Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-10-14 - PB TOWN OF ULYSSES PLANNING BOARD 10/14/04 Approved August 18, 2005 Present : John Wertis , Chairman, Planning Board Members Margot Chiuten, Rose Hilbert, David Means, Robin Carlisle Peck, Secretary. Excused : Lorren Hammond and Rod Porter. David. Tyler arrived at 7 : 40 pm . Chairman Wertis called the meeting to order at 7 : 30 pm . A quorum is present at the meeting. Introduction to Secretary Robin Carlisle Peck was introduced to members ; she has had prior experience with the Town of Enfield Planning Board as well as various clerical and record keeping experiences . Minutes Two sets of minutes needed to be approved. Mr. Wertis reminded the group that the planning board was legally required to differentiate between excused vs . unexcused absence . 1 . Legal requirement of 09/09/04 absence of Ms . Hilbert lacked the designation . Ms . Hilbert said she had informed Mr. Wertis that due to conflict she would be unable to attend the next meeting; however if quorum was present take actions as appropriate . Correction to note Ms . Hilbert was an excused absence for meeting of 09/09/04. 2 . Minutes of September 23 , 2004 meeting. All members had received and reviewed minutes . Minutes did not indicate who made motion to approve minutes . Correction to note Mr. Means made motion to approve minutes of previous meeting, Ms Chiuten seconded. Motion made by Mr. Tyler to accept minutes with corrections, Mr. Means seconded . Ms Chiuten Aye Ms Hilbert Aye Mr. Means Aye Mr. Tyler Aye Mr. Wertis Aye Adopted . Review of Design Standards Mr. Wertis stated the focus of this meeting is to be Design Standards . Mr. Alex Rachun has suggested the Planning Board review the Design Standards . Clarification of the town codes compared to the levels of State and Federal as the minimum to build on was given by Ms Chiuten/Mr. Tyler. Mr. Rachun ' s concerns are he would prefer the items be in quantitative units as compared to subjective units . Mr. Wertis stated when we look at our Standards sound and lighting are quantifiable but many others are more aesthetic . a I Planning Board Meeting 3 10/ 14/2004 16.2 .3-Odors Upon review the term "Objectionable" is used. Discussion led to believe that sewage would be found to be objectionable but what other items would be was difficult to ascertain within this area. Definitive terms need to be found to enforce this ordinance. No recommendations were made. 16.4.2-Off Premises Signs Discussion of clarified where off premise can be located. Some members expressed concern that agricultural and residential districts would have signs to large . It was eventually understood that the signs ( 12 ' x12 ' ) are limited to light industry areas . No recommendations were made. 16.4.3-Business Directional Signs Discussions regarding what signs are used for. Mr. Tyler suggested advertising tend to be large whereas information tend to be small . He referenced information signs around Vermont were uniform and consistent ; they are generally small but are adequate . Current Ulysses regulation states 9 square feet, vote was taken to change this to 6 as follows : Ms Chiuten Nay Ms Hilbert Aye Mr. Means Aye Mr. Tyler Aye Mr. Wertis Nay Adopted . Change recommended by the Board : 1 . no business directional sign shall exceed six (6) square feet in area, nor exceed six (6) square feet in height; As it was time to adjourn, the group agreed to stop review of Design Standards . Mr. Wertis stated he would contact Mr. Rachun and Mr. Frantz to coordinate them attending the next meeting. To enable the Board to work through the Design Standards it was decided to meet in two weeks, next meeting to be held October 28th, 2004 . Mr. Wertis will contact all members if this can be scheduled. Ms . Hilbert explained that November thru March would be difficult for her to meet on Thursday evening. Other members indicated Tuesday evening would be an alternative evening; Mr. Wertis will approach the absent members to change the meetings to Tuesday evening. Motion to adjourn by Ms Hilbert, seconded by Mr. Means . Approved unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9 : 30 pm Respectfully submitted, Robin Carlisle Peck RCP/rcp Planning Board Meeting 2 10/ 14/2004 Ms . Chiuten stated that to lessen the subjective aspects, i . e . not to bright vs . levels of brightness enables enforcement of the regulations . Her general practice is to follow the most stringent standard thus all codes are incorporated including ADA standards . Mr. Rachun informed Mr. Wertis he goes to the codebooks and uses the other books if referenced foi; further information. Mr. Tyler stated there are different levels of regulation the codes books are minimums you have to d'o regardless ; you can surpass these with zoning . Mr. Wertis stated Mr. Rachun would like to have our Design Standards reference outside sources if easily identifiable . Mr. Tyler stated this would enable Mr. Rachun to have reference to provide basis when enforcing regulations . Mr. Means stated one reference for each standard would be sufficient for the Design Standards . Ms . Chiuten stated the difference between Design Standard and the code is the Design Standard is the best practices of the field that have been established. Upon review; discussion as to where the Standards specifically came from was addressed, Mr. Wertis sated George Frantz composed the document. Planning Board is sympathetic to the Zoning issues ; however need more direct input as to the references used to move forward. Members felt it would be advantageous to have Mr. Frantz and Mr. Rachun attend a meeting to discuss the specific reference they used in composing the document. However, the members chose to use the time remaining to review the document and make recommendations if any items stood out demanding change . Review/Recommendations : 16. 2 . 2-Noise Discussion questioned the hours, levels , not clear as to the aspects of measurable noise levels ; also what is objectionable to one person may not be objectionable to another. Mr. Wertis commented that sound is not persistent, it may stop/start and you have to catch it when it happens . Or it may be a one-time pain in the neck like your neighbor running a chainsaw at Sam Sunday morning, thus difficult to establish level consistently. Ms . Hilbert stated that the difference of 55 decibels to 65 decibels within a few minutes is not definitive ; not having reference to understand the levels the regulation is not easily understood . Ms . Chiuten commented that most municipalities are not as specific they state constructionjnoise vs . specific decibel levels . Mr. Means explained that a machine shop in a neighborhood operating all day would be disruptive. Ms . Hilbert stated another problem would be the time ; a circular saw being operated next to a Bed & Breakfast at lam would be disruptive to her, but may not be to another person. Ms . Hilbert questioned barking dogs , kennels being in violation of this ordinance, yet they are allowed in the agricultural component. Mr. Wertis stated these types of activities need to be reviewed but do we need more expertise, and should we have the experts assist us or have the experts review it . No recommendations were made.