HINESBURG DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD

                                                   MINUTES OF MARCH 19, 2002

                                                                 Approved 4/2/02

 

Members Present: Clint Emmons, Greg Waples, Carrie Fenn (for item #2), Wayne Burgess, Peter Ross, Brad Jensen, and Ted Bloomhardt (who as vice-chair ran the meeting).  Also Zoning Administrator, Peter Erb.

Member Absent: Tom McGlenn

Members of the Audience: Bill Leggett, Sam Evanson, Jim Thibault, David Blittersdorf, Phyllis &           Alex Rose, Larry Winters, Raymond Therrian, Gary Robair, Mike Boutin, John McEnter, and George Bedard.

 

 

1.  MINUTES   Peter Ross made the motion to accept the minutes of March 5, 2002 as corrected.  This motion was seconded by Greg Waples and passed.

 

 

2.  BARONE/GIROUX - SKETCH PLAN   Russell Barone was first on the agenda requesting sketch plan approval for a 7-lot subdivision currently owned by Ernest and Teresa Giroux and located on the east side of the Mechanicsville Road.  This proposal is for 6 single-family homes, and a remaining lot of 62 acres.  There will be a second phase to this project of 30 elderly units to be proposed at a later date.  The Development Review Board (DRB) members had conducted a site visit to the property on March 9th and reviewed the roadway, house sites, drainage and location for Phase 2.  Wayne Burgess recused himself from the discussion and vote on this proposal as he had not attended the first meeting or made the site visit.  Alternate Carrie Fenn took his place for the review of this project.

After thanking the Board members for having this site visit, Russ explained the following aspects of the proposal:

– At the time of preliminary plat review, he will provide sidewalk easements for along the Mechanicsville Road and also the development road.

– They will show street trees also.

– There will be a designation on the plan delineating the division between the Village and Rural Residential Districts (RRI) on this piece of property.

– There was also discussion on the number of curb cuts onto the Town road, as the plan now has two.  It was felt that it would be better to re-orientate the lot lines for lots 1 & 2 in order to only have one curb cut.  Russ would like to keep these two lots orientated to the public street like the houses across the street.

– Ted commented that the building envelopes were too big for lot 3 & 4 and this would allow the houses to be built too far up the slope.

– These 6 houses would be accessed by a road 22' wide with a sidewalk on the south side.  The developers would like the Town to eventually take over this road as a public road.

– There will be a context location map presented for preliminary plat review of the surrounding properties.  Russ explained that at this time, Hinesburg has very little sewer allocation available and with the soil conditions here, it is unlikely there will be further houses built in the future.

Hinesburg DRB                             Minutes of 3/19/02                                             Page 2 of 6

 

– There will be a home owners road association for these 6 lots and then a separate one for the elderly houses units.

– Carrie asked whether there could be a parking area at the end of this road so that townspeople could use hiking trails on the open 62 acres.  Russ did not feel it would be fair to have the homeowners maintain this private road and then have other people use it.  Whether the Town takes over this road  is an issue that would be governed by the Select Board as Road Commissioners.

– There is about an acre of wooded land on a knoll to the south of these 6 houses that would be preserved.  Barone explained that this area would be part of the elderly housing association.  It was felt that the owners of these 6 houses would also use this natural area.

Greg Waples then brought up the issue of density and the fact that this proposal is for a Planned Residential Development as governed by Section 4.5.3 of the Zoning Bylaw.   Lots 1 and 2 and maybe 3 seem to be in the Village District and therefore with a size of approximately 1/3 of an acre meet the density requirement of that district.  However Greg felt that there should be designated on the plat additional common acreage so that lots 4, 5, and 6 meet the density requirement of 1 acre size for lots on Town water in the RRI District.  Russ explained that at this time there are 62 acres of open land which could be used by these people.  Ted, however, felt that this could be made unaccessible to the residential lots and therefore, there should be some designation of where the 2 1/3 additional acres to meet the density requirements would be located, until Phase 2 of the project is presented and approved.

Raymond Therrien, a homeowner on Hawk Lane to the north, questioned how the run-off of water would be controlled.  He explained that some springs there has been flooding in their subdivision.  Ted said that at the time of preliminary plat review there would be engineering plans detailing run-off control such as culverts and ditching.

