Members Present: Chair Jeff McDonald

Jim Donovan

Al Moraska

Dave Brown

Members Absent: Josie Leavitt

Gene Diou

Gordon Troy

Officials Present: Dean Bloch

Chair Jeff McDonald called the meeting to order at 7:13 p.m.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Mr. Bloch brought up the fact that three Planning Commission (PC) members were absent and that it may change the direction of the agenda relating to voting. Mr. Bloch said that there are two issues relating to the Stearns matter and that he will have a draft decision for the next meeting. Therefore, there will be no deliberation on Stearns for this meeting.

Mr. Brooks asked if there was any more discussion, or a decision made, on making documents available electronically for the public. Mr. McDonald said no and that no public email would be set up until further notice. Mr. Brooks asked if it could be put on the agenda that, if the notes are public or if they are not, can they be available electronically and the same question for the minutes. Mr. Bloch said that minutes are not available electronically to the PC or applicant and that everything is hardcopy. Mr. Donovan would like to have it on the next agenda. Mr. Brooks said “thank you very much.”

PUBLIC COMMENT

Pete Rosenfeld said that he would like to say a few things about the proposed Nextel telecommunications tower. He said that if you look at the zoning ordinance, you can’t build a residence over 35 feet in height. If you can say that for residential development, why can’t you say that for towers to be set 300 feet back? As for aesthetics, putting antennas on silos was an alternative to having a tower stick up by itself. He asked why the antennas can’t be put inside using non-ferrous sheathing? He noted that people are concerned about radiation and the zoning ordinance is to make people feel comfortable in their house. Electromagnetic radiation is similar to a light in that you could get hot spots. He said that there is no reason in the world not to enforce the zoning ordinance which says that you have to put a tower 1,500 feet away.

Mr. Bloch said that the PC doesn’t have jurisdiction over Federal regulations. He said that the PC agreed because it felt that it had to be consistent as a town and stick to 35 feet. But it doesn’t have jurisdiction over government regulations. Mr. Rosenfeld responded by saying that there is no reason the PC can’t say that it feels that it makes sense to keep these transmitters at 1,500 feet. We are talking about radiation, he said. Mr. Bloch said that the Town was trying to protect itself against litigation from the 1,500 feet issue. It is not clear how the Federal courts will decide. Mr. McDonald said that it is a zoning issue.

WRITTEN DECISION: PECOR

Mr. Moraska said that under the Findings, in Item 1, second sentence, the word “better” should be changed to “more efficiently”, as well as deleting the word “also.” Mr. McDonald said that since three members were out, there were two option: a) the four present members could vote on it; or b) the written decision could be circulated and approved individually. Mr. Moraska said that there were no major issues last time regarding this and he feels comfortable voting. Mr. McDonald said that he would entertain a motion at this time. Mr. Moraska moved that that the PC members present at this meeting approve the decision on the application of Joan Pecor for a subdivision amendment and application of PC 02-15 and that the PC approve this application within the conditions previously noted. Mr. Brown seconded the motion. All were in favor, with the exception of 1 abstention (Mr. Donovan). The motion was approved.

MINUTES

It was decided that any approval of minutes would not be done at this meeting.

ALMA TOWNSEND CLARK ESTATE: SKETCH PLAN REVIEW FOR A 2-LOT SUBDIVISISON LOCATD ON MOUNT PHILO ROAD IN THE RURAL DISTRICT

Tony Stout appeared with Jean Townsend, trustee, and presented a sketch plan to the PC. The location of the proposed subdivision is at the foot of Mt. Philo Road at the intersection of Spear Street. Mr. Stout explained the slope of the land and showed different options of the proposed subdivision. He noted that the septic has enough capacity for two homes. Both lots are fairly private, he said. Mr. McDonald asked about existing use of the lot and Mr. Stout said that it is presently vacant. Mr. McDonald asked when the lot was created and Ms. Townsend said that it used to be used for haying and it was created in the 1950s. Mr. Stout said when they get to the final hearing for this subdivision, they will provide the PC with a full legal analysis. Ms. Townsend said that the little piece of land on Spear Street was perfect for beekeeping and she gave a brief history of this. Mr. Stout said that it is in the Town Plan as one of the viewing spots, but the property is maturing. Mr. Donovan asked to go back to the plan and asked that since you decided to move down the hill, are views not an issue for Lot No. 2? Mr. Stout said that it reduces the concerns. Mr. Donovan asked why he didn’t keep on going and Mr. Stout said that they wanted to keep above the view and below the road. Mr. Donovan asked if they had access to Spear Street and Mr. Stout said that they have frontage on Spear Street.

Mr. McDonald asked the public for questions. Mr. McDonald said that they will need comments from neighbors as well. Mr. Donovan said that there have been times when the PC has established two building envelopes. Mr. McDonald said that the PC tries to preserve the views as they are and Mr. Stout said that they try to work around other houses that are there.

