Development Review Board Town of Stowe September 4, 2007 The regular meeting of the Stowe Development Review Board was held Tuesday, September 4, 2007 starting at 5:00 P.M. in the Banquet Room in the Akeley Memorial Building. Members present: Larry Jones, Susan Brittin, Ed Izzo, Don Ramos, Brian Leven, Dean Pineles and Ted Teffner at 6:00 P.M. Others present: Rich Baker, Zoning Administrator, Megan Goss, Eileen Kast, Ruth Brewster, Ann Fry, Chapman Smith, Shawn Sweeney, Darrow Mansfield, Tyler and (?) Michelson, Jesse Goldberg, Bill Nolan, Eric Lande and Mark Coy. 5:00 P.M. Project #: 3525 Owner: Binder, Henry and Joan Tax Parcel #: 2-193.030 Location: 1357 North Hill Road Project: Construct storage shed in RHOD Zone: RR 5 & RHOD Present was Chapman Smith explaining the shed will be 9’ x 13’ and attached to the existing house with materials to match the house. Mr. Smith stated one would have to stand in front of the garage door in order to see the shed. There will be no exterior lighting. Mrs. Brittin moved to instruct the Zoning Administrator to draft Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law finding the project is a minor with the following CONDITION: (1) Any change in the plans or the proposed use of the property shall be brought to the attention of the Zoning Administrator, prior to its implementation, for a determination if an amendment shall be required. 5:10 Project #: 3539 Owner: Strong, Louisa Tax Parcel #: 7A-076.000 Location: 394 Maple Street Project: Exterior alterations and addition to single family dwelling Zone: VR20 & SHOD Shawn Sweeney present and explained the addition will be 576 s.f. and a barn type structure in the rear and side of the existing house with shiplap pine and architectural shingles to be used. Some windows in the existing structure will be changed, as will the columns on the porch, bringing the rooflines together on the house and addition. Picture window in the front will have true divided lights. Mr. Sweeney stated the two doors on the rear of the house will have lights on either side. Mrs Fry, in the audience and abutting property owner stated her concern with traffic entering onto Rte 100 from the property as there are additional people living on Maple Street. Mr. Jones noted her concern and suggested Mrs. Fry bring the issue to the attention of the Selectboard. Mr. Sweeney stated there are two dwelling units in the house. Trim, doors and other materials will match the existing house. Mrs. Brittin moved to instruct the Zoning Administrator to draft Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, taking into consideration the recommendations of the Stowe Historic Preservation Commission, approving the project as proposed with the following CONDITIONS: (1) Any change in the plans or the proposed use of the property shall be brought to the attention of the Zoning Administrator, prior to its implementation, for a determination if an amendment shall be required. (2) The applicant shall provide for the record cut sheets of any proposed lighting, showing the location and wattage Mr. Pineles seconded the motion with all members present in favor. Mr. Teffner not yet at the meeting. 5:20 Project #: 3530 Owner(s) Lande, Eric and Coy, Mark Tax Parcel #: 3-064.000 Location: 330 Adams Mill Road Project: External renovations of historic house Zone: MC (Moscow Commercial) Present were Mr. Coy, Mr. Lande and Bill Nolan, contractor. This property is located within the Moscow Mills subdivision. Mr. Lande explained the various proposed changes stating the ones on the east elevation would be minor, including changing a door, which will match the door, which had previously been on the building. On the north elevation, adding a second story porch, which will wrap around the building and have exterior stairs with a handicap entrance. Mr. Lunde stated the proposed sky lights will have no, or limited visibility from any public road. Windows throughout the building will be changed to one-over one style and no muntins. All roofing will be changed to match what exists. Building will be converted to two condominiums. Plans are to have down lighting under the porch roofs and carriage lights on the sides of the doors. Possibility of having lighting in the rear for safety purposes. Carriage House is a 1 ½ story building. Mrs. Brittin moved to instruct the Zoning Administrator to draft Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, incorporating the recommendations of the Historic Preservation Commission, with the following CONDITIONS: (1) Any change in the plans or the proposed use of the property shall be brought to the attention of the Zoning Administrator, prior to its implementation, fro a determination if an amendment shall be required. (2) Cuts sheets of alighting lighting, with the locations and wattage shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator, prior to a zoning permit being issued. Mr. Ramos seconded the motion with all in favor expect Mr. Teffnmer who was not yet at the meeting. 