TOWN OF WILLISTONF506B13C-605B-4878...APPROVED DRB Minutes December 12, 2017 Page 1 of 14

APPROVED DRB Minutes December 12, 2017 Page 1 of 14

TOWN OF WILLISTON

DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD

December 12, 2017, 7:00 PM

Town Hall Meeting Room | 7900 Williston Road

Minutes approved January 9, 2018 with a minor modification to spelling.

A video recording of the meeting is broadcasted by Channel 17 and available at www.cctv.org. The minutes

and project proposal information/site plans can be found under Public Records and Documents on the town

website, http://www.town.williston.vt.us.

Members in attendance: Scott Rieley (Chair), Peter Kelley, David Turner, John Hemmelgarn, Courtney

Doherty, and Paul Christenson

Absent: David Saladino

Planning & Zoning Staff: Ken Belliveau, Matt Boulanger, Melinda Scott, Emily Heymann Attendees who signed in: Esther Lotz, Andy Rowe, Denis White, Moe & Shelley DuBois, Norman Boyden, Bob

Prout, Chiuho Duval, Keith Benoit, Andrea Dotolo, Amanda Raab

AGENDA

I. Public Forum

II. Public Hearing

DP #18-11 Ethan Allen Holdings, LLC requests pre-application review of a proposed subdivision to

create a 47-unit planned unit development on 9.43 acres located at 53 & 55 Morgan Parkway in the

Residential Zoning District (RZD). WITHDRAWN

DP 18-12 Denis White Interior Contractors, Inc. requests pre-application review of a proposed 3,000

SF warehouse to be located behind an existing single family home at 332 Shunpike Road in the

Industrial Zoning District West (IZDW).

DP 18-09 Randee Brownell and Jo LaMarche request pre-application review of a 7-lot subdivision of a

51.3 acre parcel with existing dwelling at 4354 South Brownell Road in the ARZD.

III. Communication, Final Plans, and Other Business

IV. Minutes from November 28, 2017 DRB meeting

V. Adjournment

7:04 PM Opened public forum

DP #18-11 Ethan Allen Holdings, LLC requests pre-application review of a proposed

subdivision to create a 47-unit planned unit development on 9.43 acres located at 53 & 55

Morgan Parkway in the Residential Zoning District (RZD).

WITHDRAWN BY APPLICANT. NO PUBLIC HEARING.

DP 18-11 STAFF REPORT

Application No: DP 18 - 11 Name: Wheel Residential Subdivision

https://www.cctv.org/watch-tv/municipalities/williston

http://www.town.williston.vt.us/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC=%7b57E614D0-52D1-43D1-9EF9-658BD6A7B303%7d


Tax Parcel #: 03:046:014, 03:046:999.01&.02 Property Address: 55 Morgan Parkway

Zoning District: Residential (RZD) Total Acres: 9.43 acres

Overview

This is a request for pre-application review for a proposed 47 unit residential development of a 9.43 acre parcel

in the Residential Zoning District (RZD). The subject property is comprised of a .98 acre parcel developed with

a duplex structure and a 9.44 undeveloped parcel of land. It is located to the north of Morgan Parkway and to

the east of VT Rt. 2A with access frontage on both streets. The applicant is proposing to relocate the existing

duplex structures and build an additional 45 dwelling containing a mix of multi-family dwellings and

townhomes. If the DRB approves the pre-application to move forward to the growth management stage of

review in early 2018, the applicant would then request the required number of units of residential growth

management allocation for the new dwellings beyond the two existing dwellings.

Project History

A request for pre-application review for a residential development was considered by the DRB for DP 17-08 on

November 8, 2016. The proposed development however did not receive any allocation as part of the growth

management review by the DRB on March 28, 2017.

What is Pre-application?

This is the first step in the development review process, and called pre-application. It is not a formal request for

project approval or a permit; it is a preliminary level of review. Proposed residential developments potentially

receive authorization to precede the annual residential growth management allocation process held in March of

next year (2018).

The purpose of pre-application review within the town’s development regulations (WDB 6.2) is as follows:

“6.2.2 What is the purpose of pre-application review? The purpose of pre-application

review is to acquaint the DRB and its advisors with a proposed development site and its

possibilities without requiring the presentation of extensive surveying, engineering, or

design data. At this step in the review process, plans for complex projects should be

presented in an informal way that invites comment and the discussion of alternatives.”

