HINESBURG
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes
of June 6, 2001
Minutes approved 6/20/01
Present: Ted Bloomhardt, Roger Kohn, John
Mace, Jean Isham, George Bedard, Carrie Fenn, Fred Haulenbeek, and George
Munson. Also Faith Ingulsrud, Town
Planner
Members Absent: Will Patten
Members
of the Audience: Ernest Gilbert,
Charles and Charlotte Ross, Carol Jenkins, Ken Brown, Clea Cope, Terry Scanlon,
Linda Porier, Jeanne Wilson, Rocky Martin, David Lyman, John Lyman, Doug
Gardner, Gayle Gardner, Tom Herbick, Al Barber, Chris Berger.
1.
Cope/Ryder Subdivision - Sketch Plan
Review. Ted Bloomhardt opened the
meeting with the sketch plan review of the Cope/Ryder subdivision proposal on
Silver Street. (Roger Kohn recused
himself from discussion.) Terry Scanlon
and Clea Cope (Clea Cope is the executor of the John Ryder estate) propose
subdividing the 5.29 acre parcel into two lots. Mr. Scanlon explained Lot #1 would include the existing house and
Lot #2 would include the existing “albatross” barn which could be converted to
a three bedroom house. Ted noted that
this proposal is for simple parceling, but there are enough factors that could
make it a minor subdivision. The
possibility exists for buyers to build new houses on the upper portions of the
lots on top of the hill, rather than live in the existing structures. No one was certain if the Cope’s had a
right of way for Lot #2 to use Coyote Ridge Road. Ted reminded them that they will most certainly need a right of
way, and also the right of way across Lot #1 will need to be 50 feet wide
instead of the 30' shown on the plan.
Ernie
Gilbert, a member of the audience and a neighboring land owner, expressed a
concern about the “albatross” barn on Lot #2 being converted into a house. The structure is rough, and there are no
conditions or town design review policies.
Mr. Gilbert suggested subdividing the parcel across north/south, rather
than east/west. That way there will be
a conforming lot on top of the hill and the house, barn would stay intact and
the septic system for the new lot would not be on the lot with the existing
house. Mr. Scanlon agreed that the barn
is not pleasing to the eye, however he felt it is really not a barn, but three
quarters of a house. Mr. Scanlon
expressed some interest the north/south subdivision idea. Fred Haulenbeek added that a clean lot on
top of the hill would be more marketable, and Ted thought keeping the house and
barn together on one lot would also be sellable. Carol Jenkins, a member of the audience who lives on Coyote Ridge
Road, said the right of way is on her property and it was her understanding
that the right of way was just to be used to access a private dump area. She requested that the dump area be cleaned
up. She also noted that Coyote Ridge
Road is a dirt road with limited visibility at the Silver Street intersection
and she would like to see the number of cars using the road be limited. Jeanne Wilson, who was in the audience and
lives across the street from the Ryder parcel agreed with Mr. Gilbert. She felt the barn is indeed a
barn. Ms. Wilson also agreed with Ms.
Jenkins that more traffic on Coyote Ridge Road is not a good idea. Ted noted that the town approved road access
to Silver Street for Coyote Ridge and the two drives on the Ryder lot. He said he didn’t want to see development on
top of lot #2 with the current proposed lot line configuration because the barn
would be inaccessible from the house site.
Fred encouraged the applicants to rethink the idea, and consider the
practicality of a north/south division.
Mr. Scanlon agreed the north/south division is a good idea, but that he
needed to look into the right of way situation.
Ted
summarized that everyone is looking for the best use, the best market value and
the best subdivision for this parcel.
Ted then moved to continue the sketch plan review with the applicant to
continue research on the north/south line division. Fred seconded, and all approved with the exception of Roger who
had recused himself from the vote.
2. Boutin Subdivision - Continuation of Sketch
Plan Review. There was a quick
summary of the site visit that took place May 23rd. In attendance at the site visit were Ted
Bloomhardt, Carrie Fenn, Jean Isham, George Bedard, John Mace, Will Patten,
Fred Haulenbeek, Tim Thibault, Gayle and Doug Gardner, and Mike Boutin. The Planning Commission found pasture,
wooded areas; they walked the proposed driveways, saw septic sites, and good views.