5:40 Project #: 3533 Owner: Reed, C. Paul Tax Parcel #: 6-051.000 Location: 2160 Mountain Road Project: Convert retail/office space to dwelling unit Zone: MRV (MountainRoadVillage) Present for the hearing was Paul Reed who explained that the building (Cactus Cafe/Action Outfitters etc) has been converted numerous times from one use to another, including enlarging the barn. He would like to convert an existing 400 s.f. space on the ground floor of the brick building to a one-bedroom apartment including a kitchen, bath, living room, dining area and entrance. This will be the only dwelling unit in the complex. Mr. Reed stated there will be no exterior changes. Sec. 4.7 reviewed in which many of the criteria did not apply. Adequate sewer (septic) and water for the project; traffic not changing and no additional parking required. There will be no shared access to the building. Mr. Reed stated he plans no additional exterior lighting for the change. Mr. Pineles moved to instruct the Zoning Administrator to draft Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law with the standard CONDITION: (1) Any change to the plans or the proposed use of the property shall be brought to the attention of the Zoning Administrator, prior to its implementation, for a determination if an amendment shall be required Mrs. Brittin seconded the motion with all in favor except Mr. Teffner who was not present. 5:50 Project : 3522 Owner(s): Hayes, Alan and Laura Tax Parcel #: 11-085.010 Location: 202 Pine Ridge Road Project: Create transfer of development rights Zone: RR 5 & UMR (Upper Mountain Road) Present were Darrow Mansfield and Jesse Goldfine. Mr. Baker explained the concept of TDR’s to members Sec. 4.13 provides for the opportunity to transfer density. This has been done once, but never to a TDR bank. The area where development is not wanted is called a “sending area” and where the town wishes to have more development is called the “receiving area”. One can sell their developments rights to a receiving area. tape 1 side two There is a provision in the regulations which allows for it to go to a bank. In this case, Mr. Hayes would own the number of density units and he would find a buyer at some point. Once the density is sold, it is gone. Mr. Baker stated the legal document written by Mr. Goldfine needs to be rewritten and come back to the Board. In this case, it is a split zone so the density can be only taken out of the UMR zone. Mr. Goldfine, representing Mr. Hayes, stated the document is still in the final analysis. One of the questions is, who will transfer the development rights and to whom? Mr. Jones felt the Town Attorney should review the document before going ahead. Mr. Mansfield said he would like to give Mr. Hayes an approval subject to the document approval. Mr. Jones felt the Board would buy into the concept but did not want to get into the logistics and mechanics of running it. Mr. Goldfine explained that when the transfer of development rights is made away from a parcel of land, there is an easement on that parcel which says it cannot be developed. The question arose, could Mr. Hayes buy it back. Mr. Baker stated that is not what the intent was, when the density is gone, it is gone. Mr. Mansfield stated there is a house on the parcel being talked about so there would still be density. Mr. Goldfine explained the 30-year reversionary rule under the state statute but did not feel it would work in this case. Mr. Teffner arrived at 6:00 P.M. The request is to transfer development rights for 6 acres to the bank but there is no idea at this time when it will be sold (quite different from when Stoweflake purchased the density direct and used it). Transfer could be purchased one unit at a time. Mr. Teffner asked who is the bank. Mr. Mansfield answered, the town. How do you own them, on someone’s behalf asked Mr. Teffner. Mr. Mansfield said it is an entity that holds the density and keeps it until someone wants it. Mr. Teffner suggested when one purchases the density, they should come to the Board otherwise the Board wouldn’t know what was in the bank. Mr. Goldfine said the deal could be contingent on the Board ‘s approval. Mr. Baker said in his opinion, the owner couldn’t buy it back, at least for 30 years under state law, because the only place, which could buy, is a receiving area. Discussion continued with questions left unanswered by all members. It was agreed members bought into the concept but need to see the mechanics and the easement. Mr. Baker stated it is not the Town’s Attorney’s job to write the easement and they will have a conference call with the Town Attorney and Mr.Goldfine could participate. Mr. Izzo moved to RECESS to October 16, 2007, seconded by Mrs. Brittin with all members in favor. 