Town of Bolton
3045 Theodore Roosevelt Highway
Bolton VT 05676
802-434-5075
Development Review Board members present: Rob Heimbuch, Chair, Mike Rainville, Ken Richardson, Margot Pender
Development Review Board members absent: Susan Vita
Zoning Administrator: Dick Ward
Clerk: Amy Grover
Also present: Tony Barbagallo, Jim Caffry, Matthew Johnson, Pete Fellows, Sarah Borggaard, Judy Fellows, Ted Fellows, Dave Johnson, Wayne Deslauriers, Renata and Bill Banke, Jerry Chabot
1. Wayne Deslauriers/Variance
2. Tony Barbagallo/Appeal
3. Other business or communications
4. Adjournment
Rob Heimbuch called the hearing to order at 7:02 p.m. and swore in all that would be giving testimony. Rob noted an agenda change as Wayne Deslauriers was not yet present, the Barbagallo appeal would be heard first.
Agenda Item #1 – Barbagallo Appeal
This hearing was convened to consider the appeal of Anthony Barbagallo of an administrative decision of the Bolton ZA. The appeal is of a zoning permit and a waste water permit (ZP#04-21 and WW#04-05) issued July 13, 2004 to Matt Johnson of Essex VT, permitting construction of a single family dwelling and sewage disposal system on a property located at 1431 Notch Road.
Tony Barbagallo, Matt Johnson, Jim Caffry, and Ted Fellows appeared before the DRB for the appeal.
Dick Ward provided the Board with a recap:
· Matt Johnson first submitted a plan in October 2003. Matt, Dick, Ted Fellows (Matt’s engineer) and Ernie Christenson (State of VT) met on site, and it was suggested that monitoring be done early in 2004.
· In the spring of 2004, the monitoring was completed, results tabulated and a sewage treatment plan, located at the top of the challenging property was submitted to the Town.
· Tony Barbagallo requested being kept in the loop regarding permitting, which was done by Dick.
· The Town of Bolton hired an independent engineer, Mike Wiessel to review the plan. Mike sent a letter to Dick, stating that it was a viable plan. Based on that letter, Dick issued the building and waste water permits to Matt Johnson. At the time, no-one realized that Tony Barbagallo and Mike were acquainted, and Mike did not know that Tony was the abutter to the Johnson property.
· Tony Barbagallo and Mike Wiessel subsequently realized that Mike was reviewing the adjacent property’s sewage plan, had conversations regarding that plan, and based on those conversations, a second letter from Mike sent to Dick outlining problems with the sewage design plan.
· Tony Barbagallo filed an appeal to permits ZP#04-21 and WW#04-05.
· The sewage permit WW#04-05 was revoked, and a new plan by Ted Fellows, located at the bottom of the property, was submitted to the Town, which was reviewed, signed off on by the Town’s engineer, and a new waste water permit WW#04-08 was issued.
· The school bus turnaround on Matt Johnson’s property was an issue. The previous owner did not have a formal agreement with the Town, rather a handshake agreement. Matt noted that he was willing to work on providing a permanent easement to the Town. Dick noted that this issue had nothing to do with the zoning and planning issues, or the permits, which were still standing.
· Dick noted that there was not an avenue in the regulations for Tony Barbagallo to appeal the sewage permit, which Tony had to appeal the zoning permit to which the sewage permit was attached.
Jim Caffry, Matt Johnson’s attorney stated that Tony Barbagallo filed his appeal on 7/27/04, and that the 2nd permit was issued on 8/10/04, and had been signed off on by the Town’s engineer. Jim stated that the 2nd permit was not being appealed, that legally that permit was not before the DRB. Jim added that there would have to be a second written notice of appeal by Tony, for the 2nd permit. He added that if the school bus turnaround was the issue that was not a legitimate basis to appeal the permit.
Ken Richardson asked Tony Barbagallo what his issues were with the permits. Tony stated that he had initial concerns, which is why he met with Dick, and found that there was not an appeal process for anyone other than the applicant (regarding sewage), so he appealed the zoning permit and added the sewage treatment permit too. When the original sewage permit was revoked, Tony stated he had asked Dick to revoke the zoning permit also. Tony stated that he disagreed with Jim Caffry that there was no claim on the 2nd permit, as the only avenue to appeal was the zoning permit, which still stood. He added that the 2nd design, located at the bottom of the property needed to be tweaked to function correctly as it involved 100’ vertical change, 750’ from the proposed residence, and was therefore pressurized. Tony stated that he did also have concerns with the school bus turnaround issue.
Rob Heimbuch asked Tony Barbagallo for details concerning his issues with the permits. Tony provided the MLS listing for the Johnson property to the DRB. He stated that it was noted on the listing that the soils were not suitable for sewage. He added that he himself had been hoping to buy the property, but that the price tag of 20K was too much for a recreational piece of property. Tony added that the current owner had purchased the property with the knowledge that it was not a developable lot. Jim Caffry added that the MLS information had dubious value. Tony stated that in looking at the land use planning picture he didn’t really want to see a house built on a small, substandard lot that would require a bridge and a sewage pipe over the stream. Ken Richardson asked if Tony had just said he would prefer not to see a house there. Tony replied yes.
