December 13, 2021

Agenda
Appeal of denied zoning permit; application 21-039 for Tiny House Village on The Original Newfane Flea Market property at 788 Vermont route 30

Site Visit 3:00 pm
Applicants: Jesse Holden, E.W. (“Bill”) Morse, Jr
Development Review Board (DRB): Hendrik van Loon, Lynn Forrest, David Lucido, Walter Dadik
Newfane Planning Commission: Ken Estey

Mr. van Loon chaired the visit. He explained the visit was an opportunity to learn how the proposed use might fit the property and how it might affect neighborhood. He said testimony and gathering of evidence would take place at the hearing that evening – not during the site visit.

Mr. Morse and Mr. Holden led a tour of the area that would be dedicated to the proposed tiny house Village and gave an overview of the layout. They pointed out the eight proposed homesites and a recreation area as well as proposed connections to route 30 and Radway Road. They said landscaping would maintain the current open atmosphere of the property.

Public Hearing 6:00 pm – 7:10 pm
Attendees:
Applicants: Jesse Holden, E.W. (“Bill”) Morse, Jr
Development Review Board (DRB): David Cotton Chairman, Hendrik van Loon, Lynn Forrest, David Lucido, Walter Dadik, Erica Walch alternate
Newfane Zoning Administrator: Merle Tessier
Newfane Planning Commission Chairman: Ken Estey
Newfane Zoning Administrator: Merle Tessier
Abutters: Randall Antinarelli, Erika Goldstein
Brattleboro Reformer: Bob Audette

Mr. Cotton opened the hearing at 6:00 pm and swore-in all those who expected to give testimony. He then asked Mr. Morse to describe the proposed project.

Mr. Morse said the project was conceived as a way to provide much-needed affordable housing in Newfane while producing a reasonable income for the site’s owners – himself and Mr. Holden.

The plan is to rent/lease tiny house sites with access to a septic system, utilities and parking to tenants who will supply their own tiny houses. The goal is a rental/lease term of a least one year. Eight house sites are proposed; but only four will be leased initially. There will be a community recreation area and maintenance will be provided by Mr. Morse and Mr. Holden. The existing Original Newfane Flea Market will share the property and continue to operate.

Mr. Cotton asked each DRB member for comments.

David Lucido noted there is no description or specified size to define tiny houses in the Zoning Bylaw. There was general agree there is a need for one.

Erica Walch asked if there are other tiny house villages. Mr. Morse said he knew of at least one. He believes the tiny house manufacturer in Townshend is supplying some of its houses. This led to a discussion of Kenolie Village, a seasonal mobile home recreation area in Newfane.

Mr. van Loon asked if the project requires a subdivision permit and Mr. Tessier said it does not. Mr. van Loon also asked if the driveways were planned for two-way traffic and Mr. Morse replied they are. There was discussion about arranging he house plots in a less “regimented” fashion; but no changes were made.

Ms. Forrest endorsed the concept of concentrating the plots in a cluster in order to maximize the amount of open space. She also said she is a member of Newfane’s Planning Commission and they plan to have tiny house specifications completed by town meeting day.

Mr. Dadik questioned whether DRB has authority to act on an application for a Tiny House Village since the Zoning Bylaw does not list it as either a permitted or conditional use. Mr. van Loon said DRB does have authority to act regarding residences and this application involves residences.

Mr. Dadik also mentioned difficulties interpreting internal traffic flow on the plot plan submitted with the DRB application; He later expressed concerns about compliance with the Zoning Bylaw’s mixed use specifications – in particular the requirement that the entire cumulative development not cover more than 65 percent of the lot area. Mr. Morse said he strongly doubts there is a problem. Mr. Dadik said there should, nonetheless, be an accurate calculation of the area affected by the multiple uses compared to what the bylaw allows .

