HINESBURG DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD

MINUTES OF HEARING MAY 7, 2002

Approved May 21, 2002

Present: Tom McGlenn, Greg Waples, Wayne Burgess, Ted Bloomhardt, Pete Ross, and Clint Emmons. Also Town Planner, Faith Ingulsrud.

Member of the Audience: Judy Driscoll, Patricia Gilbert and Conrad Omansky.

1. MINUTES Tom McGlenn made the motion to accept the minutes of April 16, 2002 as corrected and this motion was seconded by Wayne Burgess and passed.

2. DONALD & LAUREL PALMER - FINAL PLAT Tom McGlenn opened the public hearing for a warned public hearing for final plat review of a 2-lot subdivision of property owned by Donald and Laurel Palmer and located on the east side of Palmer Road which is a Town road off the Sherman Hollow Road. There will be a new lot 10.01 acres in size with a remaining lot of 42.3 acres, which at this time, the Palmers do not plan to develop. The Palmers actually live in Richmond at the end of this road and their remaining 18.8 acres is in that town.

The following issues were then discussed and questions answered by Don Palmer:

– State case law has determined that a Town line divides property and therefore the remaining property in Hinesburg is a separate lot and must have conditions attached so that it can not be developed without further review in relation to access and septic etc.

– Patricia Gilbert and Judy Driscoll, who also live on Palmer Road, expressed concerns about the width of this Town road and safety issues. They said that this road is single-lane in some areas and also has a dangerous corner. They said more people are living there with small children.

– The power will be underground and a short section of this line will be under the edge of the septic system. Don had supplied a letter from the power company stating they do not have a problem with this and also a letter from Justin Willis, his septic site technician, stating “this utility line does not affect compliance with Vermont Environmental Protection Rules.”

– There is also deed language for a small section of the septic system which will be on the property to the north (currently owned by David Palmer) and also, if it is necessary, for a shared driveway cut off the Town road. This road-cut has already been approved by the Town.

– Well logs for several properties had also been prepared and the location of the new drilled well as been moved to keep any isolation distances on this property.

– There was then a discussion of whether to require a specific building envelope with dimensions.

It was requested that the Board contact the Select Board to have them investigate the safety issues with this Town Road.

Tom McGlenn made the motion to close the public hearing and this motion was seconded by Greg Waples and passed.

HINESBURG DRB Minutes of 5/07/02 Page 2 of 5

Tom McGlenn then made the following motion (see attached sheets). This motion was seconded by Wayne Burgess and passed unanimously.

3. COUTURE - CONDITIONAL USE WITH VARIANCE Kevin and Kathleen Couture the presented an appeal to construct an addition of their house which is located on a private road on the south side of the Lincoln Hill Road. Kevin explained that they wish to add 388 square feet to the front of their house with a small porch and also a dormer on the second floor. There are two areas that had to be addressed with this proposal:

1. The original house does not meet the requirement of Section 2.5.2 of the Zoning Bylaw which states that a structure must be within a 75 foot setback from a body of water. The existing house is 74' from the stream that circles their house and the new addition will then be only 62 feet from the edge of that stream.

2. This house is a non-complying structure and is governed by Section 5.10 of the Bylaw and specifically Section 5.10.3(4)(b) which states that any expansion of the first floor cannot exceed 20% of the existing ground floor area as of 11/7/72. The addition requested by the Coutures is 388 square feet in size. The figure was decided after some discussion and finally agreement that the porch would not be included in the living space.

Kevin had contacted and met on his property April Moulaert, a State District Wetlands Ecologist, and he presented the Board with a letter from her. April stated that although there are Class Two wetlands on this property and she has determined that this addition would not need a Conditional Use Determination from her office. She did require that a “line of silt fence should be installed along the limit of disturbance to minimize the potential for erosion into the wetland.”

The following issues were then discussed:

– Kevin said that the back corner of their house is actually only 12 feet from the edge of the stream so it could be interpreted that they are not encroaching closer to it.

– Their septic tank is on the north end of their house and with the stream so close in the back, that this front side of their property is the only direction that they can expand.

– It is difficult for the Board to grant a variance under this State Statute, especially Findings of Fact #2, as there is a house on this property showing it has been developed already. There must also be a finding that a “variance is necessary to enable reasonable use of the property.” Kathleen Couture felt that their adding more space to a small house is reasonable use of the property.

– Conrad Omansky, the neighbor across the street, felt that this request was very reasonable as the Coutures would be improving the neighborhood and adding to the tax base in town.

– It was suggested that a second story be added to the house, but Kevin explained that there were two separate slabs under the original structure and this would not be possible.

– Tom felt that there may have been other instances where the Board had determined that it was reasonable to grant a variance. He also agreed with Kevin that because their original house is very small they could only add on a small section whereby someone with a much larger house could construct a larger addition. It was agreed that this section of the Bylaw needs to be reviewed and perhaps re-written.

HINESBURG DRB Minutes of 5/07/02 Page 3 of 5

– Katherine felt that the quality of the water in the stream and wetland is the most important issue and they had addressed that issue in meeting with and getting a letter from the State wetland ecologist.