6:35 Project #: 3536 Owner: Michelson, Thomas Tax Parcel #: 7-309.010 Location: 1203 Waterbury Road (Pine Motel) Project: Proposing to create a 3-lot subdivision Zone: RR 1 & RR 2 Present for the hearing were Tyler Michelson, Thomas’s son. Mr. Michelson asked that project # 3538 be postponed, as it is still preliminary. Mr. Baker stated there is a tie between the two projects as the motel requires 5 acres and the applicant wishes to retain ownership of two lots under the proposed subdivision until such time when the motel is converted to condominiums. LotB1 and B2 (with a house under construction) would be under the same ownership. B1 could not be transferred to someone else) until the motel is gone because the motel needs 5 acres. tape 2 side 1. Mr. Ramos felt the use of the motel has to be removed prior to selling Lot B2. Mrs. Cass, in the audience, asked about the location of the driveway, which Mr. Michelson wants to move the easement, which is outside the subdivision. Mrs. Cass stated she has no problem where the existing driveway is located at the present time. The new house will use the same driveway, which goes to other homes. Subdivision Review Sec. 5: 10 acres total in RR 1 & 2. Lot B1 will be 3 acres and Lot B2 will be 5.1 acres. Lot B3 has replacement leach field and the owner would like to retain the irregular lot to own the pond for his personal use in the future. Mr. Jones stated the Board does have some authority to waive or vary things in the regs because of unique circumstances, landscape features etc. (Sec. 3.1(2) of the Subdivision Regulations) and said he was struggling with Lot B2 with its irregular shape. The regulations go on to provide that the greatest dimension of the lot cannot be more than three (3) times the shorter dimension. Mr. Michelson stated the shape does not affect other peoples land. Mr. Jones stated the residual lot is still a lot. Mr. Izzo said the Board has never approved a lot like this. If the condos are built on the same foundations as the motel, he is allowed to use the same septic system, stated Mr. Baker. Mr. Ramos asked what circumstances could be unique? Mr. Pineles said probably the topography. After more discussion re: Sec. 5.1 (2), members felt there should be a site visit. Mr. Ramos moved to RECESS Projects # 3536 & 3538 to OCTOBER 16, 2007 with a site visit at 4:00 P.M. Mrs. Brittin seconded the motion with all members in favor. Project #: 3538 Owner: Michelson, Thomas Tax Parcel #: 7-309.010 Location: 1203 Waterbury Road Project: Convert 8-unit motel to 3 dwelling units Zone: RR 1 & RR 2 Mr. Michelson requested that this hearing be postponed as it is now very preliminary. There being no further business to come before the board, the meeting adjourned at 7:20 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Barbara S. Allaire Development Review Board Town of Stowe September 18, 2007 The regular meeting of the Stowe Development Review Board was held Tuesday, September 18, 2007 in the Banquet Room of the Akeley Memorial Building starting at 5:00 P.M. Members present: Susan Brittin, Ed Izzo, Don Ramos, Dean Pineles, Brian Leven and Larry Jones. Also present: Rich Baker, Zoning Administrator and those listed in the minutes book. Absent: Ted Teffner. Mr. Baker stated the appeal submitted for Eric pond in Stowe Hollow has been withdrawn. 