CHARLOTTE PLANNING COMMISSION

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2004

7:00 PM

Charlotte Town Hall – 159 Ferry Road

Members Present:

Jim Donovan

Jeff McDonald

Al Moraska

John Owen

Linda Radimer

Gordon Troy

Members Absent:

Robin Pierce

Staff Present:

Dean Bloch

Others Present:

Allan Jordan

Liam Murphy

Eleanor Russell

Jonathan Fisher

Trina Bianchi

Bob Perry

Kathleen Mushkat

Mike Lambert

Roger Lambert

Chair McDonald called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.

APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA AND REGULAR AGENDA

CONSENT AGENDA: (Nothing on Consent Agenda)

Mr. McDonald asked for comments or changes. Mr. Donovan said that he would like to add a discussion of Lake Champlain Bikeways; this topic will be discussed at 8:45 p.m.

DISCUSSION OF PLANNING COMMISSION SCHEDULE

PUBLIC COMMENT

None

Mr. McDonald asked for comments. There were none.

MINUTES:

December 4, 2003 – table Dec 4. Mr. Troy suggested circulating his revised copy of the minutes for everyone’s review and to vote on them at the next meeting. Everyone agreed. Mr. Bloch will incorporate everyone’s comments and resubmit in one document to everyone.

January 8, 2004—tabled

January 15, 2004—tabled

January 29, 2004—tabled

KATHLEEN MUSHKAT AND MELROSE HUFF: SUBDIVISION AMENDMENT TO MODIFY SHARED CURB-CUT, REVISE BUILDING ENVELOPE FOR LOT 2, AND CONFIRM “AS BUILT” LOCATION OF FORCE MAIN. PROPERTY LOCATED ON PRINDLE ROAD IN THE RURAL DISTRICT

Liam Murphy and Kathleen Mushkat addressed the PC. Linda Radimer offered to excuse herself from these discussion, due to a possible conflict of interest because of her connection to the property via family, but no one had a problem with her continuing on in an active role.

Mr. Murphy said that the first issue was that there was a shared driveway but when it was built, the road commissioner advised that it should be relocated because it was dangerous. The map shows the revised right-of-way. The second issue is the actual physical location where the force main is now on map. The third issue involved a revised building envelope previously approved by the PC. Mr. Bloch, in his notes, raised the question that the depiction of trees around the building envelope as shown on the map is larger than the originally approved plat. Mrs. Mushkat noted that it was not to scale. Mr. Moraska asked what had changed when the building envelope was revised. Mr. Murphy said it just got shifted a bit further away from the creek. However, Mrs. Mushkat said, it was approved by the Town without anyone visibly looking at it. When the road commissioner saw it, he said it was not safe. They plan on moving the entrance to the driveway. The driveway is going to go down the hill to the east. Mr. Troy said that when the original decision on the force main was made, there was flexibility. Mr. Murphy said it was an easement to be centered on the force main as constructed.

Mr. McDonald asked if there was documentation showing where the curb cut is going to be located. Mr. Murphy said the condition of the PC said it had to be a shared driveway cut. Mr. Bloch said that they will need an access permit now for the combined curb cut. Ellie Russell said it will show in the approval process.

Mr. McDonald asked for questions. There were none. Mr. Donovan made a motion to close this hearing. Mr. Owen seconded. All were in favor and the motion was unanimously PASSED.

MELROSE HUFF: SUBDIVISION MODIFICATION TO ALLOW THE CONVEYANCE OF 9.4 ACRES FROM LOT 1 TO LOT 3. PROPERTY LOCATED ON ROSCOE ROAD IN THE RURAL DISTRICT.

Liam Murphy addressed the PC on behalf of Melrose Huff. He explained that Ms. Huff owns the little house on the parcel of road on Roscoe Road. She has purchased the adjacent 15 acre parcel Therefore, Mr. Murphy said, she would like to change the boundary to make 2 conforming lots out of 1 nonconforming lot and one conforming lot. There will be no changes to the building envelope, except that of the new boundary.

It was noted that there is a mistake on the plan: 9.04 acres is incorrect, it should say 9.94 acres and Mr. Murphy said they will change that. 5.06 acres and 11.34 acres are the bottom line numbers. The force main on the approved septic plan coms out to the meadow (onto Lot 3), and then up to the building envelope on Lot 1, so it needs an easement . Ms. Huff owns both lots and has no plans to sell them. However, before it advances to a third party, it should be noted that there will be an easement for the force main conveyed. Mr. Murphy assured the PC that Ms. Huff will give an easement before it is conveyed to any third party. Mr. McDonald asked for questions. Mr. Bloch noted that the title on the plan needs to be changed. There were no other questions or comments. Mr. Troy moved to close this hearing. Mr. Donovan seconded. All were in favor and the motion was unanimously PASSED.