 

Ted Bloomhardt the made the following motion:  The Hinesburg Development Review Board hereby grants sketch plan approval to Barone Construction Inc. for a six-lot single family residential development on a 65 acre parcel owned by Ernest and Theresa Giroux.  The subdivision shall be as proposed by the applicant and as shown on a map titled “Barone, Sketch Plan,” dated 1/18/02. 

 

This proposal is found to be in keeping with the Planned Residential Development (PRD) requirements in Section 4.5 of the Zoning Regulations because the project clusters six lots on approximately three acres out of a 65 acre parcel, resulting in an efficient use of the land and economic provision of streets and utilities.  Given the project’s proximity to the Village District, and the fact that the project is partially in the Village District,  the density and pattern of development proposed is in keeping with the context of Hinesburg Village, provided the conditions below dealing with design and open space are addressed. 

 

This approval is subject to the following conditions:

1.  The applicant shall meet all the preliminary plat application submission requirements for major subdivisions listed in Section 5.1 of the Subdivision Regulations, including the following specific items:

Hinesburg DRB                                Minutes of 3/19/02                                         Page 3 of 6

 

1.                  A Context Map shall be provided as required in Section 5.1.2 of the Subdivision Regulations.  As a part of the context map the applicant shall identify the buildable and non-buildable portions of the land (using readily available mapping data) on the 65 acre parcel so that the Board can better evaluate the potential for future development and possible road and trail connections on this and adjoining properties and to identify possible locations for permanent open space preservation.

2.                  The zoning boundary line shall be shown on the preliminary plat and calculations showing what portion of the proposed development is in the Village and RRI Districts shall be provided.  The modifications from the Zoning Bylaw that are needed for this development (lot size, frontage, etc.) shall be indicated in addition to the amount of open space that needs to be reserved on the remaining 63 acres to off-set the clustered lots. 

3.                  Section 3.4.5(5) of the Zoning Bylaw prohibits more than one road cut onto a town road from a parcel.  Lots #1 and 2 shall be re-configured so the driveway can be located off of the new development road rather than having direct access from Mechanicsville Road.

4.                   An erosion control plan shall be provided addressing erosion control during and after construction.  Minimum specifications for roadside ditches are provided in the Hinesburg Policy for Transportation Construction and Improvements.

5.                   The plans shall show a road designed with a 22' wide paved surface, with surface drainage,  5' wide sidewalks and street trees spaced every 40 feet.  Shared driveways shall be shown wherever possible with easements established for them.

6.                   A stormwater design shall be provided that ensures that the volume of water flowing from the development can be accommodated without damage to downstream properties, including the public roads and that State and Federal water quality standards are met.  At a minimum, the Town Policy for Transportation Construction and Improvements should be met, including the requirement that all new culverts be at least 18" (driveway culverts may be 15") and meet the 25-year event standard.  .

7.                  In order to ensure a traditional village development pattern with the front facades defining the edge of the road, either the building envelope sizes shall be reduced to prevent large front yards (allowing accessory structures outside the building envelope) or a maximum front yard setback line shall be established.  

8.                  A perspective sketch or other visual aids shall be provided showing how the development will appear from Mechanicsville Road.

9.                  Information on the level of blasting for this project, the timing, duration and any measures that will be needed to prevent damage to adjoining properties shall be provided.

10.               All utilities lines shall be underground.  The applicant should consult with the utility companies before submitting the preliminary plan to make sure the utility locations shown are acceptable to the power company.  Transformer box locations shall be shown on the plan with landscaping treatments if necessary.

2.  The Town does not have a policy of accepting any new roads, however, the proposed development road has the potential for becoming a through-road in the future so the question of whether to


Hinesburg DRB                                                    Minutes of 3/19/02                                          Page 4 of 6

 

accept the road at this time or in the future will need to be decided by the Select Board.  The applicant shall assume at this time that the road will be privately owned and maintained but that it will be offered to the Town in the future.   Deed language will need to be prepared at final plat review for the road’s maintenance and snow plowing so that properties can be accessed by emergency vehicles year-round.  Legal mechanisms for transferring the road to the Town in the future will also need to be established. 

 

3.  The Board reserves the right to require that the open space for the PRD be applied to a specific public recreational feature such as trail easements or a sledding hill, etc. 

4.  The applicant is encouraged to obtain a Project Review Sheet from the District Environmental Office to determine the types of state permitting required for this project in advance of preliminary review, so that any state requirements can be addressed concurrently with the town review.  The State Wetlands office should consulted on whether this project will impact any streams or wetlands.

