Development Review Board                          Wednesday, April 6, 2011


MARK AUDETTE Administative Review for a 2-lot Subdivision on Cherrierville Rd.


Members Present: J. Heyer, M. Casey, B. Murphy, C. Rainville

Alternates Present: L. Hayes

Public Present: Skip Taylor, ZA; Mark Audette, Dylan Palmer, William Monahan (representing Lisa Monahan), Dale Ritter.


7 PM: The pubic notice was read, introductions made, and all parties were sworn in.  Skip explained that the 5.27-acre lot is somewhat irregularly shaped.  The proposed new lot (Lot 3A) will also be irregularly shaped.  The property in 2004 was approved as a PUD from an original 44 acres.  At that time no restrictions were placed on further development.   Skip said the project meets density calculations and dimensional requirements.  He recommended the subdivision be approved.


Skip had concerns that one abutter (Ben Palmer) was not notified.  The applicant had not supplied all names of abutters.  J. Heyer stated that Ben Palmer should be allowed to come in to be heard by the board.


Questions from Board Members:


            M. Casey asked about ownership of  Cedar Rd.  B. Murphy asked about the distance of the proposed             driveway on Lot 3A from Cedar Rd.  Cedar Rd. was considered a driveway in accordance to the             Subdivision Bylaws in 2004.  She suggested moving the driveway and the proposed building envelope             to avoid the potential for a non-conforming structure should Cedar Rd. ever be updated to a road. There                  was discussion regarding the surveyor’s signature on a survey if the survey is not ‘final’.  Skip will       check into this with the Vermont League of Cities and Towns.   There was discussion regarding a             ditch across Mr. Audette’s property.  Mr. Audette dug the ditch to drain excess water from his property.              B. Murphy asked if there was a wetlands delineation on his property? No.


Meeting open to public input:


            Dale Ritter had concerns that Mr. Audette’s property was part of the original PUD with frontage on        Cedar Rd. and that any future construction should be consistent with the other homes that have access to             Cedar Rd.  He is concerned about property values and would like any new home to be in the same             character as the rest of the homes.  B. Murphy asked if there were any covenants as to home quality or             type?  No., only on the maintenance of the road.  Skip explained that the only restrictions on the             property were by the state (re: septic and well) and that the Town does not specify a house’s style or             standard.   The back part of the proposed Lot 3A borders Mr. Ritter’s property.  He would like some             consideration to leave the back part of Lot 3A as it is.   The area is wet and is outside the building             envelope but could have a shed.  Does Fairfax have the authority to prevent this? No.  Mr. Ritter             disagreed and asked the Town to consider this.


            William Monahan stated that he was told that the development on the lots was complete and that no other homes would be built.  He is against any further construction on proposed Lot 3A.  Another home    would change the character of the area.  He also commented on the “significant amount of water” on             Cedar Rd. across the front of his property.







            Dylan  Palmer stated his concerns about power and utilities to his lot.  He felt the underground utilities on the survey were not accurate.  


Skip said that Lots 1,2,5 and 6 were served by a utility easement on Lot 4.  Lot 3 does not have any easements although there are underground lines on the survey.  B. Murphy requested additional information from the power company regarding easements and how they might affect the density calculations.


8:15 PM – B. Murphy moved to recess the hearing until Wednesday, April 20, 2011 at 8PM; M. Casey 2nd.  All in favor.



Respectfully submitted,


Martha Varney, Planning and Zoning Assistant



Approved: _________________________________    Date: ________________________________

                       For the Development Review Board




These minutes are unofficial until approved at the next regularly scheduled meeting.  All motions were unanimously approved unless otherwise indicated.