CHARLOTTE PLANNING COMMISSION

Guests Signed in:

Linda Radimer

Debbie Ramsdell

Sylvia Sprigg

John Pitrowiski

Mel Hawley

Spin Richardson

Kate Lampton

Bill Lockwood

Kent Koptiuch

Maria and Marion Paris

Ron Miller

Ed LeClair

Linda Hamilton

Steve Mack

Robin Simpson

Linda Clark

Frances Foster

Stephen C. Brooks

1. General Business, review of Minutes: Because of the makeup of members present only the August 2^nd minutes were reviewed. A reformat of four sentences was recommended for greater clarification, and one word correction and one date correction were made. Also the first two sentences in the third paragraph of the Town Plan discussion were deleted as unnecessary.

Gordon Troy moved to approve the Minutes of August 2, 2001 for the Charlotte Planning Commission with the noted corrections on pages 1 and 3. Josie Leavitt seconded the motion and the motion was approved, 3-0 with one member abstaining and four members absent.

2. Greenwood America, Continuation of the Preliminary Plat Hearing for a 6-lot subdivision creating 4 building lots, one common lot, and one retained lot, located on Lake Road: Mel Hawley represented Greenwood America and introduced Bill Lockwood who is one of the owners, and John Pitrowiski from Trudell Consulting Engineers. He said that David Raphael could not be here.

Mel Hawley explained some changes. All buildings have been moved 50' to the west, away from the wetlands, and they have eliminated the pond. He said someone from the State had said the pond was not allowed because it was in the wetland. They said if it were put in, it would tend to fill with water and stagnate. There was not much flexibility to relocate a pond because of septic.

Along the Steve Mack boundary, they intend to have more landscaping, and he displayed an aerial photograph and an overlay prepared by Landworks. There would be more trees, with large trees in the mix. The turquoise colored area is the wetlands, with the darker tinged area the wooded area within the wetland.

Each of the homes will have individual property wells. If the well is uphill, according to regulations, there will be 100' setback, and if the well were downhill, there would be 150' setback. Mel said there is 75' between the disposal field and foundation drain.

He said he is concerned that Dean has suggested moving the edge of the building envelopes still 50' more. He is concerned that there isn’t enough room to move them more. Planning Commission members expressed concern that putting the building envelopes right on the edge of the buffer zone may tempt the person who will live there, to mow it.

Bill Lockwood put a tentative line to move one side of the building envelope for lot 2, and to take off a small corner of lot 3 so that the buffer zone would not be affected, because a setback can be forest; it doesn’t have to be a lawn. This way he was only reducing the size of those two building envelopes, not moving the entire building envelopes.

Next was a discussion of a trail easement. Linda Hamilton, from the Charlotte Conservation Committee, has talked with Jesse Bradley of the Trails committee. If the Town should take an easement, they saw a potential trail parallel to the railroad tracks as a transit route to get to Ferry Road. This is not a final plan for a trail, but is a suggestion. That narrow strip on the southern boundary could have a very thick hedgerow. Al Moraska asked how that would link up to existing trails. Linda Having the easement doesn’t commit the Town to using this, Linda said.

At one time there was one running parallel along the southern border in that narrow strip. That strip, however, could be a very valuable path for the wildlife to get to that significant wetland. Another recommendation is to just leave the common land with the property and have the agreement that this corridor be left undisturbed. Their concern is that it would be used for bicycles and motorized vehicles, and they would want to keep the people traffic out of that area.

Josie asked how they would access the trail easement if it were all the way on the east corridor, if the people can’t walk through that common land. Linda said that would be a north – south trail, and Linda was optimistic that eventually the Town would have a number of cuts that would connect trails to Ferry Road. But this is general. They envisualize people going around the wildlife corridor in this other trail network.

Gordon Troy: “Just out of curiosity, if you create this wildlife corridor, how is it that the animals then know about it and use it? And how are you going to prevent people from using it?” That would be because this is private property in a development, Linda said. They could add more vegetation and put a hedgerow there along that strip. That would, however, affect the driveway so they suggest moving the driveway slightly.

Marion Paris and Steve Mack said the wildlife usually go north – south and are just staying away from the houses. Linda said they don’t see a regular trail there but they are just trying to make a sort of bridge to enable the wildlife to get to the vegetation on other side of the road.

Jim Donovan said there is some merit to having a pedestrian path there because we don’t know what the potential is in the future. He would be more in favor as we move on for the final hearings, that even if the exact path is not defined there is at least a legal option for one somewhere there.

Linda said the chief reason for not putting a trail there is that it goes into the middle of that forested wetland in order to lead from Lake Road to the train station. She said she is all for a trail access but probably it would have to be to the south.

Bill Lockwood said the middle of the wetland woods has approximately one foot of water that doesn’t dry up. On the south side this is almost impenetrable. Al Moraska suggested this seems to be limited to snowshoeing. He suggested limiting any trail to along the railroad tracks and not going into the wetlands.

