HINESBURG DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES OF MEETING OCTOBER 5, 2004
Approved
10/19/04
Members Present: George Munson, Tom McGlenn, Robert Gauthier,
Greg Waples, Howdy Russell, Ted Bloomhardt, Clint Emmons and Peter Erb (Zoning
Administrator).
Members of the
Audience: Steven and Carol Palmer,
Laura Carotenuto, Mary Mills, Elizabeth Ross, Tom Goulette, Lisa and Ted
Godfrey, George Bedard, John and Jean Kiedaisch, Jody Ciano, Dianne Deforge,
Paul Lamberson, Mark Styduhar, Terry Harris, Colin McNaull, and Ray Ayer.
***** Prior to the meeting, the Board members had
made a site visit to the Stewart property on the North Road. *****
1. MINUTES Howdy
Russell made the motion to approve the minutes of September 21, 2004 as
corrected. This motion was seconded by
George Munson and passed with Robert Gauthier abstaining from the vote.
2. FRANCIS – FINAL PLAT Tom McGlenn explained
that this was a continued final
plat public hearing and Dick
Francis and Joyce DeVoid were present representing the Francis family. Dick explained that they had reviewed the
draft conditions of approval and made a few suggestions to better clarify some
dimensions. They did not have any
further information to submit.
Tom McGlenn made the motion
to close the final plat public hearing for the Francis subdivision and this
motion was seconded by Ted Bloomhardt and passed unanimously. Howdy Russell then made the motion to grant
the Francis Family subdivision approval to create three lots on the north side
of Hayden Hill Road West. This motion
was seconded by Robert Gauthier and passed unanimously.
3. HODGKIN – FINAL PLAT Tom McGlenn
opened the public hearing for final plat
review of a proposal by
Vivian Hodgkin to subdivide her property on the corner of Silver Street and
Lewis Creek Road. This project consists
of the new lot on the west side of Lewis Creek with the existing house which is
7.3 acres in size; and the remaining approximately 25 acres which fronts on
Turkey Lane. The larger lot cannot be
developed without further approval by the DRB.
It was explained that the line on the plat to the east of the creek is
not the boundary line but a tie line for the surveyor. The remaining acreage will be surveyed if
and when it is proposed for development.
Greg Waples made the motion
to continue the public hearing to the October 19th DRB meeting in
the Town Hall and direct staff to draft conditions of approval. This motion was seconded by Howdy Russell
and passed unanimously.
4. BISSONETTE – SKETCH PLAN Wayne
Bissonette was next on the agenda with his engineer, Nick Nowlan from McCain
Consulting. They began the discussion
by announcing that the Bissonettes are withdrawing their sketch plan proposal
for a 9-lot Planned Residential Development subdivision. This property is located on the west side of
the Gilman Road. Wayne had met with the
neighbors to this portion of his property and is now proposing a 6-lot
subdivision, which will not be a PRD.
Nick then explained with
Wayne the following aspects of this new plan:
a) These would be 5 residential lots 2 acres or more in
size and they would be accessed by the private road from the Gilman Road..
b) The 6th lot would be the remaining
Bissonette land and they have indicated a 50’ wide right-of-way to this
remaining road.
c) Lot 1A would be 3.7 acres in size and approximately
8/10 of an acre would be set aside for a joint septic system for the other
lots.
d) The new road to these houses would be located
easterly of the Jones house which could eliminate vehicles lights affecting
that home. This new road to these
houses would follow the topography of the land and be fairly level.
e) The deep ravine where there is a hiking path would be
to the west of these 5 lots.
f)
There are no plans at
this time to develop the Pearce lot to the south of other Bissonette property,
however there are locations shown on the master plan as future development
areas.
There was then interaction
with the members of the audience to address some of their issues:
a) The Board had received today, an email from several
neighbors listing their concerns about the size and impact of this development
(they had not seen the revised plans).
This listed the uniqueness of this part of Hinesburg and their concerns
with the potential of extensive development of the Bissonette property. John Kiedaisch then restated some of those
concerns.
b) Diane DeForge, one of the three landowners on the
private road, which will be used to access this new subdivision, then read a
statement and submitted a letter from the Jones in regard to the new plan. She expressed appreciation to Wayne and Barb
for meeting with them and addressing their concerns and being willing to revise
their plans.
c) Carol Palmer also spoke in appreciation of Wayne’s
cooperation to meet with them. She said
that there are some issues that still need to be addressed but Wayne has been
willing to listen to them the neighbors.
d) Mark Styduhar, a landowner on Mead Farm Road said
that the landowners in that subdivision have a hired a surveyor and plan to
straighten out their common land boundary issue.
