HINESBURG PLANNING COMMISSION

       Minutes of December 12, 2001

APPROVED

 

Present:            Ted Bloomhardt, Roger Kohn, John Mace, Jean Isham, George Bedard, Carrie Fenn, Fred Haulenbeek, George Munson, and Will Patten.  Also Faith Ingulsrud, Town Planner

 

Members Absent:            none                                   

 

Members of the Audience:            Lynn and Marie Gardner, Al Barber, Michael Boutin, John Adsit

 

 

1.  Boutin Subdivision - Preliminary Plat Review.  Jean Isham opened the meeting at 7:30 with the preliminary plat review of the proposed  8-lot subdivision of the Boutin Estate parcel off of Shelburne Falls Road.  Michael Boutin described the status of the project.  Some lot lines had to be modified to accommodate the completed wetland delineations.  He traced out each lot on the map for everyone’s benefit.  The road and cul de sac had been extended to reach the house site on Lot A.  Additional adjustments were made to the road and the house site to avoid impacting the wetland and wetland buffers.  A fire pond was added to Lot C.  Building envelopes are now defined.  He would like to move the house site on Lot C from an open field, to an area behind some woodland.  He received Selectboard approval for a new road cut for Lot H because the existing driveway to the mobile home on Lot H would need to cross wetlands to reach the new house site.  He said that the mobile home will be removed.

 

There was a discussion on the proposed pedestrian trail shown skirting the perimeter of the subdivision.  The trail does not connect to any other trails at this point, and would only be used by the homeowners.  Roger wanted the location of the trail to either be staked out or described.  Mr. Boutin preferred to have the homeowners determine the exact location.  Roger suggested Mr. Boutin have the surveyor lay out an appropriate trail location while he is surveying the parcel.  It shouldn’t be left up to the homeowners.

 

Roger would like to have the homeowners association incorporated.  The proposed roadway width of 24 ft with 2 ft shoulders was questioned by George Bedard who advised not building a road that wide if you don’t need to.  Mr. Boutin said he used state standards in case the town took over the road in the future.  The Planning Commission recommended going with a 18 ft width instead.  Fire Chief Al Barber, speaking from the audience, commented that the project just needs the one large fire pond with a small turn out on Lot C.  Mr. Boutin did not foresee recreational uses for this pond.  Faith suggested that an easement be created around the fire pond that the uses for the fire pond and its maintenance be defined in the covenants for the homeowners association.

 

Utilities will be underground.  The design needs to be done by Green Mountain Power before the final plat review and it needs to be shown on the plan.  Mr. Boutin thought all the utilities will be kept in the 60 ft ROW.  Faith cautioned that in order to get compliance on the shared portion of utilities, the power and road construction should be done before the issuance of zoning permits for the individual lots.  George Bedard strongly disagreed with Faith.  Mr. Boutin said his intention was to construct the road, power and fire pond before selling the lots.  Roger confirmed the surveyor will show the boudaries of the building envelopes on the plan.


Carrie Fenn asked about the septic systems.  Mr. Boutin said the systems will be identified with markers and will also be surveyed and shown on the mylar.  Faith said she reviewed the test pits and that at least on paper they appeared to comply with state standards.  George Bedard reviewed them as well and noted that they appeared to reflect what the Planning Commission saw on the site visit.  The Planning Commission voiced its concern with compliance of the septic system locations, as well as the installation and the entire credibility issue they have with the septic engineer working on this project.  Faith said there will be a standard condition requiring the systems to be inspected by the engineer after installation, and suggested that Mr. Boutin hire a different engineer to conduct the inspections.  Will Patten suggested that prior to issuance of a zoning permit, the zoning administrator verify that the areas staked on the ground are in the locations identified in the plan.