Mr.
Boutin explained he was proposing a 10 lot subdivision, and he understood the
concern was with the layout of certain lots.
He wanted to know if he should scale down his proposal or move forward. Ted said the concern was with contiguous
open areas in relation to lot layouts.
There may be a better way to configure the lot lines. George Bedard explained that land owners
would take better care of blocks of land defined by ledges, roads and
landscaping, rather than pieces of land divided by those features. George Bedard told Mr. Boutin he has done a
good job with house placements. Roger
said there’s nothing magic about having 10 acre lots since Act 250 septic
approval will be needed no matter what the lot size. John Mace suggested having a few big lots that control most of
the meadow, and a few smaller lots, and to have land ownership all on one side
of the driveways.
Charles
Ross, a member of the audience and owner of the Taproot horse farm across from
the proposed Boutin subdivision, said he had a special interest in the Boutin
land as his great grandfather had owned it.
Mr. Ross said he was in the process of negotiating an arrangement so
that his 250 acres will never be developed except for recreational use and
therapeutic riding. Mr. Ross expressed
concern about traffic speeds along Shelburne Falls Road. Gayle Gardner, a member of the audience and
buyer of one of the Boutin lots, said she was happy with the discussions and
wished the Boutins well. She would like
to see a road maintenance association for the subdivision. Ms. Gardner also agreed with Mr. Ross that
someone will get hurt with the traffic speeds on Shelburne Falls Road. Al Barber, Hinesburg Fire Chief and a
member of the audience, suggested fire pond placement and a dry hydrant would
give the houses a better fire safety rating and thus more sellable.
Mr.
Boutin said he would do a reconfiguration of lot lines for the Planning
Commission. Roger thought the easiest
way would be for the applicant to withdraw the application and then present a
new one when he is ready. Mr. Boutin
agreed to withdraw his application for the subdivision. Ted Bloomhardt moved to waive the fee on the
re-submission of the revised sketch plan.
Carrie Fenn seconded, and it was unanimously approved.
3. Saputo Cheese - Site Plan Follow-Up. Tom Herbick, representing Saputo Cheese,
came before the Planning Commission to propose some ways to deal with erosion
problems on the southern bank of the canal, and also to present a new option
for the facade of east side of the building facing Mechanicsville Road.
Mr.
Herbick presented a site plan with color pictures and drawings from Trudell
Consulting Engineers. Mr. Herbick said
the erosion has gotten worse since the pictures were taken. He said the dam itself is unsafe, and they
propose to take one corner of the dam off, as it serves no function other than
being the cause of the erosion. A
member of the audience, John Lyman asked who would be responsible if more
erosion occurs on the Lyman property as a result of part of the dam being
removed. Mr. Herbick thought the
waterflow was on Saputo’s property side, so it wouldn’t be an issue for the
Lymans. George Bedard suggested the
Lymans consult with Saputo’s engineers to determine where the water will flow,
and to work out any other issues.
Mr.
Herbick then discussed the proposed new facade for the east side of the
building. It would have wood siding and
a color scheme matching the rest of the building. The Planning Commission was very pleased with the appearance, and
Roger asked Mr. Herbick to let Montreal headquarters know the proposed facade
is very much appreciated.
Ted
Bloomhardt then made a motion which was revised after being seconded. The final, approved motion is as follows:
The
Hinesburg Planning Commission hereby approves the following items submitted by
Saputo Cheese USA Inc., in conformance with the January 8, 2001 site plan
approval and subsequent approval for a revised site plan on March 7: A plan for
correcting the eroded bank along the canal off the northeast corner of the
building; and a proposal to improve the appearance of the front of the building
facing Mechanicsville Road. This
approval is subject to the following conditions:
1.
The applicant
shall consult with the adjoining property owner and the engineering plan for
the modification of the spillway shall be designed such that the water flow
will not cause further erosion on either side of the canal.
2.
