Town of Bolton
3045 Theodore Roosevelt Highway
Meeting called to order at 7:15 p.m.
Planning Commission members present: Linda Baker, Steve Barner, Rodney Pingree, Jim Bralich
Planning Commission members absent: None
1. Public Hearing re: proposed Land Use and Development Regulations for the Town of Bolton
2. Minutes – November 1, 2004
3. Other communications/mail
4. Any other business
Agenda Item #1 – Public Hearing
Linda Baker called the hearing to order and read the official warning. MPG Advisory Committee members were introduced, and a brief review of the grant and the process was given by Joss Besse. Steve Barner gave a power point presentation regarding the proposed changes, accompanied by a brief overview of those changes by Sharon Murray. Sharon noted that the regulations encompass four documents: zoning, subdivision, floodplain, and telecom, as well as referenced statutory information and a greatly expanded definitions section. Sharon added that because of the aforementioned items, the document was longer, and more user friendly. The adoption process for the regulations was reviewed. Linda noted that the purpose of the hearing was twofold – the amendments to the Town Plan and the proposed zoning regulations.
Linda Baker asked if there were any questions and comments regarding the amendments to the Town Plan. There were none.
Linda Baker noted that before the floor was opened to questions and comments regarding the proposed zoning regulations, she wanted to state that the proposed regulations were written in an endeavor to create regulations that were in the best interests of the Town, that there was no “us versus them” mentality, and the hearing would proceed with mutual respect for all individuals present and giving input. Linda then asked Bolton Valley/Redstone’s representatives if they would allow other folks to give their input before moving on to their lists of concerns. The representatives agreed to do so. The floor was then opened to comments and questions.
Public Comments generated during the hearing:
· Discussion of the differences between permitted vs. conditional use, i.e. gas station.
· VII to Forest District, a 100 acre lot affected, major change. Concern expressed by that landowner of the lowering of the density. Landowner asked to consider 10 – 15 acre minimum lot size. Concerns echoed by another attendee.
· ACT 250 has done/does a good job controlling growth and of review: impacts on roads, schools, drainage. Should be more concerned about the growth in West Bolton, not under ACT 250 review, no control.
· Road standards – define “Class IV Road” in definitions.
· Discussion of private vs. public roads.
· Discussion of the Town taking over private roads. Jerry Mullen, Select Board member stated that the Select Board had a firm policy during the last fifteen years of not accepting any private roads as Town roads.
· A landowner stated that a limit of 10% for driveway slope was ridiculous noting that she had had bypass surgery and runs on a treadmill at 12%.
Input from Bolton Valley/Redstone:
· The MPG Advisory Committee listened attentively to concerns, and the two groups have come closer to a consensus, but it is important for the resort’s hands not to be tied, and to have the flexibility to move forward. Steve Barner noted that he wanted to go on the record stating that compromise works both ways.
· Some amount of development has to occur for the mountain to survive, and the town needs to recognize that; the “core” is ok, but the proposed regulations make it difficult to develop the “Broadway” area.
· Document is more comprehensive than it needs to be, i.e. wastewater, pond construction.
· Duplicates State review, independent review by the Town would be costly, with increased administrative work. Local concerns would be addressed under ACT 250. Margot Pender noted that not all of Bolton is subject to ACT 250 review.
· Still areas of disagreement, and significant concerns, especially: environmental standards, slopes, fragmentation of land, setbacks, road lengths, e.g. 10% slope for driveways not reasonable, 15 – 25% slope limits for building unreasonable. Road limit 1800’ also unreasonable.
· Need flexibility to be successful, for different types of development, including single family/real estate development to support the ski area.
· Redstone’s development vision; Core: a larger hotel base, 100 condo units, RV/RR: 35 lot subdivision (SFD’s), residential estates along Broadway, slopeside at Timberline, Wilderness lifts. 110 – 300 units in the next 10 years.
· Ski area/facilities should be a permitted (vs., conditional) use, could create 15-20 conditional use applications seasonally to do summer projects, too complicated and time consuming a process.
· Conditional uses too restrictive - should be permitted uses with site plan review.
· Master Plan requirement too onerous.
· Limit development along the Access Road to “S curve”, gateway to the resort.
Agenda Item #2– Minutes November 1, 2004
The Commission met briefly with Greg Brown, CCRPC, to review the revised work plan and budget he presented for the FY2005 municipal planning grant. Jim Bralich made the motion to approve the revised work plan and budget as presented by CCRPC. Steve Barner seconded the motion. All were in favor, motion passed. Amy will submit the revised work plan and budget to DHC.
The next scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission will be December 13, 2004,
6 p.m. at Smilie School.
The meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
Clerk, Planning Commission
These minutes are unofficial until accepted.
__________________________ , 2005.
Linda Baker, Chair