GENERAL MINUTES

Members Present: J. Heyer, B. Murphy, C. Streets, J. Beers, C. Rainville

Public Present: S. Taylor, ZA

7:00 PM J. Heyer called the meeting to order. The General Minutes for 05/20/2009 were reviewed.

B. Murphy made a motion to approve the General Minutes from 05/20/2009 with a minor adjustment. J. Beers

second. All in favor. P. Rainville may be an alternate for C. Streets on August 5, 2009. S. Taylor asked the Board about the Dusablon subdivision that was approved in 2007. A prospective buyer of one of the lots would like to slightly expand the building envelope. After much discussion the Board agreed that a Public Hearing for a revision would be needed. That specific lot has steep drop offs and the Board is concerned about erosion. They would like to see the property again. On May 28, 2009, an Addendum to the Minutes was signed by three Board Members, stating they reviewed and approved the Paper Map and Mylar for the Peter Rainville Property.

B. Murphy signed the Mylar for the Board on May 28, 2009. The paper map for the Nelson Subdivision was previously approved. The Mylar was reviewed. B. Murphy made a motion to approve the Mylar for the Nelson, LLC subdivision. C. Streets second. All in favor. J. Heyer signed the Mylar for the Board.

7:15 PM – HENNING – SKETCH PLAN REVIEW

8:25 PM The paper Map and Mylar for the Morin property was reviewed. The maps were very hard to read. The Board was concerned if there were any legal issues in the future the Mylar could not be easily read. Either one or two clear Mylars would be acceptable. The Morins will need to submit an extension request to

S. Taylor, ZA.

8:30 PM P. Rainville arrived, J. Heyer left.

8:32 PM – MCNALL – FINAL PLAT ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

9:00 PM B. Murphy made a motion to adjourn. P. Rainville second. All in favor.

The next meeting will be August 5, 2009. There are no hearings on July 1, 2009 or on July 15, 2009.

Respectfully Submitted,

Cathy Raymond, Zoning and Planning Assistant

Approved: ________________________________ Date: _________________2009

For the Development Review Board

HENNING – SKETCH PLAN REVIEW

Members Present: J. Heyer, B. Murphy, C. Streets, J. Beers, C. Rainville

Public Present: S. Taylor, Z.A.; T. Haddock; R. Ertl; J. Ertl; P. Stewart; R. Bissonnette; K. Lesny;

R. Lesny; S. Arnzen; C. Wood; G. Brault; D. Henning; C. Collins, Engineer.

7:15 PM J. Heyer called the meeting to order. The public notice was read and attendees signed in. Interested parties were sworn in. The C. Collins, Engineer, gave the presentation. The parcel is approximately 4.4 acres with an existing single family residence. The applicants are proposing to separate off the existing residence on 2.4 acres (Lot 1) Half of Lot 1 (1.2 acres) will be designated as open space. Lots 2 & 3 are each proposed as one half (1/2) acre with a duplex on each lot. Lot 4 is proposed as one (1) acre with a duplex. Access to the new lots will be through Old Academy Street. There will be underground power, phone and cable lines. The new development hopes to connect with the Fairfax Municipal Sewer lines from the pipe on Old Academy Street. Each lot will have an individual drilled well. B. Murphy asked about the open space between the existing homes and the new duplex. Some landscaping in the Development will be done in keeping with the neighborhood. B. Murphy also asked about sidewalks. They are required in the Growth Center, along with curbs. Garbage pick-up was also talked about. Drainage and run off was discussed. C. Rainville asked about lighting. Each home will provide its own lighting. Paving was discussed. The final coat of paving has not yet been done on Old Academy Street. The applicants would prefer not to pave the new road, but curbs are required in the Growth Center, which implies a paved road.

Dianne Henning asked for permission to speak. She has owned the property for approximately 16 years and wanted to keep the field agricultural. She has observed: trespassing; bee hives invaded; tree lines taken down, fences removed and a general disrespect of her land. Robert Ertl questioned the accuracy of the map that was provided. The property has not yet been surveyed. B. Bossonnette talked about the road association for Old Academy St. The owners of the new homes would need to pay their share of road maintenance for Old Academy Street. He was also concerned about damage to Old Academy Street during the construction of the new homes. He also referred to an Engineers Report that specified that Old Academy Street was not built to standards. The Engineer that designed the road also certified the construction of it.. G. Brault was disappointed that Fairfax Investments did not have a representative at this hearing. There are already many homes still for sale in the Old Academy area. He is also concerned about road damage. Per D. Henning, each home owner on Old Academy St. was given a disclosure for future use of the ROW. There was much discussion on the quality of Old Academy Street. There was also much discussion on whether this project would be obligated to upgrade Old Academy Street. T. Haddock stated he would be happy if Old Academy was a Town Road. He also said it was very difficult to control pedestrian traffic through the area mostly due to the proximity to the Schools.

