HINESBURG DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 1, 2005

Approved 2/15/05

 

Members present:  Tom McGlenn, George Munson, Robert Gauthier, Clint Emmons, Howdy Russell, Greg Waples and Ted Bloomhardt.

Staff member: Peter Erb

 

Member of the Audience:  Hans Jenny, Peter DeGraff, Frank Twarog, Alan Casell, Betty Wright, Karla Munson, Jared Stolper, Todd Bailey, Peggy Jones, Patrick Coulombe, ALan Brace, Scott Brace, George Bedard, Sandra Collins, Dustin Jurenson, Wendy Ordway, Eric & Ginger Johnson, and David Brown.

 

1.            MINUTES

            January 4, 2005 minutes.  Howdy motions to approve. George Munson seconds. Approval unanimous.

            January 18, 2005 minutes. Howdy motions to approve. Tom McGlenn seconds this motion. 4 ayes, 3                      abstain. Unanimous.

 

2.            STOLPER a continued public hearing.

            A site visit was conducted on January 18 at the camp location.

            The interior and exterior were looked at and evaluated for the camp replacement.

            The support posts under the camp are made of cedar and are not in great shape as a             support system. Replacement of a basement structure will be needed. (Frost wall      with drainage options has been discussed).

            The Septic system may be a condition upon further evaluation.

            The tree cutting around the house and up the hill will need to be looked at to         insure proper drainage and care of erosion issues.

            There is a concern for the flow of traffic in that area as the road bends and it may   become difficult with the increase of construction vehicles and equipment.

            Possible property lines had been specked out while on the site visit. 

            A question regarding the roofline is that it should remain relatively the same in             appearance.

            There were no questions or observations from the audience members.

 

Conditional use discussion.

            Mr. Stolper to use the existing foot print of the original camp.

            The roofline will be 9 ft. higher than the existing roof.

            This will be creating actual floor space on the second floor where as now there is             only a loft type space.

            Preexisting living space is 795’.

            Total proposed living space to be 1,115’.

            Creating a 320’ difference. (40%)

            there will be no other water appliances other than what exists now. (bathroom             sink, toilet, shower and kitchen sink.)

            Mr. Stolper spoke with STGriswold regarding using the Septitech design system             for the new septic.

            A state web site is available regarding this system. Paperwork available with the        Stolper file.

            The extra space added to the new structure is the second floor.  The main floor             basically follows the footprint of the original house.

            The screened in porch now will become an enclosed porch with the new             structure.

            The second floor will not visibly block the neighbor’s view.

            There are septic worries in regard to the capacity.  The new camp will possibly             have more frequent visitors and long occupation into the September month and             starting in the June month.

           

            A concern with the choices of foundation for the new structure needs to be             addressed.  The stone and cedar that is the foundation now lets the natural aquatic             flow run down in a gradual setting.  A new foundation, possible frost wall, needs             to address this same issue in about the same way. There needs to be a natural flow             to allow the proper drainage of the lands surrounding the camp and hillside area.

            A suggestion for curtain drains around the frost wall to help alleviate the flow             problem that may occur is being considered.

            Whatever system is considered should minimize disturbance of  the root system along the front             of the lake.

            Drainage into the lake is a huge concern.  The foundation needs to be properly             drained so as no pollutants are making their way to the water edge.

           

            What are the hours of constructions?

            A concern for noise and equipment will need to be addressed. These are seasonal             homes so working hours should be enforced.

            In the beginning during the digging and pouring for the foundation should start in             either May or June.  The frost can be unpredictable.

            Construction will probably be from June, July and August.

            Time and day of the week: 8-4 for crew or 9-4, Monday through Friday June     through August.

            They will avoid weekends and holidays and special occasions.

            Members of the public were informed that according to Chapter 117 of State Staute, in order to be allowed to appeal any decision of this board, members             of the public must have participated in the process prior to appeal.  Therefore, if they have concerns or questions, they should have them entered into the             record.

