HINESBURG PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of March 7, 2001
APPROVED
Present:
Ted Bloomhardt, Jean Isham, George Bedard, Carrie Fenn, Fred Haulenbeek,
and George Munson. Also Faith
Ingulsrud, Town Planner
Members
Absent:
Roger Kohn, John Mace, Will Patten
Members of the
Audience:
Michael Boutin, Jim and Judi Thibault, Tom Sopchak, Peggy List, Robert
Frost, Lisa and Steve Carlson, Martha Keenan, Doug and Gayle Gardner, Bob
Mellion, Joe Fallon
1.
Saputo Cheese - Follow up to Site
Plan. Ted Bloomhardt called the
meeting to order. With no
representatives from Saputo present,
the Planning Commission reviewed the revised site plan that was submitted
and compared it to the conditions of the January 8, 2001 approval. It was noted that there wasn’t much
change to landscaping from the previous site plan, just “a filling in” of
areas. The plans showed new
plantings proposed in front of the building facing Mechanicsville Road.
Jean Isham asked
about the front of the building facing Mechanicsville Road. George Bedard suggested the Planning
Commission invite Saputo Cheese to come to discuss that building face when they
come to discuss the eroded bank. Carrie Fenn felt strongly that evergreens
should be planted on the Mechanicsville Road face to visually break up the
siding. She also would like to see
a dressed up door. George Bedard
asked if Saputo could deal with that issue by using paint or if added
architectural features would be needed.
In reviewing the
other approval conditions, Ted noted that the side of the building facing
Mechanicsville Road and the erosion issue were the only conditions not yet
resolved. Ted then made the
following motion:
The Hinesburg
Planning Commission hereby approves the revised site plan dated 12/20/00, last
revised 1/19/01, submitted by the Saputo Cheese USA Inc., in conformance with
Condition #2 of the January 8, 2001 Planning Commission approval, with the
following conditions:
1.
Proposed
improvements to the eroded bank between the northeast corner of the building and
the canal and any other erosion problem and mitigation required along the north
side of the building shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review
and approval before the end of May 2001.
2.
Condition #3
from the January 8, 2001 approval has not yet been satisfied and the applicant
shall return to the Planning Commission before May 2001 with a proposal to
improve the appearance of the front of the building facing Mechanicsville
Road.
George Bedard
seconded the motion, and it was unanimously approved.
2. Boutin Estate - Sketch Plan Review. Michael Boutin described his proposal for 10
lot residential subdivision. The
lot sizes would be from 10.3 acres to 18.9 acres. The main access would be off Shelburne
Falls Road. Ted confirmed that this
access is already used for two front lots.
Lots 1, 2 and 3 are already subdivided. George Bedard reminded Mr. Boutin that
the right-of-way needs to be 50 feet wide wherever it is
shared.
Ted asked Mr. Boutin
how it was decided to draw the lot lines, they seem arbitrary in context to the
lay of the land, and it appears that the lots were specifically designed to be
over 10 acres . Mr. Boutin said
access was a factor. He said they
had soils for 11 lots, but couldn’t fit the 11th one in. Everyone reviewed a copy of an aerial
photo of the location in relation to proposed house locations and natural
features. Carrie suggested placing
the houses closer to the road and knoll.
She felt that would allow the back of the lots to be open meadow and the
land wouldn’t be fragmented. If
some lots were 2 or 3 acres owners would have the advantage of having vistas and
smaller lots which would be more affordable. Carrie expressed concern about the house
site location on Lot 5. Smaller
lots with common land, or smaller lots with one large lot that would be
maintained by the owner of the lot, were two options discussed concerning
maintaining a viable piece of open land for agricultural or recreational
use.
Mr. Boutin said
there will be some shared septic sites and some separate sites. Ted informed Mr. Boutin of the problems
the Town had with the septic engineer.
Scrutiny on his work will be high, and the Planning Commission may have
an independent engineer verify the work. In response to the topic of
wetlands, Mr. Boutin said there is no open water. There is a pond that was dug out years
ago, it is usually dry by summer.
Carrie asked about
the land on the Charlotte side. A
member of the audience, Martha Keenan described the 54 acres of land she
owns. She is working to have the
land purchased by the Charlotte Land Trust. If the land were subdivided,
Charlotte will allow no more than 10 additional houses. Ms. Keenan said she prefers to go the Land Trust
route.
Ted asked if the
Planning Commission wanted to continue the sketch plan review until a site visit
or approve the number of lots.
