SOUTH HERO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MINUTES August 23, 2023
Members Present: Tim Maxham (Chair); Doug Patterson (Vice-Chair); Mike Welch; Jim Brightwell; Liza Kilcoyne; Nate Hayward; Ellie Reid (Alternate).
Others Present: Nancy McLure (via Zoom); Tim Mullen (via Zoom); Debra and Victor Tirrito; Joshua Nase; Don Bedard; John and Irene Wright; Skip and Bev Blakely; Ray Allen; Andy Allen; Samantha Chagnon; Martha Taylor-Varney (ZA).
7:00PM – T. Maxham called the meeting to order.
Changes to the Agenda
There were none.
Public Input
There was none.
Conditional Use and Site Plan Review for Indoor and Outdoor Seasonal Storage at 110 and 111 South St. – Allenholm Farm (24-08-SS110)
- Maxham recused himself. Vice-Chair D. Patterson chaired the hearing. The warning was read and interested persons were sworn in.
Ray C. Allen presented to the Board. He explained that he is the legal guardian of his father, Ray W. Allen and oversees Allenholm Farm. He told the Board that the farm needs to diversify during the winter months when the farm does not produce income. He had been asked about outdoor storage of boats and RV’s during the off-season and is proposing a field on the east side of South St., south of the farm store. The soil in this field is poor for agriculture use and tends to be wet at times, so would not be good for heavy vehicles. He is proposing parking boats and campers in this field in a 160’ x 300’ section sitting back 120 feet from the road. There is a line of trees on the south side to provide screening from the south. An area on the west side of the road, between the barns and the Parent/Child Center would be proposed for heavier vehicles, as the ground here is more solid. Indoor storage of cars and motorcycles will be in the north barn, with an entrance via a new garage door on the north end. There will be no power here except for lights. Batteries in the indoor storage will be disconnected. Storage will be available beginning in October and vehicles must be removed from all locations by the end of April/beginning of May. This storage will help generate needed cash flow for the farm in the winter months.
Other than the farm structures and family homes, the open property and orchards on the west side of South St. is in the Land Trust. The 17 acres on the east side of South St., including the farm store, the Hive restaurant, and the land, is not in the Trust. Ray explained that he does not want to sell off any of this property and is working to restructure the farm’s’ finances.
Questions form Board Members
- Brightwell asked about additional screening. Would it be a hardship to add screening to the parking field on the east side of the road? Ray responded that he preferred to keep it open for security and to allow for a parking agreement he has with Local Motion during the summer. A hedgerow would diminish security. Any other vegetation screening will just be eaten by the deer.
- Kilcoyne asked about security. There is a streetlight in front of the Parent/Child Center and chains will be across the entrances. An overhead door will be added on the south end of the barn of the indoor storage.
- Hayward asked for clarification on the date of operation. October to May.
- Patterson – how many units can be stored? About 18 in the barn. The number in the outdoor area depends on the size of the vehicle. Allenholm will be parking the vehicles there, using their own equipment, to create order and prevent damage to other vehicles.
Andy Allen stressed that the farm would always be an orchard first. Heavier vehicles would be in the small area between the barns and the Parent/Child Center, where the ground is more solid. This would not include construction equipment. The off-season storage was just for additional needed income to prevent having to sell property that is not in the Land Trust.
Questions from the Public
Vic Tirrito (134 South St.) asked if approving outdoor storage would set a precedent and wanted to know how the Board would feel about that. He said that an attorney would interpret it that way.
Skip Blakely (128 South St.) said that he thinks Allenholm could find other ways to raise funds. What would be the charge for storage? (Ray — $75-85/month). He was concerned about the proposed storage area between the farm buildings and the Parent/Child Center. He thinks that location would be a detriment. Ray responded that if this location is not approved, he would be okay with that, and will park his own vehicles there instead. Mr. Blakely said the east side of the road is wet and the trees on the south side of the field would not have enough screening. Are there other locations that are not in the Land Trust? He is in favor of doing something, but this isn’t the right one. Ray responded that the field does not have good agriculture soils, so has no other uses for them besides parking. He needs ideas to be able to pay on loans. This would be a way to generate funds with little investment.