 

            Ginger Johnson states that from across the lake 8:00 am as a start time is too early     as they can hear it across the lake.  It would be better if the construction could    start at 8:30 or 9:00 am.

            Betty Wright owns the camp immediately South of the construction site.  A concern of         the road being blocked due to the construction vehicles and equipment.

            Alan Castle states that an association takes care of the road up to the Dimick(?)             property then it is up to the individual property owners to be responsible for their portion of the road.

            Road crossing for those camps that don’t live directly on the lake and they need to             cross the road to get to the lake. This is a safety issue.

            Alan Castle suggests that as the road is narrow the larger trucks should leave the             area  before the late afternoon and evening traffic comes through.

 

            The use of the camp should not be more than it has seen in the past.  There are             two adults and two children plus the occasional company.

            The septic should be at least a 3-bedroom system for usage.

           

Condition - A septic plan is needed. This will need to be approved. 

            There is land to the East that can be pumped upward for either a mound or             conventional system per whatever perks.

            A engineered septic plan may be required.

 

Tom McGlenn motions to close hearing.

Ted Bloomhardt seconds this motion.

A conditional approval for camp reconstruction.

Unanimous approval.

 

GEORGE AND KARLA MUNSON a preliminary plat proposal for a 5-lot subdivision.

 

(George Munson and Howdy Russell excused from the Board)

Greg Waples left.

 

            This new plan is similar to the sketch plan. 

            24 acres of  116+  on Buck Hill Road.

            A subdivision of 4 bldg. lots.  Owner to retain the other property with the existing             house.

            Each lot will be either 1 to 1.7 acres balance is open property.

            The tree line is on the North side and tree scrub to the West.

            There is a stream to the farm pond.

            A new driveway with existing on Buck Hill Road, municipal water and sewer.

            The drive will be of gravel/gray stone.

            There will be a pedestrian walkway to 116.

            Storm water will drain in a grassy swale along drive with an extra culvert added. Old culvert will be upgraded to a 24’ culvert.

            Proposed hydrants have been discussed with the fire chief.

            There is a matter of house height and color.

            Suggestions are that they match in height and are of a color to match or coordinate             with the natural landscape.

            Trees to be added are either Elms or Ash alternating.

            Shrubbery to be added to the front of the homes for a more natural look.

            Dependant on the new owners will determine what landscaping can be done in front of         the houses.

 

 

            Homes will be set back against the woods.

 

            The Hinesburg Recreation Committee and the Hinesburg Trail Committee would   like to present pathways for pedestrian use.  They would like an easement along    route 116.  The suggestion is to continue from the Russell property.

            There is trail work already in the Russell property.

            Howdy Russell supports potential access of trails extended from his property.

            Also, to minimize the visual impact of the homes they should be of a color             associated with the natural surroundings.

 

            George Munson states that his view of at least 50 houses has not been offensive to         him and they have no color restrictions.  So to have a color restriction placed upon his project seems too much.  It is private property and therefore the color    should be determined by the homeowner.

            A broad statement of color to blend with the natural surroundings would be             appropriate.

           

            The driveway will be of gray stone gravel and an association will be responsible             to maintenance.

            The Munson's are open to an easement from 116 to lots and to possibly continue             up behind the lots but not through the private properties for trail.  The Munson's             are even creating a graded pathway from 116 to the driveway of new lots.             Discussion for extended trail to be determined.

            The Trail Committee would like to keep trails that already exists from becoming             consumed by building projects and are suggesting logical options for expansion to         keep the trails open to pedestrians.

            The Munson's state that at this time to ask for an extension of the trails beyond             what they propose for a pathway is too much to ask for at this time.

           

 

            Proposed conditions as a completed list not available yet from the staff.

 

Ted Bloomhardt motions to finalize the conditions.

Clint Emmons seconds this motion.

Unanimous decision.

(George and Howdy rejoin the Board)

 

DAVE AND KELLI BROWN are requesting a conditional use permit.

 

Dave and Kelli Brown have lived at this residence for 3 months.  They would like to add a garage with breezeway and a deck onto their home.

