted care living unit” use, and any such approval must specify the primary nature of the proposed use and indicate whether it is primarily residential, institutional, health care, or commercial, etc. in nature, and further, any such approval must also specify the applicable lot area requirement for the use and/or its component units. 2. In the event the Development Review Board determines that the proposed “assisted care living unit” use is exclusively residential, the Preliminary Plan application shall be reviewed under the Planned Residential Development provisions of the zoning bylaws. 3. In the event the Development Review Board determines that the proposed use is institutional, health care, or commercial in nature, or a combination of these or other non-residential uses, the Preliminary Plan application shall be reviewed under the Planned Unit Development provisions of the zoning bylaws. 4. Any Preliminary Plan shall contain detailed information regarding existing contours, proposed contours, and the location of cuts and fills, and further, the application shall contain detailed building elevations and information regarding any proposed retaining walls. 5. Any Preliminary Plan shall contain a detailed analysis of current and potential traffic circulation flows between the subject parcels and adjoining parcels to the east (Andrus) and south (Lake Champlain Transportation). VOTING: unanimous (6-0); motion carried. 6. PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW, THOMAS D. CABOT, III, 2100 HARBOR ROAD (SUB06-07) Steve Vock, David Conard, Chris Galipeau, and Staige Davis appeared on behalf of the application. APPLICANT COMMENTS Steve Vock reported the state plan on deer yards was overlaid on the site plan to try to delineate the winter deer yards on the site. The Wildlife Action Plan for the state does not include deer because the animals do not need assistance like other species, such as bobcat. Deer habitat is not in a critical situation as is the case for other species. Regarding the “floating” building envelope, the average lot size is 25 acres and the property owner agreed to a ‘floating’ envelope of four acres so there is still flexibility in citing the building(s). Lots #4 and #5 have specified building envelopes less than four acres in size. There will be cutting restrictions on the lots. There is a protected zone along Harbor Road that cannot be cleared. A few, small open areas are allowed, but a clear view corridor cannot be created. Additional plantings in a 50’ swatch by the vegetative buffer zone are allowed. David Conard explained each lot owner who has frontage can cut no more than two 12’ wide lanes for access to the Harbor Road fields from the inner portion of the lot, and there must be a curve in the corridor to avoid a view lane. Tucker Holland asked if the path easement along Harbor Road and Bay Road is resolved (town path encroaching on private property). David Conard stated the issue is separate. The town was provided a generous deadline by which to move the path. STAFF REPORT The Planning Commission received a written staff report on the application, dated 8/23/07. Sean McFaden, Shelburne Natural Resources and Conservation Committee, stated smaller building lots are preferable and there should be a provision for the main house, guest house, and outbuildings. If these structures are spread throughout the building lot, the development will be more akin to an 18-lot subdivision than a six lot subdivision. Mr. McFaden suggested the structures be clustered as close as possible within the building envelope. David Conard stated the property owner is not interested in such a stipulation. The ordinance allows a primary residence and attached accessory unit. The permitted conditions of the development allow cutting inside the building envelope of no more than 60% of the basal area and no more than 30% of the basal area outside the building envelope so the field will not be clear cut. The conditions cannot be changed without approval by the Development Review Board. Dean Pierce clarified an attached accessory structure with no outside changes to the primary structure is allowed. An accessory unit can be up to 30% of the habitable area of the primary house. If additional structure is created for the accessory unit then conditional use approval is necessary. Also, if there are two bedrooms in the accessory unit, then conditional use approval is required. Steve Vock added once a structure is detached the design requirements for waste water are the same as for a primary structure so it is more likely there will be attached structures. Peter Gibbs noted roads, paths, driveways are also added to the amount of development in the four acre building envelope. David Conard distributed and reviewed suggested conditions of approval. Reg Gignoux asked if there is a provision to designate another party, such as The Land Trust, to maintain the fields should Shelburne Farms cease to exist. Mr. Conard stated a condition is acceptable saying the Harbor Road fields provision shall be modified to provide for succession in the event Shelburne Farms ceases to exist. There