George Bedard thought that in fairness to the applicant the Planning
Commission should look at the property to see how the lots fit the land. Ted suggested a site visit as soon as it
is possible to see the land.
A member of the
audience, Gayle Gardner, who recently moved into the old Boutin house asked
about a trail system or greenways.
She was also concerned about runoff when the road is being built. Both George Bedard and Ted said that
trails are controlled by the landowners in the subdivision. Faith added that the Planning Commission
can authorize certain recreational amenities for the subdivision, but there
needs to be an understanding of the use of the trails. George Bedard said the trails have to
tie into some concept, from where to what.
Audience member Martha Keenan said she was interested in trails/greenways
as well. Ms. Gardner
described some problems with common land on Sunset Hill in Williston. Public access was a problem, they needed
a designated parking area.
Audience member
Peggy List, who is the owner of Lot 1, said part of the appeal of the land is
the view of the hay fields and rolled hay.
She would like to see the land saved for agricultural use. She feels Mr. Boutin put a lot of
thought into house placement. Gayle
Gardner asked what the Town’s position was on cluster development. Ted said it was preferred but not
required. George Bedard noted that
when people move out to Hinesburg they expect room and privacy, so a subdivision
has to be marketable in Hinesburg.
Faith noted that
Hinesburg currently has a policy of not taking over any new roads. This subdivision with 11 lots accessed
off one road might eventually have to be taken over by the Town. Fred Haulenbeek suggested the road be
built with fabric now, rather than wait until the fabric is needed. Faith said the Town road standards are
poor right now, and the Town may be applying State standards when taking over
roads. George Bedard said the
applicant should be cautioned about improving the road bed if he ever thinks the
road will be taken over.
Mr. Boutin asked
about any requirements for fire ponds.
Fred said the fire chief does recommend larger subdivisions have fire
ponds. Faith agreed to discuss this
subdivision with Al Barber.
With no further
discussion, Ted Bloomhardt made the following motion:
The Hinesburg
Planning Commission hereby moves to continue the sketch plan review of the
Boutin subdivision until the
Planning Commission can meet with the applicant on site, with the following
conditions:
1.
The applicant
shall explore the possibilities of trails or greenways in conjunction with
neighboring properties.
2.
The applicant
shall notify the Planning Commission when the property is available and passable
for the site visit and the Planning Commission will schedule it at a mutually
agreeable time.
Carrie Fenn
seconded, and it was unanimously approved.
3. Rich Donato - Camp Conversion. Lisa and Steve Carlson, representing Rich
Donato, came before the Planning Commission seeking reconsideration of the
decision to deny Mr. Donato’s application for camp conversion
access.
Ted described the
March 3 site visit. Ted, Jean
Isham, John Mace and Carrie Fenn walked up and down the road. They looked at widths and turn out
possibilities, the parking and turn around area at the far end, and the number
of properties served by the road.
Flags placed by George Bedard were located where 18 feet width made sense
and where it did not make sense.
Ted summarized the decision to deny the camp conversion access by saying
the Planning Commission approved Rich’s mother’s house for conversion access and
rejected Rich’s other conversion access because the road need improvements and
did not have legal access for turnarounds.
Lisa Carlson said
you can’t approve just one camp conversion access and then say no other camp
conversions are allowed. Her
position would have been very different if she had known it would have been the
one and only camp conversion. The
Planning Commission should have notified all other landowners there that only
one property would be granted conversion access. Ms. Carlson asked what needed to be done
to make it feasible for any other camp conversion? She thinks year-round camps belong on
that road.
Ted explained the
Planning Commission is not looking at camp conversions, per se. The Planning Commission is looking at
development on a Private Right of Way, and specifically at safe and legal
year-round access. Review of camp
conversion itself is done by the Zoning Board. Ted continued that the Planning
Commission’s review is relatively limited.
Mr. Donato has to contribute to any improvements to the road for any
other camp conversions on that road.
Carrie Fenn continued that the Planning Commission has a responsibility
to the people on that road and to the Town to ensure that emergency vehicles
have access to those sites.
