Al Moraska Jeff McDonald

John Owen Jim Donovan

Gordon Troy Robin Pierce

Linda Radimer

Staff Present:

Dean Bloch

Others Present:

David Miskell Bob Costanza

Ellie Russell Debbie Ramsdell

Linda Hamilton Bill Maclay

Pete Demick Larilee Suiter

Lynn Mansfield Randi McCuin

Charles Russell Bill Nedde

Robert and Denise Titus Trafton and Laura Crandall

Robert and Denise Titus

The Planning Commission members present unanimously concurred that Al Moraska should act as Chair of the meeting for the evening, due to the absence of Chair Jeff McDonald and Vice Chair Jim Donovan.

Mr. Moraska next called the meeting to order at 7:28 p.m.

APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA AND REDGULAR AGENDA

CONSENT AGENDA: (Nothing on Consent Agenda)

Marjorie Mansfield, Randi McCuin, Lynn Mansfield, Lisa Gere, James Mansfield, and Lance Mansfield: continuation of Final Plat Hearing for a two-lot subdivision. Property located on Mount Philo Road and Lime Kiln Road in the Rural District

Lynn Mansfield and Bill Nedde appeared before the PC. Mr. Moraska reminded everyone that this application is being heard again tonight for two reasons. One issue was whether the road divided the parcel into two separate parcels. Mr. Moraska said that he agreed that it did and Dean Bloch checked with the Town attorney, who also agreed that a roadway does constitute a division between two parcels under the same ownership. Mr. Troy clarified that this is true for zoning purposes, not for tax purposes.

Mr. Moraska said that the other reason the applicants were before the PC tonight was the issue of a town trail. The Town has a Trails Committee and they are in the process of making trails throughout the community for public use and one part of the trail was coming down through the property directly west of the McGuire Pent Road and the Trails Committee had requested a floating trail easement. Mr. Moraska asked the applicants for comments. Mr.Troy showed on a map of what came out of the Trails Committee in addition to their letter. Bill Nedde said that because there have been different PC members between the sketch plan review for this application and now, he went over the background saying that they went through a review of the history of the property already and reiterated the simplistic nature of the application.

Lynn Mansfield told the history of the property. She explained that it has been and still is in the current use program since April 1993 and they intend to keep it in the current use program. She went on to say that the Trails Committee request was a complete surprise to her in that no one had contacted her or her family before she heard about the easement for the trail. She said she believes that it would be a separate issue from the current application but would be happy to meet with the Trails Committee. Mr. Troy asked if the ten acres that they are subdividing out is in the current use program also. Ms. Mansfield said yes. Mr. Nedde said that the Mansfields’ intent is to retain rights and use of the agricultural properties to the east side and in doing so, preserving them. He also said that if anyone came in at a later date with an application that did not meet the Town Plan’s requirements, it would be the PC’s option not to approve it. Mr. Troy expressed concern stating that by removing only a portion of the property that has structures on it, the PC would be boxed into a corner that if in final analysis to preserve open space and to do as in the master plan for the development of the property as a whole, they have an important chunk removed. In other words, it would be scattered; by removing the property, you remove the option and it limits what the PC could do. Ms. Mansfield said that they are selling the remaining 113 acres as a whole parcel. Mr. Troy acknowledged that, but said the next person that comes along may want to do something with that parcel and they would prefer to be able to look at the master plan of the parcel as a whole in what is the best development of that property based upon the direction of the Town plan and zoning regulations and by removing the ten acres, it causes a problem.

Mr. Troy said that, if they came before the PC, hypothetically, and wanted to keep lots on both sides they can group the two together as one if that’s the objective. Charlie asked if they could put an open space agreement on it right now, and Mr. Troy said yes, but it would have to be floating. Mr. Troy said he understood that Ms. Mansfield did not want to burden the larger parcel with 50% of the ten acre parcel, so the only conclusion is that 50% of the ten acre parcel needs to be identified as open space, but in the context of the larger picture, maybe this is the kind of cluster that makes sense if there was to be further development in this area and by creating that now, eliminated that as a possibility. Mr. Nedde said open space requirements are part of PRD requirements. Dean Bloch said that the Charlotte Conservation Committee submitted a letter to put in the record. He made copies of the letter and distributed them to the PC members and the applicants.

Mr. Moraska asked if there were any other issues. Linda Hamilton from the Conservation Committee noted that the wooded area is highly sensitive. There are deer and turkey trails in there so the Conservation Committee wanted to make sure that people were aware of that and to be careful and sensitive about where the trail would go. The Conservation Committee expressed its concern that when designing the location of the trails, the Trail Committee needs to be careful and sensitive about their placement.

Mr. Moraska asked if the PC had any other issues they would like to bring up. Mr. Nedde said that he nor the applicants can respond to this Trail and Conservation Committee’s letters tonight because they just found out about the trail issue. He also said there is some time sensitivity and there is some sales activity on the lot. He expressed concern about the sketch plan review not including the Conservation Committee comments or trail network comments and he said he thought it somewhat inappropriate to have something handed to them this evening. Mr. Bloch responded by saying that the intent of the distribution was to summarize. Linda Hamilton said that she was at sketch plan review and the other hearing and didn’t raise any trail issues at that time and wanted to respond to the Trails Committee’s submission and that is why the Conservation Committee did a letter at this time. She said that they have concerns about where trails are put, but wouldn’t press to pursue a trails easement on this property. Mr. Moraska asked for other comments. There were none.