 

With no further discussion, Jean Isham made the following motion:

 

The Hinesburg Planning Commission hereby grants preliminary plat approval to the Estate of Albert L. Boutin for an 8-lot single family residential subdivision on a 133 acre parcel located off of Shelburne Falls Road.  The subdivision shall be as proposed and as shown on a plans by J.H. Stuart Associates titled “Estate of Albert L. and Georgette Boutin, Phase II” map #1 dated 10/01 and drawings #2-8 dated 8/01 and shall be subject to the following conditions:

 

1.              The applicant shall provide all the documentation required for Final Plat review as stated in Section 5.2 of the Subdivision Regulations.  In addition, the applicant shall provide the following documents:

1.              A letter or other evidence from a certified engineer certifying that the design of the sewage disposal and water supply systems for all the lots in this subdivision meet the standards of the State Environmental Protection Rules.

2.              The final plat shall include a provision that prior to the installation of any septic system the area shall be marked and inspected by the Hinesburg Zoning Administrator or his designee.  Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy a letter shall be provided by a registered professional engineer stating that the septic system was installed in accordance with the approved plans.

 

2.              The subdivision plans shall be revised as follows:

1.              Combine the parallel portions of the driveways on Lots D and E, and F and G,  and show a 50' right-of-way for the shared portions of those driveways.

2.              Details of the proposed fire pond shall be provided ensuring that the size is sufficient for a minimum volume of 50,000 gallons of water.  A dry hydrant, and fire department vehicle access to the pond shall be included in the design.

3.              Locations of utility lines and transformers shall be shown on the site plan after consultation with the power company.  The utility lines will be required to be underground and  placed in the locations shown on the plan unless approval is granted by the Planning Commission for the locations to change.

4.              Road width may be reduced to 18' wide, however 2' wide shoulders on either side should be maintained.


5.              Road names shall be proposed and approved by the Selectboard.

6.              The building envelopes shall be shown on the plat and shall be tied to established points on the ground so they can be easily located.

 

3.              Draft deed language prepared by an attorney shall be provided that addresses the following issues:

1.              Sharing of costs for road maintenance and snow-plowing, including for the shared driveways, and  maintenance of the fire pond and dry hydrant.

2.              The trail easement addressing how the location of the actual trail will be established and the rights and responsibilities of the landowners.

3.              Maintenance of the agricultural land.

4.              Building envelope language.

 

4.              The Planning Commission presently is considering that a condition will be imposed, and will be revisited at the time of final plat review: “The applicant will be required to construct and complete the road, fire pond and utilities before any building permits may be issued for construction on the lots.  The applicant may present a phasing plan at final plat review to construct the improvements in phases.”

 

5.              The Planning Commission understands that the applicant may propose a new location for the building envelope on Lot C at the time of the final plat review, and the applicant may propose changes to other building envelopes at that time if he so desires.

 

Will Patten seconded the motion.  It was noted that the Phasing Policy of no more than 4 units per year per subdivision needs to be re-evaluated and possibly changed by the Planning Commission before final plat review.  The motion was unanimously approved by all those present.

 

 

2.  Gardner/Adsit Site Plan Review.  (Roger recused himself from the discussion.)  Faith noted that this is a continuation of the site plan review from the December 5th meeting.  Lynn and Marie Gardner returned with a more detailed site plan showing delineation of parking spaces and more details of landscaping.  The required setback from an industrial district boundary was not clear in regards to the Route 116 setback for this property since the state has a much wider right-of-way along the property frontage.  Faith discussed it with the zoning administrator and decided the setback should be measured from the center of the road since the district boundary runs along the centerline of the highwayway.  George Bedard thought it should be interpreted as 33 feet from the center, the standard state right-of-way plus a 50 ft setback, making it 83 ft.  Marie Gardner said they have used the State definition of 70 ft from the center of the road.   John Mace said the purpose of the 50' setback is to provide a buffer that would screen one use from the other.  Lynn Gardner said the berm along Route 116 is 10 ft tall, and no one will see over it.