was discussion of roads. Dean Pierce felt more detail on roads is needed. The applicant stated roads will meet the concerns of the Fire Chief, Public Works, and staff. The sight distance from the north is 600’ and from the south is 950’. The minimum recommendation is 250’. Mr. Conard requested the Planning Commission adopt the suggested conditions of approval with the addition of four additional conditions related to succession, waivers (2), and sight distance. There was discussion of the town’s consulting engineering reviewing the information of roads. The Planning Commission entered deliberative session at 9:35 p.m. to discuss the application. Deliberative Session ended and the regular meeting resumed at 10:10 p.m. The Planning Commission expressed concern the recommendations by Jesse Mohr, wildlife expert, are not being implemented especially in the high priority areas. The fence height is an issue (40” versus 48”). Chris Galipeau explained people can step over a 40” high fence. The plan is to keep the fence opening away from the public path so dogs cannot harm the wildlife. Deer can jump over a 48” high fence. David Conard stated according to Jesse Mohr a full grown deer can go through a 24” space under a fence. The fence height changes (top and bottom) only occur as indicated on the site plan. Other sections of existing fence will not change. Following further discussion, the Planning Commission agreed to add a condition that the applicant get confirmation from Jesse Mohr that the 40” to 48” distinction in fence height is not critical for wildlife movement. PUBLIC COMMENT None. The evidentiary portion of the hearing was closed. DELIBERATION/DECISION Preliminary Plan, Subdivision, 2100 Harbor Road, Cabot (SUB06-07) MOTION by Tucker Holland, SECOND by Claude LaPierre, that the application of Thomas D. Cabot III, Trustee of the Thomas D. Cabot III Revocable Trust, dated April 13, 1999, (“Applicant”) for preliminary plan approval of a six-lot subdivision located on 152.6 +/- acres at 2100 Harbor Road (the “Property”) is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The project shall be completed substantially as depicted on a plat entitled “Proposed Subdivision of Lot 4, Bayside Quarry, 2100 Harbor Road, Shelburne, Vermont”, dated June 5, 2007, Last Revised August 6, 2007, prepared by Civil Engineering Associates, Inc (the “Plan”).2. The existing fencing on the Property shall be modified as set forth in a document entitled “Proposed Permit Conditions re: Modification of Existing Fencing Bayside Quarry” dated August 6, 2007(the “Fence Modifications”), a copy of which has been filed by the Applicant.3. The area identified on the Plan as “Harbor Road Fields” shall be maintained in accordance with paragraph II.B.1 of a document entitled “Declaration of Covenants for Bayside Quarry”, dated August 17, 2007 (the “Declaration”), and a document entitled “Harbor Road Fields Agreement”, dated August 17, 2007, copies of which have been filed by the Applicant.4. The area identified on the Plan as “Vegetative Buffer” shall be maintained in accordance with paragraph II.B.2. of the Declaration.5. The area identified on the Plan as “Clayplain Forest Management Area” shall be maintained in accordance with paragraph II.B.4. of the Declaration.6. The area identified on the Plan as “Grassland Bird Habitat Management Area” shall be maintained in accordance with paragraph II.B.5 of the Declaration.7. The Declaration, Harbor Road Fields Agreement and Fence Modifications shall be submitted to the Town’s attorney for review.8. The building envelopes for Lots 4 and 5 shall be comprised of the un-shaded areas of those lots as depicted on the Plan.9. Lots 1, 2, 3 and 6 shall have floating building envelopes, of four acres per lot, which shall be contained within the un-shaded areas of those Lots as depicted on the Plan.10. All utility services shall be underground, except necessary above-ground equipment.11. No lighting fixtures may be located such that they will emit light which is directly visible from off of the Lot where the fixture is located.12. Crushed stone and gravel on the common drives and individual driveways shall not be white limestone.13. No oak trees in excess of twenty inches (d.b.h.) maybe removed unless dead or diseased, or their removal is reasonably necessary for construction and/or maintenance of roads, driveways, buildings or utilities.14. The Applicant’s Final Plan Application shall address any additional comments received from the Town of Shelburne Fire Chief and the Town of Shelburne Public Works Department.15. The Applicant’s Final Plan Application shall include approval from the Selectboard for the name of the road serving the project.16. Prior to commencement of site improvements, the Applicant shall comply with all applicable regulations of the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources pertaining to erosion control and stormwater, including the requirements of the Construction General Permit of the Department of Environmental Conservation.17. Prior to commencement of construction of any habitable structures on the Property, the Applicant