Mr. Cotton asked for comments from two of the property’s abutters who were in attendance

Mr. Antinarelli had five concerns:

1. Effect on property values
   Mr. Morse believes a well managed community will not have a negative effect
2. Zoning impact
   This is basically a stand alone project not expected to lead to zoning changes in the area
3. Possibility of expansion beyond the eight units applied for the zoning Bylaw limits the parcel to eight units
4. Noise levels
   Mr. Morse believes this will be a low key residential community; also, there will be rules to regulate noise
5. Trash problems
   Mr. Morse said there will be community rules plus attention from Mister Holden and himself to insure proper waste management.

Ms. Goldstein had four questions:

1. How will occupancy levels be regulated?
   Mr. Morse said there are no plans to specify them at this time
2. Is there a capital reserve for maintenance?
   Mr. Morse said there is no specific reserve; but, he and Mr. Holden are committed to good practices
3. Has there been any planning for septic systems and other utilities
   Mr. Morse said he has contacted consultants for water supply and a septic system. Initial investigations are encouraging and state regulations will be followed.
4. Will there be rules limiting or prohibiting children?
   Mr. Morse said emphatically there will be none.

Mr. Cotton asked if there were other comments and there were none. Mr. van Lon made a motion that:

The Development Review Board recess this hearing and enter deliberative session

The motion was seconded by Ms. Forrest and unanimously passed at 7:10 pm

Development Review Board
Newfane Vermont
Walter Dadik, Secretary

December 21, 2021

Background
Newfane Development Review Board (DRB) held a public hearing November 23, 2021 to consider appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s action regarding application 21– 034 for a 3 lot subdivision at 524 Vermont route 30.

Appellant Daryl Johns proposes to subdivide the 10.3 acre property into a total of 3 lots. The Zoning Administrator did not approve this application because the Newfane Subdivision Bylaw requires Development Review Board approval for more than 2 lots.

Guiding Policy Provisions
Town of Newfane Zoning Bylaw adopted February 19, 2015
Town of Newfane Subdivision Bylaw adopted October 4, 2007

Materials Submitted
Preliminary Subdivision plat showing, among other details, proposed lot boundaries and access easement, proposed leach field locations, existing house and barn on lot 3 and location of one proposed house each on lots 1 and 2.

Findings of Fact
Only lot number 1 with the existing house and barn has frontage on a public road. Applicant has proposed an access easement to provide road access for lots 2 and 3. As proposed, each of the 3 lots would contain portions of this easement.
The proposed leach area for lot 2‘s septic system is partially located in lot 1 The owner is pursuing approvals for septic system and access to route 30

Conclusion of Law
Based on a review of materials submitted and presented testimony the Newfane DRB concludes this application as proposed and when finalized and implemented in accordance with the conditions below does meet town of Newfane subdivision criteria.

Decision
Application 21-034 is unanimously approved subject to the following conditions:

1. Approval is subject to any and all applicable local, state and federal permit approvals
2. Boundary between lots 1 and 2 is to be adjusted so lot 2’s leach field will be entirely located in lot 2
3. Boundary of access easement is to be adjusted so the entire access easement is located within lot 3’s boundaries
4. The preliminary subdivision plat is to be revised and subsequently approved by the DRB Chairman and at least one DRB member who participated in the hearing of this application to confirm the plat incorporates conditions 2 and 3 described above.

Confirmation
Subsequent to the DRB hearing, Chairman Cotton and DRB member Walter Dadik reviewed the revised preliminary subdivision plat and confirmed it incorporates conditions 2, and 3 described above.

Appeal
Pursuant to Title 24 VSA Sections 4471 and 4472, an interested person who has participated in the review of this application may appeal this decision to the Environmental Division of The Vermont Superior Court Court by certified mail within thirty (30) days of the date this decision is issued. A copy of the notice must also be sent to the Zoning Administrator or the Municipal Clerk who is required to provide a list of interested persons to the appellant within five days of receipt of the Notice. The appellant is required to send a copy of the Notice, via certified mail, to each interested person.

Town of Newfane Vermont
Development Review Board
David Cotton, Chairman

The Newfane Development Review Board (DRB) will hold a public hearing Wednesday, December 8 at 6:00 pm.