– It was suggested that the Board contact the Town attorney or Planning Commission for an interpretation of this section.

Tom McGlenn made the motion to close the public hearing and this motion was seconded by Greg Waples and passed.

Tom McGlenn then made the motion to grant a conditional use permit to Kevin and Kathleen Couture to expand their non-complying structure with a 388 square foot ground floor addition on the existing house with the following conditions:

1. The exterior siding and roof shall match the existing house.

2. The appellants shall obtain a zoning permit from the Zoning Administrator.

3. Construction shall be completed one year from the issuance of this zoning permit.

4. A silt fence shall be constructed as per the letter from April Moulaert.

5. The upper floor shall expand only 388 square feet.

This motion was seconded by Greg Waples and was defeated with Tom McGlenn voting in favor of it and Clint Emmons, Greg Waples, Ted Bloomhardt, Wayne Burgess, and Pete Ross voting against it.

Tom then went through the Official Findings of Fact for granting a variance, all of which must be answered in the affirmative by a majority of the Board. The request was for a 13 foot variance from the requirement of a 75 foot setback from a body of water as governed by Section 2.5.2 of the Zoning Bylaw and a variance from the allowed 20% increase in floor area as governed by Section 5.10.3(4)(b).

Finding of Fact

1. (a) There are unique physical conditions peculiar to the property

Yes = 6 (unanimous)

(b) Unnecessary hardship is due to such conditions

No = Greg & Clint

Yes = Tom, Wayne, Pete & Ted

2. (a) Such unique physical conditions prevent development of this property in strict conformity.

No = Greg & Clint

Yes = Tom, Wayne, Pete & Ted

(b) A variance is necessary to enable the reasonable use of the property

No = 6 (unanimous)

3. The unnecessary hardship has not been created by the appellant.

No = Greg & Clint

Yes = Tom, Wayne, Pete & Ted

HINESBURG DRB Minutes of 5/07/02 Page 4 of 5

4. This variance will not...

a. change character of the neighborhood,

b. impair appropriate use of adjacent property,

c. be detrimental to the public welfare, and

d. reduce access to renewable energy resources.

Yes = 6 (unanimous)

5. This variance will be...

a. the minimum possible variance to afford relief

Yes = Tom & Pete

No = Clint, Wayne, Greg, & Ted

b. the least deviation possible

Yes = Tom, Pete, Clint, & Greg

No = Ted & Wayne

Tom made the motion that based on the Official Findings of Fact the Hinesburg Development Review Board denies the request by Kevin and Kathleen Couture for a variances. This motion was seconded by Greg Waples and passed unanimously.

Ted Bloomhardt then made the motion that the Development Review Board ask the Town Agent, Bud Allen, for an interpretation of Section 5.10.3(4)(b) of the Bylaw. This motion was seconded by Tom McGlenn and passed with Greg Waples voting against it.

4. PALMER FAMILY TRUST Steve Palmer was next on the agenda, representing the Palmer Family Trust, to request sketch plan approval for a two lot subdivision of land owned by the Trust on the west side of the Shelburne Falls Road. This lot would be 10.1 acres in size and accessed by a 50' wide right-of-way. The remaining Trust land in Hinesburg will be 34.44 acres in size and has an existing farm house with sheds.

Steve explained the following aspects of his proposal:

– The power will be underground from a line to his Dad’s house which is in Charlotte and also accessed by this right-of-way.

– The house will be in the back portion of the lot but out of the tree line to preserve their sugar orchard and also the field for haying.

– The shared portion of this private drive will be widen to 18 feet and meet the other requirements of the Hinesburg Road Standards for a Lane.

– They have found good sandy soil and therefore plan to have an in the ground septic system.

– Mike Anthony, Town Road Foreman, will be contacted to see if a longer culvert is needed at the road-cut onto the Shelburne Falls Road.

– There is a Vermont Association of Snow Travellers (VAST) trail crossing this property. Steve said they are very supportive of this group and therefore will continue to allow them to use their land.

HINESBURG DRB Minutes of 5/07/02 Page 5 of 5

– Steve felt it would be difficult to continue the Boutin pathway easement onto their property as they have a lot of sugaring pipeline in their woods.

– He will ensure their well meets all isolation distances from any septic system and their well-head protection zone will not encroach on any adjacent properties.

– The new septic system will meet all State Requirements and the system with the existing farm house will meet the Town policy for “New Lots with Existing Dwellings.” There will have to be certification that the existing system is not failing and that there also is a replacement septic area for this larger lot. There may have to be easement language to allow this replacement area to be in the good soil on the new lot.

Tom McGlenn made the motion that the Hinesburg Development Review Board hereby grants sketch plan approval to Steve Palmer and the Palmer Family Trust for one 10+ acre single family residential lot from a 45 acre parcel located on Shelburne Falls Road leaving a 34+ acre parcel with an existing house. Access to the new lot will be from a shared driveway over a 50 foot wide right-of-way previously approved for Loren Palmer, Jr. The subdivision shall be as proposed by the applicants and the applicant shall meet all the final plat application submission requirements for Minor Subdivisions as listed in Section 4.2 of the Subdivision Regulations, including the following items:

1. A building envelope shall be shown on the plat, locating the house in such a way that the requirements of Section 7.10.8 of the Subdivision Regulations, Design Standards for Rural Areas, are met.