The town’s development regulations provide that the DRB may take certain actions, as excerpted below:

“6.2.8 What type of action is taken on a pre-application? A pre-application is a basis

for discussion. It is neither approved nor rejected and creates no vested rights. The DRB

will adopt written recommendations that should be reflected in the application for a

discretionary permit. The DRB may also require that certain information be included in

the application for a discretionary permit, including:

6.2.8.1 … the wetlands delineation and/or functional assessment that may be

required by WDB 29.8.1;

6.2.8.2 … the shared parking study that may be required by WDB 14.2.2; and/or

6.2.8.3 … a traffic study, where it is determined that existing studies do not provide

sufficient information (see WDB 13.8).

6.2.8.4 Other Determinations. Pre-application review is also the time at which the

DRB may:

exempt proposed infill developments in the RZD from open space

development requirements; and/or

authorize the transfer of development rights in a discretionary permit

application.


The DRB may also recommend that the applicant prepare a specific plan

before an application for a discretionary permit is filed.”

Staff Comments:

Use: This is a proposed residential subdivision and development of property in the Residential Zoning

District (RZD). The applicant is proposing to develop the subject property with an additional 45 dwellings.

Single and multi-family dwelling units are an allowed use in the RZD at a maximum density of three (3)

dwelling per acre, or five (5) per acre where at least 30% or more of the dwellings meet the town’s standards for

perpetual affordability as defined in WDB 46.3.9.

Residential Density: The subject property is located in the Residential Zoning District (RZD). The RZD

allows for residential uses at a maximum density of 3 dwellings per acre, or up to 5 dwelling per acre where at

least 30% or more of the dwellings meet the town’s standards for perpetual affordability as defined in WDB

46.3.9. The applicant is proposing a residential development of 47 dwellings containing a mix of multi-family

and townhouse units. Density is calculated on the land area that is not constrained by watershed protection

areas or slopes greater than 15%. The Williston Development Bylaw (WDB) Chapter 19 Density does require

that lands with wetlands, wetland buffers, and slopes in excess of 30% be taken out of that density calculation,

and that lands with slopes between 15-29.9% be calculated at a reduced density of one dwelling unit per ten

acres. The subject property is fairly level and there does not appear to be any evidence of wetlands. The DRB

should decide if it would like a wetlands delineation submitted with an application for a discretionary permit.

The subject property is approximately 9.43 acres. In order for the applicant to be able to construct as many as

47 dwellings in the proposed development, virtually all of the subject property must be devoid of any

constrained lands as provided by WDB Chapter 19.

Access: The applicant is proposing a point of access onto VT Rt. 2A at the traffic signal at James

Brown Drive. This would turn the existing t-type intersection into a four-way intersection at the existing traffic

signal and intersection. The applicant is also proposing an access from Morgan Parkway within a right-of-way

previously identified for road access as part of the development of Morgan Parkway. The applicant will be

required to provide authorization for access from the VT Agency of Transportation (VTrans) in the form of a

letter of intent with the submittal of an application for a discretionary permit, as well as authorization from the

Town of Williston Public Works Department for access from Morgan Parkway.

Traffic: Pre-application is also the stage of review where the DRB may ask for a traffic impact study if

they so desire. Staff notes that depending on the number of dwellings formally proposed by a discretionary

permit application, new vehicular trip generation for a development of this intensity will range between 35-40

PM peak hours trips per day on average. Staff recommends that a traffic study be required as part of a submittal

for a discretionary permit. Permit applications for all of the proposed new dwellings will have to be

accompanied by impact fees including traffic impact fees.

Review by other Boards and Town Departments:

Williston’s police, fire, and public works departments reviewed the project. The police and fire departments had

no comments at this time.

The Fire Department has offered the following comments of its requirements as part of a submission of an

application for a discretionary permit:

1. SUBMITTALS Elevation plans

Plot plan

Utilities

Hydrant locations up to 1000 feet in all directions

2. ACCESS Driveway and roadway width

Determination of adequate turning radius for apparatus

3. DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS Separation distance between units

4. SIGNAGE Building and mailbox marking per Town Ordinance


5. HYDRANTS Numerous hydrants will be needed

6. OTHER Any traffic light added for this project will require preemption

Williston Public Works’ comments (attached) requested that the applicant provide the following information as

part of an application for a discretionary permit:

Please provide a written response to the following items prior to receiving approval for the project:

1. Provide all utilities, water, sewer, electric, etc.

2. Provide information of impacts for stormwater.

3. All public works applications and associated fees are required, water connection, sewer

allocation, etc.

4. Provide a crosswalk across Route 2A at the proposed intersection.

The Williston Conservation Commission also reviewed this project and their findings and recommendations are

listed below.

Recommendations:

1. The site plan should incorporate landscaping around the perimeter as needed for visual

screening.

