MEMBERS PRESENT:       Tucker Holland (Chairman); Dick Elkins, Peter Gibbs, Dennis Webster, Gary von Stange, Kate Lalley, Kay Kraushaar.

STAFF PRESENT:                Dean Pierce, Town Planner.

OTHERS PRESENT:            Ted Rakochy.

Tucker Holland called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.

 

There were no changes to the agenda.

 

 

Dennis Webster referred to the proposal by John Giebink and Charlie Brush of Green Mountain Development Group to redevelop the mobile home park in the village (Shelburnewood). Mr. Webster recalled at one time there was an inner village master plan to extend Church Street to the shopping center and onto the Shelburnewood property in a loop road fashion. The road would have involved several private property parcels and some of the property owners objected. Mr. Webster asked if there is a way to have the loop road without involving private property so the proposed development can be connected to the shopping center and Church Street. Dick Elkins pointed out the loop road may not be appealing if it goes through the park. Dean Pierce explained the idea of a loop road goes back to 1963. The road was again mentioned in the 1988 village plan to include extending Harbor Road into the shopping center, involving Church Street and extending to the north. With the update of the village plan a few years ago there were some concerns voiced about the road. It is unlikely the town would condemn any private property for the road. Mr. Pierce will compile information on the proposal by Green Mountain Development Group relative to the connector road mentioned by Dennis Webster.

 

Ted Rakochy explained his proposal to subdivide his property at 622 Mt. Philo Road into two lots, one being one acre and the other being 1.7 acres. The total parcel is 2.7 acres located in the Residential-3 zone. Conforming lot size in the Residential-3 district is 2.3 acres. There are several properties in the district that are nonconforming. Five lots are of similar size to the proposed subdivided lots.  Mr. Rakochy suggested the Residential-1 zone be extended so the lots are conforming.  Mr. Rakochy asked when and how the nonconforming lots were formed with respect to the Residential-3 zoning bylaws, and whether a district overlay can be created so the smaller lots will be conforming. If the boundary of the Residential-1 zone is extended to encompass the lots, the lots would then be conforming, said Mr. Rakochy. Ted Rakochy asked if the residential zones are set by where the town sewer line ends, noting his neighbor to the north is connected to municipal sewer service, but this is not shown on the map. It was mentioned the sewer connection was illegal. Dean Pierce stated the minimum lot size in the zone is proposed to change from 2.3 acres to five acres with the current zoning changes. Tucker Holland pointed out under the current regulations Mr. Rakochy’s lot is not large enough to be subdivided. Mr. Rakochy stressed there are existing lots that are not conforming in size. An overlay could be done to allow an exception. Mr. Rakochy said at his expense he would like to connect to town sewer at some point if his on-site system fails. The process for changing the Town Plan and zoning was briefly explained. Besides the zoning change, extending the sewer service area and doing an overlay district would also have to be decided.

 

Dean Pierce reported no further information has been received from the Selectboard or the requestor. Tucker Holland stated a directive from the Selectboard is needed because extending the sewer is a capital expenditure for the town. The Selectboard needs to decide if additional development will be allowed or the life of the sewer plant extended. It was noted the allocation amount changed from 150 gallons per day per bedroom to 210 gallons per day per house. Also, the number of children is decreasing per household so there is less use and more available allocation. Dennis Webster observed this may be opportunity within the village to clean up the ad hoc hatch-work of lots (i.e. keep the green, green, and have more density where there is already development). Mr. Webster said he does not want to increase the area of the sewer district, but change the footprint. There are areas that are poorly planned and laid out (nonconforming lot sizes), and potential for sewer problems. Tucker Holland stated the sewer area was thought out and subscribed to, and the treatment plant had a predetermined shelf life. Now there is excess capacity to what was projected. Mr. Holland reiterated the decision of extending the life of the treatment plant or having more development is a capital expenditure one to be made by the Selectboard. Kay Kraushaar felt the sewer district boundary was a planning issue and a factor in containing development. The sewer district was a defined area (definition of the edge more so than the middle). The Selectboard is looking to the Planning Commission for a recommendation on how relaxing the boundary is seen. Dick Elkins said he would like to expand use within the sewer area and utilize the sewer by expanding within the district (by the types of housing), not expand the district itself. Dean Pierce stated the 2007 Town Plan shows the areas to change from Residential-1 to Residential-2 (changing 50,000 s.f. to 20,000 s.f.). Peter Gibbs pointed out the zoning changes will use some of the projected extra five years of life of the treatment plant. The town has an obligation to serve people within the existing sewer service area before expanding it. If there are sewage problems (high density and multiple failures) the town will be able to address them. There may also be unforeseen demands.  Dennis Webster stressed there are a tremendous number of lots in Shelburne that are nonconforming. Dick Elkins pointed out the Planning Commission does not discriminate against a nonconforming lot. Peter Gibbs observed if the zoning is changed to allow a small lot size, the lots will not be adequate for an on-site septic system so the sewer service area will have to be expanded.  Gary von Stange asked if the Selectboard wants the Planning Commission to recommend defending the sewer district boundary. Dean Pierce explained the Selectboard was not comfortable with making an ad hoc change and wanted the Planning Commission to look at the larger question of making a changed to the sewer district. Kate Lalley spoke in favor of leaving the district as it is because the demand in the future is not known. The town may need to increase density within village core areas. Ms. Lalley said she also wants to avoid sprawl of housing development and maintain open areas. The consensus of the Planning Commission is not to make a change to the sewer boundary at this time.