Al asked about the proposed landscaping shown on the drawings; what kinds and what size? Bill said David Raphael had suggested options: maples, birches, ashes, oaks, evergreens. Jim Donovan said these were a good mix of fast growing and slow growing, with deciduous and evergreens. He said there should be percentages identified of each type.

Steve Mack asked if those on the south side could be more of the evergreen trees. Marion Paris asked about the area near her side, and that is not affected.

Dean Bloch asked about the driveway and ditch area. John Pitrowiski acknowledged that there is a town regulation that they clean out the ditch. It hasn’t been cleaned in this section in a long time, but they intend to do this before putting in a culvert.

Al Moraska noted that most houses to the north are one story homes, and expressed concern about whether there is any objection to a height restriction. He wouldn’t want to see very large houses which would be very unlike the rest of the neighboring homes. Bill Lockwood asked if that height restriction is imposed throughout the town, which is affirmative.

Bill asked if the applicants need to be aware of additional proposals for things that need to be put in the covenants. Gordon Troy recalled that at a previous hearing when the Planning Commission asked about the expected size of the houses, that Mel had replied that they might be 1500 s.f. or something like that. Even though these might be 3-bedroom houses, some of them have many extras such as a library, a den, an office, an extra dining room etc. which make them very much larger than anticipated.

Mel Hawley said when someone buys lots one, two and three, the fourth one has a pretty good handle on what kind of standard is expected so as not to upset the rest of the small neighborhood. Putting a 6,000 s.f. house in this development wouldn’t seem to be a good fit.

Jim asked what affect it would have if the homes were moved closer in together, away from the buffer zone.

Steve Mack noted, as he did in a previous hearing, that the houses are 600' back. He had been restricted so that from 400' back it was a “no-build zone,” and still feels that the standard he was restricted to should have been the same for this present situation. The Planning Commission was unable to find anything in the written record for the 400' no-build zone. However, in a statement made by Robert Mack to Dean outside of the hearing, that the Mack farm wanted it kept open for farming.

The plans specify cleaning out the ditch and filling back in. Bill explained that they had opened a de-watering ditch for the monitoring program to design the sewer system, and it has been requested that this be filled back in.

Dean asked if the applicants would consider an Open Space Agreement for the common land (Lot 5), for the four residential units. It is common land, not to be developed.

Linda Hamilton asked if the proposed covenants still have in them that there can be no clotheslines. Mel said that restriction is out.

Stephen Brooks said he notices that the driveway plan has three driveways parallel to one another, and asks what the purpose of this is.

Mel said they have looked at that. The developer would install waste water disposal lines and anything common. Any of this activity here is not common. One thing they have looked is that the people who buy these lots may decide to have the driveways joined for at least 100' and be common, and then split. The circle is part of the common land. Bill noted that lot 4 looks pretty but some buyer may decide to place his garage in the front and have a very short driveway, and the same with lot 2. It could just as easily be a short driveway.

Bill said the common land extends around the circle. When Stephen Brooks still pressed the issue of the driveway location, Mel said the answer is that they are not the developers and don’t know what design the buyers or the developers are going to choose within their building envelopes.

Al Moraska moved to close the Preliminary Hearing. Josie Leavitt seconded the motion. In discussion some neighbors requested having some sort of size restriction. Some Planning Commission members question how they can do this. Bill Lockwood suggested that something might be included in the covenants. Mel Hawley said he couldn’t see that anyone would want to build a 6,000 s.f. house on one of those lots, when the neighbor is building one that is 1,500 s.f. because the 6,000 s.f. house would be devalued by the 1500 s.f. one.

Steve Mack recalled that before all this started, he had asked what the plans for this land were, and that the answer was, “We are not developers.” There is a lot of growth now happening with this, so his question now is, “What are the plans for the future, for the rest of this land?” He asked about septic, also. Mel said they have a 6500 gal./day wastewater permit, an easement that flows from the Old Lantern property. Or, replacement for the Waldorf School, which won’t require it as long as they don’t exceed 44 employees. As soon as the Waldorf School exceeds 44 employees then the 600 gal./day system they have will become abandoned and they would need to attach to another system which has 700 gal./day. It appears that the previously proposed restaurant won’t be using the 6500 gal./day system because they haven’t continued with their plans.

Mel started to explain the other pieces of the original property and Josie said this was going off the subject. She asked for a vote on the motion to close the hearing. The Planning Commission has to deliberate and write up any findings. The motion to close the hearing was approved, 4-0 with three members absent.

3. Charlotte Land Trust discussion: Frances Foster and Kate Lampton presented some maps. Kate described the lot that they are still trying to sell. She said Scott Gardner, a builder, has suggested and that Lang Realty is marketing for them, has suggested a spot that he would like to build, with a small amount of viewshed cutting. He is not building it at this time. But this is at the edge of the woods, with an elevation of 245'. They only want to cut enough of a small area to show through the trees, a small view of the mountains. First of all the Land Trust doesn’t want to pay to cut any more trees.

