HINESBURG DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES OF MARCH 16, 2004
Approved 4/06/04
Present: Tom McGlenn, George Munson, Robert Gauthier, Howdy Russell, Ted Bloomhardt, and Clint Emmons. Also Peter Erb, Zoning Administrator.
Member Absent: Greg Waples.
Members of the Audience: Frank & Helen Kilkenny, Nancy Wright, Jody Ciano, Tim Brown, Ted White (Conservation Commission), Owiso Makuku, Chris Applin, John & Phyllis Cheeseman, Jerrilyn Miller, Alan Nyhan, Steven & Robin Stockwell, and Barbara Walling.
1. MINUTES Howdy Russell made the motion to accept the minutes of March 2, 2004 and this motion was seconded by Robert Gauthier and passed.
2. CARLSON – SKETCH PLAN The sketch plan review for a proposal by Steve and Lisa
Carlson to create one new lot at their property on Upper Access Road had been continued to this evening. Board chair, Tom McGlenn asked whether there was any new information in regards to this application. The following members of the audience stated their concerns:
· Francis Kilkenny that the right-of-way to be used is not 50 feet in width and that repairs need to be done to the roadway which at this time is dangerous.
· Jody Ciano stated that the width of the land owned by the Carlsons at the entrance from Pond Brook Road is only 47’ wide, as depicted on a survey done of the area. She also commented that Lisa had stated at a previous meeting that widening the road would change the character of the neighborhood.
Tom McGlenn made the motion to close the public discussion of the Carlson sketch plan proposal and the Board take up this project in deliberative session in order to render a decision. This motion was seconded by George Munson and passed unanimously.
3. ROBERT – SKETCH PLAN The sketch plan review of a proposal by Arthur and Hannah
Robert had also been continued to this evenings’ meeting. This plan is to create one new lot from their property on the Swamp Road in Hinesburg. The applicants have received approval from the Hinesburg DRB for development on a private right-of-way to access their land in Richmond where they are proposing to create 3 lots.
Holly Russell stated, for the record, that this evening the Board had received: the minutes of the Richmond DRB, a letter from the Richmond Conservation Commission, and letter from Bernd Heinrich, a Hinesburg landowner.
Artie Robert presented the following arguments for approving his proposal and addressed the issues as outlined in the memo to the Board members by Peter Erb:
a) Peter had calculated there is not sufficient land to meet the zoning requirements and Artie felt that by further adjusting the lot lines he could meet them.
b) He showed on the Town Tax Maps that many parcels in this area of town are irregular in shape. He stated that the Town seems to want clustering of houses and he meets all the zoning requirements.
c) This 3-bedroom, 2-bath home will not be out of character with the existing houses in this neighborhood.
d) There is no ledge where the new road will be constructed and therefore blasting should not be an issue. If it proves necessary, he will provide a plan to be approved.
e) He is not encroaching on the wetland on his property with the septic systems and buildings and he will submit an erosion control plan.
f) The well on his house provides 7 gallons a minute and is sufficient to serve his house and 4 others.
g) The grade down to the new house building envelope is not 30%.
h) The wildlife in this area will not be affected.
The members of the audience then presented their concerns with this proposal:
a) It appears that this house will be very visible from the Town road and that headlights from this drive would shine in the Cheeseman house.
b) The new road will require blasting and this could affect neighboring properties.
c) If the 3 new houses are approved in Richmond (which has 1-acre zoning) this would mean 5 houses very close together which would affect the character of the neighborhood.
d) It seems highly probable that these 5 septic systems will have an adverse affect on the extensive wetland here. There seems to be a question as to the actual delineation of where this wetland is located. Artie said he would have to receive approval from the State wetland coordinator for his proposal.
e) The amount of traffic on Swamp Road has increased a lot and this subdivision will contribute to that problem.
f) The wildlife in and around this swamp and wetland will be very adversely affected.
Ted Bloomhardt explained that the Board at its last meeting had determined that the proposed lots’ shape was irregular and now the Board must determine, as per Section 2.4.7 of the Zoning Bylaw which states “Triangular or other irregularly shaped lots may be allowed at the discretion of the Development Review Board provided that the configuration allows for reasonable use of the land.” Any proposed new lot must also meeting the Planning standards for a lot as outlined in Article 5 of the Subdivision Regulations.
Tom McGlenn made the motion to close the public discussion of the of the Robert sketch plan proposal and the Board take this up in deliberative session in order to render a decision.
4. ROSE – SITE PLAN Alex Rose had submitted an application to convert the building
owned by him in Commerce Park next to the Mobil station to a mini-mart. There were no representatives to present this request and therefore the Board did not review this application.
5. EMMONS – SKETCH PLAN Clint Emmons recused himself from the Board to present
with George Bedard a proposal to further develop his property on the south side of C.V.U. Road. Clint had originally owned 10.03 acres of land with an existing house and large garage. He had previously received approval to subdivide this property into 4 lots: one with the existing house, a second with the existing garage where he has built a new home, and two open lots. These lots are all served by a private septic system that he had constructed that connects with the Town system. Each house has an individual drilled well.
George Bedard explained the following aspects of their new proposal:
a) Lot #3 with the existing garage and new house would be subdivided and have 1.9 acres with these structures and the new lot would be 1.5 acres in size.
b) The building envelope could be made smaller and the house on this lot would probably have a walkout basement.
c) There is screening with hardwood trees to the east and cutting will not be allowed between the new house on this new lot #5 and the existing one on lot #3.
d) The infrastructure of a road and sewage line are already in place and the system is designed to meet the State requirements.
e) This new house would have a new access cut off this private road and not share the one with the existing garage.
Steve Utter, a landowner, directly below the Emmons property was concerned about water runoff onto his lot. He said that he had constructed a new curtain drain at the back of his property and since there had been drilling and construction on the ledge above him, water had been running onto the front of his property. He also would like to see some type of privacy hedge along the back of his lot as it is so busy at CVU that his family really enjoys their backyard. His house is further back on the lot than the other houses on the CVU Road and this 5th house could affect his family’s quality of life. George Bedard suggested that the Board make a site visit to the property to see these conditions.
Tom McGlenn made the motion to continue this sketch plan review to the April 6th meeting preceded by a site visit to the property at 6:00. This motion was seconded by George Munson and passed unanimously.
6.
ACTION ITEMS
The meeting was adjourned at 10:40.
Respectfully submitted,
Holly Russell, Recording Secretary