Village Growth Project

Discussion Session #3 (3/1/06) – Summary

Focus Areas: Ballard’s Corner & Route 116 North of Commerce Street

Discussion Questions

1) Which growth option are you more interested in for this area – i.e., greater hamlet concept or lesser hamlet concept (refer to maps)? Both options include some degree of mixed commercial & residential growth, but the extent and arrangement is markedly different.

2) Do you favor or oppose a new north/south road connector west of Route 116 to provide access options for growth in this area? To what extent does your answer depend on the function and end points of the road – e.g., local, low speed traffic vs. Route 116 bypass; Commerce Street to Shelburne Falls Road or Charlotte Road to Shelburne Falls Road?

3) Should the Town encourage more large industry (employers like NRG, Nestech, Iroquois Manufacturing, etc.) to locate in the area from NRG to CVU road on the east side of Route 116?

4) Do you want the Town to restrict larger commercial or retail buildings, either through size caps or through more stringent review standards? Consider Williston’s big box stores, but also consider Lantman’s, NRG, Saputo.

5) Do you think concentrating more people, stores, and jobs in this area of new village growth should be offset by protecting more of Hinesburg’s rural lands from development? Do you think the Town should allow rural landowners to sell the development rights to their rural land in order to encourage concentrated growth in the village area?

6) Do you think the proposed village green (or community gardens) shown on the greater Ballard’s Corner hamlet is a good idea? How could such a space best serve the community (visual aesthetic, community building, community gardens, recreation, etc.)?

Major Themes (see meeting minutes for details from each discussion group)

· Lack of consensus on preference between greater and lesser hamlet. One solution may be to start small and expand in such a way that favors functional (if not literal) connection to existing village nodes – e.g., existing core or Ballard’s Corner. The components and features of growth in this area will be critical to making informed decisions about how acceptable the overall scope of the area is.

· Connectivity is key for any growth options in this area, and the focus should be on creating a walkable, pedestrian friendly place.

· West Side Road is a logical connection if this area is to grow, BUT it should not be seen or used as a bypass. This road should provide access to growth areas and community space. It should control traffic speeds by design and contribute to an emphasis on pedestrian access and walkability. Connectivity to Charlotte Road may be difficult now, but should not be ruled out for the future.

· Limits on the size of commercial buildings should be related to the landscape where the building will be placed. More important than size limitations are aesthetic considerations to ensure buildings fit into the landscape, and performance standards to ensure commercial and industrial uses are compatible with surrounding uses – especially in mixed commercial-residential areas.

· Preservation of the view/aesthetic along Route 116 south of Ballard’s Corner is important; however, a multi-functional village green on this corner is not a good idea because of traffic, safety, etc. Green space is a good idea, but should be appropriate for the desired use/function – e.g., view corridors, community gardens, recreation, etc.

· Transfer of development rights from the rural areas to the village growth area needs more exploration to determine if it could work. At face value it seems like a good idea, but should be a voluntary option for rural landowners.