2. The applicant needs to submit a professionally-prepared runoff and erosion control plan as part

of the discretionary permit application.

3. The proposed development should incorporate raingardens and other onsite infrastructure to

maximize stormwater infiltration and reduce the runoff load to the stormwater ponds.

4. All buildings and appliances should meet Efficiency Vermont Certified standards.

5. The applicant should provide a draft trail easement as part of a Discretionary Permit

application.

Staff recommends that all findings and recommendations made by the Conservation Commission be adopted as

pre-application recommendations.

Staff Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the project be allowed to move forward to growth management review with the

following recommendations.

Recommendations:

1. The applicant shall submit a traffic study meeting the requirements of WDB 13.8.2. The applicant

should also submit a letter of intent from VTrans for the proposed access at VT Rt. 2A.

2. All proposed findings and recommendations made by the Williston Conservation Commission at their

December 6, 2017 meeting shall also be adopted as Pre-Application recommendations.

3. All comments made by the Department of Public Works and stated in their memo dated November 17,

2017 shall also be adopted as pre-application recommendations. The applicant shall meet all Public

Works Standard Specifications.

4. All comments made by the Fire Department as stated in their memo dated November 17, 2017 shall

also be adopted as pre-application recommendations.


MOTION

As authorized by WDB 6.6.3, I, _________________, move that the Williston Development Review

Board, having reviewed the application submitted and all accompanying materials, including the

recommendations of the town’s staff and the advisory boards required to comment on this

application by the Williston Development Bylaw, and having heard and duly considered the testimony

presented at the public hearing of December 12, 2017, accept the recommendations proposed by staff

for the review of DP 18-11, and authorize the applicant to proceed Residential Growth Management

Allocation.

WITHDRAWN BY APPLICANT. NO PUBLIC HEARING.

7:05 PM Opened public hearing for DP 18-12

DP 18-12 Denis White Interior Contractors, Inc. requests pre-application review of a proposed

3,000 SF warehouse to be located behind an existing single family home at 332 Shunpike Road in

the Industrial Zoning District West (IZDW).

Representing the application: Denis White of 462 Shunpike Road and Andy Rowe of Lamoureux & Dickinson

Matt Boulanger presented the staff report and explained the request.

Andy Rowe explained that they are keeping the existing location on Shunpike Road for the main operation of

the business; this site is strictly for storage and no employees will work onsite.

Paul Christenson asked about curb cuts. Andy Rowe clarified that only 1 curb cut is allowed.

John Hemmelgarn asked about the paved area and parking spaces. Andy Rowe explained that the exact location

of the overhead door will determine the paved area and parking spaces.

Peter Kelley asked about building materials. Denis White explained that they haven’t decided the specifics, but

are considering a metal stud building with a metal truss roof. The siding may be metal or plastic.

There were no further comments or questions from the board, applicant, or audience.

7:15 PM Closed public hearing for DP 18-12


Williston Development Review Board (DRB) Staff Report

Application Stage: Pre-Application Hearing Date: 12/12/2017

Application No: DP 18-12 Project Name: Denis White Shunpike Warehouse

Property Address: 332 Shunpike Road Zoning District: Industrial Zoning District West

(IZDW)

Tax Parcel #: 07-016-019-000 Existing Lot Size: 0.85 Acres

Overview

This is a request for pre-application review of a proposal to add a warehouse building and appurtenances to an

existing residential property, at 332 Shunpike Road in the Industrial Zoning District West (IZDW). The

property is currently developed with a single-family home.


Project History:

This is the first time this proposal is to be reviewed by the DRB.

Proposed Use:

The applicant proposes a warehouse. The North America Industry Classification System (NAICS) lists

Transportation and Warehousing as use code number 48-49. as uses for the property. WDB 36.A lists NAICS

uses 48-49 as allowed uses in the IZDW. Since the adoption of the Williston Unified development Bylaw

(WDB) in June of 2009, residential uses have not been allowed in the IZDW. Staff recommends that the

single family home on the property is an existing nonconforming use.

New Structure:

The applicant has proposed to construct a 3,000 square foot warehouse.

New Site Work:

The applicant proposes changes to the driveway and parking area to provide access to the warehouse.

Subdivision and/or Boundary Line Adjustment:

No subdivision or boundary line adjustment is proposed.

Outdoor Lighting:

Any outdoor lighting will have to be shown on the plans when a discretionary permit is submitted.

