Planning Commission Meeting

Present: Chair John Ringwood, Craig Hunter, Greg Boshart, Chris Glabach, Bill Drunsic; Tristan Poplar; also Planning Director Lee Krohn, and others per sign-in sheet

The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M.

Motion Glabach, seconded by Boshart, to approve the minutes of 10/19/09; OK unanimously.

Everyone was pleased to welcome Megan LaValley back as a full voting member of the Commission!

Signs for mixed uses in the GR-2 district, further discussion and clarification:

In the case of a business park or multi-tenant development, a landowner may choose to keep each sign at the maximum permissible size of 8 sq ft, or may choose ‘option B’ below, allowing larger signs but subject to all of the following conditions:

The free standing sign (or signs, if two are allowed under frontage rules) may be up to 16 sq ft in size;

A maximum of 6 sq ft shall be dedicated to the business park or ‘place’ name;

No more than 10 sq ft may be used to advertise tenants;

Individual tenant signs shall be of similar size/shape/orientation; these shall have at least one uniform dimension (ie., width; and may then be of varying height);

A decorative cornice (as otherwise permitted) may include E-911 numbers but not advertising;

Each tenant may be advertised on only one sign (if multiple signs are otherwise permitted);

Each tenant sign may be no larger than 5 sq ft in size.

The purpose and rationale is to help solve the problem statement (how to advertise multiple tenants in larger projects, while maintaining the integrity of a mixed use zoning district). Motion Hunter to approve this language for a public hearing; timing to be determined after considering other matters on the agenda; seconded by Drunsic and approved unanimously.

Northshire Day School, 5484 Main Street: proposed Act 250 amendment to remove offer/requirement to restore the historic barn, reconsideration. Information was offered on current events: the pending DRB hearing, barn grant application prepared by Krohn on behalf of NDS, the request that NDS file its Act 250 application, and of the state that a collaborative approach between all the parties (NDS, Town, Act 250, Division of Historic Preservation) be used to seek the most appropriate and acceptable outcome. Any further discussion of ideas, options, financial constraints... are better considered with fuller representation of the applicant. It was agreed by consensus to table the discussion to a future time when it makes sense strategically.

Flood Hazard Bylaws: review draft amendments with state comments

The latest draft was reviewed, incorporating for the most part the latest comments from the state, understanding that since these new requirements originate with the state and FEMA, there is less to discuss and less flexibility than with bylaws of our own creation. As discussed previously, the PC is willing to do what’s required, but is not enthusiastic about going beyond those requirements to become even stricter in regulation. Considerable effort has been taken to discern the difference, and work out questions and concerns. One further review by the state is warranted once this is warned for hearing. Questions and concerns were discussed about particular aspects of new law, as well as ramifications of not doing this work or enforcing these rules as written. Motion Drunsic to approve this language for a public hearing; timing to be determined after considering other matters on the agenda; seconded by Hunter and approved unanimously. It is understood that the warned version will include a number of definitions to be added to the bylaw; these are simply required by the state and FEMA.

C-1 zoning boundary concepts: reconsideration in light of the recent

Selectboard decision

Recap: the Selectboard had declined to approve the boundary changes as proposed, but made two suggestions: that the boundary change on the High Ridge property (the source of the controversy) be separated from the changes on all of the other properties; this would allow these latter changes to be made without being dragged through the rest of the debate.

It was also suggested that the PC consider alternatives to the change on High Ridge - whether a less substantial change in the C-1 boundary, or as suggested by a Hillvale resident, changing the rear of the property, presently GR-1, to C-2 instead of C-1. After discussion of goals, reasons, and ramifications, it was agreed to separate out High Ridge from the other properties, and to press on with the boundary change on High Ridge as proposed originally. No other options were believed to solve any problems, nor to help in better achieving community goals for eventual development or redevelopment of that property. It was also agreed that from a timing perspective, it made sense to pursue this matter sooner than later, as waiting just puts it off and elongates the debate. Motion Boshart to warn all three proposals as discussed (signs in GR, flood hazard review, and the C-1 boundary changes - to be considered and voted as two separate items) for a public hearing on Monday, November 30, 2009. Seconded by Glabach and approved unanimously.

Other Business

Upcoming meeting schedule, and other informational items were discussed.

Next meeting: November 16, to discuss the new draft Capital Improvement Program.

With the new meeting for the public hearing added on Nov. 30, it was agreed to hold only one meeting in December, on the 14th.

The meeting was then adjourned at 8:30 P.M.

Respectfully submitted by Lee Krohn.