After slope
stabilization next to the canal has been completed, the applicant shall provide
the Planning Commission with a plan for landscaping at the top of the bank as
proposed by the Trudell Consulting Engineers in their letter of May 29, 2001
and obtain the Commission’s approval of it.
3.
The wood sided
building facade plan is approved with the understanding that evergreen shrubs
are proposed to replace the deciduous foundation plantings on the plans
approved on March 7. The color for the
siding and trim shall match the colors of the rest of the buiding.
4.
The applicant
shall consult with the Hinesburg Fire Department to insure fire fighting access
is retained along the north side of the building.
Roger Kohn seconded
the motion. Mr. Herbick noted that both
he and the Lymans are not waterflow experts.
Member of the audience, Fire Chief Al Barber wondered if the Fire
Department would lose the foot path fire access if the contouring of the land
changed as a result of the proposed slope stabilization next to the canal. Ted revised the motion to address both Mr.
Herbick’s and Mr. Barber’s concerns.
Roger re-seconded the revised motion.
It was unanimously approved.
4. Town of Hinesburg Police Department - Site
Plan Review. Jeanne Wilson and Rocky Martin presented the
proposal to convert the former Flore house on Route 116 across from Fire House
Plaza into temporary police
offices. A drawing showing both the
house and the nearby Fire Department building and parking lot was reviewed. The biggest issue is the ADA access
ramp. In order to reduce the requirement
for a lengthy wheelchair ramp, the Town is proposing a slightly raised
accessible parking space.
David Lyman, who was
in the audience, wanted it to be known that he reserved a ROW opposite Commerce
Street in the vicinity of the north line of the Police Department
property. Landscaping and tree
placement for better road visibility were discussed. Faith pointed out that the sign location on the plan was in the
wrong place. Future plans for a
sidewalk were undefined at this point, but it was agreed a sidewalk was a
necessity.
Ted Bloomhardt made
the following motion:
The Hinesburg
Planning Commission hereby grants site plan approval to the Town of Hinesburg
for use of the former Flore House at 10298 Route 116. The site plan shall be as shown on a plan by Bast and Rood
Architects titled “Site Plan for Police Offices and Fire Station Parking
Renovations and last dated 5/31/01,
except as set forth herein. This
approval is subject to the following conditions:
1.
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 them.
2.
No exterior
lighting has been proposed and no lighting is approved at this time.
3.
Plants shall be
installed as shown on the plans. All
plants and trees shall be properly maintained and any plants or trees that die
shall be promptly replaced.
4.
The applicant
shall obtain a zoning permit from the zoning administrator prior to the
approved change in use. Before a zoning
permit is issued the applicant shall provide the zoning administrator with copies
of any required state permits including a Vtrans road cut permit and a
wastewater permit.
5.
The Right of
Way along the northern property line shall be shown on the site plan.
6.
The free
standing sign shall be as shown on the plan with recessed lighting as
shown. The lighting shall not result in
glare off the property. The plan shall
show the sign located outside the Route 116 right of way.
7.
The Town shall
return within 90 days to the Planning Commission with a plan that provides a
schedule for sidewalk construction that includes the sidewalk in front of this
building.
8.
This approval
does not include any improvements on, or modifications to any property other
than the former Flore lot.
Roger Kohn seconded
the motion, and it was unanimously approved.
5. Chris Berger - Request to Change Building
Envelope. (George Bedard recused himself from the
discussion). Chris Berger explained
that he owns Lot #2, the middle lot of the three lot Bedard subdivision on
Texas Hill Road. He is seeking approval
to move the building envelope 200 ft further to the east based on the building
envelope in Lot #1 having moved it’s location too closely to Mr. Berger’s
original building envelope location.
Mr. Berger said he did not know that the owners of Lot#1 had requested
to move their building lot and that it had been approved by the Planning
Commission until a month ago. Ted
asked if the owners of Lot #1 knew of tonight’s meeting and of the Bergers
concerns about house site locations. It
was explained that the same builder owns Lot #1 and Lot #3. Lot #2 will now have a 700 ft. driveway with
a 13% grade. Roger suggested a site
visit in light of the problems with the Pond Road steep driveway. Ted expressed dismay that building envelope
locations were moved after approval.