5.  The applicant shall designate on the plan that offsetting acreage to this 6-lot PRD be reserved on the remaining land and propose provisions for access to the remaining land until concrete proposals are provided as part of Phase 2 for open space or other amenities available to these 6 lots.

 

This motion was seconded by Carrie Fenn and passed unanimously.  Wayne Burgess had recused himself from the review of this proposal and therefore did not vote.

 

 

 

3.  BOUTIN ESTATE - FINAL PLAT         Ted Bloomhardt opened the public hearing for this final plat review of an 8-lot subdivision on land owned by the Albert and Georgette Boutin estate and located on the west side of the Shelburne Falls Road at 8:45.  (Carrie Fenn left the meeting at this time)

Mike Boutin explained the following aspects of this proposal (which had been previously reviewed and approved by the Hinesburg Planning Commission) and any changes since preliminary plat approval.

– The lot lines have been surveyed, the septic designs done and located on the plans, they have met with Green Mountain Power and located the placement of the utility lines on the plat, and the road profiles and culvert locations are now on the plans.

– There will now be a shared driveway for lots E and D and the building envelopes have been relocated on lots C and G.

– As pointed out by Faith, the engineer has shown the fire pond as 20' x 10' and this would  be too small.  Mike explained that the submitted dimensions seem to be for the bottom of the pond and it will actually be 30' x 100' and meet the requirements set by the Hinesburg Fire Department to provide 60,000 gallons of water.  There also should be a 20' easement around this pond.

– The pedestrian easement would not be activated until such path easement are set up on surrounding properties.  Peter Ross thought it would be good for Hinesburg to talk to the surrounding towns about connecting paths.  Faith said there has not been an organized effort yet


Hinesburg DRB                                           Minutes of 3/19/02                               Page 5 of 6

 

to do this.  She also said that the easement shown on the plans is straight along the boundary lines and it would be good, if when it is activated, the location could be negotiated.  Mike suggested this could be put in the deed language of the Homes Owners association.  A section of this path could cross a designated wet land.  Peter Erb had contacted the State and it was explained, that as long as the area was not filled,  it could be crossed with a path or walkway.

 

Faith then went through some of the issues she had noted in her memo to the Board members in reviewing this project:

– The utility lines should be shown underground within the road right-of-way

– The engineer had not made the roadway more narrow on these newest plans, and it does not have to be wider than 18 feet.

– There was a discussion of maintaining the agricultural fields on the lots with larger meadows.

– The fire pond should contain 50 - 60,000 gallons of water and there is a concern (expressed by Jim Thibault, landowner to the east) that this pond would not fill up with water and be a dry hole.  Mike said they had contemplated drilling a well for the pond and also that there is a drainage area off the rest of the property that would go into this pond area.

– There needs to be shown erosion control and culvert standards.  Mike said they plan to put in the road prior to selling the lots.

– Due to previous experience with this design engineer, the septic systems will have to be inspected and approved by another engineer.

– Several of the conditions of the covenants should be included in the conditions of approval to ensure enforcement of them.

– The covenants for these lots state that there will be no wind mills and Dave Blittersdorf, who has a windmill/alternative energy business was concerned about this.  He said that the Town Plan encourages the Town to promote renewable energy sources.

– The developers have to go through the Act 250 process and therefore it was decided to require additional information on or changes to the submitted final plat.  These could be submitted after the Act 250 process was completed.  This would have to be accomplished within the 90 day State requirement for filing a mylar of an approved subdivision.

 

Ted Bloomhardt closed the public hearing at 10:00 and  read a draft motion with the following conditions of approval:   See attached sheets

 

Ted then made the motion to act on this as the first item of business at the next meeting of the DRB on April 2nd.  This motion was seconded by Greg Waples and passed unanimously.

 

 

 

4.  NRG - CONDITIONAL USE & SITE PLAN   Dave Blittorsdorf, owner of NRG, an alternative energy business located on lots 11 & 12 in Commerce Park, then requested a conditional use permit and site plan approval.  He is proposing to use the building on lot 3 and owned by Alex and Phyllis Rose (who were presented at this meeting) for overflow inventory,


Hinesburg DRB                                        Minutes of 3/19/02                                 Page 6 of 6

 

bulk storage, engineering testing and manufacturing of their larger towers.  This would be a short term lease while NRG is building a larger building in Commerce Park.  During construction, their employees, which number about 35 at this time, would also park on the Rose property.  They will store long tubes used in the business in this building and also do some light manufacturing.  All storage will be within the building and not outside.  Dave explained they would not have a problem meeting the performance standards in the zoning regulations in regard to noise, etc.