5:05 P.M. Project #: 3502 (Recessed from 8/7/07) Owner(s): Fishman, Stephen & Susan Bayer Tax Parcel #: 7A-134.000 Location: 55 Mountain Road Project: Addition of second deck Zone: VC 10/SHOD Mr. Leven moved to POSTPONE to October 16, 2007at the applicant’s request for SHPC review. Mrs. Brittin seconded the motion with all members in favor. Project #: 3552 Owner(s): Braff, Steven and Martha Tax Parcel #: 15-042.260 Location: 10 Dish Lane Project: Requesting to construct a pond in the RHOD district Zone: RR 5/RHOD Bill Henchy and George Stearns, Attorney for the Braffs present. Mr. Henchey described the proposed pond as being located in the Robinson Springs area. Mr. Baker had done a site visit and reported the site has been cleared. Mr. Henchey stated this was done at the beginning of the development so no additional trees will be cut. No dirt will leave the site. The existing trees below the site are to remain in the 30-40’ height. There will be no visibility of any other structure except in the winter; one may see two houses below. Mr. Baker stated the pond will not be seen from any public vantage point. From the house, a view can be seen but not from the pond site, the pond will be lower than the house and additional trees will be planted for protection in the winter, stated Mr. Henchey. Mr. Pineles moved to instruct the Zoning Administrator to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law based on the determination the project be classified as a minor in the RHOD with the following CONDITIONS: (1) Any change in the plans or the proposed use of the property shall be brought to the attention of the Zoning Administrator, prior to its implementation, for a determination if an amendment shall be required. (2) There shall be no additional trees cut for this project anywhere associated with the project or below the elevation of the pond. Mrs. Brittin seconded the motion with all voting to approve. Mr. Teffner not present. Project #: 3503 Owner(s): Sullivan, David and Helena Tax Parcel #: 7A-011.000 Location: 177 South Main Street Project: Renovation of front porch, construct a sunroom and modify garage façade Zone: VC-30/SHOD Mr. Sullivan present. A letter dated 8/23/07 from the Stowe Historic Preservation Commission was submitted recommending approval with conditions, one of which the porch and sunroom panels shall be either vertical boards or multiple panels with molding (Mr. Sullivan stated he has not made a decision on this) and the door to the existing garage space shall be a four-divided light door. Mr. Sullivan explained the porch will be reconstructed to help shield from snow over the entrance (a separation of two sections of the building) so the entrance will be relocated. A door and window will be replaced on the existing garage and adding a sunroom on the 177 South Main Street side with the materials to match the existing house. New unheated space area to be 792 s.f. The garden shed and garage were previously approved by the Board. Mr. Sullivan stated there will be no additional external lighting but will be internal lighting. Mrs. Brittin moved to instruct the Zoning Administrator to adopt Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law based on the recommendation of the SHOD with the following CONDITIONS: (1) Any change to the plans or the proposed use of the property shall be brought to the attention of the Zoning Administrator for a determination if an amendment shall be required. (2) Conditions imposed by the SHOD by letter dated 8/23/07 shall remain in force. (3) The applicant shall submit cut sheets for the new internal lighting being proposed. Mr. Ramos seconded the motion with all members in favor. Mr. Teffner not present. Project #: 3537 Owner(s) Lonetto, Mila and Graham Tax Parcel #: 6-073.000 Location: 1940 Mountain Road (former Gladys Knapp residence) Project: Requesting approval to convert a single family dwelling to retail use. Zone: MRV Mila Lonetto present. Mr. Jones stated the house is listed on the Hitroic Site survey but there will be no exterior changes. Sec. 9.3 (13) Plans for the building are for a 900 s.f. retail space and ski repair shop of 900 s.f.. Sec. 4.7 reviewed. Mr. Baker stated no negative impacts papers. Dwelling is on town sewer and water. 3 parking spaces required for the retail area and 3 (at the most stated Mrs. Lonetto) for the employees. 2 spaces in the existing parking area and 4 will be constructed in the rear, which will be accessed by the existing driveway. MRV section. No additional landscaping being proposed and no new curb cut. Mr. Pineles asked if there will be any pedestrian traffic from the Gale Shops to this property and Ms. Lonetto said she did not foresee that happening but one could walk through the tree row between the properties so they do not have to walk on the road. Mr. Leven felt for a ski shop there could be more than 4 customers (referring to the number of parking spaces provided) and questioned if customers may park at the Gale Shops. Mrs. Lonetto felt that will not happen. She stated the existing lighting locations will be adequate. Mrs. Brittin moved to instruct the Zoning Administrator to