The hearing is to consider the application of E.W. (“Bill”) Morse, Jr. and Jesse Holden for site plan review and conditional use approval for a ”Tiny  Home Village” on The Original Newfane Flea Market property at 788 Vermont Route 30.

The application to be considered at the hearing is available for public review at the Newfane Town Office Monday thru Thursday.

Participation in the hearing may be in person or via Zoom.  The in-person hearing will be held at Newfane Town  Office 555 VT RT 30.

Zoom-based participation in the hearing may be accessed at:

https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84926125675?pwd=SVN1QlErZXgvQmV6T1pOdUpnRlROUT09

•  Meeting ID 849 2612 5675
• Passcode 893163

A site visit at 3:00 pm will precede the hearing.

Participation in the public hearing portion of these proceedings is a prerequisite to the right to take any subsequent appeal.

COVID -19 Saftey Procedures will be followed

Persons wishing to appear at the public hearing may do so in person or via Zoom as well as by a representative or attorney or through a written comment.

Newfane Development Review Board

Walter Dadik, Secretary

November 15, 2021

Continue reading →

Continue reading →

Continue reading →

Subject:

Minutes of Development Review Board (DRB) May 19, 2021 second session of Zoom-based hearing for natural burial ground within the Manitou project at 300 Sunset Lake Road.

Appellant Present  

Michael Mayer, representing Higher Ground Conservation Cemetery Association

Development Review Board Members Present

David Cotton Chairman; Walter Dadik, Secretary; Hendrik van Loon; Samantha Harlow

Others Present

Merle Tessier, Newfane Zoning Administrator; John and Linda Walker, abutters; Gordon and Jean Bristol, abutters; Judith A. Strom, abutter; Jane Douglas, Newfane Planning Commission, & South Newfane Cemetery Association

Supplemental Written Testimony

Michael Mayer

Background

This was a continuation of the hearing opened on April 28 and recessed until May 12.

The May 12 session was later rescheduled to May 19 because of problems using the Zoom system.

Hearing: held remotely via Zoom  from 6:30 pm to 7:48pm

Mr. Cotton said he would ask for comments from all those present.

There was considerable discussion about how responsibility for reviewing various aspects of the project is divided.  The right of way and Act 250 review were of particular interest.

Mr. Cotton noted there is disagreement about the right of way shown on the subdivision plan and asked how that would affect DRB’s decision.  Mr. Tessier said the disagreement doesn’t affect DRB or the Zoning Administrator.  It is up to the disagreeing parties resolve it.  Meanwhile, the Zoning Administrator is responsible for reviewing the subdivision plan as submitted.

Mr. Walker said he has engaged a surveyor to accurately locate the right of way.

Mr. Bristol believes Act 250 relevant yet there is no record of an application being filed.  He also asked about follow-up to make sure all requirements are met.  Mr. Mayer said he understands what is needed and preparation is well underway.

The problem of verifying all requirements have been met when responsibility is divided between several was discussed.  Mr.  Bristol said he is concerned that there is not what he considers concrete evidence that all applicable state laws and regulations are being considered and respected.  Michael Meyer said he is aware of what his project requires and will make certain the requirements are met.

Mr. Dadik said Vermont statutes do require final approval from the Board of Selectmen

and town Board of Health or equivalent before selling any plots; also, a plat showing

the location of all burial sites must be maintained and filed with the Town Clerk.

Mr. van Loon reminded he group that DRB’s responsibility is limited to matters covered by the Zoning bylaw and they are the focus of this hearing.

Mr. Mayer outlined his operational plans:

• Minimum alteration of the area’s character
• Concerted effort to be as non-invasive as possible to the existing landscape and forest
• Daytime operations only
• As little operation as possible during mud season or wintertime
• Hand dug graves wherever possible
• No mechanical excavating equipment stored on site

Ms. Douglas commented that cemeteries are by nature quiet and tranquil places. She also noted natural burials avoid many of the pollution problems associated with chemical embalming.

Ms. Strom said she is probably the closest neighbor to the site proposed site and sees no intrusion from the proposed burial ground.