Setbacks and Landscaping

The proposed Landscaping Plan is provided on Plan Sheet XXXX. The subject parcel is adjacent to list

adjacent uses. Chapter 23 of Williston’s Unified Development Bylaw (WDB) requires that the proposed

(applicant’s proposed uses go here) be buffered from the neighboring properties in the following ways:

Required landscaped Buffers per WDB 23.A

Proposed

Land Use

Adjoining Land Use Type I

Existing

Vegetation

Type II

Dense

Plantings

Type III

Informal

Plantings

Type IV

Formal

Plantings

Industrial North Public Way Street trees

East Industrial/Commercial 50-ft 9-ft 23-ft

South Industrial Wetland

West Industrial 9-ft

The applicant is proposing buffers as follows:

Required landscaped Buffers per WDB 23.A

Proposed

Land Use

Adjoining Land Use Type I

Existing

Vegetation

Type II

Dense

Plantings

Type III

Informal

Plantings

Type IV

Formal

Plantings

Mixed Use

Including

residential

Use

North Public Way Street trees

East Industrial/Commercial 9-ft

South Industrial Wetland

West Industrial 9-ft

Where there are wetlands present and where a watershed protection buffer is identified, that buffer may be

supplemented by a Type III or IV buffer a minimum of 8 feet in width.

Parking Lot Landscaping:

Parking lot landscaping for the added “potential future parking spaces” can be reviewed at the time they are

proposed. Retained vegetation to the south will likely suffice to meet this requirement.


Outdoor Storage

The applicant is not proposing outdoor storage.

Wetlands, Waterways, and Conservation Areas

Wetlands are present on the site. A 50 foot watershed protection buffer from the wetlands is required and

proposed on the plan.

Access

The proposed development will be accessed by a relocated curb cut on Shunpike Road.

Traffic

Staff is not recommending that the DRB require a traffic study as part of a discretionary permit application.

Traffic impact fees will be assessed by the Zoning Administrator as part of the administrative permitting

process.

Parking

The project could generate a requirement for three parking spaces, as shown on the plan.

Shared Parking:

Staff does not recommend that the applicant be required to submit a shared parking study for this project.

Signs:

No signage is proposed.

Solid Waste:

Trash and recycling containers are proposed to be contained within the garage of the existing house.

Design Review:

This project is not subject to design review.

Comments from Public Works, Fire Department, and Police: This project was reviewed by the police, fire, and public works departments. The police department had no

comments on the application. Fire and public works comments are attached to this report and will need to be

addressed by the applicant as part of an application for a discretionary permit.

Recommended Action

Staff recommends approval of this discretionary permit with recommended findings of fact, conclusions of law,

and conditions of approval as provided below.

Recommendations

1. The applicant proposes a warehouse. The North America Industry Classification System (NAICS) lists

Transportation and Warehousing as use code number 48-49. as uses for the property.

2. WDB 36.A lists NAICS uses 48-49 as allowed uses in the IZDW.

3. Any discretionary permit application shall conform to all of the WDB requirements and standards, and

conditions of approval as required by the DRB. The discretionary permit application shall also address

all comments and requirements identified in the following items:

a. Plan changes in response to Williston Public Works Department memo dated 11/16/2017 and a

written response to the department outlining the changes that were made in response to their

comments.


b. Williston Fire Department memo dated 11/17/2017 and a written response to the department

outlining the changes that were made in response to their comments.

MOTION

As authorized by WDB 6.6.3, I Courtney Doherty, move that the Williston Development Review Board,

having reviewed the application submitted and all accompanying materials, including the

recommendations of the town’s staff and the advisory boards required to comment on this application by

the Williston Development Bylaw, and having heard and duly considered the testimony presented at the

public hearing of December 12, 2017, and the recommendations proposed by staff for the review of the

DP 18-12, and authorize this application to move forward to discretionary permit review.

SECONDED BY: Paul Christenson VOTE: 6 AYES – 0 NAYES


7:15 PM Opened public hearing for DP 18-09

DP 18-09 Randee Brownell and Jo LaMarche request pre-application review of a 7-lot

subdivision of a 51.3 acre parcel with existing dwelling at 4354 South Brownell Road in the

ARZD.

Representing the application: Amanda Raab and Andrea Dotolo, both of Trudell Consulting Engineers

Scott Rieley stated that this hearing was opened on November 28, 2017.

Melinda Scott presented the staff report and explained the request.

Amanda Raab addressed concerns from the last hearing regarding parcel boundaries and well design. She

submitted the plat on file in land records and noted that well and wastewater systems will conform to state

regulations.

Peter Kelley asked about the staff’s position on the location of Lot 4. Melinda Scott clarified that the lot should

not be created given the bylaw strongly discourages development on steep slopes Ken Belliveau clarified that

the bylaw is written so that a parcel with nothing but steep slopes can realized some development potential, but

not realize the highest lot yield for a subdivision and recommends the board not approve Lot 4.