Debra Tirrito was concerned about bicycles and the increase in traffic. Ray responded that the increase will be only during short times in the fall and spring as vehicles arrive and leave. There will be no constant flow of traffic. The bike ferry closes in mid-October and doesn’t re-open until Memorial Day.
Irene Wright (124 South St.) said she was sympathetic to Allenholm’s needs but does not believe there is enough screening for the field on the east side of the road. Is there any way to relocate out of sight? It would be better for the community. Ray responded that all other out-of-sight areas are in the Land Trust and are being utilized for agriculture. The proposed outdoor area is not good for any other use. During AppleFest, 200 to 300 cars would be parked in that field.
Samantha Chagnon said she was surprised at the feedback from neighbors of Allenholm. How does this proposal impact them? The location in the field is blocked from their homes’ view by trees on the south end of the field. She believes in landowners’ rights and much of this would be in the dead of winter. Allenholm is trying to find creative ways to make money. She wants to see the community support a local farmer during the winter. They need creative ideas of the land could become development that no one wants.
Debra Tirrito asked if approval of this proposal would be permanent. South St. is a beautiful road and trailers would make it look horrible.
Joshua Nase said that this is what Conditional Use review is made for. Allenholm is not asking for a lot, and this is a small price to pay to save an historic barn. It can be done well for a limited period of time.
Bev Blakely – What is the timeframe? Will it eventually be expanded? Ray responded that he does not want to have the storage year-round. He said they keep some apples in refrigeration for wholesale later in the winter, but they have no income to pay the refrigeration costs. Bev Blakely said she was in favor of the indoor storage proposal, but not the outdoor.
Andy Allen – Could we park the same number of our own vehicles and trailers in the field? M. Taylor-Varney said yes.
Victor Tirrito said he had mixed emotions. He was disappointed and surprised that this was needed to keep the farm going. He was it would be disappointing to have no Allenholm. Ray responded that they were doing whatever they could.
Bev Blakely – could Christmas trees go in the field? No, the deer would damage them, and he does not want to have to build a large fence to protect them.
Victor Tirrito – will the trailers be on blocks? The blocks will prevent them from sinking in and will be removed in the spring.
Tim Maxham said that the number of vehicles had not been proposed by Allenholm. The Town’s parking dimensions are 9’x20’. He calculated 30 spaces in each row. Limit it to 60 spaces? Ray said that the vehicle sizes will vary and the number that can be stored will depend on that. He estimated 3 rows of vehicles parked 3 deep. He will be placing them.
Continued Questions from the Board
- Kilcoyne – are there any ideas for screening from the street? Any landscaping? Ray responded that having no screening would deter break-ins. Would Allenholm be open to limiting the number of stored vehicles during the first year? Ray responded that it is not a goal to have parking up to the road. He would agree to having nothing between the barns and the daycare center on the west side of the road except for Allenholm trailers. He does not want mas parking.
- Hayward asked how limiting the number of vehicles in the field would dictate what is seen from the road. The designated area is 300’x160’.
- Patterson asked for a motion for waivers on the site plan. L. Kilcoyne moved to waive the site plan requirement to show the boundaries of the Allenholm property, a designated parking layout ih the east field, and contours on the site plan; N. Hayward second. All in favor.
8:16PM – D. Patterson closed the hearing. T. Maxham rejoined the Board.
Request for Setback Waiver in the Shoreland Zoning District at 59 Kibbe Farm Rd. – Cedar Ledge Builders/Dan and Beth Farr (24-07-KF059)
8:20PM – T. Maxham opened the hearing. The warning was read, and Joshua Nase was sworn in. Josh Nase presented the proposal to the Board for owners Dan and Beth Farr.