Secondly, it is a pretty good guess that the person buying this would want to build over at this edge. At the present time the building envelope is a floating one and could go to either side. Any cutting would still have to be reviewed by the Conservation Commission. They would just like to cut a little bit, just to the area where the septic is going to be. Frances said she would be happy to walk with someone to show where they would like to have a “keyhole” view.

Linda Hamilton asked why someone couldn’t have photographs that are “cut” with a virtual reality program on the computer. Kate Lampton said she had not been happy with those in the past. Sylvia Sprigg agreed with Linda. She advised them not to cut the trees until they have a buyer.

Jim Donovan said that in the past, the Planning Commission has allowed some cutting for a view corridor. He is willing to do this, but then the building envelope would have to be restricted to just that small area where the view corridor has been cut. That is the risk. Someone may like having the clearing, but then someone else may still prefer to have their house surrounded by woods.

Al Moraska agreed that they would be committed to that one site if they cut anything. Gordon Troy said this is a beautiful piece of property and has terrific views. He would suggest that, rather than have this actually opened up, and having the expense, they could explain to the buyer all the options, and let them go to the expense of cutting. We know that they can’t void the contract with a claim that, after the cutting, they think there’s no view there because there is.

Kate thought they need a “carrot” to entice a potential buyer. Gordon Troy suggested that they tell the buyer, “We have approval to do the following:” There is a 50' elevation difference, so Gordon asked if they are willing to cut the size of the building envelope.

Kate said the area where the septic is going will be cut anyway and felt the new request was quite small and the trees they would cut are small.

Stephen Brooks asked, “Why not just allow a certain number of trees to be cut, because they will grow back.” This is on 16 acres.

Jim Donovan suggested that after the trees around the septic are cut, they again walk around that area and see what that looks like, then come back if they still feel they need to do some cutting. They agreed to do this, and to have Larry Hamilton give his suggestions. Larry is a forester.

4. Senior Center discussion: Spin Richardson said he came here specifically to express his concerns. One is the location of the privacy bench. This plan makes a very nice private garden in their backyard, but he would like to have that privacy plan be extend the privacy hedge that was approved, to protect his back yard and those of Joe’s yard. The way it is now, from the center’s windows they can look down into Joe’s house, down into Spin’s back yard, and up into Spin’s tenant’s house. He would like to see that extended up to the porch, and high enough so that they can’t see over it.

Concern number two, is that their contention is that they don’t want to do anything until next spring. Spin said his contention is that in order for them to get an occupancy permit, they need to complete the requirement which is the privacy hedge.

Gordon Troy noted that we are just talking a hedge. He asked Spin if he cared whether it looks like a manicured hedge rather than like a hedgerow. Spin said he didn’t care that it would be plain, but it now has to be 10' high because they have built the house 4' higher than planned. They can do anything they want to as long as it provides privacy.

Spin said he had spoken with them while they were building it, he brought up that requirement that had been in the approval, and they laughed at him, saying they didn’t have any money for it. He said that at the first hearings they had only planned to have privacy for themselves, hiding his barn from their view. They had agreed to move it so that the neighbors would have the privacy. The floor of the building, Spin said, is 4' above the ground. This building dwarfs his house. The beginning of the second floor is higher than his roof.

Josie promised that the Planning Commission will look into this.

5. Ten Stones continuation of discussion of possibility of affordable housing: Ron Miller and Ed LeClair came back after their investigation proved that they have already filled their density requirements.

Gordon Troy noted that in Housing Strategy, Section 5.2, Cluster Housing, we are looking to find ways to provide affordable housing. This is a pre-existing p.r.d. which is cluster housing. He went on to quote from Zoning Regulations. In permitted uses in the rural zone, 4.2.B2, there are supposed to be 5 acres for each dwelling unit or use. A permitted 2-family dwelling is a permitted use.

Gordon said there is an easier way. Section 5.14 discusses affordable housing. Where it says, “For example” it gives the Planning Commission to grant a density bonus of one density unit in exchange for having two perpetually affordable units. The applicants said they have a letter the Burlington Community Land Trust applauding them for actually wanting affordable housing. Much of the time neighbors fight the addition of affordable housing. There is only one other affordable housing unit in Charlotte, the writer said.

When the applicants come in for a hearing, this letter will be included.

7. Town Plan discussion: Gordon Troy has a web site, www//webtm.com for the changes proposed. He said they do not have glossary items, but the Table of Contents is now 5 layers deep. The tables are being updated. Some of the earlier plan was proposed before the Census came out.

Gordon asked if members wanted to review bylaws for Warren, VT. Dean will make copies of that available as a possible guide for some of what is being done in Charlotte.

8. General Business: Linda Hamilton had further news about Planning Commission member Dave Brown. She said Dave has a positive attitude, but reported that doctors could not remove the cancer in his esophagus, so on Tuesday he is starting a chemotherapy program. She said Martha Perkins is willing to be an alternate on the Planning Commission.

Some other options for a replacement were mentioned, including asking former member Ed Melby to come back in the interim.

Submitted by Nancy Lane

APPROVED BY THE CHARLOTTE PLANNING COMMISSION ON

Chairman Date