draft Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law with the following CONDITIONS: (1) Any change in the plans or the proposed use of the property shall be brought to the attention of the Zoning Administrator, prior to its implementation, for a determination if an amendment shall be required. (2) If there is any change in the external lighting the applicant shall submit cut sheets to the Zoning Administrator. (3) One (1) parking space shall be designated as an ADA space. Mr. Pineles seconded the motion with all in favor except for Mr. teffner who was n ot present. Project #: 3551 Owner: Deutsche Bank National Trust- Trustee AMC Mortgage Services. Tax Parcel #: 11-101.000 Location: 4492 Mountain Road Project: Convert Woodchip Inn to residential school Zone: UMR (Upper Mountain Road) Present testifying was Margaret Novotney who stated the requested residential school will not exceed 12 children who may have development disabilities, focusing on autism and from 6-22 years of age. No major renovations are proposed except for those required by the Labor and Industry and the general maintenance and clean up of the property. tape 1 side 2 There will be a medical director, supervisors, and specialized education staff. Al Holtrager (Sp.?) (who lives across the street from the property and in the audience) expressed a concern with having an institution like this in the area. Ms. Novotney stated this building was chosen for a reason and for the area because of Stowe and the environment. Mr. Jones sated the Board has to address their comments in the context of Conditional Use Review. Mr. Culp, a neighbor, asked how many children there will be at any one time and the answer was 12 who will be a very select group. When one may be transition out and one transition in, there may be an overlap of numbers. Mr. Cook, abutter, asked what plans are being made for safety to the building and addressing the closeness of Rte 108. Ms. Tovotney stated there will be no exterior changes to the building and fencing will be put up around the property. They presently have 3 schools, one in Enosburg, Williston and Morrisville. Sec. 4.7 Review: The Fire Department has reviewed the proposal and asked that a letter from Labor and Industry be sent the. Mr. Izzo asked if one of the children were to ask to go to Stowe public Schools, would that be permitted and Ms. Novotney stated she could not foresee that happening and could not see any reasons one would transfer from this school to a public school (although parents may have second homes in Stowe). The screening and state requirements would not allow this to happen and students will come from all over the country. Mr. Jones felt the use would be a decrease in traffic. Private schools are allowed in the UMR district. Plans are for 8-10 employees (maximum) with 3 at night with up to 12 parking spaces provided (zoning does not address parking for schools) but Mr. Baker suggested using Sec. 22.3 (b) Ms. Novotney stated at the present time it is possible that the students will reside at the property and be driven to one of the other schools each day. Mr. Leven asked if there will be visiting hours, parents week-ends etc and the answer was yes. Ms. Novotney stated they do not need any parking lights. Elaine de Bothurie, in the audience and a neighbor, asked what security the neighbors have and how will the children be protected. Ms. Novotney replied they will not be allowed out at night without supervision and the proper staff. Mr. Jones felt the issue is up to the Dept,.of Education and not within the jurisdiction of the Board. It was felt noise, or air pollution would not be an issue. Private schools are allowed in the district and compatible with the Muncipal Plan. There is presently adequate driveway access-shared access not applicable. No exterior lighting being added. Ms. Novotney stated there could be a residential licensed facility that does do education programming without the contentation of an independent school, under the Vt, guidelines. Mr. Baker asked if they will be certified by the Dept of Education and the answer was yes. Mr. Trulane was concerned if it should become a day school, the traffic pattern. The answer was it will not become a day school- it is not meant to be that, stated Ms. Novotney. Mr. Pineles stated there are concerns of the neighbors and asked if there has been problems with the other 3 facilities. The answer was there have been concerns which were alleviated with discussions and education. Some kids do community service but do not work, stated Ms. Novotney. Mr. Pineles