Amanda Raab explained that only a small portion of Lot 4 has been surveyed, and eliminating the lot would be

premature without a full survey. She identified on the map a potential alternate site for Lot 4.

John Hemmelgarn clarified that Lot 4 is currently between 15-29% slopes. Allows a reduced density. Amanda

Raab stated that it is based on the revised density calculation and requested it not be eliminated before a formal

survey is conducted.

Paul Christenson asked where Lot 4 would go if it had to be moved. Amanda Raab identified the alternate site

on the map.

Scott Rieley noted the letter submitted by James Beecher. This letter is available on the website with agendas

and minutes.


James Beecher, 4987 Route 116, Shelburne, gave an overview of his observations of the parcel, having grown

up in the area, and playing on the parcel as a child. He explained that the dumps could contain more than farm

waste, such as construction and building debris. He noted that a 1984 map at Trudell should label the dump

locations on the property. He expressed concern that the fill contaminants could impact the well water.

Paul Christenson and David Turner asked about the process for investigation. Ken Belliveau stated that staff

reached out to the state Waste Management and Prevention Division and the board can decide to require the

applicant to provide additional technical information, such as a Phase 2 environmental report.

Amanda Raab was unsure about where dumping sites would be located or if a map exists that labels the sites.

John Hemmelgarn asked about the wetlands delineation, noting that class 2 wetlands would impact their current

plan. Andrea Dotolo gave an overview of her wetlands assessment. Based on her observations, Andrea Dotolo

and Amanda Raab are fairly certain that the wetlands are class 3 because of their size and lack of connectivity.

Amanda Raab clarified that they will have wetlands information from the state when submitting the

Discretionary Permit.

Scott Rieley noted the letter submitted by Craig Sampson, Jr. This letter is available on the website with

agendas and minutes. Scott Rieley clarified that the board will want to see proof of legal access to the property.

Amanda Raab asked when the board and staff want the easement information. Ken Belliveau said the sooner the

better so it can be reviewed by the town attorney.

Scott- Rieley asked about the driveway grade. Amanda Raab explained that the new driveway has not been

surveyed so the exact grade is unknown at this time.

Paul Christenson asked about septic systems and the wetland. Ken Belliveau clarified that septic is permitted by

the state. Amanda Raab stated that a wetland can be impact by a septic system if approved by the state.

Paul Christenson asked about septic pipes. Amanda Raab explained the system piping plan and force main.

Shelley DuBois expressed concern about the location of the shared septic field and their wells. She asked how

to contact the state. Ken Belliveau clarified that the State of Vermont Department of Environmental

Conservation (DEC) has a regional office located in Essex and they regulate and permit wastewater systems and

potable water supplies.

Keith Benoit asked about the next steps for subdivision. Scott Rieley gave an overview of step 2, growth

management allocation, and step 3, discretionary permit, both are noticed public hearings. He emphasized that

this is step1, pre-application, where projects are reviewed on a sketch plan level and recommendations are

provided, no permits to build are granted.

Chiuho Duval, 120 Rosewood Drive, stated that their well is within the 60’ access right of way. Scott Rieley

clarified that matters regarding water and wastewater are handled by the state Department of Environmental

Conservation (DEC).

Paul Christenson addressed Keith Benoit in regards to the landscaping buffer. Keith Benoit noted that a 9’

buffer is not much, given that the existing land is a field. Melinda Scott noted that a Type 3 buffer uses informal

plantings. Amanda Raab explained that the buffer can be planted first so it is established before construction

begins, and they can use varying species of trees.


There were no further comments or questions from the board, applicant, or audience.



Application No: DP 18 - 09 Name: Brownell/LaMarche 7-lot subdivision

Tax Parcel #: 17:003:249.000 Property Address: South Brownell Rd and

Rosewood Drive

Zoning District: Agricultural Rural Residential

Zoning District (ARZD)

Total Acres: 51.3

Staff Note: This application was continued from the original hearing date of November 28, 2017, to allow the

applicant to resubmit Pre-application materials and for the Board and Staff to review these materials. These

staff notes are largely similar to the staff notes of November 28, but address newly submitted information

where appropriate.

Overview

This is a request for pre-application review for a proposed seven-lot residential subdivision of a 51.3 acre

parcel. The parcel is located at 225 Rosewood Drive and 4354 South Brownell Rd in the ARZD. The property

is currently developed with one single-family home. The applicant is proposing to subdivide the single lot into

seven single-family home lots sized at between 1 and 2.5 acres. The applicant is proposing to set aside 38.44

acres as protected open space.