 

Ted Bloomhardt then made the motion to approve a temporary (18 month) conditional use and site plan for the building at 79 Commerce street to be used by NRG for storage, light manufacturing, research and development with the following conditions:

1.  All parking spaces shall be indicated with painted lines.  Markings will be repainted when necessary.

2.  If experience indicates inadequate parking or unsafe traffic flow on the property, the owner of the lot shall submit to the Hinesburg Development Review board, an appropriate amendment of the site plan to resolve the problem.

3.  The applicant shall ensure that emergency vehicle access is available to the rear of the property at all times, and that the access lanes on either side of the building shall be open and free at all times.

4.  The landscaping shall be as shown on the plan submitted by the applicant.  All areas so designated on the site plan shall be maintained as grass areas with plantings of the type and location shown on the site plan.  The grass and plantings shall be maintained and groomed, and any plats or trees which die shall be promptly replaced.  Landscaping shall be as shown on the site plan.  The additional trees to be added to the northwest corner shall be conifers at least 8 feet in height and shall be planted by November 1, 1995.  All grass areas shall be mowed on a regular basis, and kept attractively maintained.  No parking or storage shall be allowed off of the paved areas. 

5.  A dumpster may be located against the north wall of the building and a scrap steel bin on the eastern side of the property as shown on the plan.  There shall be no open storage of refuse or scrap or raw materials on the property.

6.  This site plan approval applies only to NRG and is not transferrable.  Any other use or owners shall require full Development Review Board site plan review.

7.  No additional lighting beyond that approved in Condition #5 of the 7/5/95 site plan modification shall be installed without further DRB review and approval.

8.  Performance standards of the Section 5.12 of the Hinesburg Zoning Bylaw shall be complied with.

This motion was seconded by Peter Ross and passed unanimously.

 

5.  After reminding the members that there would be a site visit at 9:00 a.m. this Saturday, March 23rd, Ted closed the meeting at 10:30 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Holly Russell

Recording Secretary

                                     HINESBURG DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD

                                                8 - LOT SUBDIVISION APPROVAL

                                        ALBERT L & GEORGETTE BOUTIN ESTATE

Draft Motion

 

The Hinesburg Planning Commission hereby grants final plat approval to the Estate of Albert L. and Georgette Boutin for an 8-lot single family residential subdivision, Lots A - H, on a 132.9 acre parcel located off of Shelburne Falls Road (tax map parcel # 4-1-21.14).  The subdivision shall be as shown on a plat by David J. Peatman, dated February 12, 2002, and on plans by J.H. Stuart Associates, Map #1-8 dated, Road Details - Maps #1 and 2, and Utility Details - Drawing #1A and shall be subject to the following conditions:

 

Standard Conditions for Subdivisions

1.                  Utility lines shall be placed underground as required in Section 7.9.1 of the Subdivision Regulations.  Utility lines shall follow the road and driveway locations.

2.                  In keeping with the rural character of Hinesburg, all exterior lighting for residences in this subdivision shall be installed or shielded in such a manner as to conceal light sources and reflector/refractor areas from view from points beyond the lot.

3.                  Any principal structure and any garage shall be located in the building envelope shown on the plat.  Structures for agricultural purposes may be located outside the building envelopes. 

4.                  "Substantial Construction" for this subdivision shall consist of construction of the road and electric utility installation.   In accordance with Section 8.9 of the subdivision regulations, if substantial construction has not begun within 3 years from the date of this approval, final plat approval shall expire.

5.                  In accordance with State statute, the mylar of this subdivision and a copy of the conditions of approval shall be recorded in the Hinesburg Land Records within 90 days of this approval

6.                  No further subdivision of this property shall occur without review and approval of the Hinesburg Planning Commission.

