CHARLOTTE PLANNING COMMISSION

1. General Business: Minutes for November 30, 2000 were accepted. November 16^th minutes were reviewed. Ed Stone moved to accept the minutes of November 16, 2000. Josie Leavitt seconded and the motion was approved, 4B0 with 3 absent. were approved and December 21^st minutes were reviewed. On page 1, a clarifying phrase was added for the location of the mound in a group of mounds within a common area. Ed Melby moved to approve the minutes of December 21, 2000 with that addition. Ed Stone seconded the motion and it was approved with 3 votes for, 1 abstention and 3 absent.

As a general discussion, Ed Melby cautioned that for any new developments especially of this size, an impact statement should probably be prepared for the school board. For instance if there were an average of 3 school aged children per house, for 10 houses that would be 30 expected new students for the system to absorb. It=s just something to be aware of. No vote was taken on this.

January 4, 2001 minutes were postponed. However Dean=s letters and findings were reviewed. Ed Melby said he would like to be sure that the Planning Commission work with the Stearns to be sure things are going along as planned.

Jeff McDonald questioned #2 (findings) that the driveway cuts for all the development should be off the access road. Dean showed another plan where the curb cuts were different. The drive cuts for all the building lots had not been discussed at the Sketch Plan. Dean said the Stearns would like to stay away from Act 250 so some further discussions had occurred.

Jeff had a comment at the end of #1 could be removed, and then go to #2 and scratch that. Then the fire pond was discussed as commented on at their site visit. There would be a cul-de-sac at the end of the drive for the fire trucks to be able to turn around for #4. There would also be a pull-off area. The numbers of the findings are changed as discussed, and There should be some language crafted to specify the no-build area unless an open space agreement is done.

Ed Melby suggested they notify North Ferrisburgh, and Dean said that will be done automatically since the statutes require this. There was consensus to approve the Stearns recommendations.

Plouffe Lane letter: There is a roadway agreement and Ed Stone suggested that this be noted in the letter that goes to Yvan Plouffe, that this be put in the deed. Jeff said the APlanning Commission recommends that a Maintenance Agreement be included in the deeds for the new lots.@ There was a consensus to approve the Plouffe recommendations as revised.

Traffic Study: Ed Stone suggested that since the Country Home Products had used a traffic study, the Waldorf School applicants might be able to use that knowledge. Even though it isn=t a requirement to have their own traffic study it is hoped that when they do their scenario, they make sure the timing for the beginning and ending of the school day doesn=t conflict with the same time the trains arrive or the ferries are letting cars off.

Dean said #1 says, Traffic concerns will be addressed through timing and arrivals coincide with existing other schedules. Ed Stone asked that he also say that the applicants include the study that was done and that they work with that study. The Planning Commission approved the Waldorf letter as revised.

The town attorney was contacted and discussed the Stockbridge Homeowners Association. Since the application was specifically for the Barkers= lot and the site plan shows a reduced setback only for that lot it only applies to that lot. Fire Pond Road is not constructed to the north of the applicant= lot. The parcel to the north of these lots is protected by a condition of the original subdivision approval so it is not likely that there will be any further extension of this road. His recommendation is to not take any further action. The Stockbridge Homeowners Association issue is closed.

2. George Burrill B Sketch Plan Review for Subdivision Modification, Lucy=s Lane and Higbee Road: The applicant proposes to divide an 11.5 acre lot into two, but join one of these two, a 5.97 acre piece, with his adjoining parcel which is 30 acres. The remaining 5.19 acres is proposed to be sold as a building lot.

The 5.19 acre lot was approved previously, but since it is now smaller than 10 acres it will need a State subdivision permit. Mr. Burrill has a preliminary design for a new septic system.

Mr. Burrill said he wants to keep control of the pond and the wooded area. This was part of a subdivision in which this lot was created in 1978. He bought it in 1982 when it was part of the Lucy Lane subdivision so thought this might be a subdivision modification.

Dean mentioned that Paul Craven had called about drainage from above. Mr. Burrill said AJunior@ had fixed that. Higbee is a Town Road and it is believed Lucy Lane is a private road.

Jeff McDonald moved to classify the George Burrill application as a Subdivision Modification. Ed Stone seconded and the motion was approved, 4B0 with three members absent.