Project History

The subject parcel resulted from a subdivision (SUB 04-17) that was approved by the DRB on May 11, 2004.

The intent of that subdivision was to divide the parent parcel at the town line. At that time, since the portion of

the parcel in Williston had one mobile home dwelling and no further development was proposed, the

subdivision was not required to obtain allocation through Growth Management Review.

On June 5, 2017 the applicant received an Administrative Permit to remove this existing dwelling, construct an

access driveway and a new 2-bedroom single-family dwelling located at 4354 South Brownell Rd. Under the

Williston Development Bylaw Chapter 11. Growth Management, a lot that was created prior to 1990 is allowed

one dwelling by right without having to go through Growth Management Review. Since the applicant removed

an existing dwelling and replaced it with a single-family dwelling, neither Pre-application nor Discretionary

Permit was required at that time.

The applicant first presented this proposal to the DRB on November 28, 2017. The public hearing for this

application was continued to December 12, 2017, so as to allow the applicant the opportunity to address the

following:

1. Correct the density calculation by excluding the acreage of wetlands and wetland buffers in the density

calculation;

2. Reconfigure the lot lines so as to exclude all slopes in excess of 30%, which must be in the open space;

3. Suggestion to include landscape buffers between the proposed development and adjoining properties on the

site plan in conformance with WDB Chapter 23 and WDB 31.8.6.

Review by other Boards and Town Departments:

Williston’s Police, Fire, and Public Works departments reviewed the project. The Police Department had no

comments at this time. The Fire Department submitted the attached comments stating there is currently not an

adequate water supply at the site and requesting an adequate water supply be established via one of the

following methods:

burial of a large (+/-15,000) gallon tank,


installation of a +/- 15,000 gallon cistern, or

installation of a +/- 15,000 gallon pond/retention pond.

The fire department also requests the installation of a dry hydrant water source connection, accessible from a

paved and plowed road.

The Department of Public Works submitted the attached comments stating the project shall conform to the latest

Public Works Standard Specifications. As-Built plans and Engineering Certifications are required at the

completion of the project, prior to Certificate of Occupancy (CO).

This proposal was also reviewed by the Williston Conservation Commission (WCC), and staff proposes their

recommendations to be adopted as DRB recommendations moving forward. In summary, the WCC’s

recommendations address the requirements under WDB 27 for a Habitat Disturbance Assessment to be

submitted as part of the discretionary permit application, as well as the requirement under WDB 29 for a

wetlands delineation and a professionally-prepared runoff and erosion control plan to be submitted as part of the

discretionary permit application. The WCC also noted that the open space configuration of the original site plan

is not optimal and requested that the applicant reconfigure the lot boundaries so as to allow for a minimum

200ft width of open space at any point along its boundary in order to make it more contiguous. There is no such

definitive requirement in WDB Chapter 27, nor a definition of contiguity. The applicant’s revised site plan

slightly improves the contiguity of the open space, increasing its width between Lot 5 and Lots 1-4 to roughly

100 feet. The Habitat Disturbance Assessment will need to specifically address the contiguity requirement and

document no adverse impact.

Staff Comments:

Use:

The proposed subdivision will be for the purpose of adding 6 new dwelling units to the parcel. Single and two-

family dwelling units are an allowed use in the ARZD.

Residential Density: The applicant is proposing a subdivision which will result in seven dwelling units on 51.3 acres of land, where

the maximum allowed residential density in the zone is one dwelling unit per 80,000 square feet (1.84 acres).

The Williston Development Bylaw (WDB) Chapter 19 Density does require that lands with wetlands, wetland

buffers, and slopes in excess of 30% be taken out of that density calculation, and that lands with slopes between

15 and 29.9% be calculated at a reduced density of one dwelling unit per ten acres.

Staff notes that the applicant’s previous density calculations were incorrect because the acreage of wetlands was

not subtracted. The applicant has submitted a revised constraints analysis with which staff is satisfied. The

applicant’s previous constraints analysis was done using very fine scale elevation data, which is not the standard

method and results in very small fragments of steep slopes. The revised constraints analysis used a coarser

elevation dataset, which is more appropriate for the density calculations at this scale. Note that the coarser data

has resulted in slightly different acreages for the steep slopes than what was previously presented. Staff has

reviewed the revised constraints analysis and has determined the analysis to be satisfactory, shown as follows:

