Development Review Board

                                                   January 8, 2008

                                                   Town of Stowe

 

The regular meeting of the Stowe Development Review Board was held Tuesday, January 8, 2008 in the Banquet Room in the Akeley Memorial Building starting at 5:00 P.M.

 

Also present: those listed in the minute’s book as well as Mr. & Mrs Les Peer. 

 

Members present: Larry Jones, Dean Pineles, Susan Brittin, Don Ramos, Brian Leven (5:25). There is presently one vacancy on the Board. Ted Teffner resigned effective after previous meeting because of work, traveling and time constraints.

 

Project:          Modification of driveway for two-lot subdivision

Present were Mr. & Mrs Peer and Attorney Ron Merelman. Mr. Merelman stated the engineer and designer of the project, Mr. Kules, was out of town, the reason for his presence. The issues with the driveway as currently approved are it will go across the existing driveway to the barn, the existing curb cut is rather steep, a culvert and fill will be required over a large swale and the view shed will be affected. It is a single lot subdivision for a single-family residence with no possibility of expansion. Mr. Merelman stated the Peer’s may wish to down size into a smaller dwelling and direct emergency access is critical. To cut through the existing driveway will require an easement and a road maintenance agreement, which could create an emergency hazard if the driveway is not well maintained. The state has issued a letter of intent, not approval for the proposed new curb cut. The tree line next to the Adams property will remain. Mr. Jones described the decision in the original subdivision application, with the issue being in Sec. 5.4 (4) of the subdivision regs, that there cannot be more than two accesses within 1,000’ along a state highway. Under Sec. 3.1(2) the DRB has some discretion to modify the regs. Mr. Jones stated that at issue is the condition is requisite for the public health and safety. He felt that that stretch of Rte 100 is a very aggressive stretch of Rte 100, in a bend, short distance from Shaw’s, short distance from the entrance to the egg farm etc. Mr. Pineles felt that turning south would not be a problem and asked if the state addressed that. Mr. Izzo stated there is a very short distance with the two existing curb cuts along with a line of trees obstructing the view to the south and in proximity to Brush Hill. Mr. Merelman said he felt the road would not be used that much, that there is plenty of sight distance both ways etc. When asked if an easement could be obtained from the Adam’s the answer was no. Mr. Jones reiterated the criteria for waiving the rules. Mr. Peer spoke saying traffic would not be increased and felt it would be safer. Discussion continued and Mr. Ramos as well as other members were not that familiar with the property and Mr. Jones asked they take a look at some of the issues which have been expressed and asked that the state respond if they have any issues. Mr. Baker stated for the Board to waive something, they have to find there are unique circumstances affecting the particular parcel and the burden is on the applicant. Mrs. Brittin moved to RECESS to FEBRUARY 5, 2008, to give members the opportunity to look at the property and the proposed location, seconded by Mr. Pineles with all in favor.      

 

Project:          Amendments to previously approved renovations of a historic duplex (former Adams Mill house)

Mr. Lande and Mr. Coy were present. SHPC reviewed and approved the changes on 12/13/07. Most of the changes will occur on the north side of the building, i.e. 1^st and 2^nd floor window moved to the left; typical window added on the 2^nd floor; porch stairs removed; 1^st floor open porch now enclosed; sky light added but will not be seen; west: 2 windows added; external stairs removed; connecting 2^nd story deck and roof removed; bulk head removed; windows added in lower level of gable and basement window added; south elevation: change in type of window on 2^nd floor. Mr. Pineles asked if removing the staircase would create a safety issue (stated he wanted to make certain this building complies with any state regulation). Mr. Lande said no, as now each individual unit will be on 3 floors. Mrs. Brittin moved to instruct the Zoning Administrator to Draft Findings of fact and Conclusions of Law in Project # 3658 for the proposed changes and based on the letter of approval from the SHPC dated 12/13/07 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, prior to its implementation, for a determination if an amendment shall be required.

(2)   All previous conditions shall remain in force.

Mr. Izzo seconded the motion with all members in favor.