shall obtain a Water Supply and Wastewater Permit from the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources.18. Within the building envelopes on each Lot, tree cutting shall be limited to sixty percent (60%) of existing basal area, exclusive of species which have been designated as Noxious Weeds by the Vermont Department of Agriculture.19. Unless already further restricted by being in the Vegetative Buffer or Clayplain Forest Management Area, tree cutting in portions of the Lots outside of the building envelopes shall be limited to thirty percent (30%) of existing basal area, exclusive of species which have been designated as Noxious Weeds by the Vermont Department of Agriculture.20. The Harbor Road fields provision shall be modified to provide for succession in the event Shelburne Farms ceases to exist.21. The application shall include all other required information identified in the Final Plan Checklist contained within the Town of Shelburne Subdivision Procedures and Application.22. Any Final Plan application shall contain a detailed and complete list of requested waivers from subdivision bylaw standard requirements.23. Any Final Plan application shall include detailed information about the existing and proposed roadways on the site, including existing width, proposed width, and approximate age to enable more thorough review by the Planning Commission.24. The applicant shall get confirmation from Jesse Mohr (wildlife expert) that a 40” to 48” fence height restriction in critical areas is not critical for wildlife movement.VOTING: 4 ayes, 1 nay (Kraushaar); motion carried.7. SITE PLAN & DESIGN REVIEW, VASILY KARPOV (NATALIA’S MARKET), 935 FALLS ROAD (SP07-01 & DR06-08)No one appeared on behalf of the application. The Planning Commission received written staff reports on the applications, dated 8/23/07. Dean Pierce reported there have been no changes to the site. There were no comments from the public. The evidentiary portion of the hearing was closed. DELIBERATION/DECISION Site Plan & Design Review, Exterior Changes, 935 Falls Road, Karpov (SP07-01 & DR06-08) MOTION by Dick Elkins, SECOND by Tucker Holland, to deny without prejudice the site plan application submitted by Vasily Karpov (Natalia’s Market, LLC) for proposed site plans, date stamped April 26, 2007, for retail use intensification at 935 Falls Road. VOTING: unanimous (6-0); motion carried. MOTION by Dick Elkins, SECOND by Tucker Holland, to deny without prejudice the design review application submitted by Vasily Karpov (d/b/a Natalia’s Market, LLC) for exterior renovations to property at 935 Falls Road. VOTING: unanimous (6-0); motion carried. 8. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF FINAL PLAN APPLICATION FILING DEADLINE, API PROPERTIES, POND ROAD Mike Burke and Michael Anderson appeared on behalf of the request. The Planning Commission received a memo from Dean Pierce, dated 8/17/07. MOTION by Peter Gibbs, SECOND by Claude LaPierre, to grant the request by API Properties for extension of the deadline for filing the Final Plan application for the project on Pond Road with the following conditions: 1. The Final Plan application shall be reviewed by the Shelburne Development Review Board. 2. The complete Final Plan application must be received by November 23, 2007, and one additional extension of the deadline by up to three months may be considered if requested by the Development Review Board prior to November 1, 2007. 3. The decision to extend the deadline shall be voided in the event any changes are proposed to the boundary between the subject parcel and any adjoining lands, such as the so-called Lewis parcel. VOTING: unanimous (6-0); motion carried. 9. OTHER BUSINESS/CORRESPONDENCE DRB & PC Thanks and appreciation was extended to Hilda White for her decades of service to the town. Ms. White resigned from the Planning Commission. Reg Gignoux announced at the next Planning Commission meeting he will be stepping down as Chairman. Dean Pierce reported five people have been named to the Development Review Board, four of whom are current Planning Commissioners. Presently, the regulations allow one individual to serve on both boards, but the Selectboard may revise the condition to increase that number. 10. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Dick Elkins, SECOND by Peter Gibbs, to adjourn the meeting. VOTING: unanimous (6-0); motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m. RScty: M.E.Riordan
January 2007Planning Commission Minutes February 2007 Planning Commissioin Minutes March 2007 Planning Commission Minutes April 2007 Planning Commission Minutes May 2007 Planning Commission Meeting June 2007 Planning Commission Minutes July 2007 Planning commission Minutes August 2007 Planning Commission Minutes September 2007 Planning Commission Minutes October 2007 Planning Commission Minutes November 2007 Planning Commission Minutes December 2007 Planning Commission Minutes December 2008 Planning Commission Minutes - December 2008 |
|
|
|
Home | Contacts | Departments | Events | Information | Search | Site Map | Services | Forms | Minutes
Site by DIGITAL FRONTIER © 2008 |