reiterated that Zoning Regulations allow for the project being proposed. Mrs. Brittin moved to instruct the Zoning Administrator to draft Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law with the final decision not being rendered until such time evidence has been submitted on or before 9-21-07 and reviewed by Board members documenting that 8 parking spaces currently exist and with the following CONDITION: (1) Any change to the plans or the proposed use of the property shall be brought to the attention of the Zoning Administrator, prior to its implementation, for a determination if an amendment shall be submitted. Mr. Leven seconded the motion. Voting in favor: Mr. Leven, Izzo, Jones, Pineles, Leven and Ms. Brittin. Mr. Ramos abstained. Mr. Teffner not present. 7:00 P.M. BREAK Project #: 3557 Owner(s) Halvorsen, Andreas and Diane Tax Parcel #: 10-099.000 Location: 2152 Weeks Hill Road Project: Relocate driveway within the RHOD Zone: RR 5/UMR Present were Darrow Mansfield, Keith Wagner and Mark Streuli (Project Manager). The applicant has modified the driveway configuration without approval. Mr. Streuli stated he had spoken with another engineer who told them it was not necessary to get approval. Mr. Jones reiterated the “change condition” in the approval. Mr. Mansfield submitted a new plant plan and the relocation of the drive which will get the drive away from the pond. Finished landscaping is not in. Mr. Streuli stated no trees were cut for the driveway. Mr. Baker stated the trees removed do not affect the view of the new house from any vantage point. Mr. Mansfield stated the driveway is setback so did not feel it will be seen. There is an extensive landscaping plan with large tree planting, calipers up to 9”. Mr. Streuli stated the caretaker is absolutely aware of the no cutting zone. Mr. Pineles moved to instruct the Zoning Administrator to draft Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law in re: project # 3557 and classify as a “minor” within the RHOD. Mrs. Brittin seconded the motion with all members in favor. Mr. Teffner not present. Project #: 3556 Owner: Elizabeth J. Stram Family Trust Tax Parcel #: 3-096.040 Location: Points North Road (Lot 8A) Project: Construct a single family dwelling in the RHOD Zone: RR 5/UMR Present were Darrow Mansfield, Rick Stram and Alec Genung. Mr. Mansfield described the location which is at the top of the North Points Road. 5.1 acre lot and in the RHOD district. Milford Cushman plans had been submitted for review. Current conditions of the site is the driveway is cleared, modest clearing of where the house will be located (all done prior to the RHOD implementation). tape 2 side 2 Mr. Mansfield described the site plan for members, where no clearing will be done and the area where 60% of the trees will be taken, leaving 40%, which will open up the view of the Green Mountains. Mr. Jones felt the greatest site impact will be the site line from Moscow Village. Mr. Mansfield stated the clearing would have the potential to do that, but the boundary of control of clearing would justify the clearing being proposed. Mr. Jones stated the cupola on the drawings appears to stick up way above the roofline. Mr. Wagner said they would like the cupola and there will be no light fixture inside and Mr. Izzo stated absolutely no light shall come from the cupola. The cupola is to be set back to the rear of the building envelope which gives the perception of being high, stated Mr. Wagner. Sheet identified as A.201 shows the cupola towards the rear of the site. Mr. Izzo suggested a site visit with Mr. Pineles agreeing to get a sense of the meaning of 60% of the trees being cut. Mr. Leven said he felt it important to see the site and then return to the plans. Mr. Izzo reiterated that it is a very sensitive area and the Board has to be very diligent in its determination. The applicant would like to consider a standing steam roof (dark brown) or asphalt shingles. The cupola will be of natural red cedar and trim. After little more discussion, Mr. Izzo moved to RECESS to OCTOBER 16, 2007 with a site visit being done by Mr. Izzo and Pineles on October 10, 2007, as a committee designated by the Chairman. (Mr. Pineles said he accepted Mr. Cushman’s design as being accurate but felt a site visit would be beneficial). Mrs. Brittin seconded the motion with all members in favor. Mr.Teffner absent. There being no further business to come before the board, the meeting adjourned at 8:30 P.M. These minutes were taken by Mrs. Brittin. Barbara Allaire transcribed the minutes.
|