 

 

Tucker Holland reported the Selectboard is intending to send the Planning Commission a summary of their thoughts on the bylaw revisions following the August 26, 2008 meeting. The Planning Commission must being work with the consultant, Mike Munson, by September 11, 2008 on the items identified in the grant or there will not be time to complete the process which will jeopardize the grant. One option may be to hold special sessions to go over the revisions from the Selectboard and complete the review by the end of September.

 

Dean Pierce will check with Mike Munson about having a kick-off meeting on the next round of zoning amendments on 8/28/08.

 

The Planning Commission received a copy of the application by Peter and Rose Garritano for a 10’x 12’ ground mounted tracking solar panel on their Dorset Street property. Following brief discussion the Planning Commission had no reservations with the solar panel.

 

There was mention of compiling information to determine the effectiveness of existing wind turbines in Shelburne.

 

There was brief discussion of the number of vacant businesses along Shelburne Road. Tucker Holland urged business owners to discuss the zoning with the Planning Commission so the Planning Commission can do what is practical and helpful in the corridor.

 

 

The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m.

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:       Tucker Holland (Chairman); Dick Elkins, Peter Gibbs, Dennis Webster, Gary von Stange, Kate Lalley, Kay Kraushaar.

STAFF PRESENT:                Dean Pierce, Town Planner.

CONSULTANT:                    Mike Munson.

OTHERS PRESENT:            Jed Graef, Shirley Priest, John Giebink, Jeremy Matosky, John DuBrul, III, Chris Neme, Tom Anderson.

Tucker Holland called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m.

 

There were no changes to the agenda.

 

 

There were no comments from the public at this time.

 

Dean Pierce noted the town received a planning grant to do zoning revisions. Phase 1 of the zoning changes are currently under consideration by the Selectboard. The Planning Commission received a summary of comments on the zoning amendments in Phase 1 covering Article I through Article XVIII from the Selectboard. Phase 1 includes work on the list of uses and zoning districts in which the uses are allowed. Pre-requisites for zoning regulations or bylaws were reviewed. If a town wants to have regulations then there must be a comprehensive plan drafted. There is no requirement for a community to have zoning regulations. Title 24VSA117 is the state planning statute. Now that the town has a Development Review Board handling site plan review, the Planning Commission can focus on the town plan and bylaws, stated Mr. Pierce. The hearing process to adopt changes to the zoning regulations was reviewed. The Planning Commission holds a hearing on the draft revisions, forwards the document to the Selectboard where additional public hearings are held. If there are significant changes to the document then the Planning Commission once again reviews the material. If there are no changes by the Selectboard, then the document is adopted. The Planning Commission develops the draft document and the Selectboard adopts/finalizes the document.

 

Mike Munson, planning consultant, briefly reviewed his past 30 years of planning experience in Vermont as a consultant that includes working on Shelburne’s town plan in the past, working with the Regional Planning Commission, and being the Town of Williston planner. Mr. Munson reviewed his proposed approach with Phase 2 of the Shelburne zoning revisions. Changes in site plan review requirements will be covered first. The statute now allows inclusion of items under site plan review such as outdoor lighting, storm water management, pedestrian access and circulation, transportation impacts. Next under revision will be conditional use requirements. State statute requires four criteria for conditional use approval, but a town can establish more criteria if desired so there is not a “one-size-fits-all” approach. Performance standards (such as off street parking requirements), refining requirements for treatment of nonconforming uses or structures, sign regulations and requirements, and building demolition requirements will be covered next in the stated order. If time allows the subdivision regulations will be covered (or this could be Phase 3 of the zoning revisions). Each zoning item will be discussed by the Planning Commission (concerns, problems, what works, what does not work), and then Mike Munson will produce a first draft of the discussion on the item for review at the next meeting. Then a second draft incorporating changes/clarifications will be done by Mike Munson and reviewed by the Planning Commission followed by a third draft which will be placed aside for incorporation into the complete document. The same procedure will be followed for each zoning revision.

 

Mr. Munson reviewed the timeline of the work. The schedule includes two work sessions in September and October and one each in November and December, two meetings in January and one meeting each in February and March.  It is anticipated the revised zoning package will be compiled at the February meeting and a public forum will be held at the March meeting. The schedule allows for an extra meeting to be inserted if needed. Each meeting will start with the next topic first and end with review of the document(s) drafted by Mike Munson.