Constraint Acres Allowable density/Acre Allowable

Dwelling Units

Wetlands and buffers 3.53 0 Dwelling units/Acre 0

slopes 30% and greater 5.4 0 Dwelling units/Acre 0

slopes 15-29.9% 16.9 ARZD: 1 Dwelling unit/10 acres 1.69

unconstrained 25.47 ARZD: 1 Dwelling unit/ 1.83 acres 13.84

Totals 51.30 n/a 15.53

Because WDB 19.1.3.3 requires rounding down to the nearest whole number when determining residential

potential, the maximum number of dwellings allowed on the parent parcel is fifteen. The applicant has proposed

7 units. The applicant has indicated that the wetlands as delineated on the site plan need to be confirmed by the


State wetlands program. Any additional Class 2 wetlands or wetland buffers present on the parcel would reduce

the amount of the parcel available for the purposes of calculating density.

Open Space:

As a subdivision of a parcel of land 10.5 acres or greater, this project will be required to set aside a minimum of

75% of the area of the parent parcel as permanently-protected open space. This open space must include steep

slopes, wetland areas and setbacks, and any other resources required to be protected under WDB 27. The

applicant’s proposed 38.44 acres of open space meets the 75% requirement. The applicant’s previously

submitted site plans indicated that some of the steep slopes (>30%) had not been encompassed in the open

space, as required by WDB 31.7.2.5. The applicant’s revised site plans now indicate that all slopes in excess of

30% are within the open space.

Beyond prohibiting development on slopes 30% or greater, WDB 31.7.2.6 strongly discourages development on

slopes in excess of 15%. Lot 4 is mostly comprised of slopes exceeding 15%, in fact there appears to be no

alternative on this lot but to build on steep slopes. Staff therefore has concerns about the creation of Lot 4, as it

forces development on undesirable terrain.

Within Lots 6 and 7 there are Class 3 wetlands shown that have not yet been confirmed by the State wetlands

program. If after State review those wetlands are designated as Class 2, the applicant will need to include them

in the open space. The DRB may, upon the recommendation of the Conservation Commission, require that a

functional assessment of the Class 3 wetlands on the proposed development site be provided along with the

delineation, in order to determine if the Class 3 wetlands have significant functional value worthy of protection.

The Conservation Commission has not make a formal recommendation to that effect.

Access:

The existing home on proposed Lot 5 is accessed by a recently constructed driveway from South Brownell Rd.

Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 are all proposed to be accessed from this driveway. WDB 13 allows up to five dwelling units

on a shared driveway. For driveways serving multiple dwellings, the grade shall not exceed 10%. Lots 6 and 7

are proposed to be accessed from Rosewood Drive.

On December 4, 2017 staff received a letter (attached) from abutting property owner Craig Sampson raising

concerns about the proposed access via Rosewood Drive, and whether the applicant has legal means of access

through abutting properties. Mr. Sampson also raised concerns about the steepness of both access roads and the

safety of the Rosewood Drive/Rte 116 intersection. Staff recommends the DRB require the applicant produce

documentation of legal means of access to the subject parcel via Rosewood Drive, for review by the Town’s

attorney at the time of Discretionary Permit application submittal. The DRB may wish to consider whether or

not to impose additional requirements that address some or all of the concerns raised by Mr. Sampson.

Regarding the safety issues stated above, at initial construction Rosewood Drive was required to obtain a State

highway access permit and presumably met the applicable safety standards.

The proposed access drive for Lots 6 and 7 crosses over the town line and into Shelburne. Any changes to this

access road or any other proposed development in Shelburne may require a permit from that jurisdiction. Staff

recommends that the DRB require the applicant to provide documentation that the proposed development is in

conformance with Shelburne regulations, at the time of Discretionary Permit application submittal.

Traffic:

Permits for new single family homes will have to be accompanied by impact fees including traffic impact fees.

Pre-application is also the stage of review where the DRB may ask for a traffic impact study if they so desire.

Staff notes that in Williston, seven additional single family units would produce 7.07 new PM peak hour trip-

ends. Staff does not recommend that the DRB request a traffic study for this project.

Landscaping and Setbacks:

WDB Chapter 31 establishes minimum property line setbacks in the ARZD as follows:

Front setback from ROW (Town highway) 50 feet

Side setback See Chapter 23, if N/A 15 feet


Rear setback See Chapter 23, if N/A 15 feet

WDB Chapter 23 states that open space residential developments in the ARZD “must provide ample buffers,”

but does not specify minimum buffer widths. WDB 31.8.6 provides additional guidance for landscaped buffers

in open space developments, specifically stating that clusters of lots “must be effectively separated from

neighboring properties, public ways and each other by open space.” WDB 31.8.6 states that compliance with

this standard can be achieved by using terrain features such as existing woods, fields that remain in agricultural

use, ridgelines, steep slopes, streams, wetlands, and watershed protection buffers to separate clusters and to

buffer home sites from adjoining properties and public ways whenever possible. WDB 23.3 and WDB 31.8.6

allow the DRB considerable discretion in determining the minimum width and what type of landscape buffer

will be appropriate in a particular context.