Josh told the Board that Dan and Beth Farr own 2 camps on Kibbe Farm Rd. – KF057 and KF059. They purchased KF059 two years ago and allowed the previous owners to remain there rent-free until they were unable to continue coming. This is a steep lot sloping from Kibbe Farm Rd. at the top down to the lake and is only 60 feet wide. The Farr’s want to keep the 2BR, 2-story camp for use by extended family and asked Cedar Ledge to evaluate. Josh said that Cedar Ledge recommended a teardown rather than a renovation due to the condition of the structure. The current wastewater is a cesspool pit in the ground, 80 feet from the lake, and will be replaced by a new year-round mound system between the road and the house (already permitted by the State). The number of bedrooms will remain the same. Retaining walls will be added to reduce erosion and protect the new structure. The current cedar stump and concrete block support will be replaced by a concrete foundation. Exterior stairs accessing the second floor in the current structure ill be moved indoors. Most of the replacement structure will be in the same footprint as the current one, while filling in a few jogs and making the rooflines more uniform. By raising the roofline, the replacement structure will be able to have full 8-ft. ceilings on both floors. The new structure will fill a space between the main structure and a small room that is attached to an existing deck. The deck space will become an enclosed porch with a rooftop deck above. The net expansion of the footprint will be 60.9sf. The existing 2nd-floor area is 254sf. The proposed expansion of the second floor is 380sf, plus 237sf for the proposed rooftop deck.
The existing footprint extends 5” onto the Farr property at 57 Kibbe Farm Rd. The proposed replacement will retreat to the boundary of KF059 lot, reducing the degree of non-conformity. The McLure home at 61 Kibbe Farm Rd. is slightly on the KF059 lot and the Farr’s have agreed that it can remain. The replacement structure will be more functional and cost-effective. It will be a full-size height with an increase in roof pitch. The added eight will help with water runoff and allow for 8-ft. ceilings. A bulkhead on the lake side (front) of the house will add to the footprint in the non-conforming space but allow access to the basement. The current and proposed replacement homes are well outside of the Town’s 75-ft. lake setback.
Question from the Board
- Hayward asked what the proposed and existing setbacks were from the lake. Josh explained that, with the exception of the bulkhead, the expansion will be away from the lake. He wants to maintain an existing tree close to the home on the lake side. He is not sure about 2 trees that are on the north side of the structure next to the McLure home.
- Kilcoyne commented that the proposed height of the new home would be in scale with the McLure home. Has an application been sent to Shoreland Protection? Yes, Josh expects approval. Liza asked about the additional height of the replacement structure. Josh said it will not block any additional view from the road or the field beyond than the existing home does.
A letter of support for the proposal from Martha McLure was read to the Board. M. Welch moved to accept the letter into the record a Exhibit #1; D. Patterson second. All in favor.
Questions from the Public
Nancy McLure told the Board that she appreciated the Farrs’ communication with her and was in favor of the proposal.
9:00PM – T. Maxham closed the hearing.
New Business
There was none.
Review of August 9, 2023 Minutes
- Patterson moved to approve the amended minutes of August 9, 2023; L. Kilcoyne second. All in favor.
Administrator’s Report
-Upcoming schedule:
September 13, 2023 —
- Continued Pest Pro appeal to Notice of Violation
- Conditional Use/Site Plan review for boat repair at 50 Ferry Rd.
September 27, 2023 –
- 2-lot subdivision administrative review at 269 US RT 2
- Residential PUD at 125 Station Rd. (not yet confirmed)
-There will be no Zoning 101 class on August 31. The next class will be September 28th.
Adjournment
9:20PM – L. Kilcoyne moved to adjourn and move to deliberative; M. Welch second. All in favor.
Respectfully submitted,
Martha Taylor-Varney, ZA
Signed: ________________________________________ Date: _______________________
For the DRB
These minutes are unofficial until approved at the next regularly scheduled meeting. All motions were unanimous unless otherwise indicated.