May 27, 2010





The meeting opened at 7:00 P.M.


Commission members present:  Howard Burgess, Tony Flory, Ray Leonard, Andy McKane, Jerry Stearns, Tom Turner and Charles Vajda.


Review of the 5/20/2010 Minutes


Review of the 5/20/2010 minutes was postponed until the next meeting.



Final Hearing for the Thomas 4-Lot Subdivision


Andrew McKane led the meeting as the Vice Chairman in Bill Matteson’s absence.  He read the warning for the hearing and listed the requested waivers, which were #18 (Location of trees), #19 (covers #9-#18 in regards to abutting lands) and #20 (requires contours shown on the map every five feet).  To satisfy an abutter who was present, Mr. McKane read items #9-#18 aloud.  There were many abutters present who had questions.


Mr. Zingale said that Margaret Smith was left off the list of abutters in error but this does not affect the proceedings.  There are thirty abutters in all.


The Commission reviewed the plot plan while Atty. Kevin Candon listed items that were added or fixed.  These included correcting names of abutters, adding a permanent easement, a storm water prevention plan and a traffic pattern/policy statement provided by the Department of the Army.  This policy refers to military vehicles and civilian traffic.  Mr. Burgess said that he felt the statement referring to soldiers traveling on Post Road to the facility should be removed and that they should be allowed to travel that route for convenience, especially in light of what they are doing for our country.  He agreed that the part of the policy, which covers heavy equipment, should stay.  Heavy equipment should only access the facility via Route 7 to Post Road, a shorter distance to travel on Post Road than from Route 4 E.


Mr. Turner said that he agreed with the SOP as written, even though it is not binding.  It is just an encouragement to keep children safer during weekend functions and to lessen the wear and tear on Post Road.


Jay Stevens of the 99th command, which will be in charge of the upkeep and maintenance of the new facility said that the military vehicles would follow the SOP but that a “No Through Traffic” sign could be put up to help with other traffic.


A couple of Town residents asked questions about the traffic to clarify what was being discussed.


Diane Dickerman, an abutter, asked about noise and light issues.


Mr. Zingale said that noise and light are not part of the subdivision process since the Town does not have zoning.


Atty. Candon said that the building is almost hidden as it is in the middle of the hundred-acre lot.


Jennifer Howe, one of the engineers present said that they use energy efficient light that don’t shine off-site but are directed down.


Charlie Dickerman questioned the 100’ setback waiver.  Mr. Zingale explained that this involves sewer and wells but in this case the facility will use City water and sewer.


Another resident was concerned about abutting wells and waterways when blasting is done.  He wanted to know who would be responsible if something happened to his well.  Ms. Howe responded that there is some ledge near the entrance road but it is not significant and blasting would be under control.


Mr. Turner asked if any blasting would be done close to any wells and the answer from the engineers was no and that they only have to blast down about ten feet.


Atty. Candon said that the chances of damage are very minimal.


Another resident said that the blasting company would do pre-blast testing to ensure that no harm will come to wells or waterways.


Mr. McKane said that this discussion was out of the realm of the subdivision procedures.


Mr. Turner added that the project will go before Act 250 and Mr. Zingale said only the Thomas portion will go before Act 250 since the government is exempt from the Act 250 permit process.




A Town resident, Ms. Smith, asked about wetlands and storm water runoff.  Ms. Howe said that the EPA monitors this and there is one small wetland on the Army portion of the subdivision.  They will have to get a storm water permit from the State of Vermont.


Kevin Candon added that the Army did not really have to go through the process of talking to abutters, but they wanted to be up front about what was going to happen.


Another resident asked about weapon discharge.  Jay Stevens said there will be no firing proposed.  It is strictly an administrative training facility.  They will also do maintenance of equipment.  There may be some exercise routines with some shouting of commands, but nothing any louder.  Weekend events take place three weekends a month.


Another resident wanted an explanation for the waiver of #19.  He was told that this would require the plot plan to show one hundred feet over all abutters’ properties and since there will be nothing within one hundred feet of abutters, then this is not necessary.


A question was asked about future subdivisions.  He was told that if there were to be any, then they would have to go through the subdivision process and subject to Act 250.


Dennis Wilbur asked that there be a tree line so he can’t see the facility.  One of the engineers said some trees would be left and a few more would be added.  Another resident said he didn’t want to see the building either.


Ms. Smith asked if people could see a plot plan and was told there would be one available at the Town office.


Mr. Turner explained that the road going into the new facility may or may not be taken over by the Town.  He added that neither the Army nor Reserves would have to pay any taxes to the Town. He said that the permanent easement for access to Parcel 3 from Parcel 2 should be made clearer on the map as otherwise Parcel 3 would be landlocked.  It was suggested that the explanation be put with the other easement notes.  Mr. Candon said that it is on the deed.  Mr. Turner asked Mr. Thomas to guarantee that the easement is agreeable to him and will be added to the map.  Mr. Thomas said that he is agreeable and it would be added to the notes on the map.


Mr. Turner said that the map should have a block provided for the stamp from the Planning Commission and the Chairman’s signature.




After asking if there were any more questions, Mr. McKane closed the hearing at 8:15 P.M.


Mr. Burgess made a motion to strike the requirement on the SOP form the Army so that military personnel could travel on Post Road in their own vehicles.  Mr. Flory seconded the motion.  Six were in approval with Mr. Turner voting against the motion.


Mr. Leonard motioned to approve the subdivision with the conditions of adding permanent easement notes for access from Parcel 2 to Parcel 3 and a block for the stamp and signature of the chairman to the plot plan.  Mr. Flory seconded the motion.  The motion passed unanimously.




Mr. Zingale reported that there was a two-lot subdivision on Blueberry Lane in Pittsford and Rutland Town was not notified.  The Zoning Board in Pittsford deemed the subdivision invalid.  Now there is a proposed five-lot subdivision and the Town has not been notified.  Officials in Pittsford said they only have to notify abutters in their own town.  Mr. Zingale believes this to be incorrect.  Mr. McKane suggested sending a letter saying the Rutland Town Planning Commission disagrees with their position and Mr. Turner agreed.  Mr. Matteson can sign the letter at the next meeting.


Mr. Flory motioned to end the meeting.  Mr. Leonard seconded the motion. All were in approval.  The meeting ended at 8:26 P.M.







_________________________________                              ________________

            Andrew McKane, Vice-Chairman                                                       Date