Tony then began to provide the DRB with a handout containing an overview of the design. Dick stopped the distribution stating that it was not appropriate testimony, as one engineer could not be pitted against another.
Ken Richardson asked Matt Johnson what made him believe that the lot was developable. Matt stated that he had had an engineer complete perk tests in various areas on the lot before he had purchased it.
Mike Rainville asked who had shouldered the cost burden of the two reviews. Dick noted that Matt Johnson had paid for the first review, and that the Town had paid for the second review.
Mike Rainville asked if the second plan would be more expensive to construct. Matt Johnson replied yes, that though it was better plan, it was located at the bottom of the property, requiring trees to be cut and a haul road constructed. Matt added that construction would be easier if he had an easement from Tony Barbagallo to use Tony’s road to reach the bottom of his lot. Tony noted that issue could still be discussed. Tony added that the second plan was a conventional design, not taking into account that pressure which would increase the 40gals/minute to 80 gals/minute, sufficient to blow the cover off the distribution box. Rob Heimbuch stated that a P.E. (Ted Fellows) had stamped the plan, that the plan was approved and accepted, and that if there proved to be a problem with the plan, that the P.E. was liable. Ted Fellows stated that all of the issues with the plan had been addressed.
Rob Heimbuch asked if there were any other abutting property owners in the audience. There were not, it was found that the remainder of the audience were Matt’s friends and family from Essex there to support Matt.
Rob Heimbuch noted that there was nothing non-conforming about the lot, or the plans.
Margot Pender asked what the slope percent of the lot was. Matt Johnson stated it was 20% before the site work would be done. Tony Barbagallo stated he believed it to be closer to 30%. Ted Fellows noted that there were no slope requirements/maximums, and that the slope varied between 5% – 30 % in the building areas.
Dick Ward noted that with current land costs, unique parcels were going to be found by creative buyers, like Matt, who would find professionals ready for the challenge of drafting plans for theses unique lots.
Mike Rainville asked what the next step in the legal process would be. Dick stated that if the DRB supported Tony, Matt had the option of appealing the Court. If the DRB supported Matt, Tony had the option of appealing the Court.
Mike Rainville asked Tony Barbagallo if Mike Wiessel had looked at his points regarding the second plan. Tony replied no. Ted Fellows stated that he had.
Rob Heimbuch asked if there were any other questions or comments. There were none. Rob called for a motion.
Ken Richardson made the motion to approve the permits, ZP#04-21 and WW#04-08, as issued by the Bolton ZA to Matt Johnson.
Mike Rainville seconded the motion.
.
All were in favor, motion passed.
Agenda Item # 2– Delauriers Variance
This hearing was convened to consider the request of Wayne Deslauriers seeking a variance from Section 2, subsection D, Dimensional Requirements, requesting permission to extend the footprint of an existing garage to 26’ x 30’, within 19’ of the side yard (minimum required 25’). Property is located at 30 Champ Lane, Tax Map 03, VI District.
Wayne Deslauriers appeared on behalf of the application.
Rob Heimbuch swore in Mr. Deslauriers.
Dick Ward stated that this was a rescheduled hearing, as there had been no quorum of the DRB on 8/18/04; the hearing was tabled until the next available date. Dick added that the ad joiners, Mark and Tina Atwood had told Dick they had no issue with the proposed construction.
Rob Heimbuch asked Wayne Deslauriers for information regarding his request.
Wayne Deslauriers, stated that the DRB could see on the sketch that the proposed 2 car garage would extend 6’ into the required setback. Wayne noted that the existing 1 car garage had been demolished leaving just the slab. He noted that structures including the swimming pool, and a row of 35’ fir trees which he did not want to cut down prevented him from extending the garage in any other direction to stay in compliance.
Rob Heimbuch asked Wayne Deslauriers to show the DRB where the structures, trees, and the Atwoods buildings were.
Margot Pender asked if the footprint of the garage was being increased. Wayne replied yes, but that it would remain as one story with the same driveway.
Mike Rainville asked if there would be any exterior lighting, or if the use would be for a business. Wayne replied no to both questions.
Rob Heimbuch asked if there were any other questions or comments. There were none. Rob called for a motion.
Ken Richardson made the motion to approve the request for a variance by Wayne Deslauriers seeking to extend the footprint of an existing garage to within 19’ of the side yard.
Margot Pender seconded the motion.
All were in favor, motion passed.
Agenda Item #3 – Other business or communications
Rob Heimbuch provided a letter of resignation to the DRB from Greg Swan. The letter noted that Greg had moved to Waterbury, hence his resignation.
The DRB congratulated Margot Pender on her appointment to the DRB, filling the seat vacated by Greg Swan. The Select Board appointed Margot to the DRB at their 9/13/04 meeting.
Rob Heimbuch introduced Jerry Chabot who had attended the hearing. Jerry stated that he was interested in serving as an alternate to the DRB and provided the DRB with information about himself. Dick Ward noted that his information would be forwarded to the Select Board, who would consider his appointment as an alternate and notify him regarding his appointment.
Agenda Item #4 – Adjournment
The hearing was adjourned at 8:02 p.m.
Amy Grover
Clerk, Development Review Board
These minutes are unofficial until accepted.
These minutes were read and accepted by the Development Review Board on
________________________ , 2004
_________________________________
Rob Heimbuch, Chair