Nick Nowlan then explained
that this part of Hinesburg is zoned with 2-acre density and this plan meets
that standard and that 5 houses is not a lot of new homes when the Bissonette’s
own close to 1,000 acres. Tom McGlenn
stated that the Board commends Wayne for submitting a master plan that he had
worked with the Planning Commission to develop.
Tom McGlenn made the motion
to continue the Bissonette sketch plan review of this 6-lot subdivision to the
DRB’s October 19th meeting.
This motion was seconded by George Munson and passed unanimously.
5. STEWART – SKETCH PLAN Clint
Emmons recused himself from the Board during
the discussion of this
project. Prior to the meeting, Ted,
Howdy, Robert and Greg with Peter Erb, had conducted a site visit to this
property on the North Road. Sally is
proposing to create one new lot from her property, which has an existing house
and mobile home (which is now classified as a shed).
The following conditions
were observed at that site visit: Steep
slopes, the existing vegetation, drainage, the location of neighboring houses,
the location of the proposed new house, and the location of the mobile home
down by the Town road.
The following issues were
then discussed:
a) Her surveyor George Bedard has assured Sally that there
is sufficient acreage to create this lot excluding the deeded 50’ wide
right-of-way.
b) The driveway to this new house location may not meet
the standard of less than a 15% grade and it was suggested that the new house
could perhaps be located down by the North Road.
c) There are septic systems for both structures on the
properties that may not be sufficient for future uses.
d) It was suggested that this proposal could be treated
as a PRD and with the upper acreage being open space.
e) Sally has a new drilled well with her existing house
with a yield of 1˝ gallons at 500 feet.
f)
If a new driveway was
installed to the upper land, an engineer would have to design it and perhaps a
lot of trees would have to be cut.
g) There may be a seasonal stream, which would require
specific setbacks.
h) Sally commented she could maybe use the Hathaway
driveway and access her house from the south.
Tom McGlenn made the motion
to continue the discussion of the Stewart sketch plan to create one new lot on
the west side of the North Road to allow the applicant to work with staff on a
new plan. This motion was seconded by
Greg Waples and passed with Clint Emmons abstaining from the vote.
6. CARLSON – PRELIMINARY PLAT Steve and
Lisa Carlson, with their lawyer
Roger Kohn, were next on the
agenda for preliminary plat review to create one new lot at their property on
Upper Access Road on the south end of Lake Iroquois. Roger addressed the issues brought up by Peter in his memo to
the Board:
a) Several of these concerns were with the septic
systems and Roger explained the Carlsons would have to obtain State approval of
the new system and replacement areas for the existing systems.
b) The primary septic system for the new lot overlaps an
existing parking area easement and this can be moved.
c) They will provide a letter from the utility company
that septic areas may be located within that easement.
d) There is not a pathway through the Carlson property
at this time.
e) The applicants have submitted Homeowners Association
language for the maintenance of this private road, however other homeowners
that use this road cannot be required to join the association. The Carlsons are committed to paying for any
upgrades that are incurred due to this subdivision project.
f)
Steve Carlson explained
that if there is not sufficient space for lake access for pedestrians at their
“camp” land then they do own the former “Dennis” lot and the lake could be
accessed through this property.
g) The car, which had been buried on the property, has
been removed.
h) There was a discussion of the amount of tree cutting
that may have to occur with the house, utility lines, and septic areas.
i)
The applicants are
willing to have the right-of-way at the Ciano/Brown property relocated. The plans also show a proposed parking
easement on the new lot for parking at the Carlson camp.
j)
A report on deer
habitat had been submitted for the record.
k) The plans indicate that the well shield for the new
lot will extend onto an adjacent property and the DRB has previously has not
allowed this. It was suggested that
they could obtain an easement from that neighbor.
l)
Due to the size of the
shed with the existing house the property line at that location will have to be
moved to allow for a 20’ setback.
There were several items
that should be included on the preliminary plat including:
a) The utility easement on the northern side should be
shown.
b) It was requested that the flagging be replaced to
identify aspects of this proposal.
c) A design for the utility systems will also have to be
submitted.
d) There is still some confusion as to the location of
the Ciano/Brown and Makuku easements for their existing septic systems and what
has been shown on these new plans, as well as discrepancies between surveys
concerning boundary lines.
e) The septic
easement across the Allen property has to be clarified also to ensure that the
replacement area for the camp can be accessed.
Ted Bloomhardt made the
motion to continue the review of the Carlson preliminary plat and direct staff
to draft conditions for the next meeting.
The applicants will need to further address the easements that overlap,
the well shield, the utility system design and location of its easement, and
the ability to access the replacement area for the existing camp. This motion
was seconded by Clint Emmons and passed unanimously.
The meeting was adjourned at
10:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Holly Russell
Recording Secretary