Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-83-0000 - Decision - 0911 Dorset StreetSepterriber 8, 1983 Sidel and Associates P.O. BOX 115 Waitsfield, Vermont 05673 Dear Peter: Be advised that on Auqust 9, 1983 the Indian Creek development was granted approval to amend the original subdivision plan to include tennis courts and a swiming pool_. A copy of the approval imtion is enclosed. Please note the minor changes required and also the fact that a perforffence bond is required before construction of the facilities. If you have any questions please don't hesitate to call. Very truly, Richard ward, Zoning Acbtinistrative Officer RW/mcq 1 Encl PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 6, 1983 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, September 6, 1983 at 7:30 pm in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present Sidney Poger, Chairman; Mary -Barbara Maher, Peter Jacob, Judy Hurd, John Belter, William Burgess Member Absent George Mona Others Present Richard Ward, acting City Planner; Ruth Poger, The Other Paper; Don Melvin, Free Press; Stephen Page, Peter Sidel, Mike Lawrence, Roger Dickinson, Martin Schmidt, Louise Larocque, Warren Lyon, James Ewing, David & Kathleen Collette, Len Rubin, Joyce Collette, Robert Martineau, Kathy Ryan, Ed Smith, Frank Murray, Bruce Mozhdehi, Duncan Case, David Minnich, Assistant City Manager; J. Pat Brennan, Gary Farrell, Frank Lidral, Colin Lindburg, Doug Fitzpatrick, Daniel O'Brien, Dave Desautels Minutes of August 9, and August 16, 1983 On page 4 of the August 9 minutes, the word "property" in the fourth.line of the third paragraph should be "properly". Mrs. Maher moved to approve the August 9, 1983 minutes as corrected and Mr. Jacob seconded the motion, which carried with all voting aye. Mr. Jacob moved to approve the minutes of August 16, 1983 and Mrs. Maher seconded the motion. All voted. in favor. Continuation of discussion on location of swimming pool for Indian Creek development Mr. Sidel said he had walked the area with Mike Lawrence of Site Concerns. There are,,about 8 units which have a direct view of the area containing the pool and tennis courts. Site Concerns has been asked to screen the area, but also to provide something which would enhance the area. To this end, they have planned for vegetation which will change color during the summer. Given the height of the nearby Ridgewood buildings, it will be several years before the vegetation to be planted will block their view of this area. Mr. Sidel said that Frank Murray, who represents Ridgewood, had passed on some concerns of Terry Boyle, a landscape architect. Mr. Boyle suggested replacing the red maple trees planned with ash trees, which grow better in clay soil and survive better. He also mentioned moving the screening toward Ridgewood up the slope to gain some height and Mr. Sidel had no problem with doing that. Mr. Boyle also mentioned adding some fill to bring the height up, but Mr. Sidel said that would be expensive and this landscaping was already costly. Mr. Mike Lawrence said they would like to plant the area in such a way as to keep the natural feeling and yet still screen the area. He said there would be no problem moving the vegetation up on the slopes to gain height. Total cost for all the landscaping shown on the plan was S13,000. Mr. Jacob asked about pool lighting and was told that all that was planned was one bulb in the pool for safety reasons. Mr. Martineau said he was a resident of Indian Creek and that he and others living in the development supported the request for a pool. He listed the names of about 10 other residents of the area, for whom he said he spoke. 2. PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 6, 1983 Mr. Murray, representing Ridgewood, said they did not oppose the pool at all - all they oppose is the -proposed location and they want to retain their rights to make an appeal from the Commission's decision to the courts. He felt a lot of problems could have beenavoidedif the developerhadearlier proposed this development as Indian Creek instead of Ridgewood phase III. He said that a concern at the last meeting had:been the location of a poolhouse and parking. He wanted to be -sure the parking"area was deleted from the pool area. He said Mr. Boyle had felt that the location of the entrance to the pool and tennis courts might encourage people to drive there and he suggested access from the north be provided. Mr..Murray did not want pool lighting which would encourage people to use the pool after dark. He wondered how effective the plantings would be and Mr. Sidel said someone -from Ridgewood could look from the decks when the plantings areL set in. 'Mr.,Poger said the developer could call the neighbors when he gets ready to do the planting. Mr. Murray wanted assurance not only that the plantings would go in, but also that they would go in by a specific time in the future. Mr. Sidel said he would like to phase in the planting behind the pool, which will not affect Ridgewood, but the other plantings will go in as soon as possible. They should go in in the spring. Mr. Poger suggested a date of before August 1, which should give the developer -plenty of time. -Mr. Murray asked that the developer report to the board and also inform the Ridgewood Association president when the plantings are in, so everyone can be sure they were done as planned. Mr. Sidel noted that city regulations covered areas like that. Mr. Murray mentioned the monuments to be set and was told the person who was going to do that had been very busy lately and they hoped to have it done by the end of the week. Mr. Poger said no building permits should be issued until that is done. Mrs. Maher moved.that the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the landscaping plan as presented by Site Concerns for the Indian Creek development with the understanding that 'a bond°of $13,000 be posted and that minor shifts in location and kind of trees as shown on the plan dated August 26, 1983 will be allowed in accordance with the requests from the residents of Ridgewood a from the walkin; path shall be on the north side of the development. Mr. Jacob.; seconded the motion. Mr. Sidel noted that if the pool were not allowed due to court action or other procedural problems, he would not want to put in such extensive landscaping. Mr. Poger said if that were the case next year, he could come to the board and request an extension. Since the tennis courts are already approved, Mr. Burgess noted that it was a question of having the pool and screening or nothing. No landscaping is required around the tennis courts. An audience member asked -about the parking area near the tennis courts and Mr. Sidel said that had been deleted and it would not go in. Mr. Poger noted that it was the Commission's intention to have two entrances to the area - one from the road and one from the path. The motion carried with all voting aye.