The square footage of the existing house is 1900 sq.ft. roughly, plus a screened in porch.

The house is designed with two stories.  The basement is finished and walks out onto the lake side.

The neighbor has a summary plat and the original plans for this property.  They all concur that the lots are 100 ft. in width.  The planted stakes are assumed to be the property lines.  When measured from property to property they are roughly 100 ft. each across.

 

Set backs for the house and garage is 45 ft. from road center to the house.  Garage would sit 35 ft. from center road to garage.  This is nonconforming per the setbacks established by the town for this property. Creating new setbacks for the garage would require a variance and those are difficult to get.  To conform to the existing setbacks would be a viable option if the homeowner would try to maneuver the plans of the new garage perhaps back another 10 ft. or closer to the house. Perhaps making the garage a bit smaller also would stay with the conforming requirements.

Mr. Brown will reevaluate the plans he has but would like to try and stay with his original idea of an attached garage with breezeway.  Garage would also be two stories.  Above garage would be storage and possible game room eventually. Would be considered living space as part of the house.

Erik and Ginger Johnson live on the south side of the property and have stated that the side yard set backs are not a concern for them but the project moving closer to the lake maybe an issue.  There is a ravine between the house that serves as drainage for the two properties must be preserved or both properties will have water issues on their lawns.  Also to have the garage and house match as close as possible in height has been recommended.

 

The septic is a concern, as the garage would sit on or near the location of the septic.  Septic could be moved up across the road 300-ft or so to a leach field area there.  Property is 100 ft across and roughly 500 ft long. Majority of property is across the road from the house going up into a steep hill.

Mr. Brown will reevaluate his plans and the property and return with a revised plan for possible approval.

 

Ted Bloomhardt motions to continue 3/15/05

Robert Gauthier seconds this motion.

Unanimous.

 

SANDRA COLLINS is requesting a revival of the sketch plan for a sub division on her parent’s lot on Lincoln Hill.  The present sketch plan approved in December of 2003 has expired.

Driveway will be shared with current home (Cliff and Christine Collins).  The lot to be divided sits in back of the existing home.

The drive meets the setbacks with a wide right if way.  There will be at least another 20-30 feet extended to new lot of shared drive then this will branch off for the new driveway. 

The sketch plan is for a 3-acre lot.  The sketch plan has not changed at all from the first sketch plan approved in 2003.

Storm water run off to Lincoln Hill Road is to comply with joining property that was established years ago.  A system should be considered, as there is a lot of water running down from Lincoln Hill.  A condition of a road design and run off design to show the Board is requested at preliminary meeting.

The old order #3 proposed requirements for this and appears to meet concerns.

 

Ted Bloomhardt motions to approve  - A final sketch plan approval to be drawn up.

Robert Gauthier seconds this motion.

Approved unanimously.

 

OFFICERS ELECTED

 

Chair - Tom McGlenn

Vice Chair position (re-nominated) Ted Bloomhardt

Clerk position (re-nominated) George Munson

Howdy Russell motions to nominate; Robert Gauthier seconds this motion.

Unanimous approval.

 

NEXTEL sketch plan approval.  3 step process.

 

#3 of “Findings of Facts” are questionable information of what we are visually getting for sketch plan approval.

Question - Should town land be used for this project?

                  Is this proper use of town land?

The town is the co-signer of this application.

Consideration for possible funding for the sewage system or growth of it should be an issue with this proposal.

Tom motions for approval

4 approvals 2 abstain

Approved

 

WRIGHT & LIDLE vote on the draft conditions of approval.

 

The state helps determine the system and reports are gathered accordingly.

Extra reporting to the town may be too much. State reports should be enough.

 

Clint motions to approve

George seconds this motion

Ted abstains

Approved

 

Meeting adjourned at 10:30 pm.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Hannah B. Robert

Recording Secretary

 

yle='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'>Meeting adjourned at 10:30 pm.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Hannah B. Robert

Recording Secretary

 

>