THOMAS AND VALERIE ESNES: REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE FINAL PLAT DECISION FOR A TWO-LOT SUBDIVISION. PROPERTY LOCATED ON SPEAR STREET AND UNCLE TOM’S LANE (aka SPEAR GERVIA ROAD) IN THE RURAL AND CONSERVATION DISTRICTS.

Liam Murphy and Bob Perry (attorney for the Esnes) addressed the PC. Mr. Murphy said that PC has to decide whether or not to reconsider this decision. Mr. Murphy said the issue is whether or not there is new and substantial information to warrant opening the hearing. Mr. Donovan asked Mr. Bloch if there was any new information from the Trails Commission. Trina Bianchi paraphrased the discussions of the Trails Commission meeting. Peter Swift and Diane McCargo came to this meeting, she said, and talked about the subdivision. They propose giving a trail easement on the western portion of land and relinquishing the easement on the eastern portion of the land and the Trails Commission discussed it and thought it was a good proposal.

Mike Lambert said that he and his brother, Roger Lambert, have property off that trail which is a Class 4 road. He asked how it would affect the value of their property if this trail was relinquished and how it would affect accessibility for their property also. Mr. Murphy said that he is requesting that the new floating trail easement be located only on Lot 2. He is not requesting the elimination of Uncle Tom’s Lane at this time. Mr. Lambert said they were never notified that that meeting was going to take place Monday (ie: the Selectboard meeting). Mr. Bloch said that if it gets proposed to get reclassified, there will be notification, but it is just discussion on Monday night with no action and that’s why he was not notified. Mr. Troy made a motion that the PC reopen the hearing for the request for reconsideration of Condition No. 5 of the Final Plat Decision of the 2-lot subdivision of Thomas and Valerie Esnes. Ms. Radimer seconded. All were in favor and the motion was unanimously PASSED.

REOPENED HEARING - THOMAS AND VALERIE ESNES

Mr. Donovan raised the question that if the easement will be an east-west easement across Lots 1 and 2, and if the PC relinquishes it as requested, how are they trying to maintain that connection between Mount Philo Road and Spear Street? Ms. Radimer responded by saying that they would be going north-south and picking up on an existing trail that allows access to the east. Mr. Donovan said that he would not be ready to relinquish it until everything was set. Mr. Troy said he had a problem with the fact that the PC is confronted with the issue of practicality; Mud Hollow Brook is only passable for a trail in the winter. The ability to join the west and east sides of the lot and take advantage of a pre-existing road/trail is fairly low other than the winter. Ms. Radimer noted that Mud Hollow Brook is rich in wildlife and an increased opening of trails in that area is detrimental, so if the Trails Commission has the thought of being able to access a place that already is open up, it would be much better. Mr. Murphy said the floating easement impairs the Esnes’ ability to build a house where they want it to be and the result of that is that the Esnes might abandon their subdivision application. Bob Perry explained that the Esnes bought the parcel last summer; they didn’t know where the best house location was, best views and wildlife were, etc., so they were reluctant to do that. They bought it as a retirement home site with no plan to build a house in the immediate future. The problem for them is that the Esnes want to put up a storage building on the lot and not realizing that the subdivision process was going to take as long as it did, they have contracted to buy that and a have contractor ready to build it. Mr. Perry said that they have applied for a building permit and one can’t be issued until subdivision approval, so they either have to get prompt approval or the deal falls through. Mr. Perry said other problems are that on the old road along the south side, there is a hedgerow that gives privacy to the south and if they put it on the northerly boundary, it comes close to the Jordan house, so given the distance south from Carpenter Road, the best approach for everybody is to go across land to the north of Lot 2. Mr. Perry went on to say that he would like to see accomplished tonight approval of a building envelope on that plan so the Esnes can proceed with the shed construction. He said he would also like the floating easement on Lot 2 only and a building envelope that they can put the shed in.

Mr. Murphy addressed the uses. Peter and Diana McCargo have no problem with the uses outlined in the Town Plan – pedestrian, bicycle, equestrian – and they would be willing to have snowmobiles as well.

Mr. McDonald asked for questions on the proposed language for Condition No. 5. Ms. Radimer asked if there was a VAST trail across Lot 2 now. Somebody thought that it’s still there. She suggested demarcating that VAST trail as the existing easement area and not have a floating easement. Mr. Troy said that that may not work due to how it connects for non-winter usage. Brook Scatchard from the Trails Committee showed on a map where the VAST trail connected. Mr. Scatchard said the trail is at least 500 to 1000 feet from the river in response to Ms. Radimer’s concerns about wildlife and riparian concerns.