Mr. Owen moved to close the hearing. Ms. Radimer seconded. Having no further discussion, all were in favor and the motion was unanimously APPROVED.

Champlain Valley Co-Housing: Discussion regarding potential modifications to building envelopes and building style.

Bill Maclay and Robert Costanza from UVM addressed the PC. Mr. Maclay said that they were before the PC this evening for two issues, the first being a minor site plan change. He has talked with the fire department. This change would cause no major significance for them. It is at the southern end of the project. They have adjusted the road, there is less stormwater runoff and the house would come close to the 25-foot wetland setback but still maintain that setback. The major thing is that the road had to be moved to accommodate the berm and it changed the lot boundary. The fire department has not approved it yet. Mr. Moraska doesn’t see a problem with tweaking the building envelope and road, but would like to not change the setback from the wetland because it would be setting a not so favorable precedent. He asked the total height. Bill Maclay said about 20 feet. He said the new house was partly in the ground and every efficient.

Mr. Troy said that he understood that the buildings were not going to have basements and asked for clarification. Mr. Maclay said that there were always basements, but only used as storage space and not considered living space. Mr. Troy asked if the basements in the multi-units would be divided off and Mr. Maclay said yes. Mr. Moraska asked if there were any more issues or questions. Mr. Maclay asked if the new house drawing was acceptable to the PC. Mr. Troy said they will make a decision and send the applicants a letter.

Trafton M. and Laura L. Crandall: Sketch Plan Review for a Subdivision Modification to a change the boundary-line between Lots 1 and 2. Property located on Orchard Road in the Rural District

Mr. and Mrs. Crandall addressed the PC. Mr. Moraska asked them to outline their application and explain the background. Mr. Crandall said that they owned 2 adjacent lots, one being 14+ acres and the adjoining being 10 acres. They are proposing a boundary line adjustment to incorporate less than 5 acres into the larger 14-acre parcel and leaving a 5.3 acre lot on the north end. Mr. Moraska asked if there was a house on Lot 2 presently. Mr. Crandall said they have a building permit and have begun to develop that on Lot 2 for their primary residence. He said there was an existing building envelope on Lot 2 and they are proposing to put a building envelope on Lot 1. He showed the full-sized plan to the PC, which they have provided to the Town, explaining in more detail their intentions. He said they have submitted a septic application to the Town for the lot with the easement.

Mr. Troy noted that the new lot 1 was going to need a curb cut and asked the Crandalls if they had talked with the road commissioner about the proposed location of the curb cut. Mr. Crandall said that they have not yet done that. David Miskell said that the property was very open there. Mr. Moraska asked about wetlands. Mr. Crandall showed on the map where they were designated. Linda Hamilton asked if the wetlands ecologist was out there doing delineation or were they using the wetlands map. Mr. Crandall said they were using the map from the subdivision plat. She asked how far the house was to the edge of the wetlands. Mr. Crandall said 300-400 feet. Mr. Moraska asked if they had Lot 1 had been approved for septic. Mr. Crandall said that they had submitted to the Town and Spencer has recommended approval, but if they go ahead with the lot line adjustment, less than ten acres, it needs to go through the state permit process. If left as is with ten acres, it wouldn’t have to go to the State.

Mr. Moraska said that since this is a sketch plan review, the PC need only to classify at this point and he asked if any PC member had questions or concerns. Ms. Radimer asked if there was septic capacity for further subdivisions. Mr. Crandall said not presently but there is land enough potentially for that. Mr. Troy recommended that the PC classify this application as a subdivision modification for boundary adjustment and subdivision amendment, in particular, to review Lot 1 as a building lot and to look at both lots in their entirety for both modification and amendment.

Mr. Moraska said the next step is to file for a hearing. Ms. Radimer reminded them to contact and meet with the road commissioner.

Mr. Crandall said that his only concern is that he’s already begun and wanted to know if there is any problem. Mr. Troy expressed concern about access points and their placement and noted the Town’s policy to minimize curb cuts when possible. Otherwise, the PC had no other concerns at this point.

Robert and Denise Titus: Sketch Plan Review for an eight-lot subdivision. Property located on Spear Street and Guinea Road in the Rural District

Mr. Moraska asked the applicant to put forward their proposal. Mr. Dolliver said there are 7 lots on Dolliver Drive. Mr. Troy asked who owned Dolliver Drive. Mr. Titus said that he owned 350 feet of it, the start of it. Mr. Moraska said that they would have to avoid the prime agricultural area/wetland. Mr. Titus said their intention is to come off Guinea Road and put houses along the roadway. He said he has talked with the road commissioner and he had no problem with his plans. He said he did not want to scatter the houses, so he could leave land to farm. Linda Hamilton asked if he thought of clustering the houses near Spear Street. Mr. Titus said not, but it might work. After discussion, it was decided that the PC members would need to go see the land. Mr. Troy said it would be helpful to have a wildlife overlay. Mr. Titus said the whole farm is pasture. Linda Hamilton asked the status of the gravel pit there. Mr. Titus said that the Town leases it is using it and they have that right until 2010. In response to a question by Mr. Troy, Mr. Titus said that all the property is in the current use program

A site visit was scheduled for April 15^th at 5:00 p.m. and they will discuss the application again that evening at 8:00 p.m.

DELIBERATIONS

The PC conducted deliberations.

ADJOURNMENT

Ms. Radimer made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Troy seconded. Having no further discussion, all were in favor and the motion was unanimously APPROVED. The meeting adjourned.

O:\Planning Commission\Minutes\2004\April 01 .doc