2. Proposal for widening the shared portion of the driveway to town road standards with a turn-around sufficient for emergency vehicles, and indication from the Town Road Foreman as to whether a road cut permit is required for widening.

3. Deed language to address the sharing of maintenance for the shared driveway.

4. A letter or other evidence from a certified engineer or site technician shall be provided certifying that the design of the sewage disposal and water supply systems for this lot meet the standards of the State Environmental Protection Rules.

5. The applicant shall also meet septic policy in regard to new lots with existing dwellings and easement language provided if necessary.

This motion was seconded by Ted Bloomhardt and passed unanimously.

5. The members decided due to the lateness of the hour, not to discuss Rules of Procedure with Faith. The meeting was adjourned at 10:30.

Respectfully submitted,

Holly Russell

Recording Secretary

HINESBURG DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD

DONALD AND LAUREL PALMER 2-LOT SUBDIVISION

FINAL PLAT APPROVAL - GRANTED MAY 7, 2002

The Hinesburg Development Review Board hereby grants final plat approval to Donald and Laurel Palmer for one 10.3 acre single family residential lot from a 70 acre parcel located on Palmer Lane, leaving a 60 acre parcel with one existing house located on the portion of the parcel in the Town of Richmond (tax map parcel #2-01-03). This includes approval for Development on a Private Right-of-way for a common driveway in a 50' right-of-way between the new 10.3 acre parcel and the David Palmer lot to the north.

The subdivision shall be as shown on a plat by Ronald LaRoe last revised 4/02/02 and a site plan and wastewater disposal system design by Willis Design Associates, inc., last revised 4/03/02, and shall be subject to the following conditions:

1. Utility lines shall be placed underground as required in Section 7.9.1 of the Subdivision Regulations.

2. A 42.3 acre portion of the 60 acre property remaining after this subdivision is created, is located in Hinesburg, and is separated from the 18.8 portion remaining in Richmond by the Hinesburg-Richmond town boundary. Due to lack of frontage on a town road, the 42.3 acre portion shall not be considered a lot and shall not be placed in separate ownership from the 18.8 portion without further subdivision review by the Hinesburg Development Review Board. No zoning permit shall be issued for development on the 42.3 acre portion without Development on a Private Right-of-Way approval. This requirement shall be noted on the final plat.

3. The proposed driveway is located on the northern boundary in the location of an existing driveway (not in the location shown on the site plan for the wastewater system) and will be located in a right-of-way shared with the David Palmer property. The right-of way shall be shown on the plat and the proposed deed language governing the use, sharing and maintenance of a common driveway shall be applied to the deeds for both the Donald Palmer and David Palmer properties.

4. The driveway shall be designed to disperse runoff from the driveway onto the applicant’s property and reduce the amount discharged into the town road right-of-way. This may require that one or more culverts be placed under the driveway.

5. The proposed driveway for the new lot shall be constructed, maintained and plowed at least 12 feet in width. No road cut permit was required by the Select Board because it is located at an existing cut. If an additional lot is served by this driveway, the driveway shall but upgraded to the town road standards and the proposed deed language for sharing the costs and maintenance of the driveway shall be applied.

PALMER FINAL PLAT DRB - Granted 5/07/02 Page 2

6. In accordance with State statute, the mylar of this subdivision and a copy of the conditions of approval shall be recorded in both the Hinesburg and Richmond Land Records within 90 days of this approval. Before the plat is recorded, the applicant make the following revisions and submit two paper copies of the plat to the DRB and shall obtain approval of it:

1. Show the septic easement on David Palmer’s land.

2. Show the driveway easement on David Palmer’s land.

3. Note restrictions on the retained 42.3 acre portion of land in Hinesburg (see condition #2).

4. Location of building envelope with dimensions from properties lines.

7. In keeping with the rural character of Hinesburg, all exterior lighting 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.

8. Any principal structure and any garage shall be located in the building envelope shown on the plat.

9. The septic system for the new lot is designed for a 3 bedroom house and shall be installed in such a way that it meets the standards of the State Small Scale Treatment and Disposal Rules and as shown on the Site Plan and Wastewater Disposal System Plan. Any increase the number of bedrooms shall be approved by the DRB.

10. Before obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy for a dwelling on the new lot, the owner of the land shall require that a licensed engineer or site technician submit a letter to the Zoning Administrator stating that the septic system has been built in accordance with the approved plans.

11. "Substantial Construction" for this subdivision shall consist of construction of the driveway for the new lot. 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.

12. No further subdivision of this property shall occur without review and approval of the Hinesburg Development Review Board.

13. The well shall be as shown on the site plan or in a location to ensure that the wellhead protection area does not impact adjacent properties.