GENERAL MINUTES
Members Present: J.
Heyer, B. Murphy, J. Beers, C. Rainville, M. Varney
Public Present: S. Taylor, ZA
7:00 PM J. Heyer called the meeting to order. The minutes from May 19, 2010 were reviewed. J. Beers made a motion to approve the General Minutes from May 19, 2010. B. Murphy second. All in favor. There are no hearings to be scheduled at this time. The Board members were invited by the Planning Commission to a joint meeting with other Boards on June 29, 2010 to obtain information, and a draft copy of the revised Regulations.
7:15 – ROONEY – REVISION TO FINAL PLAT FOR PUD– 26 APPLE TREE ROAD
8:10 PM C. Rainville made a motion to adjourn. J. Beers second. All in favor.
Respectfully Submitted,
Cathy Raymond, Zoning and Planning Assistant
Approved: ________________________________ Date:
_________________2010
For the Development Review Board
These minutes are
unofficial until approved at the next regularly scheduled meeting.
All motions were unanimously approved unless otherwise indicated.
7:15 PM – ROONEY – REVISION TO FINAL PLAT FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
(PUD)
26 APPLE TREE
ROAD
Members Present: J. Heyer, B. Murphy, J. Beers, C.
Rainville, M. Varney
Public Present: S. Taylor, Z.A; L. Fosher; M. Fortney;
M. Averill; J. Rooney
7:15 PM Introductions were made, the Public Notice
was read, and attendees signed in. Interested parties were sworn in. Michael Averill,
Engineer, made the presentation. At the
time of the original hearing - approving the 9 lot PUD - it was believed that
the remaining 8.5 acres of the Rooney property had been previously subdivided
in 1996 into four (4) 2+ acre lots. It was discovered in 2010 that a survey map
was never recorded in the Fairfax Land Records for the 4 previously mentioned
lots. These lots received a Vermont
Subdivision Permit in 1996, however they are not recognized by the Town of
Fairfax due to a survey never having been filed. This proposal will add the 4 lots
of approximately 8.5 acres, unchanged from the configuration that was given
State approval in 1996, to the
previously approved (May 20, 2009) PUD. The Rooney’s are willing to deed both Lot
13 (9 acres) and Lot 12 (2.27 acres) to the Homeowners Association. Currently
both lots are owned by the Rooneys with a recreational easement for lots 5 – 11
for lot 13 and a septic easement for lot 12. The Rooneys would like to maintain sugaring rights and forest
management for lot 13 as long as either one of the Rooneys live in the
development. Mr. Rooney may also clean out an area on lot 12 for a recreation
area.
J. Heyer asked if the new
septic rules would change the septic design.
Mr. Averill said there would be no clear advantage to making any changes
at this time, but it may be possible to amend the State Permit. B. Murphy asked about drainage issues
with the alteration of land. Mr. Averill stated that all septic systems are far
away from the well shields. Also the
Storm Water Permit is being worked on. J.Beers questioned Mr. Rooney about
Forestry Management and sugaring on lot 13.
She is concerned about the rights of the homeowners who will pay the
taxes on the land. Mr. Rooney said that
this would not be a commercial operation.
He would like to keep the woods clean and the trails maintained without
getting permission each time he works in the woods. His intention is to keep
the woods in a condition to make them advantageous for common land. S.
Taylor asked if there is a sugar house on the property. Eventually Mr. Rooney may build a sugar
house, but it would be on his own land.
B. Murphy noticed there was no Surveyor’s
Seal on the map. A condition could be
placed to have the seal on the paper map before it could be approved by the
Board. B. Murphy also asked about the proposed sidewalk. This proposal will increase the sidewalk to
Sam Webb Road. She also questioned the
configuration of the lots to comply with the PUD Regulations. Mr. Averill said
the design of the project was discussed many times and this was the best
configuration for the lay of the land - including wet lands and septic
systems. S. Taylor agreed that it still
does have a neighborhood look, even though there are some larger lots. B.
Murphy also wanted to be sure there will be no houses or further development on
lots 12 and 13. This can be a condition
of approval.
M. Fortney questioned the location of his house in relationship
to the others in the development. He
was also concerned about drainage issues.
M. Averill said there are excellent soils for the septic systems that
would be in the vicinity of his home.
S. Taylor asked Mr. Fortney if he gets water from the springs in the
area. He has a well that is not close
to the new development. State Permits for General Construction were
discussed. L. Fosher asked about the common land. There is a beautiful creek
on the property that she hopes will be maintained as a natural area and not be
trashed with litter or other contaminates.
The covenants can be specific on what would be allowed, such as
prohibiting small motorized vehicles.
Homeowner Associations were discussed in general. A condition to
approval could be made to require a copy of the Covenants and Bylaws to be
recorded before any Building Permit would be issued.
C. Rainville asked about the
possibility of a detention pond and where it would be located. A Storm Water
Permit has not been completed yet, and if a pond is required, they may need a
revision to the Plat at that time.
C. Rainville made a motion to
close the hearing to public input and move to deliberative. M. Varney second. All in favor.
Respectfully Submitted,
Cathy Raymond, Zoning and
Planning Assistant
Approved:
________________________________
Date: _________________2010
For
the Development Review Board
These minutes are unofficial until approved at the
next regularly scheduled meeting.
All motions were unanimously approved
unless otherwise indicated.