 


There was discussion about the legal advice Faith recieved from the League of Cities and Towns about whether this project constitutes a subdivision.  It was agreed that the Planning Commission would accept the position that no subdivision is required and review the project as a site plan only.  John confirmed that the Gardner’s own all the land.  With no further discussion, Jean Isham made the following motion:

 

The Hinesburg Planning Commission hereby grants site plan approval to Lynn and Marie Gardner for use of a portion of the 8.7 acre Clifford Lumber Property for a business selling horse and construction trailers.  The site plan shall be as described in a 11/15/01 letter by the Gardners and on a site plan titled “Over-all Site Plan Showing Proposed Utility Trailer Sales Area” and dated 12/09/01, 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 it.

2.              No exterior lighting has been proposed and no lighting is approved at this time.  Planning Commission approval is required before any exterior lighting fixtures may be installed. Fully shielded fixtures will be required for all exterior lighting.

3.              The proposed trees along Route 116 shall be shade trees, well-suited to the site, and shall have trunks a minimum 2-21/2" caliper in size at “d.b.h.” so that they will be visible when first planted.  Trees shall be planted by June 30, 2002.  

4.              All landscaping, including the landscaping in front of the office, shall be properly maintained and any plants or trees that die shall be promptly replaced.

5.              We understand there are different interpretations of the setback requirement described in the Zoning Bylaws.  The Planning Commission feels the berm with existing trees between the highway and the property provides adequate screening to satisfy the intent of the buffer zone.

6.              The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit from the zoning administrator prior to using the site for the trailer business.

7.              No subdivision under the Hinesburg Subdivision Regulations is required for rental of this portion of the property for the trailer sales business, as long as the owners of the land maintain full control and responsibility for the property. 

 

Carrie Fenn seconded the motion.  It was approved by all present, except for Roger Kohn who recused himself the vote.

 

Ted Bloomhardt arrived after the vote.  Roger said there isn’t a legal distinction between “renting” and “leasing.”

 

 


3.  Work Session on Road Standards.   Faith gave a brief overview of the draft road standards.  The Commission began at the beginning and worked through the first several pages of the document.  George Bedard felt a definition section was needed in the policy.  Roger thought private roads would be impacted the most by the road policy, and if it didn’t have it’s own section it would get lost in the wording.  He suggested Faith restructure the document.  It was noted that the DRB would have authority for private roads, while the Selectboard would have authority for public roads.  Will Patten thought the real concern was how road standards would impact growth.  Fred asked what the criteria were for public vs. private roads.  Public roads achieve a public benefit or serve the public good.  Roads in the village district are to be public.  Interconnecting roads vs. cul de sac roads is also a possible criteria.  Al Barber, speaking from the audience, noted that from a town cost perspective, dead-end roads are more expensive to maintain than public roads.  He suggested that public roads be defined as through roads.  Roger wondered if a dead-end road in the village district should be public.  Roger added that paved roads vs. gravel roads could also be a criteria.  Would this mean the town does not want gravel roads in the village district?   Faith suggested considering adopting an official map of future roads, such as South Burlington has done. 

 

It was noted that it may be impossible to accept some existing private roads as public because they have not been built to town standards and will be difficult to upgrade them.  Ted added that residents of gravel/dirt private roads often do not want their roads to become public.  George Bedard moved to table this discussion until the next work session.  It was agreed that Faith would not rewrite the draft until the Planning Commission goes through the entire document.  Faith asked everyone to think about how the new Planning Commission could restructure it’s operating style to better work through tough issues like the road policy.  She suggested possibly working in sub-groups on some projects. 

 

 

4.  Minutes of November 28 and Scheduling.   Will Patten moved to adopt the minutes of November 28th.  George Munson seconded, at it was unanimously approved.

 

Faith noted that a site visit for the Clinton Emmons parcel is scheduled for Saturday, December 15th at 8:00 a.m.   There is also a work session meeting scheduled for Wednesday, December 19th.

 

 

The meeting adjourned at  10:30 pm.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

Sally Kimball, Recording Secretary