3. Tom Mansfield: Discussion regarding Black Willow Phase II. Nancy Jenkins and Brian Jackson, who have Lot #11, claim that Graham Goldsmith constructed Thorpe Cove Road across the corner of their lot in violation of the approval. And thus, they say, it reduces the marketability of said lot. Beal is Lot #10, Robinson is Lot #9.

Tom said he first reviewed this request at the end of July. There was no consensus at that time, when he did a site visit, that there was anything wrong or that the access road was any different then it was supposed to be. Since that time, he did receive a copy of a letter that was drafted by Jackson and Jenkins, signed by the Association members, to Graham Goldsmith requesting that Mr. Goldsmith voluntarily correct the problem with the road.

Since that letter, Tom received a second certified letter saying that the Town Amust take action,@ and that as Zoning Administrator, he must take action regarding this. He asked that a determination be issued in writing without further delay.

Ed Stone asked if the road is built different from what was approved. The complainants have shown what is shown in the land records, vs. what is actually there and they say that is their proof.

Ed Stone noted that there is still a deposit of $3,500 from Graham Goldsmith in the Town. He suggests that if a survey is ordered which would probably cost $1,500, it could be taken from that deposit. If, however, the survey shows that the road is built where it is supposed to be, then the Homeowners= Association would have to pay for the survey.

Ed Stone asked Tom to ask the Homeowners to come to the Planning Commission meeting and then to ask them to make a recommendation.

Tom has in the files a letter written in October of 1998 by Graham Goldsmith asking for the $3,500 deposit back. Charlie Burnham had responded by making two requests, one of them being the survey regarding the right of way. Graham Goldsmith never responded, and Tom Mansfield said he had written Mr. Goldsmith another letter, to which he has not responded.

The other request to Mr. Goldsmith was about the fire pond. There is no record that the request to certify that the fire pond meets regulations. Tom was waiting for Fire Chief Chris Davis to get back from recent surgery so he could find out if that was ever done.

Jeff McDonald said the Town does have a vested interest in making sure that roads are constructed according to plan. This road is also access to the fire pond, he noted, so the Town does want to make sure that it was constructed according to the approval.

Ed Stone said the best way to work this out with the homeowners and also with Graham Goldsmith. If we see that Mr. Goldsmith didn=t do the correct thing, then we have legal recourse. We need to hear both parties, he said. We extend the invitation and decide at that time. The consensus of the Planning Commission is to make this a regular agenda item.

Dean Bloch will make time at the next Planning Commission meeting for this discussion among the parties.

4. Tom Mansfield, discussion of Certificate of Compliance: Tom reported on his discussions with the Selectboard regarding creation of a Certificate of Compliance, and what fees would be charged for this.

Usually up until now, attorneys will come in and ask Tom to look in all the records and see whether a property they are doing a title search on has all its permits in order and whether there is anything which will prevent a closing. Tom does the work and they leave.

This will be similar to a Certificate of Occupancy issued for a residence whether it is new, or has recently had some renovations done. But this is for an existing property to be sure it meets current regulations and the septic systems, etc. are adequate.

Members agreed this would be acceptable and settled on a fee of $50.00 for this. Tom will take this information back to the Selectboard. Ed Melby moved to make a resolution to the Selectboard regarding Certificates of Compliance. Josie Leavitt seconded and the motion was approved, 4B0 with 3 members absent.

5. Railroad Lighting Plan: The Planning Commission did an Administrative Review for the remaining conditions of the Site Plan Approval. The lighting will be toned down, with wattage reduced and lowered closer to the ground.

They also looked at the island, which will be planted and not paved, and the landscaping plan.

Ed Stone moved to accept the Landscaping and Lighting plans for the train station that are already submitted for approval. Josie Leavitt seconded the motion and it was approved, 4B0 with 3 absent.

6. General Business: Members of the Planning Commission have been invited to go to Hinesburg for a joint meeting and presentation by the Chittenden Regional Planning Commission and discuss what kind of needs we have. Regional Planning had helped with the traffic study in the past, Ed Stone said.

At 8:25 p.m., Ed Melby moved to adjourn. Ed Stone seconded and it was unanimous.

APPROVED BY THE CHARLOTTE PLANNING COMMISSION ON

Chairman Date

O:\Planning Commission\Minutes\2001\cpc18jan2001apprvd