Mike Lambert asked about discussion of the Class 4 road on Monday and what time it was. Mr. Murphy said 8:30 is when that discussion is going to happen.

Mr. Troy asked if they had a proposal for what the building envelope looked like for the Esnes’ proposed project. Mr. Perry said it is on the plan submitted with the zoning application. Mr. Perry said that the required 2-3 acre envelope meets the setbacks required by zoning.

Mr. McDonald asked the opinion of the PC members. Mr. Troy suggested making a motion to close the hearing with the understanding that the applicant would come back to the PC in 2 weeks with a revised plan showing their proposed building envelope of 2-3 acres.

Bob Perry said he would like to do a mylar immediately with a building envelope with setbacks of 100 feet from Spear Street and 50 feet from each side yard.

With regard to septic, Mr. Troy asked about where the septic would be located and the answer was that it would be inside the building envelope. Mr. Troy said his preference would be not to have it there and make the building envelope smaller. Mr. Perry agreed to make the building envelope smaller, and drew a sketch.

Mr. Troy moved to close this hearing. Mr. Owen seconded. All were in favor and the motion was unanimously PASSED.

LAKE CHAMPLAIN BIKEWAYS

Jim Donovan said that Lake Champlain Bikeways is again requesting that the Town consider putting up bikeway signs. He said he is not representing them, but wanted to know if the PC wanted to send a recommendation to the Selectboard. He would like to recommend that the PC send out a letter supporting the signs but recommending putting the signs on existing signposts. Mr. McDonald agreed. Mr. Moraska asked where the trail goes through the Town. Mr. Donovan said that it goes down Greenbush Road, down to Ferry Road, Lake Road, and back to Greenbush Road. Mr. Troy said that he was against putting up more signs. Ms. Russell said that people can usually get a map and if that’s the case, signs are not needed.

The consensus of the PC is that they don’t have a problem with signs as long as they are put on existing signposts where it’s possible, and they keep the number of them as low as possible.

Monday’s Selectboard meeting items are as follows:

1. bikeways

2. Uncle Tom’s Road throw up

3. CCMPO presentation by Jeff McDonald

4. CCRPC update by Marty Illick

5. Discussion of trail by Liam Murphy

Ms. Russell said that Liam Murphy’s intention is to start the discussion about how the Town approaches designating trails. He also wants to talk about what the Town’s policy should be regarding the throwing up of roads and how it relates to trails. Ms. Radimer said it would seem ill-advised for the Town to give up a road that it is not maintaining because it’s not costing anything to have that right. Ms. Russell said that the general position of the Selectboard is not to throw up any roads.

Ms. Radimer said that trails should be site specific. She said that the Planning Commission, Conservation Committee and Trails Committee need to work together and have a reason and a placement for a trail. Mr. Troy said that Brook Scatchard has been going around the Town with a GIS tracking system and his goal is to overlay where there are existing trails. Ms. Radimer expressed the concern about putting trails too close to waterways and wildlife habitats.

LETTER FROM VERMONT HOUSING AND CONSERVATION

Mr. Moraska commented that this letter from Vermont Housing and Conservation addressed to Charles Russell, as Chair of the Selectboard, is basically saying that the Town is not doing enough towards the goal of affordable housing and that the Land Trust has given a lot of land and monies for open land. During the Burns process, Mr. Moraska said, people from Habitat for Humanity came to see the Town about a project in back of the Charlotte Health Center and they couldn’t do anything because it was owned by the Land Trust but all the PC felt it was a worthwhile project. Affordable Housing went to the Land Trust and the Land Trust rejected the idea and that was the end of that. Ms. Radimer said that the Town has received a lot of monies from the Land Trust because of the amount of farm projects that have been done. She went on to say that the Town is trying to work towards the density bonuses. Mr. Bloch said the director of the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board met with Charles Russell, John Owen, Peter Richardson and Kate Lampton. From that meeting, they offered to have the Town apply for the grant that would look at inventorying potential sites for affordable housing as well as inventorying organizations that would be supportive. Also they felt that an education program would be a part of it. Mr. Troy asked what the PC needed to do. Mr. Bloch answered by saying that the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board said the important thing is that the zoning regulations of the Town be amended to allow for and encourage affordable housing. Mr. Bloch said he did send them a draft of the Town’s bylaw change for affordable housing.

Ms. Russell said that they weren’t aware of the Town’s bylaw change when they wrote that letter.

It was decided that the PC should invite them to a work session. Mr. Owen said if one project got done, that would illustrate what an affordable housing project can be to the people in the Town and that would be the best education.

DELIBERATIONS

ADJOURN

O:\Planning Commission\Minutes\Unapproved\February 05.doc