There was discussion of parking and the ability to develop the right of way.   A 24 car parking lot accessed via a 20 foot wide right of way is proposed.  Mr. Walker questioned whether the parking lot is consistent with the area. Mr. Mayer said the parking lot sits on an area originally approved by Vermont Land Trust as a residence site which he believes would have been much more invasive.

Mr.  Dadik questioned the single lane right of way.  Mr. Mayer said the width is 20 feet which conforms to the zoning bylaw and minimizes infringement on the environment.  There is also a clear line of sight so safe passage should not be a problem.  Mr. Walker said it may not be possible to develop the full length of the right of way to a 20 foot width without serious negative environmental impact.  There was brief discussion but not enough information to resolve this point.

Mr. van Loon moved that the Board close the evidentiary portion of the hearing and enter closed deliberative session.  The motion was seconded by Ms. Harlow and unanimously passed.

Newfane Development Review Board

Walter Dadik, Secretary

Supplemental material: Written testimony by Michael Mayer, exhibit D

Development Review Board Public Zoom Hearing Wed. Apr 28, 2021 06:30 PM

https://zoom.us/j/93999619815?pwd=VHZzVUYyRVAyVHI4aEh5YWs1MHlmQT09
Meeting ID: 939 9961 9815 Passcode: 013108

Town of Newfane Development Review Board Public Hearing Notice

The Newfane Development Review Board will hold a public hearing as a Zoom electronic meeting on Thursday July 30, 2020 at 6:30 pm to consider appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s rejection of Zoning Permit Application 20-0001.

Applicant Kathy J. LaBombard is proposing change of use for the property at 25 Moss Hollow Road in accordance with Section 430 of the Newfane Zoning Bylaw.   The proposed change is from part time residential use to use as a wellness retreat/nature retreat.

The hearing will be preceded by a site visit at 5:00 pm.  Because of complications related to the covid-19 virus, the applicant, who resides in Massachusetts, is not expected to attend this site visit.  Attendance is optional for members of the public.   For those attending, social distancing is required and face masks must be worn.

Zoom participation in the public hearing may be by computer or telephone.  To obtain the Zoom information, e-mail or telephone the Newfane Administrative Assistant at tnewfane@svcable.net or 802 365-7772 ext 4 by July 24.

The application to be considered at the hearing is available for public review at the Newfane town office.  Copies may also be obtained by contacting the Newfane Administrative Assistant at tnewfane@svcable.net or 802 365 7772 ext 4 by July 24.

Participation in the Public Hearing portion of these proceedings is a prerequisite to the right to take any subsequent appeal.

Newfane Development Review Board

Walter Dadik, Secretary

April 23, 2020

Subject

Minutes of Development Review Board (DRB) meeting held via telephone conference on April 23, 2020

Agenda

Act on a proposal that, as allowed by ACT 92, all deadlines for any permits, hearings, decisions or meetings required by law shall be extended to a date not more than 60 days from the lifting of the Governor’s COVID 19-related restrictions applying to gatherings/meetings of more than 10 people.

DRB Members Present and Voting

David Cotton, Chairman, Hendrik Van Loon, Walter Dadik

Others Present

None.   The meeting, however, was warned and notice was e-mailed to all DRB members.

Meeting

Chairman Cotton opened the meeting at 2:00 pm and noted the chair would entertain a motion to approve the proposed deadline extension.

Mr. Dadik made the following motion:

That, as allowed by ACT 92 of the Vermont Legislature, all deadlines for any permits, hearings    decisions or meetings required by law be extended to a date not more than 60 days from the      lifting of the Governor’s COVID 19-related restrictions applying to gatherings/meetings of more  than 10 people.

Mr. Van Loon seconded the motion.  There was no discussion and the motion passed by unanimous vote.

Mr. Van Loon made a motion that the meeting be adjourned. Mr. Dadik seconded the motion and Chairman Cotton adjourned the meeting at 2:09 pm

Town of Newfane, Vermont Development Review Board

Walter Dadik, Secretary

Minutes approved by attendees via mail on April 24, 2020

Continue reading →

Continue reading →

Continue reading →