Jean Isham said that
during the site visit, Ms. Carlson had pointed out where turn outs could
be. George Bedard said that fire
chief Al Barber should see the turn out locations, Mr. Barber needs to feel
comfortable that his people can see what is coming and going. Ted said there are four turn outs at
issue, and the turn outs need to be improved such that you can see oncoming
traffic. Faith relayed John Mace’s
opinion (as he could not attend tonight’s meeting). John felt that turn outs made sense
instead of having to require a 18 foot wide road. John also talked with Al Barber at the
town meeting. Mr. Barber feels the
road is kept in good condition, but also, there is water at the pond, so they
don’t have to run trucks back and forth.
Fred felt that turn outs require a lot of coordination, and he’d like to
see as few as possible. He would
rather see two-way traffic because emergency type vehicles need
it.
George Munson noted
that emergency vehicles are one concern, the other concern is a jumble of parked
cars and vehicles. George Bedard
agreed, the folks near the water need to resolve parking. The Carlson’s have already done a lot to
clarify the requirements for the road, but Mr. Donato needs to do further work
on the turn-around area.
Mr. Donato’s access
in relation to Jimmy Nelson’s property was discussed, as were the possibilities
of easements, deed right of ways, legal access, adequate parking. Carrie noted that’s why the Planning
Commission would like to see a neighborhood association that could work out the
safe and legal access. George
Bedard summarized that the Carlson’s have done Step 1, now it is up to people
further down the road to figure out a solution to parking and turning
around. They may want to go for
easements. They all have to sit
down and figure out how it will work.
It was agreed that everyone wanted future applicants to know what needs
to be done for camp conversion access approval; no one else should have to go
through this.
Ms. Carlson thought
this whole exercise was a waste of time because in the summer each house has 10
cars parked there. For year round
houses it is just two cars that leave for work in the morning and come back at
the end of the day.
Ted noted that this
was an informational discussion, and the Planning Commission is not in the
position to grant a partial approval.
There are several things that could be done dealing with Upper Access
Road issues as it crosses the Carlson property:
1.
File the Road
Agreement, that Ms. Carlson has, in the Town Records.
2.
Provide deeded
easements for pullouts.
3.
Mark the
pullouts on the ground and have them approved by the Town.
4.
Describe
pullout configuration.
5.
Provide
language for maintenance/snow plowing.
Still unresolved
will be the legal access area to the parking/turnaround
area.
4. Mary McClements - Site Plan Amendment
Mary McClements and Brad
Palmer described Ms. McClements proposal to use the old Post Office building on
Lot #14 for the Springhouse School of Art.
She intends to buy the building.
It was explained
that the parking lot between the new Post Office and the building on Lot #14 is
a shared parking lot. Ms.
McClements parking needs are an issue in relation to the Post Office’s peak
parking needs. Ms. McClements said
the maximum number of people using the building would be about 20 people, 15
children and 3 or 4 adults. The
children will be dropped off. She
outlined proposed class times. The
Planning Commission agreed that her proposal was a great use for staggered
parking, except on Saturday mornings when the Post Office is busy.
Ms. McClements
described the proposed landscaping.
Barry Washburn is supposed to plant salt resistant trees per the site
plan. She would plant bushes in the
front and have window boxes. Ms.
McClements said she got the okay for a sidewalk after talking with the engineer
for the site plan and Marty Abair at the Army Corps of Engineers. Faith was not sure if the sidewalk could
be constructed without affecting the wetlands. George Bedard stressed the importance of
resolving the wetland issues before starting construction. He advised Ms. McClements to make sure
the slope from constructing the sidewalks doesn’t go into the
wetlands..
It was explained
that if a free-standing sign is proposed, the Planning Commission would have to
approve it. A wall-mounted sign
only requires Zoning Administrator approval. Any sign lighting will require Planning
Commission approval. An awning over
the front door (facing parking lot) is proposed. There will be no entrance on the
Commerce Street side. Ms.
McClements described a proposed handicap ramp. The Planning Commission would like to
see a drawing of it. Faith noted
that easement language on using the entry drive was all pre-approved as part of
the subdivision. George Bedard
recommended Ms. McClements’ lawyer focus on the reciprocal parking agreement, as
it currently lasts for only 25 years.
With no further
discussion, Ted Bloomhardt made a motion which is attached to the end of these
minutes.
George Bedard
seconded the motion, and it was unanimously approved.
5. Travia’s Restaurant - Informal
Discussion Bob Mellion, owner of Travia’s Restaurant,
and his attorney Joe Fallon meet with the Planning Commission to discuss site
plan requirements. Mr. Fallon noted
that when Travia’s opened in the early 1980's some of the site plan conditions
were not satisfied. He pointed out
that Mr. Mellion has operated Travia’s for 20 years without problems, and
because of the 15 year statute of limitations, Travia’s is in
compliance.