 

Project:           Addition of new stairway and façade renovations

Present was Mr. Duquette who explained the project as eliminating the exterior staircase on the rear of the building and install a door going onto a covered staircase. Adding a 12’ x 32’ deck at ground level. These changes are brought forth by the state fire marshal. On the south elevation, two windows and a new door will be installed. Plans are to remove the existing vinyl siding down to the clapboards. All windows 2 over 2. Plans are to have two small lights over each door. Mrs. Britin moved to instruct the Zoning Administrator to draft Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and in support of the project and incorporating the conditions of the recommendation of project approval from SHPC dated 12/13/07 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 submit to the Zoning Administrator for the record a lighting cut sheet.

Mr. Pineles seconded the motion with all in favor.

 

Project:            Request to continue to use yurt for 2008 Mud City Adventure Program (RECESSED 12/18/07)

Present were Christine Colangeli (applicant) and Mike Slayton, landscaper. Mr. Jones stated for members the only issue before the Board is the landscaping and is it sufficient

Mr. Pineles stated he took a close look at the project (even though he was not a part of the original decision) and did not feel the yurt needs landscaping since it is far back from the road, below grade level and was ready to issue the permit. Mr. Leven agreed with Mr. Pineles and felt the applicant had done what she was asked to do.tape 1 side 2

Mrs. Brittin stated the Board most always asks for landscaping and suggested the trees put in do not screen the yurt. She felt the applicant was aware, after all the discussions, of what the Board was asking for and felt it would not be too difficult to remedy. Mr. Ramos stated he is not offended by the yurt and did not feel additional landscaping is needed. He felt the applicant would be penalized by asking for additional landscaping and felt the yurt was adding to the character of the town. He felt the approved plan was done by the applicant and agreed small trees could not screen in the short time they have been in. Mr. Izzo stated he is not opposed to the yurt, but it is a new type of thing on the Mt. Road and the Board spent a lot of time trying to get it to blend in with the area. The landscaping needs to be functional and do what was asked (he referred to other projects which have been approved/landscaping) which preserves the integrity of the area. He did not think what has been planted does that (not trying to make it invisible). Perhaps additional fill needs to be brought in and the trees should be road level. Ms. Colangeli showed the original landscaping plan which was prepared by a landscaper and stated the trees which were planted were not expected to screen the project immediately and did what she felt the Board asked her to do and was in compliance. She stated she is trying to enhance the uniqueness and integrity of the Mt. Road and of recreation in town. Discussion continued. Mr. Slayton stated the trees would not be the size they are very long. Initially they are small but within two years they will be 12’ tall and within 5 years they will have grown together and will screen. 14- 8’ tall white pines were planted. Mr. Slayton stated they did not try and raise the level of the ground, which would have been very expensive, and also the trees would not tolerate the salt from the road. Ms. Colangeli said she did not understand what is so offensive about the yurt and why members want it to be screened. Mrs. Brittin answered saying the yurt is not offensive but screening is required for many projects. Mr. Izzo said what the board asked for isn’t there. Mr. Jones stated he came away from the previous meeting with the expectation that the ground would be higher. After more discussion, with Ms. Colangeli arguing her position, Mr. Pineles moved to direct the Zoning Administrator to draft Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law re: project 3175, extending the decision for three (3) years from this date at which time the Board will review the landscaping plan to determine if the trees have grown enough to provide adequate landscaping and 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, prior to its implementation, for a determination if an amendment shall be required.

(2)   The approval expires three years from the date of decision. The yurt shall be removed from the site by the expiration date unless the Board approves an extension.

(3)   The applicant shall re-apply for continuation of the use beyond the permit expiration in order to allow the Board to evaluate if the trees have grown enough to provide adequate landscaping to meet the objectives of Sec. 4.7(2) (A)(3) and Sec. 4.7(2)(B)(8).       

Mr. Ramos seconded the motion with Mrs. Brittin, Mr. Pineles, Jones, Pineles, Leven voting in favor. Mr. Izzo voted against the motion. There is one vacancy on the Board.

 

There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 

6:45 P.M.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

Barbara S. Allaire