P. Stewart (representing the Fairfax Schools) had concerns about the proposed Development and its effect on a proposed trail in that general area. D. Henning has noticed the Cross Country Ski Team and others on her property on different occasions. J. Ertl is concerned about bright spotlights from the new development. K. Lesney is concerned about property values going down because of duplexes rather than single family homes. R. Lesney mentioned the historical value of the area, and did not think that duplex buildings would fit in. D. Henning then talked about the need for affordable housing especially in the Growth Center. She would be happy to sell the back lot instead of developing it.

The Project was declared a Major Subdivision. A site visit was scheduled for Thursday, July 9, 2009 at 7:00PM.

EXHIBITS RECEIVED:

1. Sketch Plan (C1) by Ruggiano Engineering, Dated June 17, 2009.

2. Typical Road Section, Ruggiano Engineering, Dated June 17, 2009.

ACTION ITEMS:

1. Sewer allotments to be applied for from the Selectboard.

2. Details of sewer line connections to be provided to the Town for evaluation and request for approval.

3. Written confirmation from a duly authorized representative of Fairfax Investments, LLP and/or an

authorized representative from the Old Academy Homeowners Association, regarding permission to use

the sewer line hook-up on Old Academy St.

4. Letter from a duly authorized representative of Fairfax Investments, LLP and/or an authorized

representative from the Old Academy Homeowners Association, regarding permission to use the ROW

for access to the new homes.

5. On Plan, show a ROW to the common land

6. Submit Road Name Application to the Selectboard.

7. Show sidewalks on Plan.

8. Street must be paved and curbs put in.

9. Specify all boundary lines on plan. Property width must be at least 100 feet.

10. Show area for garbage pick-up on Plan, or have letter from trash hauler for curb-side pick-up.

11. Topography lines to be depicted on Plan.

12. Determination of the need for a Vermont Storm-water Permit.

13. Copy of Construction Storm-water Permit to be submitted to the Zoning Office.

14. Location of wells to be shown on the Plan.

Respectfully Submitted,

Cathy Raymond, Zoning and Planning Assistant

Approved: ________________________________ Date: _________________2009

For the Development Review Board

MCNALL REVOCABLE TRUST – FINAL PLAT ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

Members Present: B. Murphy, C. Streets, J. Beers, C. Rainville

Alternate Present: P. Rainville

Public Present: S. Taylor, Z.A.; D. McNall; C. Wood; R. McNall

7:15 PM B. Murphy called the meeting to order. The public notice was read and attendees signed in. Interested parties were sworn in. S. Taylor, Zoning Administrator (Z.A.) made the presentation. The

Engineer’s Drawing and the Survey were both done by David Tudhope. Both lots would have frontage on McNall Road. The large lot will remain as a non-building lot. It would require a State Permit if a house was to be built.

After much research, S. Taylor concluded that the authorization by CVPS for the placement of the mound septic system for Lot 2 within the 50 foot wide utility easement, means that the land is not subject to an easement which “prevents development within the easement”. He recommends that the easement should not be deducted for density purposes. R. McNall mentioned a natural ditch on the lot. By not subtracting out the CVPS easement, all the land for lot 2 could be on one side of the ditch. C. Streets questioned the legality of the CVPS correspondence via e-mail, not signed. S. Taylor added that many power company easements are not on the Deeds. B. Murphy was concerned about adequate density. S. Taylor pointed out that the CVPS easement does “restrict” development within the easement but does not “prevent” it.

S. Taylor stated the proposal meets all the other requirements for Administrative Review of a two (2) lot subdivision. A Road Access Permit has been approved by the Selectboard. C. Wood asked to see the location of the new house on the lot. It will probably be approximately 125 feet back from the road. He was concerned that the new home may block his existing view, which in turn would lower the value of his home. B. Murphy asked about grading. The mound system will be very long and low. P. Rainville made a motion to approve the Zoning Administrator’s Decision for the McNall project. J. Beers second. All in favor. R. McNall thanked the Board.

Respectfully Submitted,

Cathy Raymond, Zoning and Planning Assistant

Approved: ________________________________ Date: _________________2009

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.