 

Changes Required Before the Plat is Filed

7.                  Before the mylar of this subdivision is recorded in the Town Records, the applicant shall submit to the DRB for its review and approval, the following revisions to the survey plat and subsequent changes to the deed language:

1.                  An easement shall be shown around the fire pond and for the emergency access area on Lot #C as described in the proposed deed language.  The deed language shall ensure that the emergency access be plowed and in such manner so that no snow is allowed to collect in front of the hydrant

 

2.                  The driveway easement on Lot #E, serving Lot #D shall be widened to 50' as required in Section 5.7.1 of the Zoning Regulations, and provisions shall be made to allow for a single driveway to serve both Lots #D and E.  Utilities shall be allowed to be placed in the easement.

 

Boutin Subdivision Approval                                                                                Page 2

 

3.                  The note for the trail easement shall indicate that the actual trail easement location will be determined by the applicant or the homeowners association at the time the easement goes into effect as indicated in condition #6 of the Conditional Easement Agreement.  The Easement Agreement shall be amended to indicate that the location of the trail may be changed.

4.                  The open fields on the lots shall be labeled as “agricultural land” and shall include the following notation: “the agricultural land shall be maintained for continued agricultural use.  If the agricultural land is not used as such by owners of Lot A-H and Lots #1 and 2, the agricultural land shall be made available for agricultural use by others, but if no so used the duty of maintaining open fields as agricultural land shall remain with the owners of lots A - H.

 

8.                  Before the mylar of this subdivision is recorded in the Town Records, the applicant shall submit to the DRB for its review and approval, the following revisions to the subdivision plans:

 

1.                   The road details shall be revised to show a road profile with a reduced width.  The DRB requires a traveled way of 18' wide with 2' shoulders. 

2.                  The Fire Pond Details and Specification shall be revised so that the fire pond is designed for a 50,000 - 60,000 gallon volume of water as specified by the fire department and shall show the emergency access design.  The fire pond design or notes shall specifically indicate that the shape of the pond shall be naturalistic to reflect the rural context.

 

Septic Systems

 

9.                  The septic system for each of the eight lots are designed for 4 bedroom houses and shall be installed in such a way that it meets the standards of the State Environmental Protection Rules and as shown on the plans by J.H. Stuart.  Any increase the number of bedrooms shall be approved by the DRB and evidence shall be provided that .

10.       Before obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy, the owner of the lot shall require that an engineer submit a letter to the Zoning Administrator stating that the septic system has been built in accordance with the approved plans. Specifically, it shall include the dates of inspections, including staking out the system and site visits during construction; pressure tests of sewer force mains and distribution system; review of the final grading; and recommendations to the owners for future maintenance of the system. 

11.              Due to previous experience with the design engineer, the Zoning Administration shall not accept any septic system inspection approval letters from the design engineer.

 

Boutin Subdivision Approval                                                                                       Page 3

 

Roads and Driveways

12.              A roadway serving more than one house is proposed.  The road shall be built in accordance with the Hinesburg Town road standards for a "lane", except that blacktop is not required.  The road shall be built, maintained, and plowed with a traveled surface at least 18 ft. wide, and the road shall have at least 12 inches of gravel. 2' shoulders as proposed are required due to the length of the road.

 

13.              Before obtaining a building permit for the first dwelling to be constructed in the subdivision, the owner of the land shall require that the contractor constructing the road submit a letter to the Zoning Administrator stating that the road has been built in accordance with this approval and the standards specified in this condition.

 

14.              The driveways shall be constructed in the general locations shown on the site plan except for the driveways for Lot #D, which shall be in the easement on Lot #E, and the driveways for Lots E-G, which shall be located to best access the chosen house sites.   The driveways shall be constructed, maintained and plowed at least 12 feet in width.

 

15.              An erosion control plan shall be provided addressing erosion control during and after construction.  Minimum specifications for roadside ditches are provided in the Hinesburg Policy for Transportation Construction and Improvements. (Mike - I think this is the right language but will check with Faith!!??)

 

Conditions Unique to this Subdivision

 

16.              The existing mobile home and driveway on Lot H shall be removed before a Certificate of Compliance may be issued for the new house on the lot.

 

17.              The proposed Declaration of Protective Covenants and Restrictions paragraphs 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 12 are hereby incorporated as conditions of this subdivision approval.  No changes shall be made to these paragraphs by exercising the provision in covenants 16 without review and approval by the Hinesburg Development Review Board (DRB).  The Hinesburg DRB has relied on the restriction on further subdivision described in Covenant #9.  This restriction is key to the open land, house siting and lot configuration and changes to this restriction are not likely.