Mr. Fallon presented
a revised site plan with 24 parking spaces. He said the 15 original parking spaces
were not accurate because of snow cover at the time it was drawn up. They propose to keep the gravel parking
lot since Mr. Mellion can’t afford to pave it; the driveway is not paved; and
Dr. Metz’s parking lot is not paved.
Mr. Fallon said headers for parking spaces would make snow plowing a
nightmare. Dr. Metz has allowed Mr.
Mellion to have patrons park on his property. Mr. Mellion can’t screen the dumpster
because the garbage truck wouldn’t be able to access it.
Mr. Mellion said he
currently has seating for 34 people, and he doesn’t use the downstairs
area. The deck is only used two
months of the year. Ideas to
identify parking spaces and traffic circulation were discussed. Fred said he has seen parallel parking
along the driveway, how do people know where to park? George Bedard suggested single posts
with reflectors and small signs.
Ted felt it was a funky parking configuration, and the way people park could reduce the
number of parking spaces.
Mr. Fallon asked if
the approval could be reduced to 48 seats, which would accommodate the 24
parking spaces. Faith suggested
rounding it up to 50 seats.
Other Planning
Commission issues or concerns are:
1.
Deed language
for the small triangle of the driveway currently located on Dr. Metz’s
land.
2.
Overflow
parking arrangement on Dr. Metz’s parking lot.
3.
Draft language
to deal with overflow parking.
4.
Site visit by
Planning Commission.
Ted added that the
Planning Commission is looking for a site plan proposal that would show how to
utilize and direct parking as it is described. Paving the lot would help delineate the
parking spaces.
6. Miscellaneous
George Bedard moved
to approve the sewer language on the Erb property. Jean Isham seconded, and it was
unanimously approved.
Ted Bloomhardt moved
to accept the minutes of February 21, 2001 as corrected. Carrie Fenn seconded, and it was
unanimously approved.
The meeting
adjourned at 10:55
pm.
Respectfully
submitted,
Sally Kimball,
Recording Secretary
HINESBURG PLANNING
COMMISSION
March 7, 2001
The Hinesburg
Planning Commission hereby grants site plan amendment approval to Mary
McClements to operate the Springhouse School of the Arts using the existing
building currently owned by Barry and Jaqueline Washburne on Lot #14 of Commerce
Park and to make the following changes to the site plan approved on June 7,
2000: add sidewalk along the 13
spaces on west side of the parking lot; and add three wall-mounted light
fixtures on the two front corners of the building and one on the back southwest
corner. The site plan shall be as
shown on a plan titled “Proposed Improvements: Hinesburg Commercial Park Lot 14
and the Hinesburg Post Office” by Krebs and Lansing Consulting Engineers, Inc.,
dated 3/29/00, last revised 10/10/00.
This approval is subject to the following
conditions:
1.
Class start and
end times shall be scheduled to avoid coinciding with peak customer hours at the
post office. The number of
students and teachers using the facility at any one time shall be limited to 4
employees and 15 students. If
experience indicates inadequate parking or unsafe traffic flow, the applicant
shall immediately present proposed modifications of the site plan to the
Hinesburg Planning Commission, and obtain approval of it.
2.
All exterior
lighting shall be down-lit fixtures of the type and location described in the
application summary, installed or shielded in such a manner as to conceal light
sources and reflector/refractor areas from view from points beyond the lot.
3.
Refuse storage
shall be located behind the building in a secured, fenced area, or
inside the building.
4.
All plants and
trees shown on the site plan shall be planted before a Certificate of Occupancy
is issued for Zoning Permit #2000-151.
All landscaping shall be properly maintained and
any plants or trees that die shall be promptly replaced.
5.
Headers shall
be installed at each parking space along the west
sidewalk.
6.
No signs,
except those allowed and approved by direct application to the Zoning
Administrator, shall be installed without further Planning Commission
approval.
7.
The HVAC area
on the south side may be used for housing of the electric ceramics
kiln.
8.
An awning
over the east doorway is permitted and a ramp for handicapped access leading to
the doorway is permitted. The ramp
plans shall be provided to the Planning Commission for record purposes.
The above motion was passed by the Hinesburg
Planning Commission on March 7, 2001.
_____________________________
Theodore Bloomhardt,
Chairman
Hinesburg Planning
Commission