The applicant’s revised site plans show a landscape buffer along the east side of Lots 1-4 and south of the

driveway on Lot 1. Staff recommends a 50ft buffer of existing forested vegetation be retained around the

perimeter of the development where possible, and that in areas where forested vegetation is currently lacking,

the applicant provide a minimum 9ft Type III landscape buffer (informal plantings) to screen the development

from adjoining properties.

Potential Hazards/Potential Nuisances:

WDB 18.1.2 states the town’s authority to regulate existing or continuing nuisances that may not be

“development” under 24 V.S.A. § 2291 (12-17), as follows:

(12) To regulate or prohibit the storage or dumping of solid waste, as defined in 10 V.S.A. § 6602.

These regulations may require the separation of specified components of the waste stream.

(13) To compel the cleaning or repair of any premises which in the judgment of the legislative body is

dangerous to the health or safety of the public.

(14) To define what constitutes a public nuisance, and to provide procedures and take action for its

abatement or removal as the public health, safety, or welfare may require.

On December 4, 2017 planning staff received a letter from abutting landowner James Beecher (attached)

communicating his past observations of dumping of solid waste on the subject property. Planning staff has

contacted the State Waste Management Division requesting their investigation of the subject property’s history

and potential records of any past or current investigations or violations. Waste Management Division staff

responded via the attached email, stating they found three past occurrences with regards to nearby properties

(South Brownell Rd, Rosewood Dr.), but that all have been resolved. The DRB may wish to consider requiring

the applicant to conduct further investigation prior to obtaining a Discretionary Permit. Typically this is done

via a Phase 1 and Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment conducted by a licensed environmental engineering

firm.

Growth Management:

If so authorized, the applicant will proceed with a residential growth management allocation request for six

dwelling units.

Staff Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the DRB authorize the applicant to proceed to Growth Management Review in March

2018. Below are Pre-application recommendations for the DRB to consider.

Recommendations

1. All comments made by the Fire Department and stated in their memo dated 10/27/2017 shall also be

adopted as pre-application recommendations.


2. All comments made by the Department of Public Works and stated in their memo dated 10/17/2017

shall also be adopted as pre-application recommendations. The applicant shall meet all Public Works

Standard Specifications.

3. All comments made by the Williston Conservation Commission and stated in their memo dated

11/15/2017 shall also be adopted as pre-application recommendations.

4. The applicant shall produce documentation of legal means of access to the subject parcel for review by

the Town’s attorney, at the time of Discretionary Permit application submittal.

5. The applicant shall provide documentation that the proposed development is in conformance with

Shelburne regulations, at the time of Discretionary Permit application submittal.

6. The board has been advised of potential landfill on the subject parcel and will be seeking a legal

opinion, and may require additional information from the applicant at discretionary permit.

7. The applicant shall relocate lot 4 to a new location not involving slope greater than 15%

MOTION

As authorized by WDB 6.6.3, I, John Hemmelgarn, move that the Williston Development Review

Board, having reviewed the application submitted and all accompanying materials, including the

recommendations of the town’s staff and the advisory boards required to comment on this

application by the Williston Development Bylaw, and having heard and duly considered the testimony

presented at the public hearings of November 28, 2017 and December 12, 2017, accept the

recommendations proposed by staff for the review of DP 18-09, and authorize the applicant to

proceed to Residential Growth Management Allocation.

SECONDED BY: Paul Christenson VOTE: 6 AYES – 0 NAYES


8:05 PM Deliberations Opened

8:38 PM Deliberations Closed

III. Minutes from November 28, 2017 DRB meeting

I, Peter Kelley, make the motion to approve the minutes of November 28, 2017, as written.

SECONDED by: Paul Christenson VOTE: 6 AYES – 0 NAYES

V. Adjournment

8:43 PM Scott Rieley made the motion to adjourn.

Project proposal documents and site plans are posted with Agenda & Minutes and organized by the

public hearing date. For further information, please call the Planning & Zoning offices at 878-6704 or

visit the offices in the Town Hall Annex at 7878 Williston Road.

http://www.town.williston.vt.us/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC=%7b57E614D0-52D1-43D1-9EF9-658BD6A7B303%7d