 

John Giebink observed Article XIX may have already been covered under Phase 1. Mike Munson stated in Phase 1 of the revisions Article XIX was mainly reformatted (i.e. “DRB” replaced “PC”) and some work was done on the PUD section. Mr. Giebink expressed concern about proceeding with Phase 2 when the Selectboard has not adopted the Phase 1 revisions, and the meeting schedule in light of the double duty by members serving on both the Planning Commission and Development Review Board. Mr. Giebink commented there is impact on properties based on the revisions in Phase 1 much greater than the $12,000 planning grant. Some properties are in limbo until the revisions in Phase 1 are adopted. Mr. Giebink urged making completion of Phase 1 the priority and not starting Phase 2 until Phase 1 is adopted. Mr. Giebink expressed upset at the delay by the Selectboard. Tucker Holland assured the Planning Commission is aware of the potential for special sessions to cover the comments from the Selectboard on Phase 1 changes, but the Planning Commission felt the Phase 2 process had to be started to get the grant in place.  Mike Munson added there is flexibility in the schedule. Items can be combined where possible. Information will be sent electronically to the Planning Commission by the end of business on Monday. The Planning Commission must come to each work session prepared. Dean Pierce noted the deliverable to the state is the draft by May 10, 2009.

 

There was further discussion of the schedule. The Planning Commission will try to be as aggressive as possible to complete the work.  Gary von Stange commented it is speculation on what the Selectboard will give to the Planning Commission relative to the Phase 1 changes. The Selectboard is trying to do the best job possible. The Planning Commission needs to address the concerns being expressed. As well it is important to start Phase 2. Mr. von Stange offered to meet as much as possible. It was suggested that the number of DRB meetings might be decreased as an option. Tucker Holland suggested adhering to the schedule presented by Mike Munson until feedback is received from the Selectboard and then the schedule can be amended if necessary. Peter Gibbs commented the DRB schedule has been amended in the past. Dennis Webster suggested covering the first item (site plan review) now. Following further discussion it was agreed it would not be an efficient use of time to discuss site plan regulations at this juncture because no one is prepared for the discussion.

 

There was general discussion on the process following with the town plan update and the zoning update(s).  Jed Graef suggested if the town budget is in good shape then perhaps the $12,000 for the planning grant could be funded by the town to allow more time to complete Phase 1 first and then Phase 2. Tucker Holland reiterated as soon as the Phase 1 document is received from the Selectboard the Planning Commission will focus on it. Mr. Holland said he is optimistic Phase 2 will be an efficient process.  Mike Munson stressed the schedule can be changed as needed. To be most efficient Planning Commissioners must be prepared prior to each meeting.

 

Chris Neme asked about performance standards. Mike Munson said the list includes vibration, noise, smoke, odors, direct and indirect glare, liquid and solid waste. Items can be removed or added to the list as long as there is an associated performance standard and the item is consistent with the town plan and supports the health, safety and welfare of the community at large.

 

Peter Gibbs asked if there are some items that are not addressed in the regulations and need to be per state statute. Mike Munson stated storm water management is one item. Dean Pierce suggested there be regulations to allow administrative amendments to a site plan and to handle minor amendments.  Dennis Webster suggested having a consent agenda to streamline the work load. Staff could review the items on the consent agenda for approval by the Planning Commission. The agenda can be amended at the meeting if desired.

 

Mike Munson briefly mentioned some items under site plan for consideration, including pedestrian circulation, connecting the subject site to pedestrian facilities, traffic impacts (not just access), and having different site plan requirements for different districts (i.e. landscaping in the village district versus the residential district).

 

The Planning Commission will meet on September 11, 2008 to begin Phase 2 of the zoning revisions per the schedule from Mike Munson unless the meeting is pre-empted due to receipt of the Phase 1 changes from the Selectboard.

 

The Planning Commission received a summary of comments on Phase 1 of the zoning revisions from the Selectboard. The Town Manager has impressed on the Selectboard the importance of the schedule. The Selectboard may opt to make changes/edits to the document themselves. Dean Pierce is investigating software to facilitate making the changes on-line.

 

The Planning Commission received a request from Ted Rakochy to clarify the Planning Commission’s position on the request to extend the sewer boundary to his property on Mt. Philo Road or change the zoning to allow subdivision of his lot. Gary von Stange read the original request from Mr. Rakochy and noted the request is not clear that he is asking the Planning Commission a direct question. The request says “...would like the board to consider....” and refers to future use of the property. Mr. von Stange said Mr. Rakochy has not presented evidence sufficient for the Planning Commission to change the boundary to permit hook up to the municipal sewer system. Dennis Webster commented granting the request could be considered “spot zoning”. Dean Pierce said Mr. Rakochy was provided with information and encouraged to contact the Planning Office.

 

 

The meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m.