Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Natural Resources Committee - 10/30/2019 - Special Meeting NRC Special Meeting Minutes 10/30/19 6:30 pm Attending: David Crawford, Lisa Yankowski (clerk), Ray Gonda, Tim Hess, Duncan Murdoch, Jean Chaulot. Missing: Linda Chiasson, Laura Williams & Ashley Parker Public: Alyson Chalnick, from the Dorset Meadows Developer Group- Peter Kahn, Bryan Currier, Brett Bartlett, Dean Bartlett 1) David reviewed emergency procedures. 2) Additions to the agenda. a. Letter from Ray Gonda to Marla Keene regarding reasons to oppose the proposed Dorset Meadows Development. b. Statement from Dorset Meadows requesting Ray to step away from the discussions tonight due to a conflict of interest. Allyson is attending as a private citizen and not a member of the NRC committee. c. Ray declined to recuse himself per discussion with city attorney Andrew Bolduc, that there is no conflict of interest. Peter’s opposition is due to Ray’s adamantly & publicly stating his opposition to the proposed Dorset Meadows development and that he is now trying to use the committee to further bring forth these feelings. i. Ray’s rebuttal – “The comments were made when he was not a member of the NRC but a private citizen with no financial investment in the development- no conflict.” ii. Lisa then asked if her statement in front of the city council after a presentation by the Open Space Group was a conflict of interest. It is not. Tim wondered if it was a conflict for Ray to participate in the evening’s discussions if he did not participate in any votes. David explain that Ray could cause a mis-vote if we voted on his letter. 6:30 pm the committee decide to proceed with the meeting. 3) No public comments. 4) Chairs comments- David wanted to remind everyone that despite what we decide or don’t decide to present to the DRB- we must remain respectful and recognize all points and thoughts. He is also concerned that the newest member s of the committee may not have been completely presented with the NRC’s prior information and requests regarding the Dorset Meadows plans. a. The Dorset Meadows Group gave us the presentation they had given the group previously. i. Ray asked us to refer to his letter to the DRB. (This is the letter he composed and was to, possibly, be voted on tonight. There was a moratorium in the city- land was being developed too fast without enough thought as to the overall consequences. Decisions were being done piecemeal- as a new project came to the city for approval. This is why we now have Interim Zoning in place. The Dorset Meadows plans were being considered before IZ started.) He explained why he feels where the buildings will be not a good plan. One of the areas would fragment space around the great swamp and affect the wildlife corridor. ii. Tim asked if the plans had changed due to comments. David answered that the NRC had made recommendations the DRB had not considered. Lisa and Duncan had expressed concerns about a preserving connectivity, a culvert and any guard rails that might impede wildlife movement. This was considered. They still need to go before Act 250 on the state level. b. Paul, (Dorset Meadows group) said they wanted to come tonight because they were feeling there had been a change in the feelings coming from the NRC. They wanted to present some of the history leading up to today. i. Before 2006, the South East Quadrant (SEQ), was zoned as a single area. 2004 Arrowwood did a study of the natural resources in the SEQ. The report led to zoning changes, took 50% of the area off from being developed and instilled a 300ft buffer around the great swamp. TDRs were created to protect the property owners in the SEQ. c. DM presented their plans to the city who required certain changes. Staff, Public Works, Rec Path, Storm Water …….. all had suggestions they would like to see, including the NRC. The DRB had other changes and preliminary plat approval was received. The developers have also met with the state, the Army Corp of Engineers and had archeological studies done. The approval meets the Comprehensive Plan goals. d. DM wanted to convey that the area for development is only part of the whole parcel that can be developed. A large part cannot be developed. They have done everything and felt Ray’s letter follows too closely to the views of the group suing to prevent the development. They feel they are being bullied by a group who have their large homes and have stated they will keep filing suits because of deep pockets. They also felt they were being ambushed by the NRC. 1. Allyson to offense at this comment and reiterated that she had moved here from Maryland and bought a house that was already built. 2. Ray asked how many people were on the NRC previously. We believe 5 or 6. David, Lisa & Duncan were only the NRC originally. David is concerned with how we handle the proposed letter to the DRB. The wording makes it sound like the NRC is stating opposition to the development. How will the group be perceived on future projects. We have a passion towards natural resources that needs to be preserved. Ray disagrees with the “opposition against”. We want to keep being able to provide feedback and suggestions to protect natural resources on future projects. Duncan acknowledged that some of our suggestions did result in changes to the DM plans. Ray moved we vote on the letter as policy with amendments Duncan questioned the “no amendments”. But Ray felt there were no needed changes. Duncan motioned to continue the meeting to 8:15pm, Jean 2nd. 6 voted aye- approved. Jean felt the letter’s first sentence was brutal and many changes had been made to the approved plans and perhaps we needed to do more exploration. Tim asked if the city wants the opinion or statements from any of the other committees. The letter is trying to set policy. Per Ray- our Mission Statement is to sustain….. advise……… ADVISE is the keyword. Note: most departments and committees don’t actually state approval of a project. They look at a project, comment and make suggestions. The DRB is the final arbitrator. The developer feels they will have final plat approval within 2 meetings with the DRB. Ray is afraid they will be approved before the NRC can do any further exploration DM still needs Act 250 approval and some of the NRC members wish to become involved in the process. This would have to be allowed by the city. Jean motioned and volunteered to work with the city at the Act 250 hearing so the NRC will have a voice. Lisa 2nd. 5- yeah Ray abstained. Discussion of the letter is being left. Ray would like the group at the DRB meeting 11/5. Tim would like a document of what was done, results, discussions on this project- for our files. What happened, what didn’t happen. Lisa motioned to adjourn at 8:30pm, Tim 2nd. 5 ayes- Ray abstained.