George Bedard reminded the group that it was decided owners could move
the building envelopes with Planning Commission approval. Faith suggested the Planning Commission make
moving the building envelope contingent on a shared driveway. Roger thought this request should be
rescheduled until the other owners of the adjoining lots could be here. Fred Haulenbeek said the Planning Commission
developed the envelopes and moved them without adjacent owners input. It’s unfortunate, and against what he would
like to see, but, it should be approved.
John Mace and other Planning Commission members agreed with Fred.
Roger Kohn made the
following motion, with reluctance:
The Hinesburg
Planning Commission hereby revises the November 1, 2000 Final Plat Approval for
the 3-lot subdivision by George Bedard on Texas Hill Road to change location of
the building envelope on Lot #2. The
revised building envelope shall be shown on the Plat of the subdivision dated
October 8, 2000 last revised January 22, 2001, and on a site plan of the
subdivision last revised February 5, 2001, and shall be subject to the
following conditions:
1.
All other
conditions of the November 1, 2000 Final Plat shall remain in effect.
2.
The applicant
shall flag the proposed location of the driveway and obtain approval from the
Town Road Foreman or his designee with specific reference to this being the
location that the Road Foreman believes would provide the best access. And prior to construction a letter shall be
provided by the Hinesburg Fire Department confirming it will be able to provide
service to this location.
3.
The Planning
Commission notes that it has reluctantly agreed to this change based upon
concerns expressed as a result of changes made for the building envelope on Lot
#1. The Planning Commission notes the
importance and seriousness of location of building envelopes
4.
Any additional
culverts shall be appropriately sized.
5.
If prior to
construction of driveway the owner of Lot #1 agrees to a shared driveway, the
Planning Commission reserves the right to require that the driveway be shared.
6.
It’s
particularly noted that construction and maintenance of the driveway must
conform with the subdivision plat.
7.
The maximum
grade for this driveway shall not exceed 13%.
George Munson
seconded the motion, reluctantly. All
approved, with the exception of George Bedard who had recused himself from the
vote.
6. U.S. Postal Service Sign Review. Faith presented the Post Office’s proposal for three different
signs. One would be a 16 sq. ft.
free-standing identification sign at the front of the property. The second would be a 4 sq. ft. aluminum
wall plaque at the front entrance providing Post Office hours. The third would be two 14 sq. ft.
directional signs indicating customer parking and delivery locations. Planning Commission members felt the
directional signs could be smaller, so they don’t compete with main
identification sign.
Roger Kohn made the
following motion:
The Hinesburg
Planning Commission hereby grants sign approval to the US Postal Service for
the following signs:
a. A
16 sq. ft. free-standing, identification sign at the front of the
property. The sign may be internally
lite with a blue background and white letters.
b. A 4
sq. ft. painted aluminum wall plaque under the canopy at the front entrance
providing information on the Post Office hours. No new lighting has been proposed or approved.
c. The
Planning Commission does not approve the two directional signs (one on the
north side of each driveway indicating the customer parking and the delivery
locations), and requests the applicant to return with a new proposal.
The sign shall be as
proposed by the applicant except as set forth herein. This approval is subject to the following conditions:
1.
The applicant
shall obtain a Zoning Permit from the Zoning Administrator prior to installing
the signs.
2.
Any additional
signs shall require further approval from the Planning Commission unless the
zoning bylaw states that the category of signs is exempt from Planning
Commission review.
3.
The main
identification sign may be illuminated as proposed but only when the facility
is open to the public. No other sign
lighting is approved at this time.
Jean Isham seconded
the motion, and it was unanimously approved.
7. Schedule Site Visit to Gardner
Subdivision. It was agreed to schedule a site visit of the
Gardner (formerly Colton) subdivision at 6:00 p.m. on June 20th. Please meet at the Hinesburg Community
School. The work session will be held
at the school after the site visit.
The meeting
adjourned at 11:00 pm.
Respectfully
submitted,
Sally Kimball,
Recording Secretary