Mr. McDonald inquired about putting up a full stop sign instead of a yield sign. Mr. Brooks inquired if the PC had asked Ms. Townsend if she is amenable to an easement for cutting. Ms. Townsend said “yes.” Mr. Stout said that they will explore the dimensions with the Road Commissioner. Mr. McDonald asked for a motion to clarify this matter as a minor subdivision application. Mr. Moraska made a motion to classify this as a minor subdivision and Mr. Donovan seconded. Mr. Donovan asked about combining the driveways. There was discussion about a site visit and it was decided that a site visit would be scheduled before the next meeting and Mr. Bloch will provide the applicants with input from that visit. In response to a request from Mr. Brown, Mr. Stout will put flags where the driveway will be and try to stake out where the lots would be. Mr. McDonald asked Mr. Stout for a schedule. Mr. Stout said that they will continue the sketch plan. Mr. Brooks asked where the new curb cut permit policy fits into this process. Mr. Bloch said that the Select Board is the official body that issues curb cuts and you can go to them anytime. Ms. Russell said that the Select Board has drafted a policy that is a procedure for this and it goes to the Zoning Administrator who contacts the Road Commissioner who approves it. Mr. McDonald said that the PC needs to get Select Board approval and Mr. Hinsdale said that he was concerned about water because anything uphill must be 200 feet away from the well and was concerned about Mr. Hagan. Mr. Stout said that it is a non-issue in this case because the Hagan lot is already developed. He sympathizes with what Mr. Hinsdale is anything, though. Mr. Hinsdale asked if Mr. Stout knew where Mr. Hagan’s replacement area is and Mr. Stout replied that he doubts that he has a designated replacement area. Mr. McDonald asked if that is the only area that is suitable for septic and Mr. Stout answered that it was. After this discussion, the PC voted on the motion to classify this application as a minor subdivision application. All were in favor and the motion was approved.

KATHLEEN MUSHKAT: SUBDIVISION AMENDMENT TO MOVE BUILDING ENVELOPE. PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2222 PRINDLE ROAD IN THE RURAL AND CONSERVATION DISTRICTS.

Mr. Prout presented a revised plan which he noted incorporated the PC’s recommendations and changes. Mr. Bloch asked if Mr. Prout could recreate the map instead of doing a new survey and Mr. McDonald said that he could just add the envelope to the drawing and refile the map. Mr. McDonald asked about the curb cut. Mr. Prout said that the Road Commissioner and the Mushkats would prefer it about 15 feet on the other side of the road because it is at the crest of the hill. Mr. McDonald said that they would defer to the Road Commissioner. Mike Russell, from Hoff Curtis on behalf of an adjoining landowner, addressed the PC at this time. He said the curb access was dangerous and that the landowner would like flexible approval where the final plat for this amendment would be. He would come back to the PC based on agreement of the landowners as to creating a new right-of-way or retaining the current right-of-way. Mr. Donovan said that the major changes in roadway requires more discussions. Mr. Donovan said that he was not ready to agree with changes in the roadway because it could change the profile of Prindle Road and he would have preferred to move the driveway. Mr. Bloch said that it also requires Select Board approval to change the road. Mr. McDonald said that it is between the Road Commissioner and the Select Board. Mr. Donovan said that they are solving a problem that the PC has created and the may not agree with the solution it may come up with. He suggested approving the survey and leaving that issue open.

Mr. Russell said that his clients were concerned about the force main installation and the uncertainty of it. He said they would like some assurance that development is done with the needs of adjoining landowners in mind. Mr. Russell said he had not been on the site and Mr. Prout showed him on the map where the force main was. Mr. Russell asked if there was going to be enough of a buffer and Mr. McDonald said that the PC is asking that the applicant to redevelop the current map to show the easement in the revised location. Mr. Russell said that maybe the parties could agree on a location.

Mr. Bloch said that this matter was warned as a matter of moving the envelope. Mr. Donovan made a motion to approve the amended building envelope and that a new 18” x 24” mylar be submitted to the PC which identifies the location of the force main as it relates to the new building envelope. Al Moraska seconded the motion. Mr. Russell asked if it would be germane to correct the boundary adjustment and Mr. McDonald said no. All were in favor and the motion was approved.

DISCUSS AMENDING ZONING BYLAWS TO ADDRESS CHAPTER 117 AMENDMENTS AND RECENT CASE LAW

Mr. McDonald said that Burnt Rock, in their recent presentation to the PC, had recommended a number of items to be changed. Mr. Bloch said that the two main issues that seem to be on the front burner were small structures and adaptive reuse of historic structures. Small structures is a matter of interpretation and the adaptive reuse is a bigger issue. After discussion, it was decided that the PC would create an RFP for this project. Mr. McDonald asked Mr. Bloch is the PC had applied for the grant monies and Mr. Bloch said that the Town should be receiving a response in November. Mr. McDonald said that the PC needs to finalize the scope of work for the RFP.

DISCUSS VILLAGE CONCEPT PLAN; MOTION EXPECTED TO APPROVE THE FINAL DRAFT

Mr. McDonald asked if the PC if they would be willing to put out a draft of this plan for public comment and have it on the agenda for the next meeting. Mr. Bloch said that it would be fine to have it out there for a month before putting it on the agenda. Mr. Hindsale asked what the Village Concept Plan was and Mr. Donovan said that it concerns the West Village and that it was started three years ago as the West Charlotte Village Plan.

There was discussion about how many copies to print for the public and it was decided that 20 copies be made.

ADJOURN

Mr. Brown made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Moraska seconded the motion. All were in favor and the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Kimberly L. Johnson